It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Scientific Impossibility of Evolution

page: 20
33
<< 17  18  19   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 25 2019 @ 10:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: Barcs

originally posted by: edmc^2
As an engineer, it takes an engineer to replicate the trunk of an elephant. We can test it and replicate it many times over because it's a product of design.

Evolution theory, on the other hand, can't be tested since the basis is blind chance. Without outside guidance, biological evolution can't be falsified.


This is extremely dishonest. He claims that because an engineer can replicate a trunk that ID is proved and that is his standard (nothing testable), but then blindly denies an entire scientific theory that has been rigorously tested with pure conjecture and assumption.

This just proves these guys are zealots with double standards and don't care about what's true or false. Denial of evolution is like denial of gravity or germs. You can't refute a scientific theory without proving the evidence wrong or offering testable evidence for an alternative, and you have failed at both. In fact every single creationist on this website does the same exact thing. They just post conjecture and expect people to be dumb enough to believe the BS but not once has EVER refuted the evidence or research, they just arbitrarily dismiss it over their religious faith.


How can someone disprove a conjecture?

fish eventually turning into humans, what fairy tale is this? It makes a mockery of science.

edit on 25-6-2019 by edmc^2 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 25 2019 @ 11:33 AM
link   
a reply to: edmc^2

Avoiding my question again?

Do you have a testable alternative to evolution?



posted on Jun, 25 2019 @ 11:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Barcs
He claims that because an engineer can replicate a trunk that ID is proved and that is his standard (nothing testable)


An engineer can recreate an elephant's trunk. Random chance will not.

You'll deny this obvious fact to avoid the obvious answer. you'll over-complicate things to avoid the simple conclusion.



posted on Jun, 25 2019 @ 12:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: edmc^2
How can someone disprove a conjecture?

fish eventually turning into humans, what fairy tale is this? It makes a mockery of science.


No YOU make a mockery of intelligence. You can't call something conjecture when it's backed by evidence. I posted the link with supporting research and you ignored it blindly. You are not honest, end of story. If you were honest you would analyse the evidence and refute it, but you can't, so you don't even try. You just keep your silly crusade of lies going.



posted on Jun, 25 2019 @ 12:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: cooperton
An engineer can recreate an elephant's trunk. Random chance will not.

You'll deny this obvious fact to avoid the obvious answer. you'll over-complicate things to avoid the simple conclusion.


How is that even an argument? It's an unsubstantiated assumption. Where have you proved that DNA was designed? Well??? You literally just keep stating BS and pretending it's a fact. So much dishonesty these days. Humans replicate nature all the time. That doesn't make the nature itself designed. The sheer stupidity....
edit on 6 25 19 by Barcs because: (no reason given)




 
33
<< 17  18  19   >>

log in

join