Darwin is an idiot.

page: 19
40
<< 16  17  18    20 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 7 2013 @ 02:52 PM
link   
OMG this has to be the funnies post i have ever seen lmfao.




posted on Jan, 8 2013 @ 10:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyed
reply to post by CandiceZ
 


I agree but Darwin was not an idiot.He contributed a lot for his time.It's the modern day scientist that are not using logic that are making it worse.

How can a creature EVOLUTIONARY get an ability to change its skin colour(salamanders).And why dont all the creatures have it.Such feature can only be created by an intelligent being/extraterrestrial.That goes with all the other abilities of other creatures.Our bodies are the perfect machines, and cannot be created by pure evolution.


Really? I wonder what a GOOD engineer would think of the circulatory system? Or the nervous system? Ask them to devise one that makes sense and I bet they could do it without incurring the hopeless mess you see when a chest is opened up.



posted on Jan, 8 2013 @ 10:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by 01s01s
reply to post by CandiceZ
 
Evolution is not proven via scientific protocol in re empirical evidence. Nice philosophy but fails. If Darwin had remained he would have observed the Finches' beaks revert back to their original form. Certainly not enough evidence to support a tree showing that all life is related. Dawkins? "Man evolved from bacteria." Really Richard & you came to this theory because one group of the same strain of bacteria changed colors? Perhaps they caught the flu! ROFL!



Actually, bacteria CAN get sick. They get infected by mircroorganisms called bacteriophages, which are viral. Your mitochondria, which you couldn't live 2 seconds without, are captured bacteria. So are chloroplasts in plants. It's called "endosymbiosis".



posted on Jan, 8 2013 @ 01:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by 01s01s
reply to post by CandiceZ
 
Evolution is not proven via scientific protocol in re empirical evidence. Nice philosophy but fails. If Darwin had remained he would have observed the Finches' beaks revert back to their original form. Certainly not enough evidence to support a tree showing that all life is related. Dawkins? "Man evolved from bacteria." Really Richard & you came to this theory because one group of the same strain of bacteria changed colors? Perhaps they caught the flu! ROFL!



This post is just as hilarious as the OP. Pure garbage not even close to reality. Maybe you've heard the scientific fields of biology and genetics? Do you honestly think the only evidence of evolution is Darwin's finches??? That's how he first came up with the idea, and over the last hundred years it's been proven. What makes somebody so desperate to prove their religious belief to others that they lie and make stuff up about a field of science? Yeah, those peer reviewed established scientists are all idiots! Especially the 99% of biologists and geneticists that agree with evolution as the fundamental staple of both fields.
Yeah it's all just made up to debunk fundamentalist religious extremists!



posted on Jan, 8 2013 @ 01:13 PM
link   
reply to post by CandiceZ
 


All single celled organisms and multi celled organisms evolve. Like the hammer head shark was actually a regular shark before a freak of nature the first hammer head was born. Eventually this mutated gene that cause the change became dominant among the other sharks,

So evolution does take place. Genetic altercation takes place when an already evolved advanced species speeds the evolution of another species. Increasing it's mutation rate quite a bit. Creationism takes place when pure energy becomes physical condensed vibrational mass.



posted on Apr, 23 2013 @ 04:07 AM
link   
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 

Okay, madness first off evolution is a religion not a theory or fact*. Two things answer me them and I might give you credit for something. Do you agree the earth is getting slower? You should, if you do and evolution is true then billions of years ago don't you think the earth would be going faster? Second, do you agree that the moon is getting farther away every year? Again, you should, if you do and evolution is true then billions of years ago don't you think the moon would be a whole lot closer? The way I picture it if evolution is true then the earth is spinning extremely fast and the moon is almost touching the earth, If that hasn't swayed you then check out drdino.com and see if that does it.

*deny it all you want it is true*
edit on 23-4-2013 by topsecret305 because: Fixing a few things



posted on Apr, 23 2013 @ 04:12 AM
link   
reply to post by topsecret305
 


I do not know where you got your information. But most likely from creationist propaganda site. Anyway evolution is a scientific theory which is very different from the stander English definition of theory. Here is my thread explaining evolution in detail and why science supports evolution.
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Apr, 23 2013 @ 04:15 AM
link   
reply to post by CandiceZ
 



Darwin is an idiot.
Oh please don't call an uninformed person in such a way.



posted on Apr, 23 2013 @ 04:15 AM
link   
reply to post by JayTaylor
 

Species change, that is micro-evolution. However kind does not if you do not believe me watch Dr. Hoven at drdino.com



posted on Apr, 23 2013 @ 04:21 AM
link   
reply to post by Phoenix267
 

I will read it, but do you deny the earth is getting slower and the moon is getting farther away?



posted on Apr, 23 2013 @ 04:24 AM
link   
reply to post by topsecret305
 


Yes, that would be good for you to read it. Not many members are really interested in science; unless it relates to conspiracies. I'm skeptical of your claims about the Earth change in rotation speed and what not. Since I think I have heard the Moon is going further away from the Earth, but I have to look into it before I say yes or no.



posted on Apr, 23 2013 @ 08:13 AM
link   
reply to post by topsecret305
 


Dr. Dino? As in Kent Hovind? As in the man currently in prison for fraud? Hovind is so far off base in his "arguments" against evolution that other Creationists recommend not using them in a debate. This page dissects many of Hovind's claims and shows how wrong he is.

How Good Are Those Young-Earth Arguments?



posted on Apr, 23 2013 @ 09:05 AM
link   
reply to post by CandiceZ
 


It's a damn shame you didn't get to see the five vertebrae at the end of your Coccyx develop into a tail instead of them becoming absorbed at the 4 week mark when you were an embryo.


Btw... these vestigial remnants are called Atavisms
edit on 23-4-2013 by LexiconV because: added a 'Btw'



posted on Apr, 23 2013 @ 09:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by CandiceZ
Darwin is an idiot. A monkey and a cucumber are cousins? Right, and what about the evolution of the horse? Species don't evolve from other species, there has NEVER been a transitional fossil of ANY species from one to another, even from CRO-MAGNON MAN to HOMOSAPIEN. And don't believe this "facts are the worlds data" crap unless you can prove it yourself, otherwise your going on someone else's PERCEPTION of the world's data. --- "Listen to everything, believe nothing, unless you can prove it''

Il probably get grief for this or ignored even, but its my opinion. The guy didnt know what he was talking about.


So what do you think has happened instead?????



posted on Apr, 24 2013 @ 03:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by topsecret305
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 

Okay, madness first off evolution is a religion not a theory or fact*. Two things answer me them and I might give you credit for something. Do you agree the earth is getting slower? You should, if you do and evolution is true then billions of years ago don't you think the earth would be going faster? Second, do you agree that the moon is getting farther away every year? Again, you should, if you do and evolution is true then billions of years ago don't you think the moon would be a whole lot closer? The way I picture it if evolution is true then the earth is spinning extremely fast and the moon is almost touching the earth, If that hasn't swayed you then check out drdino.com and see if that does it.

*deny it all you want it is true*
edit on 23-4-2013 by topsecret305 because: Fixing a few things


You can't be serious. First off, the earth's rotation and revolution have absolutely NOTHING to do with biological evolution. Even if you are simply using the layman's version of the word to mean "change over time", then you could consider the earth speeding up or slowing down evolution. Why do you think it would have to go faster? What's the advantage? Do you understand natural selection or any evolutionary concepts at all?

And don't reference Kent Hovind. He's a proven fraud and liar. Posts like this are why people don't take creationists seriously. This is the definition of not understanding a scientific concept or even doing a slight bit of research beyond watching a propaganda piece that isn't grounded in fact like evolution.
edit on 24-4-2013 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 19 2013 @ 09:09 PM
link   
reply to post by CandiceZ
 


he also said flowers came before bees



posted on May, 20 2013 @ 03:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by CandiceZ
Darwin is an idiot. A monkey and a cucumber are cousins? Right, and what about the evolution of the horse? Species don't evolve from other species, there has NEVER been a transitional fossil of ANY species from one to another, even from CRO-MAGNON MAN to HOMOSAPIEN. And don't believe this "facts are the worlds data" crap unless you can prove it yourself, otherwise your going on someone else's PERCEPTION of the world's data. --- "Listen to everything, believe nothing, unless you can prove it''

Il probably get grief for this or ignored even, but its my opinion. The guy didnt know what he was talking about.



Yes, it is indeed your (poor) opinion. Which means it amounts to sh!t in the balance of truth and fact.
Unless you come up with a better theory (understand scientific model here —even though I doubt you know what even is), just keep posting on ATS that Darwin didn't know what he was talking about and obviously, the whole world will not only take you seriously, but also give you credence.

If only for associating monkey with... (wtf) cucumber that only proves you have strictly NO remote knowledge whatsoever what evolution is about.

Why don't you enlighten us about baby bottles and spared cond0ms instead?

Perhaps you ran out of meds the day you posted — no hard feelings. I hope you have fixed that since then.



posted on Aug, 7 2013 @ 08:01 AM
link   
Since this post was in the first page i dont feel bad for bumbin it after 3 months.
So, Darwin was a real smart person, and for his era did a great good to humanity, which is question christianity and maybe bring some people back from that nonsense. Of course evolution is real, we evolve everyday by learnin new skills or new things. Intelligence evolve too, maybe not the op's one thou


This said, there are still many anomalies in the human being, which i will never in my life explain with god, but sure enuff theyre there.
Crick was the 1st proponent of Panspermia, which is now a recognized theory, and i believe its the basis to understand why we are here. The biggest anomaly is pretty much ourself. Why in the billions of years of this planet we are the only animal that developed this kind of intelligence? And so fast. Why we are the only animals that need to destroy the environment to survive?
Plus other genetic feats that im not knowledgable enuff to talk about but are there.
God is like santa (to be nice), not saying aliens did it, althou its still more plusable than god, all im saying is we are diffrent, and a lot. Why?



posted on Aug, 7 2013 @ 08:05 AM
link   
reply to post by CandiceZ
 


Don't be spreading misinformation. You should have said Darwin WAS an idiot. He is dead



posted on Aug, 7 2013 @ 08:32 AM
link   
reply to post by rickymouse
 


LOL You beat me to it RM
it speaks to the quality of the opinion in the OP that's for sure





top topics
 
40
<< 16  17  18    20 >>

log in

join