Can you prove evolution wrong

From the tooth chronicles.

Again your comment proves you don't pay attention. I'm not just randomly participating on threads, I'm on this one for a reason.

Blahahabahablaha! OH, THE IRONY!

What reason is that tooth. To prove evolution? That's pretty much all you have done.
I for one have learned things about evolution that I have never known. Thanks in part to your ignorant claims and the brilliant responses that blow your nonsense out of the water.
Thanks

reply to post by colin42

All that writing to avoid giving me either the quote that supported your unfounded claim or admission you were wrong.

Your 'term/claim' is not valid on this thread. No further comment

It's more like anything not agreeing with you is invalid.

reply to post by flyingfish

Blahahabahablaha! OH, THE IRONY!

What reason is that tooth. To prove evolution? That's pretty much all you have done.
I for one have learned things about evolution that I have never known. Thanks in part to your ignorant claims and the brilliant responses that blow your nonsense out of the water.
Thanks

And after 400 pages I'm still waiting to see anything that resembles that.

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by flyingfish

 

Blahahabahablaha! OH, THE IRONY!

What reason is that tooth. To prove evolution? That's pretty much all you have done.
I for one have learned things about evolution that I have never known. Thanks in part to your ignorant claims and the brilliant responses that blow your nonsense out of the water.
Thanks

And after 400 pages I'm still waiting to see anything that resembles that.

Notice the 1 million year gap in fossil record, followed by an almost overnight transition to modern man.

This suggests two things:

1. Evolution does in fact occur in nature

2. Something intervened in said evolution, ie, God, ie, belevolent aliens

Originally posted by AquarianHerald



Notice the 1 million year gap in fossil record, followed by an almost overnight transition to modern man.

This suggests two things:

1. Evolution does in fact occur in nature

2. Something intervened in said evolution, ie, God, ie, belevolent aliens

Actually...it just shows the graph isn't very good

We have plenty of fossils that are 1-2m years old...

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by colin42

 

All that writing to avoid giving me either the quote that supported your unfounded claim or admission you were wrong.

Your 'term/claim' is not valid on this thread. No further comment

It's more like anything not agreeing with you is invalid.

More irony

And after 400 pages I'm still waiting to see anything that resembles that.

Your not fooling anyone.
Evidence of evolution has run you over like a train and you still go lalalaalalalala.
Your ignorance of evolution is all yours buddy

reply to post by flyingfish


There isn't any so called evidence, why do you think they are listing all of the theories as a hypothesis?

As I stated long ago, the main link that I have been provided on here even explains itself that its a series of hypothesis.

www.talkorigins.org...

Evolution, the overarching concept that unifies the biological sciences, in fact embraces a plurality of theories and hypotheses.

I don't know how clearer it can get that evolution is not a fact. Even if it were a fact, what I learned about facts is that they aren't even a for sure thing either.

reply to post by flyingfish

Your not fooling anyone.
Evidence of evolution has run you over like a train and you still go lalalaalalalala.
Your ignorance of evolution is all yours buddy

Please... the frail unproven elements that are needed to support evolution are certainly not strong enough to run anyone over.

No one on here has presented anything different to me that was convincing enough that I could buy into. I also don't buy the side by side example of people claiming that evolution is a proven theory just like gravity. We honestly don't know what makes gravity work, just that it does.

The problem here is that there is no likeminded research that can even compliment evolution. IMO I think the chances of evolution being real with what is shared on this thread, are about 2%.
A good case and point is flagellum. I hear a lot of people barking about the court case that lost on trying to prove that it could only be from a creator, well guess what, that doesn't automatically mean that evolution did it.

There are to many people on here that automatically assume that you have to believe in something. I know that what evolutionists are mistaken for evolution is actually the findings of a creator or several creators. You claim that evolution is not a thing but rather just a process. I believe that a creator had to make that process, there is just to much behind it. Your chances of creating a new life through evolution is so rare that you would have a better chance of hitting your local lottery 1000 times in a row, and thats just on one creation. We have over 5 million here. If you want to pretend that this is exactly the path of how things work with evolution, and the creation of new life, then you have to also pretend that there would be one hell of a failure rate, and I'm not seeing that much failure here.

I think a good video for you to watch is here...
www.youtube.com...

Here is another good one.
www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by itsthetooth
I also don't buy the side by side example of people claiming that evolution is a proven theory just like gravity. We honestly don't know what makes gravity work, just that it does.

We've known for about a hundred years now. Its the geodesics of relative bodies in a medium. You can thank Einstein for that one

Your chances of creating a new life through evolution is so rare that you would have a better chance of hitting your local lottery 1000 times in a row, and thats just on one creation. We have over 5 million here.

57.2 percent of all statistics are made up on the spot.

If you want to pretend that this is exactly the path of how things work with evolution, and the creation of new life, then you have to also pretend that there would be one hell of a failure rate, and I'm not seeing that much failure here.

Roughly 65% of all human zygotes are spontaneously aborted by the mother's immune system, who treats the embryo like a parasite.

The failure rate of the male germ plasm is asymptotic at 100 percent probability. That's what I call "one hell of a failure rate."

reply to post by uva3021

Roughly 65% of all human zygotes are spontaneously aborted by the mother's immune system, who treats the embryo like a parasite.

The failure rate of the male germ plasm is asymptotic at 100 percent probability. That's what I call "one hell of a failure rate."

Sure but what percentage is zygotes?

Evolution and (human) creation are not mutually exclusive...

Evolution doesn't disprove God and religion doesn't disprove evolution, so let the false dilemma die already.

If you're actually interested in answers and not just fighting, find out how they fit together.

I'm not suggesting that anyone should follow religion blindly, but the bible is not a 'book of complete and utter lies'.

It does have some historical value.

More importantly though, the theory of human evolution is far from proven - not to be confused with the theory of evolution proper, which is proven.

Humanity is alien to this planet in every conceivable way. That should be a major red flag.

reply to post by AquarianHerald

Evolution and (human) creation are not mutually exclusive...

Not quite accurate. Evolution has nothing to say on creation and cannot prove one way or the other how life started.

So to be correct Evolution does not rule out creation.

Evolution doesn't disprove God and religion doesn't disprove evolution, so let the false dilemma die already.

Correct but religion or to be precise fundamentalists like tooth believe they MUST disprove evolution because it does challenge many of their fairy stories. This indicates a very fragile faith to me.

If you're actually interested in answers and not just fighting, find out how they fit together.

Faith, any faith can live together with evolution and anyone I know that accepts The Theory of Evolution and its supporting evidence agrees. Evolution fitting into a religion ...... Not for me but if it fits your belief to maintain your god uses evolution to produce diversity it does not affect the theory in any way.

reply to post by AquarianHerald

I'm not suggesting that anyone should follow religion blindly, but the bible is not a 'book of complete and utter lies'.

Maybe it is because you have come to this thread late but tooth has blindly and without any reference, evidence or logical argument maintained the bible is a 'clear historical document' and when disputed by the very evidence he maintained showed this he again went into denial.

He makes flimsy grounds to reject any evidence that challenges him yet blindly accepts anything that he believes supports him. This is the reason for the challenges being made here which he refuses to address.

It does have some historical value.

Agreed. Any ancient text has historical value it just does not qualify as a 'clear historical document'.

More importantly though, the theory of human evolution is far from proven - not to be confused with the theory of evolution proper, which is proven.

Believe it or not we are meant to be discussing diversity. More to the point to explain diversity we see today if evolution is wrong and does not describe it.

It worries me that you write all the evidence that can be seen in every life form showing how it has evolved over time suddenly becomes invalid when it comes to humans.

Humanity is alien to this planet in every conceivable way. That should be a major red flag.

Here is the crux of your argument. Your statement has no supporting evidence. Goes against every tangible piece of evidence supplied over many years even down to the fact we belong to the great ape family and evolution shows common ancestry.

Your statement is NOT supported by any evidence we have found. In fact the opposite is true.

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by flyingfish

 

There isn't any so called evidence, why do you think they are listing all of the theories as a hypothesis?

As I stated long ago, the main link that I have been provided on here even explains itself that its a series of hypothesis.

www.talkorigins.org...

Evolution, the overarching concept that unifies the biological sciences, in fact embraces a plurality of theories and hypotheses.

I don't know how clearer it can get that evolution is not a fact. Even if it were a fact, what I learned about facts is that they aren't even a for sure thing either.

Well done. You finally managed to supply a quote from a link you supplied showing that you can. So from your refusal before it is plain to see you were dishonestly avoiding admitting your error.

Back to this post. Now all you have to do is refer back to all the times it has been explained to you what a theory and hypothesis is in a scientific context. Then you will understand how you have just again spun the quote you supplied to suit your fantasy and how wrong you are.

reply to post by itsthetooth


Your straw-man has already been debunked.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
These are the more recent, other posters have panned your frail arguments hundreds of pages ago.
Congratulations on your epic denial.

reply to post by AquarianHerald

Humanity is alien to this planet in every conceivable way. That should be a major red flag.

This post is a major red flag.
Our biology proves we are linked to this planet in every conceivable way.

Originally posted by uva3021


Roughly 65% of all human zygotes are spontaneously aborted by the mother's immune system, who treats the embryo like a parasite.

It might even be higher than that, closer to 75-80%, and the majority of zygotes aborted are male. I miscarried two boys myself.

The failure rate of the male germ plasm is asymptotic at 100 percent probability. That's what I call "one hell of a failure rate."

It sure is.

reply to post by colin42

Well done. You finally managed to supply a quote from a link you supplied showing that you can. So from your refusal before it is plain to see you were dishonestly avoiding admitting your error.

Back to this post. Now all you have to do is refer back to all the times it has been explained to you what a theory and hypothesis is in a scientific context. Then you will understand how you have just again spun the quote you supplied to suit your fantasy and how wrong you are.

I dont need to, I went on an researched it myself and found what I learned to conflict with what I was being told on here.

Theories, hypothesis, even facts are not 100% guarantees about anything.