How to prove evolution is FAKE!!!

page: 2
21
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 04:13 AM
link   
reply to post by definity
 


Shouldn't this belong in the "jokes" section? lol

The theory of evolution is a provisional truth, and there are multiple independent and corroborating lines of evidence to support it. This includes...

-Biogeography
-Comparative anatomy (morphology)
-Microbiology/Genetics
-Paleontology (the fossil record)
-Developmental biology

Nevertheless, for people who rely on poorly constructed arguments and refer to scripture to try to render the theory of evolution meaningless, I suggest that you thoroughly read the scientific information provided in these sources:

-Why Evolution is True (Run by evolutionary biologist Jerry Coyne.)

-Talk Origins (*The* comprehensive site for everything evolution.)

-Understanding Evolution (Berkeley provides a basic understanding of evolution.)

-And last but not least... Anthro Palomar
edit on 1/29/2013 by IEtherianSoul9 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 04:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by milkyway12
reply to post by Infi8nity
 


There's plenty of science in the way of evolution, people just don't really care if evolution is real or not.


Show me it.



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 04:15 AM
link   
reply to post by SpearMint
 


Word, you pulled that out of where the sun doesn't shine. Basically evolutionist and creationist would refute you. At least from the articles I have seen and what my professor has taught.
edit on 29-1-2013 by milkyway12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 04:16 AM
link   
reply to post by SpearMint
 


Okay.

It's called google. Try it some time.



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 04:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by milkyway12
reply to post by Infi8nity
 


There's plenty of science in the way of evolution, people just don't really care if evolution is real or not.


I blame the boob tube


+3 more 
posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 04:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by milkyway12
reply to post by SpearMint
 


Word, you pulled that out of where the sun doesn't shine.basically evolutionist and creationist would refute you. At least from the articles I have seen and what my professor has taught.


Nice thought out counter argument you have there. I'll take that as a "I ran out of stupid arguments".
edit on 29-1-2013 by SpearMint because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 04:17 AM
link   
I can't believe that I just took the time to watch this. Thanks for wasting my time, honestly.



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 04:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by milkyway12
reply to post by SpearMint
 


Okay.

It's called google. Try it some time.


Tried it, Google turns up nothing credible against evolution. Lots of stuff for it though!
Try it sometime.
edit on 29-1-2013 by SpearMint because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 04:20 AM
link   
reply to post by SpearMint
 


Credible? Word. Please, continue to speak with your superior logic. The statement about what said dealing with Micro or Macro ended your credibility. Principles of Biology one should help you.



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 04:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by milkyway12
reply to post by SpearMint
 


First of all, Evolution has never been observed, you're wrong. Micro-Evolution has been observed. For example, dog Breeding is a form of Micro- Evolution.

The fact that you thought I was remotely serious speaks loads about the argument for Evolution.

Magic sounds better than randomly spawning matter out of thin .... Nothing. You believe God has existed forever or you believe the make up of the Universe(es) have existed forever. By the way that would be impossible unless you have wtf magic AKA God.
edit on 29-1-2013 by milkyway12 because: (no reason given)


This is like déjà vu all over again...

You don't understand the definition of theory, and more importantly, you don't even have the slightest grasp of evolution. Stop relying on artificial distinctions (microevolution vs. macroevolution) to support your baseless claims.

I have a simple request. If you have "beef" with evolution, formulate a testable hypothesis and present it to the scientific community.



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 04:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by milkyway12
reply to post by SpearMint
 


Credible? Word. Please, continue to speak with your superior logic. The statement about what said dealing with Micro or Macro ended your credibility. Principles of Biology one should help you.


Oh, so you don't understand 1 + 1. Provide some of this science against evolution you speak of, telling me to look myself isn't good enough.
edit on 29-1-2013 by SpearMint because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 04:27 AM
link   
reply to post by IEtherianSoul9
 


Really? Try college sometime if you are going to speak of the "Scientific" community. I mean, you aren't making much sense.

Your most basic Biology class will refute what you just said. Crazy.
edit on 29-1-2013 by milkyway12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 04:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by milkyway12
reply to post by IEtherianSoul9
 


Really? Try college sometime if you are going to speak of the "Scientific" community. I mean, you aren't making much sense. You are speaking in the Metaphysical, which I don't really care for.

Your most basic Biology class will refute what you just said. Crazy.


Everything IEtherianSoul9 made perfect sense and you should pay attention to it. I can't believe you're saying the things you're saying and then telling someone else to go to college.



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 04:32 AM
link   
I was lucky there... I didn't watch this Silly nonsense, just
glanced through the thread and found out that the OP has scored
very low on the evolutionary scale for high Intelligence primates.

I don't come here much anymore, at least i don't post much, and threads like this
one are the main reason. 0 out 10
edit on 29-1-2013 by rigel4 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 04:33 AM
link   
reply to post by SpearMint
 


Most of what I have said has been sarcasm, it's sad you cannot see that because it sounded like I was trying to make a real argument to you.

What both of you have said about Micro and Macro evolution, which you learn about in your first biology course in college, has ended most of your credibility.

By the way, I'll have two degrees at the end of this semester ... so, I'm sick of college. You do your time, if you haven't already. If you have, you need a refresher course.
edit on 29-1-2013 by milkyway12 because: (no reason given)


+3 more 
posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 04:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by milkyway12
reply to post by SpearMint
 


Most of what I have said has been sarcasm, it's sad you cannot see that because it sounded like I was trying to make a real argument to you.

What both of you have said about Micro and Macro evolution, which you learn about in your first biology course in college, has ended most of your credibility.

By the way, I'll have two degrees at the end of this semester ... so, I'm sick of college. You do your time, if you haven't already. If you have, you need a refresher course.
edit on 29-1-2013 by milkyway12 because: (no reason given)


Well I'm glad you agree that you haven't made a real argument. Perhaps that's because you can not. Sarcasm is a very poor defence.

Trying to appear superior with 2 college degrees to strangers on the internet isn't wise. Like I said, micro + micro = macro, it's an unnecessary differentiation. Saying you believe in one but not the other is like saying you don't believe 1 + 1 = 2. Evolution is evolution, no matter how large the change is, obviously over time the small changes add up until you can't tell the difference between the original and evolved life form. That logic is as flawless as 1 + 1 = 2. That is why arguing about micro and macro evolution is stupid.
edit on 29-1-2013 by SpearMint because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 04:45 AM
link   
It would reallybe nice if, for those who might not be able or want to watch a video, you (and others who do the same thing) could post a short summary of the video and some of the arguments used to disprove evolution instead of just posting a video with a single comment, "this is good."


This gets tedious.

Then i wouldn't have to waste my time opening a thread that gives me no information, and forces me to comment not on the subject at hand but on the presentation.



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 04:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Liquesence
It would reallybe nice if, for those who might not be able or want to watch a video, you (and others who do the same thing) could post a short summary of the video and some of the arguments used to disprove evolution instead of just posting a video with a single comment, "this is good."


This gets tedious.

Then i wouldn't have to waste my time opening a thread that gives me no information, and forces me to comment not on the subject at hand but on the presentation.



"Evolution isn't real because my peanut butter doesn't contain life forms".



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 04:52 AM
link   
reply to post by SpearMint
 


Good god man. You wouldn't even make it through your first day. A professor would read you something out of your book and you would say that is wrong because you read on google that it was.

I also can make a good argument, put that isn't the topic of the thread. I cannot prove evolution is fake, but very flawed.

-----

By the way, here is something I stated in the past.

In the early stages of life, proteins could not have formed because it would be no way for the Amino Acids to exist in a non pure state of liquid. Obviously, lots of things were occurring on Earth, and the oceans / water would have been ... not very pure. So, how do Amino Acids link up to form proteins if the earth's heat, electrical discharges, and solar radiation destroy the protein products many times faster than they could form?

Rocks that we believe were in existence before have very little carbon. You would need a very toxic carbon-rich environment for life to have evolved. Today, the atmosphere is only 1/80,000 of the carbon that has been around since the first fossils formed. Why is that?

-----

Here, I'll give you time to google a random reply.
edit on 29-1-2013 by milkyway12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 05:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by milkyway12
reply to post by SpearMint
 


Good god man. You wouldn't even make it through your first day. A professor would read you something out of your book and you would say that is wrong because you read on google that it was.

I also can make a good argument, put that isn't the topic of the thread. I cannot prove evolution is fake, but very flawed.


Again, making assumptions about a stranger's education is stupid, for all you know I could be a university professor. May I remind you that YOU were the one that suggested Google, believing something just because Google says so would almost be as stupid as believe something just because the Bible says so wouldn't it? Many great resources can be found on Google, but the best proof is found out in the real world, the study of that is called science.





new topics

top topics



 
21
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join