Can you prove evolution wrong? -- Part 2

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

Asked for a peer reviewed journal article stating evolution is a fact

That's just a pathetic attempt
Please try again

You can't be that silly, surely

It's a website of collected, published, peer-reviewed articles about human evolution. What's the matter? Don't you understand science?

Oh and here's an individual paper on aspects of human evolution. Enjoy.

a reply to: Raggedyman

Science takes the stance of neutrality till proof is shown

That is the way its suppose to work!

originally posted by: testingtesting
a reply to: All Seeing Eye

Go on then show us the evidence that disproves evolution.

Your serious? Your really really serious??? You mean to tell me you have absolutely no idea what is coursing through your veins and arteries this very minute, second?? To know that is to know ones self. Really? Your clueless as to your very own genesis???

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye

originally posted by: testingtesting
a reply to: All Seeing Eye

Go on then show us the evidence that disproves evolution.

Your serious? Your really really serious??? You mean to tell me you have absolutely no idea what is coursing through your veins and arteries this very minute, second?? To know that is to know ones self. Really? Your clueless as to your very own genesis???

Dude, you made the claim that evolution was disproved 40 years ago. Please offer a citation instead of making things up. Yes, asking you to back up a claim that goes against the scientific consensus is kind of how logic and understanding works. You can't say it's wrong and then just not even provide evidence, especially when the vast majority of scientists still agree with it today.

a reply to: Barcs

Please offer a citation instead of making things up.

Lets see, making things up is a form of, umm, well, for lack of better terms, create something that didn't exist before?? Then I guess, I created a new theory, by your standards. So, when science gets to that, gee, I don't know stage, we are all suppose to stop thinking until the vast majority of scientists (which by the way, most of those scientists have been institutionalized) can agree on the ignorance, and there is nothing new under the sun?

Sorry, science is the "Box", and it just wont fit all the "new" trains of thought. A lot of creating going on right now. And regardless, truth just doesn't listen to the status quo.. It has its own drum beat...

a reply to: Raggedyman

Again we have been through this neighbour. If you don't do your homework, it is not my fault. I am not going to post it for the 10th time.

a reply to: Raggedyman

Which atheists would these be? Prove that whom ever these atheists are, that they hate science.

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye
a reply to: Barcs

Please offer a citation instead of making things up.

Lets see, making things up is a form of, umm, well, for lack of better terms, create something that didn't exist before?? Then I guess, I created a new theory, by your standards. So, when science gets to that, gee, I don't know stage, we are all suppose to stop thinking until the vast majority of scientists (which by the way, most of those scientists have been institutionalized) can agree on the ignorance, and there is nothing new under the sun?

Sorry, science is the "Box", and it just wont fit all the "new" trains of thought. A lot of creating going on right now. And regardless, truth just doesn't listen to the status quo.. It has its own drum beat...

Soooo..... in other words you can't answer a request for a cite with, you know, a cite. You were asked for proof of an allegation you made. You failed to back it up with proof.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye
a reply to: Barcs

Please offer a citation instead of making things up.

Lets see, making things up is a form of, umm, well, for lack of better terms, create something that didn't exist before?? Then I guess, I created a new theory, by your standards. So, when science gets to that, gee, I don't know stage, we are all suppose to stop thinking until the vast majority of scientists (which by the way, most of those scientists have been institutionalized) can agree on the ignorance, and there is nothing new under the sun?

Sorry, science is the "Box", and it just wont fit all the "new" trains of thought. A lot of creating going on right now. And regardless, truth just doesn't listen to the status quo.. It has its own drum beat...

Soooo..... in other words you can't answer a request for a cite with, you know, a cite. You were asked for proof of an allegation you made. You failed to back it up with proof.

Proof is like beauty, it must be held in the "Eye" of the beholder! And once again, the main point is shuffled aside so that the mass of the smart moneys will get in line, back into the box. Maybe "Planet of the Apes" was really a documentary. Its fascinating to watch this on going soap opera called science.

You don't want the proof, that's obvious. You want it to fit into your concept of reality, it wont. Its not that "I can't" answer, I have given all I can, in this highly controlled venue!

fok wrong window and doublepost. Pls delet. Why ats does not have a delete option

It all comes down to the best theory...the one with the most evidence that makes the most sense. It's that way with everything.

Global warming...There is so much scientific evidence and data showing us that man is causing an excellerated warming cycle with his actions. Most Scientists go with that theory until other theories and data show otherwise.

It'st he same with Evolution. It just appears from the scientific research that we evolved over time from lessor life forms. Where are the competing theories? Creation? Sure, God created the universe using observable natural processes..like evolution. Or Genesis, which is really short and lacking in specifics. God, being all knowing, didn't put anything in the bible for us peeps in modern times? I'm going with evolution and global warming here...gravity...the same. Show me a competing theory that makes more sense and we'll through gravity out the window.

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye
a reply to: Barcs

Please offer a citation instead of making things up.

Lets see, making things up is a form of, umm, well, for lack of better terms, create something that didn't exist before?? Then I guess, I created a new theory, by your standards. So, when science gets to that, gee, I don't know stage, we are all suppose to stop thinking until the vast majority of scientists (which by the way, most of those scientists have been institutionalized) can agree on the ignorance, and there is nothing new under the sun?

Sorry, science is the "Box", and it just wont fit all the "new" trains of thought. A lot of creating going on right now. And regardless, truth just doesn't listen to the status quo.. It has its own drum beat...

Soooo..... in other words you can't answer a request for a cite with, you know, a cite. You were asked for proof of an allegation you made. You failed to back it up with proof.

Proof is like beauty, it must be held in the "Eye" of the beholder! And once again, the main point is shuffled aside so that the mass of the smart moneys will get in line, back into the box. Maybe "Planet of the Apes" was really a documentary. Its fascinating to watch this on going soap opera called science.

You don't want the proof, that's obvious. You want it to fit into your concept of reality, it wont. Its not that "I can't" answer, I have given all I can, in this highly controlled venue!

You keep saying "I can'y provide a cite for my claim" with a maximum usage of words. With added nonsense. Can you or can you not provide a cite for your claim - yes or no?

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye
a reply to: Barcs

Please offer a citation instead of making things up.

Lets see, making things up is a form of, umm, well, for lack of better terms, create something that didn't exist before?? Then I guess, I created a new theory, by your standards. So, when science gets to that, gee, I don't know stage, we are all suppose to stop thinking until the vast majority of scientists (which by the way, most of those scientists have been institutionalized) can agree on the ignorance, and there is nothing new under the sun?

Sorry, science is the "Box", and it just wont fit all the "new" trains of thought. A lot of creating going on right now. And regardless, truth just doesn't listen to the status quo.. It has its own drum beat...

Soooo..... in other words you can't answer a request for a cite with, you know, a cite. You were asked for proof of an allegation you made. You failed to back it up with proof.

Proof is like beauty, it must be held in the "Eye" of the beholder! And once again, the main point is shuffled aside so that the mass of the smart moneys will get in line, back into the box. Maybe "Planet of the Apes" was really a documentary. Its fascinating to watch this on going soap opera called science.

You don't want the proof, that's obvious. You want it to fit into your concept of reality, it wont. Its not that "I can't" answer, I have given all I can, in this highly controlled venue!

You keep saying "I can'y provide a cite for my claim" with a maximum usage of words. With added nonsense. Can you or can you not provide a cite for your claim - yes or no?

Yes, but not to you!

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye
Lets see, making things up is a form of, umm, well, for lack of better terms, create something that didn't exist before?? Then I guess, I created a new theory, by your standards. So, when science gets to that, gee, I don't know stage, we are all suppose to stop thinking until the vast majority of scientists (which by the way, most of those scientists have been institutionalized) can agree on the ignorance, and there is nothing new under the sun?

Sorry, science is the "Box", and it just wont fit all the "new" trains of thought. A lot of creating going on right now. And regardless, truth just doesn't listen to the status quo.. It has its own drum beat...

Again, you said evolution was disproved 40 years ago. What criteria was that based on? Why can't you back anything up or even explain your points? The fact that you are dodging this shows you aren't too sure about that claim yourself. Isn't the mantra of this website to deny ignorance? That's exactly what I'm doing.

a reply to: Raggedyman

We aren't religious. We just have personal relationship with logic and reality.

a reply to: All Seeing Eye

Well creation was proven wrong about 40 years ago as well...

all the proof you need is in a little box that TPTB keep away from all religious institutions, just so their brains don't spontaneously explode...

no one wants to clean up that mess

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye
a reply to: Barcs

Please offer a citation instead of making things up.

Lets see, making things up is a form of, umm, well, for lack of better terms, create something that didn't exist before?? Then I guess, I created a new theory, by your standards. So, when science gets to that, gee, I don't know stage, we are all suppose to stop thinking until the vast majority of scientists (which by the way, most of those scientists have been institutionalized) can agree on the ignorance, and there is nothing new under the sun?

Sorry, science is the "Box", and it just wont fit all the "new" trains of thought. A lot of creating going on right now. And regardless, truth just doesn't listen to the status quo.. It has its own drum beat...

Soooo..... in other words you can't answer a request for a cite with, you know, a cite. You were asked for proof of an allegation you made. You failed to back it up with proof.

Proof is like beauty, it must be held in the "Eye" of the beholder! And once again, the main point is shuffled aside so that the mass of the smart moneys will get in line, back into the box. Maybe "Planet of the Apes" was really a documentary. Its fascinating to watch this on going soap opera called science.

You don't want the proof, that's obvious. You want it to fit into your concept of reality, it wont. Its not that "I can't" answer, I have given all I can, in this highly controlled venue!

You keep saying "I can'y provide a cite for my claim" with a maximum usage of words. With added nonsense. Can you or can you not provide a cite for your claim - yes or no?

Yes, but not to you!

I see. Thank you for continuing to set the bar lower and lower.

a reply to: amazing

Where are the competing theories? Creation? Sure, God created the universe using observable natural processes..like evolution. Or Genesis, which is really short and lacking in specifics. God, being all knowing, didn't put anything in the bible for us peeps in modern times?

That all depends on how you look at it. If you have been,again, "Institutionalized" you are taught it must be one or the other. No one allows you the right to consider anything outside of the box. Why are you not allowed to consider both processes took place, outside of any religious context, and that has absolutely nothing to do with the concept of God, or Gods if you will. Even in the bible the term "Us" is used!

And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

The Bible is taken completely out of its original historical context.!!! For instance in Genesis:

"14 And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:"

"15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel."

Re read the chapters together

"And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life: And, I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel."

The "Serpent" translated to Ancient intelligent creating force has had a Block placed between one race of human being, and the other. Where the "Seeds" are not compatible, and will actually fight each other. And within humanity's genome and biology where does this fight occur?

So, yes, it is there for all to see, but you have to "Want" to see it. Some people only want to see what is convenient and given to them. And above all else, they want it to fit into their closed minded concept of reality. Are they frightened as to what they will discover, what they will see?

And what was the "Original Sin" Adam and Eve were thrown out of the Garden over? They took part in the tree of life. They created their own life forms! And that is why the block is there. For those of you who deny this "enmity" is a reality, basic biology will answer it for you. You need look no further than your own physical makeup. Start at the basics.