The nail in the Evolutionary Coffin, the final spike placed there by the Royal Society itself.

reply to post by blocula


Floods are local events. There can even be very large local floods as you have correctly pointed out.

There was no global flood.

These local large flood events would not raise sea level much. Here is what I posted.

The sorts of events you linked to would indeed cause great flooding, but would not rapidly raise sea level.

The Black Sea event would actually lower sea level since it drained from the oceans.

reply to post by sligtlyskeptical

Everything I have ever read basically says that we tend to decline as time goes on. Thus de-evolution.

Evolution is not goal oriented. There is no such thing as de-evolution. Change is change and that is what evolution is all about.

reply to post by blocula

Its been said that the chances of humans evolving and developing from single celled organisms by chance,would be like blowing up a paperback book printing press factory and then digging through the wreckage and finding a perfectly assembled websters dictionary,or blowing up a toyota car manufacturing plant and finding a fully functioning mercedes amongst the wreckage,we were not made from the accidental chance of nature,we were created by super intelligent design...

These sorts of rubbish claims are made by people that are purposely telling lies about how evolution works.

Evolution is about passing on genes. The change from single to multicellular organisms took billions of years. Once that started the diversity of organisms that was created was astounding.

These wacko claims about odds are just wacko. They are garbage math with garbage conclusions, The math does not reflect actual processes and that is why it is garbage.

reply to post by blocula

Look at "a single celled organism" under a microscope and then tell me "that" will some day by chance,naturally evolve to be able to design,build and operate sr 71 blackbirds,saturn 5 rockets,nuclear powered aircraft carriers and atom bombs...Come on...No way...

This appears to be an argument from ignorance. You don't understand evolution or what can happen and you might not understand what is under the microscope yet you claim it is impossible.

The fossil record makes it very clear that this did happen. The question is how.

reply to post by Barcs

Evolution took over 3 billion years to go from single celled organisms to what we have on earth today, and I'm pretty sure it took nearly the first billion just to become multi cellular.

So here I see that you are unclear about evolution and the fossil record, yet you reject it without having much understanding of what this is all about. That's ok. You have plenty of time to learn more about evolution and the fossil record to learn why biologists have such clear evidence of evolutionary processes.

Talking about probabilities doesn't really make a difference when you look at the timescale involved.

See. Here is another mistake.

reply to post by Rocketman7


Your title is misleading.

Lesson learned; Creationists will write misleading headlines in addition to misleading content.


There is no Evolution vs. Creationist debate.

Science does NOT care about supernatural deities (pro or con).

Science DOES care about...

*Providing you electricity

*A WHOLE bunch of science (computer science) is required for computers, the internet your using, and the websites / platforms / networks / forums your using.


The three arguments you have provided have already been thoroughly proved false by others here. My point is that science is done in the field, with trained people, NOT by making up some arguments in your head mixed with argument from quote mining.

Anyhow, my bigger point is that science is a tool for human advancement. It's possible there is a higher deity, or deities, but science doesn't deal with deities.

Originally posted by blocula
reply to post by sligtlyskeptical

 

Its been said that the chances of humans evolving and developing from single celled organisms by chance,would be like blowing up a paperback book printing press factory and then digging through the wreckage and finding a perfectly assembled websters dictionary,or blowing up a toyota car manufacturing plant and finding a fully functioning mercedes amongst the wreckage,we were not made from the accidental chance of nature,we were created by super intelligent design...

edit on 12-3-2012 by blocula because: (no reason given)

Can you answer this WHY do people like you ALWAYS compare inorganic objects and things with evolution

If its not watches its cars or buildings THEY are not alive!!!!

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by Barcs

 

Evolution took over 3 billion years to go from single celled organisms to what we have on earth today, and I'm pretty sure it took nearly the first billion just to become multi cellular.

So here I see that you are unclear about evolution and the fossil record, yet you reject it without having much understanding of what this is all about. That's ok. You have plenty of time to learn more about evolution and the fossil record to learn why biologists have such clear evidence of evolutionary processes.

Talking about probabilities doesn't really make a difference when you look at the timescale involved.

See. Here is another mistake.

I sense that this post may have been partially in error, or maybe mixing me up with the other guy. I stand firmly behind the science when it comes to evolution or anything else that has experiments to back it up. I also may have edited it since you read. I did add a bunch in later.

The universe is so vast that probability goes out the window. Even if only 1% of planets in our galaxy are capable of supporting life, that is still a lot of planets. Rare, respectively, but extremely likely in the grand scheme of things. There are so many stars and galaxies out there, so even if it's 1 in a million, there are enough rolls of the cosmic dice to make it happen millions of times. Maybe the chance of abiogensis is 1 in a billion. Give the earth a billion years and it'll probably happen. The timescale is massive as is the volume of the known universe. I hate those "evolution is like a tornado assembling a 747 from a junkyard" arguments. They are pure fallacy.

reply to post by Barcs


Sorry about that. It's an embarrassing mistake.

Originally posted by Confusion42
reply to post by Rocketman7

 

Your title is misleading.

Lesson learned; Creationists will write misleading headlines in addition to misleading content.


There is no Evolution vs. Creationist debate.

Science does NOT care about supernatural deities (pro or con).

Science DOES care about...

*Providing you electricity

*A WHOLE bunch of science (computer science) is required for computers, the internet your using, and the websites / platforms / networks / forums your using.


The three arguments you have provided have already been thoroughly proved false by others here. My point is that science is done in the field, with trained people, NOT by making up some arguments in your head mixed with argument from quote mining.

Anyhow, my bigger point is that science is a tool for human advancement. It's possible there is a higher deity, or deities, but science doesn't deal with deities.

Well as a scientist/programmer analyst network specialist who helped make the Internet, I can only say that science is not a thing which you or others possess. And there are no apes, and no gorillas, in South America, at all.

And you may in your own mind have decided that the first 3 points have been proved false, and you may also believe that crows have faces, and mice and rats, if you are too blind to see that they do not.

No amount of indigenous, head binding, can account for the elongated skulls at the start of this thread. The video is there within the first couple pages.

reply to post by Rocketman7

Well as a scientist/programmer analyst network specialist who helped make the Internet, I can only say that science is not a thing which you or others posses. And there are no apes, and no gorillas, in South America, at all.

And you may in your own mind have decided that the first 3 points have been proved false, and you may also believe that crows have faces, and mice and rats, if you are too blind to see that they do not.

No amount of indigenous, head binding, can account for the elongated skulls at the start of this thread. The video is there within the first couple pages.

The first 3 are very clearly shown to be false.

Maybe you cannot determine that animals have faces, but as was shown animals can tell each other apart by their faces. Being unable to do a task such as face recognition does not mean others cannot.

No references were given for the Peru skulls. Nothing at all. So how can you tell what was being introduced in the OP? No effort was made to support that claim. It is false simply due to lack of effort by the OP to show us what they were talking about.

Hello! I can help you out with item A. Humans all have the same facial features, usually. Two eyes, a nose, a mouth, hair, two ears, a chin, etc.. We have variations due to genetics in the appearance of those features.
My dogs, mother and daughter are both pure bred Cairn Terriers. They look like Cairns, and they have all the dog feaures. Yet they do not look like Scottish Terriers, Labradores, or Saint Bernnards, ect.. They also do not look alike. Each dogs looks like themselves, they also have genetic varieations of those facial features. It is a way to reconized individuals, and thank God we all look different! Imagine how boring factory stamed out people would be. All animals have genetic variations to their feautures. However, if your get a family group together you will see that somehow they all look similiar and share different features together. It's all sharing genetics.

If Richard Dawkins is Darwin's pittbull, then Tsoukalos is my pittbull. Ask him, he will tell you that aliens did it.

i1138.photobucket.com...

If you want the skull video you have to get past the conspiracy.

Put this file number in youtube search.
phtkpPaQUf8

reply to post by Rocketman7

Well as a scientist/programmer analyst network specialist who helped make the Internet,

Are you Al Gore?

Which one are you, lol? A scientists or a programmer, or a network administrator? They certainly aren't all the same thing and if you do all 3 you are a very busy person. Computer science does not make someone a scientist, especially when referring to something biological like evolution.

Originally posted by Barcs
reply to post by Rocketman7

 

Well as a scientist/programmer analyst network specialist who helped make the Internet,

Are you Al Gore?

Which one are you, lol? A scientists or a programmer, or a network administrator? They certainly aren't all the same thing and if you do all 3 you are a very busy person. Computer science does not make someone a scientist, especially when referring to something biological like evolution.

Speaking of Al Gore...and most scientists know absolutely nothing about programming. At all. Or statistics, for that matter. When scientists attempt to write their own code and program their own models, we end up with global warming.

But I digress.

Originally posted by Barcs
reply to post by Rocketman7

 

Well as a scientist/programmer analyst network specialist who helped make the Internet,

Are you Al Gore?

Which one are you, lol? A scientists or a programmer, or a network administrator? They certainly aren't all the same thing and if you do all 3 you are a very busy person. Computer science does not make someone a scientist, especially when referring to something biological like evolution.

I am a very busy person. Learning constantly. Plenty of schooling thats for sure.

But this isn't about me. I am not the one who has a loose grip on reality, and cannot comprehend, that their belief system, visa vis, Darwinian Evolution, is a deceased parrot, to use the vernacular.

I have seen the footprints in the lava in Mexico, and in a million years, no one could convince me, that I cannot tell human footprints when I see them, in stride. What should be troubling people is that THEY cannot see them.

And in lieu of being permitted to see them and make up their own mind, they must instead, be reduced to parrots and sheep.
Sad really.
Gonzales will not publish, you will not see the footprints or be able to scrutinize the data.
You are not worthy apparently because you will not be able to handle it. Jack Nicholson was right.

reply to post by Rocketman7


You've seen them physically, in person? If you are familiar with footprints, then you should know that homo erectus had the same foot features as modern humans. If you are suggesting time travel, you'd expect to find footwear. Primitive man's ancestor that walked across the ice bridge a million or so years ago. Is it really that far fetched? Evidence suggests there was more than one settling of north america. Do you think humans existed 1.3 million years ago exactly as they are today despite evolution?

Why do humans all have different faces when no other form of life has different faces including apes?


Sorry mate. Hard to take ANYTHING you take seriously after a question like that.


Here is a thought....

If you believe in the bible. Then nothing has apparently changed in the last 6000 years since the earth was created. Not "the truth" or the way religious people think.

So maybe evolution is just not happening to you.

reply to post by Rocketman7


Iam sorry you helped invent the internet but you make a thread like this?
I call BS.
You have been given enough evidence to show that you are wrong but are just to pig headed to admit it.
Excuse me I have to go and check that CERN is still running.

Well as a scientist/programmer analyst network specialist who helped make the Internet, I can only say that science is not a thing which you or others possess. And there are no apes, and no gorillas, in South America, at all.

I am going to call BS on this. Are you saying your a part of the w3c, cern, ?? Either way, creationists cannot be trusted to tell facts.

There are monkeys in south america. Either way, how in the hell does this dis-prove evolution?

What does this even have to do with Evolution?

You do understand, that even if you where to (hypothetically) dis-prove evolution, it doesn't mean that your particular Fabricated Overlord exists.

And you may in your own mind have decided that the first 3 points have been proved false, and you may also believe that crows have faces, and mice and rats, if you are too blind to see that they do not.

You must be a troll. If you are not a troll, than I am amazing at the ignorance you are displaying.

Face - A Noun -
The front part of a person's head from the forehead to the chin, or the corresponding part in an animal.


How in the world can somebody say that crows, mice, rats, and ANY ANIMAL does not have a face?

Unless you are (literally) blind, you are retarded.

What the hell do you think the definition of the word face is?!?!?