"100 Reasons Why Evolution Is STUPID!"

Do your research instead of just reading the bible. Google is a good start, unless you think Satan controls the internet.

What on earth makes you think I am a Christian? For Fucks Sake Man... read my previous posts... I do not believe in anything remotely similar to the dribble man has written down. Nor do I pretend that I can even begin to understand our origins.

Learn to think critically... you'd be amazed at what you can learn.

No, they didn't. There are no fossils of cavemen playing with dinosaurs. You dig down a little, you find the arrowheads and stone tools. You dig down a lot, you find the dinosaurs. You dig down more, you find the trilobites. All of these are different stages in life's 2 Billion year history on this 4.5 Billion year old earth.

Not sure if you are trolling or not. But in case you aren't, proof is a funny word. There is plenty of evidence.

We can't prove gravity exists (we can't 'prove' anything), but there is lots of evidence to support the theory that it is operating. Saying you don't believe in evolution is akin to saying that you don't believe in gravity. Both are theories supported by a wealth of evidence.

If you choose not to review the evidence, and integrate it with your current beliefs, I think it begs to question why you are so resistant to integrating new info into your current belief system.

So, yes you can choose to deny the evidence if you wish.

Sometimes there are in between things, but sometimes there aren't. Here's the key, suppose all the giraffes up and died. Suppose somewhere in the genetic code of a horse, is one small modification that lets it have much longer neck. Now suppose we introduced horses to the giraffe environment, and let them go.

Now we know the long neck thing is a potential for mutation, not a recessed gene, which means natural breeding of horses will never it bring it out. What happens? Well, horses would live pretty much as they are (assuming they survive and don't get it on with zebras) possibly for millions of years, before that one gamma ray hits that one sperm cell of that one horse, and that one sperm gets the other horse pregnant. Then the mutant is born, which can use its long neck to eat from trees where all the other horses couldn't. Because he does so well, he breeds a lot, and over only a few generations that gene is everywhere. Then these go on for millions of years, like the horses did.

So what does it all look like on the fossil record? millions of years of one kind of thing, then millions of years of another, like it changed instantly.

Evolution is our perception of adaptation/mutation.

Last Edited by aliensbro on 12/08/2012 04:42 PM

All said and done...
My point being...
There is not enough proof on either side to make a truly educated guess.
Humans have some innate predilection to get others to agree even if they are wrong. 1,000,000,000 people all agreeing on a thing does not make that thing true.
We are but blind ants crawling on an Elephant; half of us believe the Elephant has 3 legs and half of us agree that the Elephant has 2.

Last Edited by First Born Son on 12/08/2012 08:24 PM

By magic? Good luck proving magic in the scientific community.

Nonsense. Gravity is testable, measurable, and repeatable. It is utter foolishness to compare observable phenomena to a historical claim of animals mutating into other animals over millions of years of culled genetic accidents.

The fossil record shows consistent gaps between major body plans. Every major biological structure appears suddenly, from insects to feathers to feet to vertabrates to reproduction, circulatory, nervous systems, to eyeballs, brains, etc. etc. everything.

Molecular phylogeny splits identical morphology into independent lineages, forcing evolutionists to dream up baseless, unsubstantiated models like 'convergent evolution', stating the exact same creatures must have evolved over and over again. There is no consistency between protein mapping to form anything close to a uniform tree.

Experimental evidence shows the evolutionary mechanism of Random Mutation + Natural Selection to be a total failure.

50,000+ generations of E.Coli produce nothing novel. We never observe a single novel protein evolve.

Other major changes in organisms such as Italian Wall Lizards forming cecal valves and other altered structures turn out to be a fixed response to the environment, a phenomena termed Phenotypic Plasticity. You move the lizards out, and the cecal valves recede on que. Nothing random about it at all. It is built into the organism.

Same with the Nylonase(modified Esterase) enzyme. Wild-type bacteria is shown to adapt to produce Nylonase in only 9 days, consistently. It is a fixed adaptation to the environment.

Random Mutations never produce anything novel, and Natural Selection doesn't have any material with which to create.

The foundational mechanism of Evolution is an empty vapor. It's not happening.

Evolution is little more than a Public Relations industry and a religion of supernatural materialism.



[link to darwins-god.blogspot.com]
[link to www.uncommondescent.com]
[link to www.evolutionnews.org]

On supposed Whale Evolution

[link to www.youtube.com]

Kent Hovind? Really? OP, you're almost as bad as that annoying bitch here who always posts those stupid Chik tracts.

Actually we created the gods in our image. We Created them to adapt to our needs, and give us a feeling of security. If you had taken the time to learn about evolution instead of cowering in fear every time it thunders and lightnings wondering why the big magic man in the sky is angry you would know that we never changed species. Our ancestors cross bred much like the process we use to make teacup poodles, and other hybrid animals.

There's a picture of one here:

[link to www.boneroom.com]

These sources are biased and uncredible. Ever hear of the peer-review process? So many of the claims you made are illogical and/or based on misinformation.

For example:
"Random Mutations never produce anything novel". This is simply untrue. Do you understand the concept of genetic coding, transcription and translation? Do you know what an allele is? If mutations never produce anything novel, how do we have diversity within a population? Please explain allelic variability.

"Every major biological structure appears suddenly". Incorrect again (and the statement doesn't make much sense either). Research cladograms, homoplasies, synapomorphies. We can document transistional changes at the genetic, molecular, cellular, system, organismal, and population levels.

"Experimental evidence shows the evolutionary mechanism of Random Mutation + Natural Selection to be a total failure." Eh? A failure at what? And what is the source of this opinion? (peer-reviewed please)

"It is utter foolishness to compare observable phenomena to a historical claim of animals mutating into other animals over millions of years of culled genetic accidents." Statements like these reveal that you do not properly understand the concepts that you are attempting to argue.

There is plenty of evidence. You are just choosing to ignore it, and instead are weaving fictious stories for yourself. Have fun with that!

Uncredible because you say so? Nope. Try again.

Yes they are biased against superstitious evolution religions which have been fully exposed as equivocation and pseudoscience. As your next comment shows, Evos will retreat to the definition of evolution as simply "change over time" when they are challenged for evidence.



Wow, you are using allele frequency as evidence for evolution? Love the equivocation. Why not just use the fact that animals reproduce as evidence for evolution? What a joke. It's no wonder you believe in it.

And Nope, genetic variation does not produce any novel functional complexity such as a new protein. Prove me wrong, show me an example and I will pick it apart with simple logic. Otherwise you're just yammering and equivocating.




Do you think spewing terms is making an argument? Cladograms, synapomorphies, and phylogentics are techniques of grouping organisms with similar genetic or morphological function. They say nothing of how those functions, or body plans, first came into being. All homoplasy shows is the same function appearing separately in independent lineages.

Show me fossil evidence of the gradual formation of a single body plan. I need a good laugh.




Entirely based on a peer-review. There is not one paper that empirically demonstrates fuctional novel protein function arising from RM-NS.

Since you are arguing in the affirmative, provide the paper.

There is a list of peer-reviewed papers detailing the limits on evolutionary mechanisms. Here are 50 of them:
[link to www.discovery.org]

There is even work being done on Natural Genetic Engineering to compensate for the obvious shortcomings of RM-NS.




Nope. No evidence. I challenge you to produce it.

Adaptation, Mutation, of course..
but Evolution, no.

What's the difference?

I think the issue is that how does species involve into different species. Macro vs micro evolution...

Why is it that homo sapien do not seem to "fit" in this world? We have to wear clothes to stay warm. Why are we so much weaker compared to higher primates? Why are we hairless compared to higher primates?

Nobody really knows... All we can do is speculate but there is no definitive proof of what really happened...

Can you please honestly think about this.

The fact that genetic variation exists, is not evidence that genetic variation can build complex body plans.

It is amazing that people will so flippantly suggest one proves the other.

It's like saying "well, sand collects on beaches, so doesn't it follow that the sand can form itself into castles and mansions and literature on the beach?"

Is this really how most Evo's think?



And observed adaptations, such as Cecal Valves in Lizards, are typically produced by phenotypic plasticity, or an organism's ability to change based on direct fixed responses to environmental conditions. NOT random mutations.

To an evo, a "just-so" story is the highest grade of proof.

If you can imagine it, then it must have happened that way.

i'm enjoying your replies, friend :)

cheers

i always asked the supporters of classic evolutionary theory,

if evolution is made through natural selection of random mutations which are fit to certain medium changes, where are the strange creatures which are the result of random mutations which were not so fit.
if it's so easy for a fish to randomly mutate into a bird such that to survive the change from water medium to earth medium, how come we don't get also very strange creatures?

if one is able of true abstract thinking, the so called scientific thinking of today is soooo funny.

like the 'great' equation of einstein. e=mc2, whose only valid point is that 'matter' and 'energy' are two equivalent ways of describing reality (one static, the other dynamic).

the numerical equivalence is pure convetion. e=m or e=mc2 or any other numeric equivalence is identical in regard to conceptual significance.

Last Edited by VenusRose on 12/09/2012 01:10 PM

reality is a combination of two opposing forces.

one which is inertial, involutionary, static, past oriented.
another which is creative, evolutionary, dynamic, future oriented.

the interplay of these to forces can be observed at any level of reality being it physical, social, metaphysical, mental or else

and even this dual understanding tells more about our subjective understanding of reality, than about reality itelf

Last Edited by VenusRose on 12/09/2012 01:17 PM

hehe, i get out quite a lot. and the 'strangeness' you talk about becomes just simple, boring and predictable after you add understanding to perception :)

i was talking about the inexistence of abominations at the level of natural species. if random mutation is really random than we would get quite a lot of species unfit in the long run, but fit enough to survive for at least a few generations. and we don't have that

Last Edited by VenusRose on 12/09/2012 01:27 PM

Firstly, Id like to apologize for the sarcasm in my last message. I wasn't sure if you were trolling or not, but now I see that you are being sincere. We clearly have very different beliefs about this topic. I'm ok with that.



Uncredible because I accept the scientific method. It's ok if you don't. We can agree to disagree.

I don't think "Evos" retreat behind this definition. It is the definition we accept in light of the evidence we've integrated. I am not challenged for evidence, I have just come to a different conclusion than you. And I'm honestly not sure what you mean by the term "superstitious evolution religions'. And I'm not sure what religion has to do with an evolutionary debate, but since you brought it there, my 'religion' (i.e. my comfort system) is an appreciation for all that remains unknown.



Mutations are causal mechanisms of allellic variability. If you understand translation and transcription (no I am not spewing terms, an understanding of these mechanisms is essential for informed evolutionary discussions), you would understand how allelic variability results in protein diversity. Its really quite a beautiful phenomenon.

There are lots of examples I could provide, but I think the difference between our perspectives lies in our different definitions of logic, and I honestly dont feel like exploring this with you since you reply so defensively.



Why do you keep comming back to the fossils? First, as many here have pointed out there are a lot of transistional fossils. Second, the fossil record is only one way of documenting the gradual changes. And if you had actually considered my response, instead of reacting defensively to it, you would have made the connections.


Correct, there are thousands.



You believe in intelligent design, cool. I believe that evolution occurs. Perform a google scholar search on any of these terms and you will find evidence counter to your arguments. Take it or leave it.



I, and countless others have provided rigorous empirical evidence. What you do with it is your choice.

Typical shills to attack people like that. His imprisonment has nothing to do with his seminars. LISTEN to what he says instead of sticking your head in the sand with your pre-conceived notions.

I've seen the video before by the way, along with every seminar and a few college courses. I agree with Hovind on most points but to be honest he's inaccurate in some cases. His seminars are like 6 - 8 years old or something so it's understandable. I love his debates with evolutionists. Hovind crush them all!
I also purchased a lot of interesting books from his website DrDino.com. They're great and interesting!

It is still a virus and always will be. Same with the dog, horse, frog, bear, ect ect.

Virus mutations are not evolution

[link to creation.com]

The guy actually makes MANY valid points. Only about 30min in though.


PIN THIS SHIT!