Evolution was not proven true...until THIS.......I am SUCH the believer now- and you??

Hahaha, not even a nice try.. sorry no evidence for evolution yet, not even clues..

I am also positive that you, along with half the people in this thread do not understand the scientific method. It's based on REPEATING RESULTS, and the premise to PROVE IT WRONG. What you're explaining so numbly, doesn't require proof. It's based on sightings or word of mouth, and the reason behind that is because it doesn't stand up to any kind of testing. It isn't even observable to most people with a shred of common sense. Omfg. Please just stop talking.

Which "intelligent" people do you speak of. Because there are some rather intelligent people (you know, scientists) who believe that you are full of shit. Or are your "itelligent" people bone rattle waving theists?

Yup, as a wise man once said it's a lot harder to unlearn an error than to learn a new truth.

No evidence for evolution;?!?!?!?! What are you living under a rock?
Go to a major university and ask a biologist if there's evidence..
Just because you don't pay attention to science, or what's happening in the world, don't you dare say it doesn't exist. There's more than proof. Repeating experiments, over and over and over. It's not even a theory any more. It's a fact. Get out from under that rock, and go read something. No proof!!! I.didn't think people here could be any more ignorant!!! No proof. Hahahaha.

Fools keep talking, the scientific method is not the end all and be all, do you all know anything at all?

that's what you get from watching too much nba..

Intelligent in some things, dumb bone rattle wavers in others.

That's it, Atheists get their religion from the Mainstream Media TV Prison Box..

No proof for evolution yet, not even a single hint.

Okay I'll bite, what is there outside of the scientific method?

There is evidence concerning Darwinian evolution. Namely the fossil record. And it clearly shows that Darwinian evolution is completely WRONG.

No it doesn't....

Yeah, we understand that if you can prove a theory by an experiment, and then have numerous other scientists repeat the same experiment, that makes it a fact. What part of that don't you understand?
What part is hard for you to understand? The fact part? I know you're probably not interested in facts, and rely more on superstition, but please try to understand that once something becomes able to repeat, that means it then is no longer a theory. Like creationism is still a theory, but darwinism is not. Do I need to speak like baby to you? Will that help? Do we need to go through links again, or are you one of those Christians who cannot read? I know there are lots of you.

Pretty original photoshop

Oh, ask who?

Dr. Etheridge, famous fossilologist of the British Museum, one of the highest authorities in the world, said: "Nine-tenths of the talk of evolutionists is sheer nonsense not founded on observation and wholly unsupported by facts. This museum is full of proofs of the utter falsity of their views. In all this great museum, there is not a particle of evidence of the transmutation of species." Is a man in that position not a credible witness?

Prof. Beale, of King's College, London, a distinguished physiologist, said: "There is no evidence that man has descended from, or is, or was, in any way specially related to, any other organism in nature, through evolution, or by any other process. In support of all naturalistic conjectures concerning man's origin, there is not, at this time, a shadow of scientific evidence."

Prof Virchow, of Berlin, a naturalist of world wide fame, said: The attempt to find the transition from the .animal to man has ended in total failure. The middle link has not been found and never will be. Evolution is all nonsense. It can not be proved by science that man descended from the ape or from any other animal."

Prof. Fleishman, of Erlangen, who once accepted Darwinism, but after further investigation repudiated it, said: "The Darwinian theory of descent has not a single fact to confirm it, in the realm of nature. It is not the result of scientific research, but is purely the product of the imagination."

Prof. Agassiz, one of the greatest scientists of any age, said: "The theory [of the transmutation of species] is a scientific mistake, untrue in its facts, unscientific in its method, and mischievous in its tendency There is not a fact known to science, tending to show that a single kind has ever been transmuted into any other."

Dr. W. H. Thompson, former president of NY Academy of Medicine, said: "The Darwinian theory is now rejected by the majority of biologists, as absurdly inadequate. It is absurd to rank man among the animals. His so called fellow animals, the primates--gorilla, orang and chimpanzee--can do nothing truly human."

Sir William Dawson, an eminent geologist, of Canada, said: "The record of the rocks is decidedly against evolutionists, especially in the abrupt appearance of new forms under specific types, and without apparent predecessors...Paleontology furnishes no evidence as to the actual transformation of one species into another. No such case is certainly known. Nothing is known about the origin of man except what is told in Scripture."

The foremost evolutionists, Spencer, Huxley and Romanes, before their death, repudiated Darwinism. Haeckel alone supported the theory and that by forged evidence.

Dr. St. George Mivert, late professor of biology in the University College of Kensington, calls Darwinism a "puerile hypothesis."

Dr. James Orr, of Edinburgh University, says: "The greatest scientists and theologians of Europe are now pronouncing Darwinism to be absolutely dead."

Dr. Traas, a famous paleontologist, concludes: "The idea that mankind is descended from any simian species whatever, is certainly the most foolish ever put forth by a man writing on the history of man." Does this apply to H. G. Wells?

Dr. N. S. Shaler, professor of Geology, in Harvard University, said: "It is not yet proved that a single species of the two or three millions, now inhabiting the earth had been established solely or mainly, by the operation of natural selection."

Prof. Haeckel, a most extreme evolutionist, confesses: "Most modern investigators of science have come to the conclusion that the doctrine of evolution, and particularly Darwinism, is an error, and can not be maintained.

Prof. Huxley, said that evolution is "not proved and not provable."

Sir Charles Bell, Prof. of the University College of London, says: "Everything declares the species to have their origin in a distinct creation, not in a gradual variation from some original type."

[link to www.ldolphin.org]

And you believe that the fossil record shows magic to be correct?

Unfortunately since the sub-species you belong to stopped evolving 2000 years ago you simply do not have the brain power to understand when evidence is presented to you.
It's not your fault though, it's genetic.

No shit. It's talking about attributes, and I happen to agree with the INVISIBLE element. If you have invisible qualities you don't show up to author books in the physical realm that will be utilized to manipulate the unsuspecting masses at the helm of men who sought political power and CONTROL. Wake up. Those who proclaim to speak for 'God' are projecting thoughts from their own consciousness. It's human nature and it's important that others recognize this.

Nope, just that every fossil ever discovered, thousands and thousands and thousands of them, shows every species to be static.

What you are basically saying is there is nothing outside of the 5 senses, which the scientific method deals with. Just not wise I think to rule anything beyond the 5 out.

[link to en.wikipedia.org]

Animals and nature can make a man laugh.
Man no longer makes me laugh.

I'm so tired of standing my ground in these threads against the uneducated Christians. Post tons of links to research papers, and go through all this stuff just to have to watch them post YouTube video links regarding how evolution is proved wrong by some random dude on YouTube. Or by the famous quote from Darwin himself that has been taken out of context by everyone from Glenn beck to Kenn ham.
I can't take it any more. There's no point in arguing with people that are either illiterate or lazy. Why is it that everyone here that didn't go to college is 100% against Darwin, but every college graduate cannot understand what schooling these people missed. That's why you guys work for us and not the other way around.. grrr science, right?
So angry at science, while you type on your computers in your houses that science built, in your clothes that science perfected, ect, ect..
I'm out of here, but before I go, I just want to remind everyone that hooked on phonics is still available via their website. I suggest grabbing that, Christians. Please.

We can build machines to account for things outside of our senses. But until we build such machines there is no reason to believe that such things exist. Unless what you are saying is that we have free reign to make up things and use the fiat excuse, "we just can't perceive them" which opens up the door to a whole lot of foolishness.

yeah.. but you just did..

So the Creator of all would just leave His creation all to itself without any communication? That's what the bible is, a guide for His children.

What happens to living organisms when the Earth is inundated with surges in cosmic radiation in the manner that ice core samples and geological records have substantiated?