Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 798 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 381,741
Pageviews Today: 477,712Threads Today: 51Posts Today: 1,228
06:03 AM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

500+ Renowned Scientists Jointly Share Why They Reject Darwin’s Theory of Evolution

 
Pilgrim001

User ID: 75732347
United States
08/03/2018 02:56 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 500+ Renowned Scientists Jointly Share Why They Reject Darwin’s Theory of Evolution


How anyone can look at the complexity of the human body and say it just happened is a fool. Even if you don't believe in God, we were definitely "constructed"
 Quoting: Sodbuster


Any subset within the human body is amazing. The Eye, alone, is an engineering marvel. When an eye is joined by another in Stereo vision, Depth percept results and a clearer picture. Evil lutionist would have you believe it all started with a light sensitive mole on the skin. LOL

The Human body is an amazing thing. It's not perfect, but damn it's good. Whether we have a soul or not, is up to you, but it's undeniable that we are a an engineering marvel. We are self-replicating machines. That we might adapt to certain things isn't an indication of evil ution, but testimony to the greatness and adaptability of the original model.
Funny how 'social security' has a shortfall...but never WELFARE!
Gimme a break.
Somehow, we can always afford ALL types of welfare (even for millions of illegal immigrants!), plus billions in foreign aid to nations that hate us...BUT...social security is a "problem".

Nah, the problem is the goobermint...Unknown AC.


Blame it on my ADD, baby...Sail


The election of Donald Trump didn't cause the hatred displayed by the progressive liberal left and democratic party. The election of Donald Trump exposed it.
Donald Isaacson

Don't forget to have your Liberals spayed or neutered....Stolen
Drunkenkungfu

User ID: 76605784
Australia
08/03/2018 03:00 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 500+ Renowned Scientists Jointly Share Why They Reject Darwin’s Theory of Evolution
There For GOD/Creator because I don't know.
11:11
Tumbler

User ID: 76792921
United Kingdom
08/03/2018 03:03 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 500+ Renowned Scientists Jointly Share Why They Reject Darwin’s Theory of Evolution
A good example of what, in aggregate , is 'Trickle Down' Disclosure .

As we can see here in this thread , the likely truth is far too much for certain groups of people to handle in a balanced way .
For many, change is something very difficult and painful to accommodate and the type of person who fits , for example , the Fundamentalist or 'Bible Literal 'name tags clearly struggle , as their whole world view is threatened .
Rightly or wrongly it has been decided that rather than risk hysteria and violence on a widespread scale , it is better to reveal matters step by step and little by little.
Very understandable unless you are highly impatient and also sufficiently balanced and flexible to absorb fundamental changes in outlook and a revision of history in many areas .
Tumbler
plzxplain

User ID: 76795396
Australia
08/03/2018 03:04 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 500+ Renowned Scientists Jointly Share Why They Reject Darwin’s Theory of Evolution
And my largest frustration in any debate is how the subject matter gets framed.

Darwin's book was titled "The Origin Of Species." He postulated that evolution within a species somehow leads to THE CREATION OF NEW SPECIES. Over time we have all accepted that EVOLUTION is real. AND IT IS! Humans in sunny, hot environments are very different from humans in cold, sun-starved environments.

Evolution within species is undeniable; however, evolution as a means of explaining origins of new species is ludicrous.
 Quoting: Harry The Dog


Evolution within species is not called Evolution it's called adaptation meaning that the human being is still a human and always will be a human it doesn't change into another species. Instead it is written in the Human genome to have the abiñity to adapt to different environmemtal conditions as a means of protección. if I were to go to a hotter climate in Africa my skin would darken but I would still be a human and a part of the human family the DNA is a code whatever it says you are you are.
 Quoting: Muscles


You would 'adapt'
Adaptation refers to the process wherein certain groups or individuals change their ways in order to be better suited to their environment and habitat. This is change is needed so that they can survive and maintain normal functioning in their community. For example, during winters or cold days, individuals learn to alter their homes and personal clothes to be able to live through the chilling temperatures.

Read more: Difference Between Adaptation and Evolution | Difference Between [link to www.differencebetween.net]


Over a very long period of time, your bloodline would 'evolve' :

Evolution, though, takes a long time. It is a process in which the genetic structure and physical anatomy change in relation to the changes happening in the environment. It does not occur overnight, but invokes generations in order to turn out into the best being suitable. Human beings are indeed an example, as evidenced from our ancestors the Homo erectus, to Homo sapiens, or basically, us. We are the proof of evolution.


Hers another example, your nose lol it will eventually change genetically, become broader

[link to www.smithsonianmag.com (secure)]
mushufasa11

User ID: 76590430
Canada
08/03/2018 03:14 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 500+ Renowned Scientists Jointly Share Why They Reject Darwin’s Theory of Evolution
Even if Darwinian evolution is indeed the general framework that more or less drives life/speciation, there will be intricacies that we humans cannot comprehend. Human's are not very good at context. The idea of change occurring over thousands or millions of years is very difficult to conceive. Nature is vast with many secrets and we have already been caught time and time again as being negligent to how interconnected all species are. Our sciences ultimately form man-made conclusions that are not "fact" or "truth" but rather speculative opinion.

That is to say it is as equally speculative as any other "theory" that man can conclude.

Can you live without having a belief in the matter? Should we not try to live in harmony with nature no matter what the theory?
 Quoting: mushufasa11


We have laws of science, such as the laws of thermodynamics, biogenesis, etc

Evolution violates these laws

If you keep studying you will see that the universe is incredibly fine-tuned, and it could not have happened by random chance.
 Quoting: Expose ALL Shills


These laws have held up and served our needs pretty well since being implemented in civilization. I would question whether these are universally built-in laws that were "discovered." Perhaps the universe does tend to behave this way for the most part, but there is probably more to the story.

I never said anything happened by random chance.

The dichotomy between random chance and creation is an example of taking data and arriving at an inevitably short-minded conclusion.
plzxplain

User ID: 76795396
Australia
08/03/2018 03:15 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 500+ Renowned Scientists Jointly Share Why They Reject Darwin’s Theory of Evolution
A good example of what, in aggregate , is 'Trickle Down' Disclosure .

As we can see here in this thread , the likely truth is far too much for certain groups of people to handle in a balanced way .
For many, change is something very difficult and painful to accommodate and the type of person who fits , for example , the Fundamentalist or 'Bible Literal 'name tags clearly struggle , as their whole world view is threatened .
Rightly or wrongly it has been decided that rather than risk hysteria and violence on a widespread scale , it is better to reveal matters step by step and little by little.
Very understandable unless you are highly impatient and also sufficiently balanced and flexible to absorb fundamental changes in outlook and a revision of history in many areas .
 Quoting: Tumbler


Well said, and that is why most 'truths' will not be revealed.
(and why people get red karma, lol for even daring to consider, that some 'book/s', may be www . rr . o . n . g . .

catfilenails
Drunkenkungfu

User ID: 76605784
Australia
08/03/2018 03:16 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 500+ Renowned Scientists Jointly Share Why They Reject Darwin’s Theory of Evolution
And my largest frustration in any debate is how the subject matter gets framed.

Darwin's book was titled "The Origin Of Species." He postulated that evolution within a species somehow leads to THE CREATION OF NEW SPECIES. Over time we have all accepted that EVOLUTION is real. AND IT IS! Humans in sunny, hot environments are very different from humans in cold, sun-starved environments.

Evolution within species is undeniable; however, evolution as a means of explaining origins of new species is ludicrous.
 Quoting: Harry The Dog


Evolution within species is not called Evolution it's called adaptation meaning that the human being is still a human and always will be a human it doesn't change into another species. Instead it is written in the Human genome to have the abiñity to adapt to different environmemtal conditions as a means of protección. if I were to go to a hotter climate in Africa my skin would darken but I would still be a human and a part of the human family the DNA is a code whatever it says you are you are.
 Quoting: Muscles


You would 'adapt'
Adaptation refers to the process wherein certain groups or individuals change their ways in order to be better suited to their environment and habitat. This is change is needed so that they can survive and maintain normal functioning in their community. For example, during winters or cold days, individuals learn to alter their homes and personal clothes to be able to live through the chilling temperatures.

Read more: Difference Between Adaptation and Evolution | Difference Between [link to www.differencebetween.net]


Over a very long period of time, your bloodline would 'evolve' :

Evolution, though, takes a long time. It is a process in which the genetic structure and physical anatomy change in relation to the changes happening in the environment. It does not occur overnight, but invokes generations in order to turn out into the best being suitable. Human beings are indeed an example, as evidenced from our ancestors the Homo erectus, to Homo sapiens, or basically, us. We are the proof of evolution.


Hers another example, your nose lol it will eventually change genetically, become broader

[link to www.smithsonianmag.com (secure)]
 Quoting: plzxplain


Everything is, Our current line of life is quiet extensive,
11:11
SDF880

User ID: 69153735
United States
08/03/2018 03:18 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 500+ Renowned Scientists Jointly Share Why They Reject Darwin’s Theory of Evolution
OK I give so we are God's cosmic petri dish of DNA/RNA, amino acid, cells, etc so great I am nothing but his cosmic experiment! If that is so is that any worse than being the latest in evolution? You all are just scared, have answers based only in faith yet we are here and now so one of us is right! 60+ years on this planet I have seen zero evidence
of any God! I don't need to explain things seems I have no choice but witness it and live life best I can! I'll figure it out when I get there!

Peace
SDF880
Pilgrim001

User ID: 75732347
United States
08/03/2018 09:40 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 500+ Renowned Scientists Jointly Share Why They Reject Darwin’s Theory of Evolution
500+ Renowned Scientists Jointly Share Why They Reject Darwin’s Theory of Evolution

snip....

"As a biochemist and software developer who works in genetic and metabolic screening, I am continually amazed by the incredible complexity of life. For example, each of us has a vast ‘computer program’ of six billion DNA bases in every cell that guided our development from a fertilized egg, specifies how to make more than 200 tissue types, and ties all this together in numerous highly functional organ systems. Few people outside of genetics or biochemistry realize that evolutionists still can provide no substantive details at all about the origin of life, and particularly the origin of genetic information in the first self-replicating organism. What genes did it require — or did it even have genes? How much DNA and RNA did it have — or did it even have nucleic acids? How did huge information-rich molecules arise before natural selection? Exactly how did the genetic code linking nucleic acids to amino acid sequence originate? Clearly the origin of life — the foundation of evolution – is still virtually all speculation, and little if no fact."

[link to www.collective-evolution.com (secure)]
 Quoting: (:-DeeZe


Fuck darwin fuck everything nothing not even the bible explains what the fuck we are or anything i seen a small fly the other day it was so fucking small there is no way in HELL that shit just made it self out of nothing its so deep and complicated i dunno what the hell to believe what the hell is the sun what is space what the hell is water why are we even here what is this?
 Quoting: Q33



I believe you've hit the nail on the head. We know nothing and there is no way to really know anything. The answers in the Bible really aren't satisfactory and it is "channeled" information, so what is left? Nothing.
To me, it's really plain that we are a created mechanism, but, beyond that, ??? Who are we? What are we? Where are we? Who made us?
Funny how 'social security' has a shortfall...but never WELFARE!
Gimme a break.
Somehow, we can always afford ALL types of welfare (even for millions of illegal immigrants!), plus billions in foreign aid to nations that hate us...BUT...social security is a "problem".

Nah, the problem is the goobermint...Unknown AC.


Blame it on my ADD, baby...Sail


The election of Donald Trump didn't cause the hatred displayed by the progressive liberal left and democratic party. The election of Donald Trump exposed it.
Donald Isaacson

Don't forget to have your Liberals spayed or neutered....Stolen
Pilgrim001

User ID: 75732347
United States
08/03/2018 10:00 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 500+ Renowned Scientists Jointly Share Why They Reject Darwin’s Theory of Evolution
Laugh, Scoff, Do what you will, but I've never read a better explanation of it all than from reading the Nurse's story in Alien Interview.

[link to exopoliticshongkong.com]


You say that it's impossible that "the alien" could telepathically send it's thoughts to the nurse? Well, that's how we got the Bible.

Last Edited by Pilgrim001 on 08/03/2018 10:02 AM
Funny how 'social security' has a shortfall...but never WELFARE!
Gimme a break.
Somehow, we can always afford ALL types of welfare (even for millions of illegal immigrants!), plus billions in foreign aid to nations that hate us...BUT...social security is a "problem".

Nah, the problem is the goobermint...Unknown AC.


Blame it on my ADD, baby...Sail


The election of Donald Trump didn't cause the hatred displayed by the progressive liberal left and democratic party. The election of Donald Trump exposed it.
Donald Isaacson

Don't forget to have your Liberals spayed or neutered....Stolen
Harry The Dog

User ID: 52680061
United States
08/03/2018 10:47 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 500+ Renowned Scientists Jointly Share Why They Reject Darwin’s Theory of Evolution
And my largest frustration in any debate is how the subject matter gets framed.

Darwin's book was titled "The Origin Of Species." He postulated that evolution within a species somehow leads to THE CREATION OF NEW SPECIES. Over time we have all accepted that EVOLUTION is real. AND IT IS! Humans in sunny, hot environments are very different from humans in cold, sun-starved environments.

Evolution within species is undeniable; however, evolution as a means of explaining origins of new species is ludicrous.
 Quoting: Harry The Dog


Evolution within species is not called Evolution it's called adaptation meaning that the human being is still a human and always will be a human it doesn't change into another species. Instead it is written in the Human genome to have the abiñity to adapt to different environmemtal conditions as a means of protección. if I were to go to a hotter climate in Africa my skin would darken but I would still be a human and a part of the human family the DNA is a code whatever it says you are you are.
 Quoting: Muscles


You would 'adapt'
Adaptation refers to the process wherein certain groups or individuals change their ways in order to be better suited to their environment and habitat. This is change is needed so that they can survive and maintain normal functioning in their community. For example, during winters or cold days, individuals learn to alter their homes and personal clothes to be able to live through the chilling temperatures.

Read more: Difference Between Adaptation and Evolution | Difference Between [link to www.differencebetween.net]


Over a very long period of time, your bloodline would 'evolve' :

Evolution, though, takes a long time. It is a process in which the genetic structure and physical anatomy change in relation to the changes happening in the environment. It does not occur overnight, but invokes generations in order to turn out into the best being suitable. Human beings are indeed an example, as evidenced from our ancestors the Homo erectus, to Homo sapiens, or basically, us. We are the proof of evolution.


Hers another example, your nose lol it will eventually change genetically, become broader

[link to www.smithsonianmag.com (secure)]
 Quoting: plzxplain


I can agree with all of this, but it does nothing to prove that evolution is the causative mechanism for the origin of new species.
The Monk

User ID: 74859192
Norway
08/03/2018 11:15 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 500+ Renowned Scientists Jointly Share Why They Reject Darwin’s Theory of Evolution
Give me ONE renowned scientist who rejects Evolution, and who isn't also a Bible tard, then I'll listen.
ToSeek

User ID: 9653749
United States
08/03/2018 11:28 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 500+ Renowned Scientists Jointly Share Why They Reject Darwin’s Theory of Evolution
The origin of life is a separate issue. Evolution only deals with what happened after life began.
 Quoting: ToSeek


Lol.... that's where the theory of evolution completely falls apart though so you guys totally discard that part ... great science there ... lol
 Quoting: The Patriot Mind


The theory of evolution only comes into play once organisms start reproducing. It's irrelevant before then. It would be like saying a professional race car driver is incompetent because he can't build his own car - his expertise only comes into play once the car is built and ready to drive.
ToSeek

User ID: 9653749
United States
08/03/2018 11:30 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 500+ Renowned Scientists Jointly Share Why They Reject Darwin’s Theory of Evolution
The religion of evolution is losing members fast.

Praise God
 Quoting: Expose ALL Shills


where is the list of the 500 Scientists who Reject Darwin's Theory/
 Quoting: seadog 36


Here (PDF download): [link to www.discovery.org]

If you see the names of any scientists sufficiently "renowned" that you recognize them, please let me know.
TheLordsServant

User ID: 76810300
United States
08/03/2018 12:30 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 500+ Renowned Scientists Jointly Share Why They Reject Darwin’s Theory of Evolution
The religion of evolution is losing members fast.

Praise God
 Quoting: Expose ALL Shills


where is the list of the 500 Scientists who Reject Darwin's Theory/
 Quoting: seadog 36


Here (PDF download): [link to www.discovery.org]

If you see the names of any scientists sufficiently "renowned" that you recognize them, please let me know.
 Quoting: ToSeek


How many of the 1400 would anyone consider as "renowned"?

And to make things a little harder on themselves, they only asked scientists named "Steve." They're up to 1427 signatures and counting. ( [link to ncse.com (secure)] )
 Quoting: ToSeek


It would also be interesting to see how many of these 1400 are "devout atheists".

How many of them are afraid to sign the other list based on previous attempts by "devout Darwinists" to blacklist anyone who disagrees with the Darwin "theory"?

Darwinsim is a religion unto itself.
I am but a humble Servant of the one True Living God.
ToSeek

User ID: 9653749
United States
08/03/2018 01:25 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 500+ Renowned Scientists Jointly Share Why They Reject Darwin’s Theory of Evolution
How many of the 1400 would anyone consider as "renowned"?

 Quoting: TheLordsServant


No one claimed that the "Project Steve" list was composed of renowned scientists, unlike the OP and the list of 500. But there are some, anyway:

Stephen Hawking (Steve #300)
Steven Weinberg (Nobel Prize in Physics, 1979)
Steven Chu (Nobel Prize in Physics, 1997)
Kakarot_

User ID: 76796294
Australia
08/03/2018 01:28 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 500+ Renowned Scientists Jointly Share Why They Reject Darwin’s Theory of Evolution
Pointless thread as Endogenous Retroviruses have already proven evolution 100%.
seadog 36

User ID: 76809044
United States
08/03/2018 06:19 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 500+ Renowned Scientists Jointly Share Why They Reject Darwin’s Theory of Evolution
How many of the 1400 would anyone consider as "renowned"?

 Quoting: TheLordsServant


No one claimed that the "Project Steve" list was composed of renowned scientists, unlike the OP and the list of 500. But there are some, anyway:

Stephen Hawking (Steve #300)
Steven Weinberg (Nobel Prize in Physics, 1979)
Steven Chu (Nobel Prize in Physics, 1997)
 Quoting: ToSeek


here is a one page speech that Hawking gave that
addresses what you say.

[link to www.hawking.org.uk]
Expose ALL Shills

User ID: 75409848
United States
08/03/2018 11:22 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 500+ Renowned Scientists Jointly Share Why They Reject Darwin’s Theory of Evolution
Even if Darwinian evolution is indeed the general framework that more or less drives life/speciation, there will be intricacies that we humans cannot comprehend. Human's are not very good at context. The idea of change occurring over thousands or millions of years is very difficult to conceive. Nature is vast with many secrets and we have already been caught time and time again as being negligent to how interconnected all species are. Our sciences ultimately form man-made conclusions that are not "fact" or "truth" but rather speculative opinion.

That is to say it is as equally speculative as any other "theory" that man can conclude.

Can you live without having a belief in the matter? Should we not try to live in harmony with nature no matter what the theory?
 Quoting: mushufasa11


We have laws of science, such as the laws of thermodynamics, biogenesis, etc

Evolution violates these laws

If you keep studying you will see that the universe is incredibly fine-tuned, and it could not have happened by random chance.
 Quoting: Expose ALL Shills


These laws have held up and served our needs pretty well since being implemented in civilization. I would question whether these are universally built-in laws that were "discovered." Perhaps the universe does tend to behave this way for the most part, but there is probably more to the story.

I never said anything happened by random chance.

The dichotomy between random chance and creation is an example of taking data and arriving at an inevitably short-minded conclusion.
 Quoting: mushufasa11


They are called laws for a reason, not because they serve human needs.

We should be teaching Biogenesis in the schools as fact, not abiogenesis.

Evolution is a tax-funded religion and nothing more.
Expose ALL Shills

User ID: 75409848
United States
08/03/2018 11:27 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 500+ Renowned Scientists Jointly Share Why They Reject Darwin’s Theory of Evolution
Pointless thread as Endogenous Retroviruses have already proven evolution 100%.
 Quoting: Kakarot_


Did the ERV spontaneously arise from mud and rocks?

You are back where you started, with nothing.
The Patriot Mind

User ID: 72537830
United States
08/04/2018 02:49 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 500+ Renowned Scientists Jointly Share Why They Reject Darwin’s Theory of Evolution
Evolution is driven by adaptation...
 Quoting: BYM


Totally disagree
Fighting and triggering liberals and SJW's in the trenches of their safe spaces since 2014

Signed,

The Patriot Mind
Kakarot_

User ID: 76796294
Australia
08/04/2018 08:55 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 500+ Renowned Scientists Jointly Share Why They Reject Darwin’s Theory of Evolution
Pointless thread as Endogenous Retroviruses have already proven evolution 100%.
 Quoting: Kakarot_


Did the ERV spontaneously arise from mud and rocks?

You are back where you started, with nothing.
 Quoting: Expose ALL Shills


ERVs are indirect evidence of evolution, common descent. Retroviruses make a DNA copy of their RNA genome and then insert it into a random position in the host out of 3 billion positions, if its in a germline cell the host's offspring will have the ERV instead and if this offspring reproduces, its offspring will also have the ERV in the exact same position, this will keep repeating over and over every generation, which is why humans and chimps share 99.9% of their ERV insertions in the exact same position with the exact same mutations. It is literally impossible for evolution to not exist due to this. (99.9% is 203,000 ERV insertions shared between humans and chimps)

Last Edited by Kakarot_ on 08/04/2018 08:57 AM
Expose ALL Shills

User ID: 75409848
United States
08/04/2018 01:50 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 500+ Renowned Scientists Jointly Share Why They Reject Darwin’s Theory of Evolution
Pointless thread as Endogenous Retroviruses have already proven evolution 100%.
 Quoting: Kakarot_


Did the ERV spontaneously arise from mud and rocks?

You are back where you started, with nothing.
 Quoting: Expose ALL Shills


ERVs are indirect evidence of evolution, common descent. Retroviruses make a DNA copy of their RNA genome and then insert it into a random position in the host out of 3 billion positions, if its in a germline cell the host's offspring will have the ERV instead and if this offspring reproduces, its offspring will also have the ERV in the exact same position, this will keep repeating over and over every generation, which is why humans and chimps share 99.9% of their ERV insertions in the exact same position with the exact same mutations. It is literally impossible for evolution to not exist due to this. (99.9% is 203,000 ERV insertions shared between humans and chimps)
 Quoting: Kakarot_


The ERV still has genetic material, right?

I believe you are confusing amino acids with nucleic acids. They are not the same.
Spur-Man

User ID: 75814481
Australia
08/05/2018 01:17 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 500+ Renowned Scientists Jointly Share Why They Reject Darwin’s Theory of Evolution
Wow, 500 scientists? lol

I can give you a list of 500 scientists named Peter who accept evolution.
Expose ALL Shills

User ID: 75409848
United States
08/05/2018 04:06 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 500+ Renowned Scientists Jointly Share Why They Reject Darwin’s Theory of Evolution
Wow, 500 scientists? lol

I can give you a list of 500 scientists named Peter who accept evolution.
 Quoting: Spur-Man


Do it, provide some names and you will see them backtracking away from some of the things which are still taught as fact in the public schools.

The most common excuse is 'evolution only deals with what happened after life appeared' or some form of that.
seadog 36

User ID: 76809044
United States
08/05/2018 04:14 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 500+ Renowned Scientists Jointly Share Why They Reject Darwin’s Theory of Evolution
Pointless thread as Endogenous Retroviruses have already proven evolution 100%.
 Quoting: Kakarot_


Did the ERV spontaneously arise from mud and rocks?

You are back where you started, with nothing.
 Quoting: Expose ALL Shills


ERVs are indirect evidence of evolution, common descent. Retroviruses make a DNA copy of their RNA genome and then insert it into a random position in the host out of 3 billion positions, if its in a germline cell the host's offspring will have the ERV instead and if this offspring reproduces, its offspring will also have the ERV in the exact same position, this will keep repeating over and over every generation, which is why humans and chimps share 99.9% of their ERV insertions in the exact same position with the exact same mutations. It is literally impossible for evolution to not exist due to this. (99.9% is 203,000 ERV insertions shared between humans and chimps)
 Quoting: Kakarot_


The ERV still has genetic material, right?

I believe you are confusing amino acids with nucleic acids. They are not the same.
 Quoting: Expose ALL Shills


the 4 basic Amino Acids are basic for all DNA
Kakarot_

User ID: 76796294
Australia
08/05/2018 10:42 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 500+ Renowned Scientists Jointly Share Why They Reject Darwin’s Theory of Evolution
Pointless thread as Endogenous Retroviruses have already proven evolution 100%.
 Quoting: Kakarot_


Did the ERV spontaneously arise from mud and rocks?

You are back where you started, with nothing.
 Quoting: Expose ALL Shills


ERVs are indirect evidence of evolution, common descent. Retroviruses make a DNA copy of their RNA genome and then insert it into a random position in the host out of 3 billion positions, if its in a germline cell the host's offspring will have the ERV instead and if this offspring reproduces, its offspring will also have the ERV in the exact same position, this will keep repeating over and over every generation, which is why humans and chimps share 99.9% of their ERV insertions in the exact same position with the exact same mutations. It is literally impossible for evolution to not exist due to this. (99.9% is 203,000 ERV insertions shared between humans and chimps)
 Quoting: Kakarot_


The ERV still has genetic material, right?

I believe you are confusing amino acids with nucleic acids. They are not the same.
 Quoting: Expose ALL Shills


ERVs contain the retrovirus genes GAG POL ENV. As well as the Long Terminal Repeats, LTRs, which are formed during reverse transcription, the process retroviruses use to make a DNA copy of their RNA genome. The LTRs are both sides of the ERVs, just like they see today when todays retroviruses do the same thing.

The 2 LTRs in each ERV have to be completely, 100% identical at the time of insertion. So when they look at the LTRs in each ERV, they are able to see the how old the ERVs are compared to the other ERVs. The more divergence of the mutations between the 2 LTRs in each ERV shows how old they are compared to the other pairs of LTRs in the other ERVs.

The more divergence of the LTRs, the older they are, the more mutation difference between each LTR in each ERV. When they look at the same LTRs in multiple species, it shows how closely related the species are. Since the LTRs are more identical in chimps with humans, than with gorillas and humans, they know chimps and humans are more closely related than with gorillas and humans. And that gorillas and humans are more closely related than with old world monkeys and humans. It shows chimps and humans share a common ancestor more recently than with gorillas and humans.

This proves evolution as it is impossible for humans and chimps to share ERVs without evolution, as ERVs are retrovirus insertions and that they KNOW they are retrovirus insertions due to the LTRs which are formed during reverse transcription, the process retroviruses use to make a DNA copy of their RNA genome. And that, they contain retrovirus genes..
Expose ALL Shills

User ID: 75409848
United States
08/05/2018 11:27 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 500+ Renowned Scientists Jointly Share Why They Reject Darwin’s Theory of Evolution
...


Did the ERV spontaneously arise from mud and rocks?

You are back where you started, with nothing.
 Quoting: Expose ALL Shills


ERVs are indirect evidence of evolution, common descent. Retroviruses make a DNA copy of their RNA genome and then insert it into a random position in the host out of 3 billion positions, if its in a germline cell the host's offspring will have the ERV instead and if this offspring reproduces, its offspring will also have the ERV in the exact same position, this will keep repeating over and over every generation, which is why humans and chimps share 99.9% of their ERV insertions in the exact same position with the exact same mutations. It is literally impossible for evolution to not exist due to this. (99.9% is 203,000 ERV insertions shared between humans and chimps)
 Quoting: Kakarot_


The ERV still has genetic material, right?

I believe you are confusing amino acids with nucleic acids. They are not the same.
 Quoting: Expose ALL Shills


ERVs contain the retrovirus genes GAG POL ENV. As well as the Long Terminal Repeats, LTRs, which are formed during reverse transcription, the process retroviruses use to make a DNA copy of their RNA genome. The LTRs are both sides of the ERVs, just like they see today when todays retroviruses do the same thing.

The 2 LTRs in each ERV have to be completely, 100% identical at the time of insertion. So when they look at the LTRs in each ERV, they are able to see the how old the ERVs are compared to the other ERVs. The more divergence of the mutations between the 2 LTRs in each ERV shows how old they are compared to the other pairs of LTRs in the other ERVs.

The more divergence of the LTRs, the older they are, the more mutation difference between each LTR in each ERV. When they look at the same LTRs in multiple species, it shows how closely related the species are. Since the LTRs are more identical in chimps with humans, than with gorillas and humans, they know chimps and humans are more closely related than with gorillas and humans. And that gorillas and humans are more closely related than with old world monkeys and humans. It shows chimps and humans share a common ancestor more recently than with gorillas and humans.

This proves evolution as it is impossible for humans and chimps to share ERVs without evolution, as ERVs are retrovirus insertions and that they KNOW they are retrovirus insertions due to the LTRs which are formed during reverse transcription, the process retroviruses use to make a DNA copy of their RNA genome. And that, they contain retrovirus genes..
 Quoting: Kakarot_


This is the old tired argument of common design vs common descent.

Once you are able to show that genetic material can arise magically from a few non-chiral amino acids, then come back and say evolution is possible. Until then you still have nothing.
Kakarot_

User ID: 76796294
Australia
08/06/2018 04:28 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 500+ Renowned Scientists Jointly Share Why They Reject Darwin’s Theory of Evolution
...


ERVs are indirect evidence of evolution, common descent. Retroviruses make a DNA copy of their RNA genome and then insert it into a random position in the host out of 3 billion positions, if its in a germline cell the host's offspring will have the ERV instead and if this offspring reproduces, its offspring will also have the ERV in the exact same position, this will keep repeating over and over every generation, which is why humans and chimps share 99.9% of their ERV insertions in the exact same position with the exact same mutations. It is literally impossible for evolution to not exist due to this. (99.9% is 203,000 ERV insertions shared between humans and chimps)
 Quoting: Kakarot_


The ERV still has genetic material, right?

I believe you are confusing amino acids with nucleic acids. They are not the same.
 Quoting: Expose ALL Shills


ERVs contain the retrovirus genes GAG POL ENV. As well as the Long Terminal Repeats, LTRs, which are formed during reverse transcription, the process retroviruses use to make a DNA copy of their RNA genome. The LTRs are both sides of the ERVs, just like they see today when todays retroviruses do the same thing.

The 2 LTRs in each ERV have to be completely, 100% identical at the time of insertion. So when they look at the LTRs in each ERV, they are able to see the how old the ERVs are compared to the other ERVs. The more divergence of the mutations between the 2 LTRs in each ERV shows how old they are compared to the other pairs of LTRs in the other ERVs.

The more divergence of the LTRs, the older they are, the more mutation difference between each LTR in each ERV. When they look at the same LTRs in multiple species, it shows how closely related the species are. Since the LTRs are more identical in chimps with humans, than with gorillas and humans, they know chimps and humans are more closely related than with gorillas and humans. And that gorillas and humans are more closely related than with old world monkeys and humans. It shows chimps and humans share a common ancestor more recently than with gorillas and humans.

This proves evolution as it is impossible for humans and chimps to share ERVs without evolution, as ERVs are retrovirus insertions and that they KNOW they are retrovirus insertions due to the LTRs which are formed during reverse transcription, the process retroviruses use to make a DNA copy of their RNA genome. And that, they contain retrovirus genes..
 Quoting: Kakarot_


This is the old tired argument of common design vs common descent.

Once you are able to show that genetic material can arise magically from a few non-chiral amino acids, then come back and say evolution is possible. Until then you still have nothing.
 Quoting: Expose ALL Shills


This is not common design, these are retrovirus insertions. They KNOW they are insertions, not from an original design. They see the exact same thing still happening today in person. LTRs form during reverse transcription. All the ERVs have LTRs both sides of the ERVs. They see the same thing happening today with todays retroviruses. It is literally the best single evidence of evolution. Humans and chimps share 99.9% (203,000 insertions) of their ERVs in the exact same position with the exact same mutations, you have to be mentally retarded to reject it. Retroviruses insert into 1 of 3 billion places, this ERV will stay in that same position generation after generation and that is what we see in all the apes. It is impossible for there to be no evolution/common descent.
Asmodée

User ID: 76764840
United States
08/06/2018 04:58 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 500+ Renowned Scientists Jointly Share Why They Reject Darwin’s Theory of Evolution
Evolution is more philosophy than science
 Quoting: 589


Its wistful thinking.
Crowley rhymes with "owl fleas"