Evolution Bashing Thread

First up - Yama Tombo, this is the second time you've made up something and said that you're quoting me. Stop it now.


This sentence makes absolutely no sense. Please find some way to restate it in English.


Here's a step by step guide to observing evolution.

Watching EvolutionGo outside.Open your eyes.Look at a living thing.That's it. Not too complicated. The problem with your argument is that you fail to understand the concept you are arguing against. Right now, you are saying that you should be able to go outside and watch something turn into a different life form. Well guess what? You can! Unfortunately, unless you have a life span of millions of years, you won't notice any change. Evolution is an extremely slow process. It can take thousands of generations to complete one change in one organism. Despite the fact that we have patiently explained this to you for the last 14 pages, you still wander blindly through the discussion, spouting off made-up quotes and ignoring our explanations. You have failed to bring up one good scientific challenge to evolution, and have resorted to inventing quotes and referring to other poster's ideas instead of actually contributing your own.
So please, either contribute or wait to post until you have something meaningful to add.
 
I guess you have short term memory because you answered me already with evolution has "no ending." By the way, I don't take orders from you.



That was not to you! The question is can you read english, Omicron or K_Coffin?









No, you fail to see what I'm saying. It's too bad you can't read my mind.
I realize it take million years.

[/u]

You've said something like this to aikimac. You just haven't been able to explain anything to me, except insult me.




And I'm tried of having to repeat myself to you! And even if I don't post a comment to you! You reply anyway.
 
Actually Yama, I agree 100% with everything K_Coffin has said.

I do have a hard time understanding what you mean with sentences like:

I'm not trying to make fun of your English, or to say that you are not intellingent because of it, but I have genuine difficulty in understanding what you mean.

I'm sorry that we fail to see your arguement, but again, it is difficult to understand. I don't mean any disrespect, and I'm sorry if you've been insulted, but I honestly don't quite see what you are trying to argue.
 
I find the fact that mankind has been on this earth for an infinitisimally small amount of time compared to the age of the earth. We are just a blip on the scale of history. Yet here we are destroying what took billions of years to create. Evolution, its just an explanation, creation its just another explanation. So if you can make an intelligent argument, its worth hearing. But don't just spout off a fact or an idea without giving some intelligent reason that you believe it or think its true.
 
That's what I was talking about. I have never said that. Quote it, and state the thread and post number where I said it, or retract.


So basically what you're saying is that YODA is right, but you're choosing to ignore that fact, and restating your opinion again.


Yes Yama, I definitely can read english. The question is whether or not you can actually explain what you were trying to say when you wrote that sentence.


Right. Then why the hell would you say this then?

If you understood that it takes millions of years, why deny it earlier? You can go outside and watch a creature evolve, but don't expect to see a significant change.


I'm sorry if I've insulted you. That wasn't my intention. However, the reason that I haven't been able to explain anything to you is because you use circular questions to dodge my explanations. Here's an example:

Yama: A duck is not a duck; it's a rabbit.
Me: A duck is a duck. It has a bill, and webbed feet. It has wings.
Yama: According to research, wings are used to fly by creating lift. Bernoulli showed that air pressure above the wing is lower than below, so therefore the wing creates lift. This shows that a duck is a rabbit.
Me: But rabbits have long ears and paws. Ducks have neither of these. Ducks can fly. Rabbits cannot.
Yama: Ok, I'm on the part of rather evolution reason for life. Ducks are rabbits. You said peanuts turn into eyes.
Me: I never said that. Prove that I said that or take it back.
Yama: But you said that ducks have a bill. You can't tell me what to do. You aren't understanding what I'm saying. I'm tired of repeating myself.

Do you see why this is frustrating? I'm not trying to insult you or make fun of you, but can you see where I'm coming from? AikiMac and I have discussed this, and agreed to disagree. It's a completely different story.

So, if you could at least apologize for misquoting me twice now, I would appreciate it. Otherwise, show me where I wrote those quotes or retract them.
 
The early environment that life first formed in no longer exists. Scientsts have been trying recreate this environment in the past fifty years, but this is a new science and we are just beginning to understand the chemistry and environments of early forms of life. One of the reasons is likely our environment has a high level of oxygen, before it did not. The appearence of an atmosphere rich in oxygen whipped out a lot of primative life forms and greatly reduced the range and numbers of those that remained.

The reason why many primative life forms do not evolve again is competition. Evolution is opportunistic in terms of environments where there are opportunities for new species to enter, diversify and and become established. These environments are already occupied by advanced forms of life. Any brief appearence of the primative pre-life forms or species quickly become the food of the more complex well adapted life forms that have occupied these environments.
 
It really gets up my nose when people come on and basically say "Because I haven't done any real research into the subject and I have never seen it happen with my own eyes, evolution can't be true because how would it possibly work?!?"

Yama Tombo - Try doing some research before you start challenging people who obviously know more than you do about the subject. Check out some books and learn some genetics and some of the theories (closer to facts that theories) of evolution. It's like going onto a football forum and saying "Pele was the best player ever" when you don't know the rules of football or anything about Pele other than hearsay.
 
Oh NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooooooooooo
another one of my threads seems to be about to close
quick, somebody do somthing
 
Yes, do something quick! Mods, please lock 'er down! It's been a blast people, thanks for the discussion.
 
Recent news has revealed that the US is now seriously lagging behind other nations in the field of science. Many polls and studies have indicated that a big issue in this decline is the rise of the belief in 'Creation Science' that has undermined the foundation of science in the educational system.

It seems many people have no problem with benifiting from the many advantages and technologies provided by science, but in bashing evolution they undermine the foundations of science and create an atmosphere of distrust and ignorance of science in the educational system. This is particularly true of elementary and high schools today.

Since there does not appear to be an end to the unfortunate bashing of evolution in the near future by ignorance and superstition, this thread should not end.
 
Doesn't the fact that we have been creating different breeds of dogs for hundreds of years prove that evolution happens?
 
Animal and plant breeding uses the principles of genetics in a similar way as occurs in evolution, but this does not prove evolution. First new species are not the result as this process and second the natural processes of natural selection are not demonstrated.

Evolution takes place over a much longer time frame than what occurs with artificial plant and animal breeding. Other factors like the isolation of populations, adaptation to different environments are important factors in evolution.

More significant evidence occurs in nature where there are subspecies and closely related species that demonstrate these changes in intermediate stages of specie formation.
 
Okay...I was a bit hasty in that last post.

I should have said, doesn't it prove that evolution is possible? I mean, the whole creationist platform is based on the fact that species were initially created at the beginning, and have been unchangeable ever since. But, if we can obviously breed plants and animals, then surely such breeding must be possible in nature...it just takes a lot longer.
 
Creationists allow for some genetic changes in population that cannot be denied, because they occur in the world today. They focus their arguement on the specific nature of speciation which takes pace over longer periods of time than the short history we have for witnessing evolution.
 
Back
Top