What happens if you "don't believe in evolution"?

[Frannie]

You get to wear a dunce cap.

So hypothetically, if you had the choice between not wearing a dunce cap, but remaining a virgin for life... or getting to do some "evolving" with 100 beautiful women, but had to wear a dunce cap while you did it? Which would you choose?

You are daydreaming again dunce

The dunce cap comment seemed appropriate. Why was it deleted?

Just about everyone in MENSA believes in evolution.

People who don't believe in evolution should form their own group called DENSA.

There is no evidence that life wrote itself into existence in a pond

 

[Questioner]

You get to wear a dunce cap.

So hypothetically, if you had the choice between not wearing a dunce cap, but remaining a virgin for life... or getting to do some "evolving" with 100 beautiful women, but had to wear a dunce cap while you did it? Which would you choose?

You are daydreaming again dunce

The dunce cap comment seemed appropriate. Why was it deleted?

Just about everyone in MENSA believes in evolution.

Argument from authority fallacy, sigh.

People who don't believe in evolution should form their own group called DENSA.

People who "believe" in evolution based on faith in others' childish or simplistic arguments from authority having been told it is true, as opposed to those who have actually researched and developed the theory themselves to any remarkable degree, yes, often on the basis of childish, mythical ideas, fables and notions of "scientists", or who or what "science" and "scientists" actually are, and what their actual relevance in the real would is to begin with, outside of childish whims, fantasizes, and imaginations.

Such as those who conflate simplistic repetition, indoctrination, or archaic arguments from authority with actual comprehension, having formulated the theory themselves, or any body of theorization or mathematical abstraction to begin with.

The same people naturally "believing" in evolution due to their average below average IQ, or their intelligence or education stunting at the paltry K-12 grade reading level and its archaic learning methodologies naturally believe it, for the same reason that theories like alchemy would have blindly been believed without question by the ignorant masses simply on the basis of it being the popular science of their day and age.

Either that, or simply for childish and emotional reasons, such as silly, politicized beliefs in it meaning something ugly and hideous to them which it actually doesn't anywhere in the civilized world, much as I'm sure some of them will still cling to that childish and archaic little script or narrative once evolution is rendered as archaic as alchemy is today, and we're laughed at by our descendants for having ever believed that superstition, beyond perhaps the level of the simplistic folk wisdom, which evolutionary thought has been since the pre-Socratic Greek philosophers - simple and easily observable enough that folk wisdom alone was enough to suffice for it as far as popular sentiments go, not needing overly complex extrapolation, such as in the case of Darwin's on take on it, and the myths and fables, and childish superstitions and hangups erroneously associated with his work and development on it.

 

[Questioner]

Evolution is a FACT
God is a theory

Evolution isn't a FACT or else all of us could use it. God is a great theory. Evolution is a false theory.

Right, he, much like the majority of the IQ 100- population don't even know the difference between "facts", or pieces of information, and theories built, created, or developed from facts or bits of information.

Much as they would have ignorantly or superstitiously asserted a childish faith in alchemy, and the institutions by which alchemy was developed, rather than questioning it, and the individuals and cultural institutions in which the theory and the merits thereof perpetuate themselves, even to the chagrin of many actual scientists who aren't merely, ill informed pedagogues, whom are only relevant due to the masses being too unthinking to reply to even the simplistic arguments for authority, or ad populum fallacies which there are to begin with.

 

[bodecea]

When you don't believe in evolution, you have what's called "faith."

Faith in what? The orange "Chosen One"?

 

[Questioner]

Just about everyone in MENSA believes in evolution.

I've seen that identical argument used by "young earth creationists".

Showing that most of the simplistic logic, argument, and axioms used by evolution fetishists have nothing inherently to do with "creationism" to begin with, as opposed to just simplistic arguments, logic or fallacies (employed by those who don't usually know what logic, reasoning or fallacies actually are to begin with, or that fallacies are not inherently "wrong" nor "bad to use" in actual arguments).

If we examine the majority of infantile atheist arguments used online or elsewhere, it will turn out that most of them are just as silly, uninformed, or erroneous as those which they ascribe stereotypically to "young earth creationism" or "Biblical literalism"

A favorite being pedantically pointing out errors or examples of "bad science" in regards to ""creationist" arguments, when the same errors or "bad science" could be used or exist in any scientific argument, regardless of whether the conclusion was conventional, like evolution, or fringe like creationism.

(Not even to mention an idiot who thinks robotically and mechanistically pointing out errors in another's argument in any way equates to any learning or comprehension of the subject matter itself, when even a child, instructed to do so by rote could do that, even without having any comprehension of the actual subject matter itself (and if that is really the only scope of what some Neanderthals were taught or learned to do to begin with, that's truly sad, and I'd even argue asking their "educators" for a refund, since they never actually learned "science" to begin with, just learned how to point out errors in someone else's scientific argument, which even a 10 year old with an IQ or EQ of 90, and a "cheat sheet" filled with the correct answers could do in regards to a thesis presented by a theoretical physicist of an IQ of 180, assuming they were hired to, and that that was all that their infantile mind and development and lack of education or comprehension taught them to do to begin with)

Much as the childish dichotomy in regards to "Bacon's scientific method (facts - conclusion)" compared to the "creationist (conclusion - facts)" method is false or silly; with the "conclusion - facts" logic being used in regards to science as well, having nothing inherently to do with "creationism" (example - conclusion - "science is good", facts to support it "washing machines! Iphones! computers! derp derp)

 

[Questioner]

When you don't believe in evolution, you have what's called "faith."

Evolution and biology debunks individualism, as well as any archaic economic theory which incorrectly presumes that a "perfectly rationally thinking" person exists except in pure abstraction or imagination (in practice, people tend to make many decisions or judgements while in the heat of the moment or "passion" rather than rationally as they would or should "in theory" - which is why our legal system, for example, distinguishes between crimes of passion (e.x. done emotionally) and pre-meditated crimes (e.x. done intentionally or rationally).

So your faith in any ideology or axiom (e.x. that of John Galt) is just that.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Yawn.. that's a simplistic argument from authority fallacy as well as an ad populum fallacy,

No ya dumbass, that's precise description of you attributing what is "settled science" to consensus, instead of to evidence. You are a cheap charlatan armed with amateurish parlor tricks.

 

[Questioner]

Yawn.. that's a simplistic argument from authority fallacy as well as an ad populum fallacy,

No ya dumbass, that's precise description of you attributing what is "settled science" to consensus, instead of to evidence.

You're conflating consensus with what the evidence is based on, as well as an argument from authority on behalf of bacon's method to begin with, your merely placing faith in it, and the individuals who work in said industry, not on having gathered the evidence yourself.

As far as the industry and its parameters of evidence go, the validity of the research isn't predicated on any particular conclusion, no.

So please tell me when, where, and how you invented the theories in question, as opposed to just naively repeating a simplistic axiom like that of the above, for some reason or another which you probably don't even know yourself, nor how or why it affects your life for the better in any way to begin with.

You effectively believe it, not having formulated any theories yourself, because you want to, or perhaps you likely believe that your mythical notion of science or scientists have any more relevance outside of their industry than do the men or women of any other, arguably archaically structured and designed to begin with, when assuming that the average person holding the generic job title of "scientist", or a low-level, unremarkable degree in said field, is little more than an industry workman to begin with, not being a Newton, and Einstein, or anyone or anything close to that caliber.

So yes, you believe it because your were told it, you were taught it, just as you'd be believing alchemy, or whatever the popular and eventually to become outdated science, information, or jargon of your day and age, not holding the same lame scrutiny or childish and naively dependent ad populum or arguments from authority, or the parameters of evidence, testability, and silly, easily repeatable notions of which you have never done or gathered yourself to begin with, in regards to any other faith, axiom or set of beliefs myths or approximations you have held yourself to, believing them because they're easy, convenient "make sense", or impose conherancy, not because they're true or honest in any inherent sense of the word, merely having to fall back on other axioms which themselves, of course, are not based on science, evidence, or physical realities to begin with, and which are easily arguable, debatable, and contestable, except to those unthinking men and women who can't muster up so much as a simple questioning of one of the simplist argument from authority, or ad populum fallacies which there is.

Much as how above, many of you have expressed no knowledge of what "facts" actually are, to begin with, let alone "the facts", or how they are used to build and construct mathematical theories and approximations, such as scientific theories, or presumably any body of theorizing, knowledge, or abstraction to begin with.

"Settled science", or what the uniformed merely conflate it with to begin with, is about as relevant in any logical discussion as what is or supposedly was settled by the Catholic Church, or any other institution within whatever the scope of its arbitration is, as opposed to the reality, as in most of the world and its institutions, laws, governments and so forth, outside of it.

 

[Questioner]

Perhaps eventually, the archaic institution of natural sciences in the sense of a silly establishment which stupid people naively and superstitiously give reverence to, rarely if ever even so much as understanding the subject matter as opposed to mindlessly and unthinkingly repeating and complying with archaic grading methodologies used on behalf of said subjects, and other subjects taught at an ill-informed, K-12 level at most - will eventually step out of its Dark Age, and stop being such an archaic indoctrinating, and anti-intellectual impediment to human reasoning, freethinking, and creativity, or possibly outliving its outdated, 19th century usefulness in the wake or the Information Age, and computational or informational sciences.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Evolution is stupid nonsensical, physically impossible, crap.

 

[Questioner]

Evolution is stupid nonsensical, physically impossible, crap.

It's awfully ugly as well, at least in the way the Neanderthals associated with it often present it, and themselves, having more in common with the hygiene and dietary habits, and awful social tact and graces of wild apes than well-adjusted normal people tend to do.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Evolution is a FACT
God is a theory

I don't even give god the benefit of being a theory. God is directly equivalent to ancient Greek mythology.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Evolution is stupid nonsensical, physically impossible, crap.

Poor Frank. I suspect that you must know how it felt to be the last Neanderthal humanoid in the Homo-Sapien world!

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Evolution is stupid nonsensical, physically impossible, crap.

Translation: Francis doesn't understand evolution.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Evolution is stupid nonsensical, physically impossible, crap.

Translation: Francis doesn't understand evolution.

Translation: the odds of 2,000 proteins randomly forming the first cell are a number with 5,700 zeros after it to 1. Translation: it didn't happen at random

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Evolution is stupid nonsensical, physically impossible, crap.

Poor Frank. I suspect that you must know how it felt to be the last Neanderthal humanoid in the Homo-Sapien world!

I love how the Internet has given Progressives the ability to vaporize the very idea that they are "intellectuals"

 

[Andylusion]

You get to wear a dunce cap.

So hypothetically, if you had the choice between not wearing a dunce cap, but remaining a virgin for life... or getting to do some "evolving" with 100 beautiful women, but had to wear a dunce cap while you did it? Which would you choose?

Virgin.

That was easy. But of course I'm a Christian, and jumping on a 100 women is a no-go for me.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

You get to wear a dunce cap.

So hypothetically, if you had the choice between not wearing a dunce cap, but remaining a virgin for life... or getting to do some "evolving" with 100 beautiful women, but had to wear a dunce cap while you did it? Which would you choose?

You are daydreaming again dunce

The dunce cap comment seemed appropriate. Why was it deleted?

Just about everyone in MENSA believes in evolution.

People who don't believe in evolution should form their own group called DENSA.

There is no evidence that life wrote itself into existence in a pond

There is no evidence of God, or how if God exists, how is it he, or she was created?

Even so I tend to believe in God, due to life circumstances.

 

[luchitociencia]

When you don't believe in evolution, you have what's called "faith."

Evolution and biology debunks individualism....

That is enough to consider 99% of evolutionist evidence as invalid proof supporting it.

An individual jaw, and individual molar tooth, an individual skeleton, etc. from here and there, are debunked by the doctrine of the same theory.

 

[JGalt]

When you don't believe in evolution, you have what's called "faith."

Faith in what? The orange "Chosen One"?

No. Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. I'm not merely "hoping for" the fact that President Trump will breeze through the impeachment in the Senate, win re-election in 2020, appoint two more conservative SC Justices and a couple hundred more conservative lower court justices, that the GOP will keep the Senate and regain control of the House, and that Trump will sign a hundred more executive orders and pass 20 pieces of legislation.

I already know these things are going to happen. But I do have faith that you will continue to lose what few marbles you have left over the next five years, as your hatred eats you alive from the inside.