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

[Fort Fun Indiana]

That's far more believable than... "BANG" and now there is stuff....

So what? Not evidence for magical horseshit.

Guess what else was and is hard to believe? Quantum physics. Relativity. Hawking radiation. Black holes.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The fact we have logical laws of nature that are consistent, is in fact evidence of a creator intelligence.

No it isn't. Your absurd argument is that these things help the universe "make sense", therefor evidence of a designer...? Without deterministism and laws, there is no "universe".

Utter nonsense. You are not making any arguments. You are simply repeating your claim over and over, and claiming wverything you see is evidence for it. You have nothing but an ever expanding tautology...I.e., useless nonsense.

 

[Vandalshandle]

What happens if you don't believe in evolution? You end up sending your money to a "man of god" who needs a new jet plane, because he can't have a conversation with god on a commercial flight....

 

[Andylusion]

The fact we have logical laws of nature that are consistent, is in fact evidence of a creator intelligence.

No itbisnt. Your absurd argument is that these things help the uniberse "make sense", therefor evidence of a designer...?

Utter nonsense. You are not making any arguments. You are simply repeating your claim over and over, and claiming wverything you see is evidence for it. You have nothing but an ever expanding tautology...I.e., useless nonsense.

You keep saying I have nothing, but I don't see any real counter in your posts to anything I have said. I'm still waiting for that random mix of dots and dashes and commons and periods, to have meaning without using intelligence.

As soon as you can decode it without using any intelligence, let me know, and I'll agree you have a point.

 

[james bond]

DNA is a code. By definition.... a code cannot exist without an intelligence that knows the code.

Complete nonsense that you made up as you typed it. Religious horseshit ID argument, thinly veiled.

-.-. --- -.. . ....... - .- -.- . ... ....... .. -. - . .-.. .-.. .. --. . -. -.-. . ....... - --- ....... -.. . -.-. --- -.. .


I just responded to you in a code... just like DNA is a code.

Now figure out what I wrote... and you can't use your brain or any other intelligence.... like you claim happened with DNA and life on the Earth.

Good luck.

He does everything without a brain

Haha. With Indiana, those who disagree with him and present a scientific argument in the S&T forum believe in magic while stupid stuff with no scientific evidence end up as science and facts after a few billion years.

 

[rightwinger]

There is evidence of God in science and now atheist are admitting such as Tyson now says the universe is a computer simulation, that did not create itself. The best evidence of God is when we travel off the Earth and bring the food web to a new place. God is proven and we are his image as said in the bible.

There is also no evidence that life created itself from nothing

So, God has a belly button, too?

God exist in the present and future as well as the past

That's called faith.

Nope it's called science unless you believe that DNA the most complicated code in the known universe wrote itself in a pond one day

This post is correct.

DNA is a code. By definition.... a code cannot exist without an intelligence that knows the code. Even if the code, magically wrote itself, how would a living cell, know how to decode, the code? How would a cell know, that this arrangement of DNA, means to make an arm, or a leg, or even just a hair?

Fannie is being flippant about this, but her statement is utterly and entirely correct.

A code must by necessity, have a coder. Someone how knows what the code means. Someone that creates a living cell, with the capability to decode, the code in the DNA, to make a functioning cell.

Without an intelligence, a code has no meaning, and certainly no function.

I have read about DNA

Where, oh where, is that definition.

 

[Andylusion]

What happens if you don't believe in evolution? You end up sending your money to a "man of god" who needs a new jet plane, because he can't have a conversation with god on a commercial flight....

So you supported Hillary? Right?

Funny how the idol of the people can change, but the loyalty of the followers does not....

 

[Frannie]

So, God has a belly button, too?

God exist in the present and future as well as the past

That's called faith.

Nope it's called science unless you believe that DNA the most complicated code in the known universe wrote itself in a pond one day

This post is correct.

DNA is a code. By definition.... a code cannot exist without an intelligence that knows the code. Even if the code, magically wrote itself, how would a living cell, know how to decode, the code? How would a cell know, that this arrangement of DNA, means to make an arm, or a leg, or even just a hair?

Fannie is being flippant about this, but her statement is utterly and entirely correct.

A code must by necessity, have a coder. Someone how knows what the code means. Someone that creates a living cell, with the capability to decode, the code in the DNA, to make a functioning cell.

Without an intelligence, a code has no meaning, and certainly no function.

I have read about DNA

Where, oh where, is that definition.

Is DNA a Code?

 

[james bond]

Why should monkeys walk?
They are on a different evolutionary track

Nah. You guys use the same pics for now and earlier. None of it happened.

Tell us how all creatures were created by magic

Poof....there is a fish
Poof....there is a bird
Poof......look everyone...a dinosaur
Poof....there is a man
Wait, let me take a rib and poof.....there is a woman

I already posted the days of creation chart multiple times already. What good would it do you? Instead, your evolution charts show the same monkeys that we are familiar with today. Your scientists used the same pictures because that is what they said earlier. Yet, creationists found contradictions such as the "present is the key to the past," i.e. uniformitarianism, and that today's monkeys do not walk bipedal, so past monkeys did not walk bipedal. That blows up a huge example of macroevolution as shown in the chart above. Furthermore, we do not see tailed monkeys become tailless nor gorillas and chimps mating. Thus, the common ancestor hypothesis does not happen and did not happen. We do not even have a billions of years old Earth as you assume.

Moreover, creationists have found fraud in the evolution. It is laid out in the chart above. Ernst Haeckel also made up drawings in order to show evolution in embryos, but they were shown to be fake. He also was exposed as a racist. Certainly, your side has had some shady characters in order to further your atheist "faith-based" beliefs.

Are those the facts you were talking about?

 

[Frannie]

Why should monkeys walk?
They are on a different evolutionary track

Nah. You guys use the same pics for now and earlier. None of it happened.

Tell us how all creatures were created by magic

Poof....there is a fish
Poof....there is a bird
Poof......look everyone...a dinosaur
Poof....there is a man
Wait, let me take a rib and poof.....there is a woman

I already posted the days of creation chart multiple times already. What good would it do you? Instead, your evolution charts show the same monkeys that we are familiar with today. Your scientists used the same pictures because that is what they said earlier. Yet, creationists found contradictions such as the "present is the key to the past," i.e. uniformitarianism, and that today's monkeys do not walk bipedal, so past monkeys did not walk bipedal. That blows up a huge example of macroevolution as shown in the chart above. Furthermore, we do not see tailed monkeys become tailless nor gorillas and chimps mating. Thus, the common ancestor hypothesis does not happen and did not happen. We do not even have a billions of years old Earth as you assume.

Moreover, creationists have found fraud in the evolution. It is laid out in the chart above. Ernst Haeckel also made up drawings in order to show evolution in embryos, but they were shown to be fake. He also was exposed as a racist. Certainly, your side has had some shady characters in order to further your atheist "faith-based" beliefs.

Are those the facts you were talking about?

You are clearly wrong as God made all of his works with the ability to evolve or change their selves to better suit the environment so that they could be successful. God made evolution, thus the drawings are not as wrong as you perceive

 

[rightwinger]

God exist in the present and future as well as the past

That's called faith.

Nope it's called science unless you believe that DNA the most complicated code in the known universe wrote itself in a pond one day

This post is correct.

DNA is a code. By definition.... a code cannot exist without an intelligence that knows the code. Even if the code, magically wrote itself, how would a living cell, know how to decode, the code? How would a cell know, that this arrangement of DNA, means to make an arm, or a leg, or even just a hair?

Fannie is being flippant about this, but her statement is utterly and entirely correct.

A code must by necessity, have a coder. Someone how knows what the code means. Someone that creates a living cell, with the capability to decode, the code in the DNA, to make a functioning cell.

Without an intelligence, a code has no meaning, and certainly no function.

I have read about DNA

Where, oh where, is that definition.

Is DNA a Code?

Is a fingerprint a code?

 

[rightwinger]

Why should monkeys walk?
They are on a different evolutionary track

Nah. You guys use the same pics for now and earlier. None of it happened.

Tell us how all creatures were created by magic

Poof....there is a fish
Poof....there is a bird
Poof......look everyone...a dinosaur
Poof....there is a man
Wait, let me take a rib and poof.....there is a woman

I already posted the days of creation chart multiple times already. What good would it do you? Instead, your evolution charts show the same monkeys that we are familiar with today. Your scientists used the same pictures because that is what they said earlier. Yet, creationists found contradictions such as the "present is the key to the past," i.e. uniformitarianism, and that today's monkeys do not walk bipedal, so past monkeys did not walk bipedal. That blows up a huge example of macroevolution as shown in the chart above. Furthermore, we do not see tailed monkeys become tailless nor gorillas and chimps mating. Thus, the common ancestor hypothesis does not happen and did not happen. We do not even have a billions of years old Earth as you assume.

Moreover, creationists have found fraud in the evolution. It is laid out in the chart above. Ernst Haeckel also made up drawings in order to show evolution in embryos, but they were shown to be fake. He also was exposed as a racist. Certainly, your side has had some shady characters in order to further your atheist "faith-based" beliefs.

Are those the facts you were talking about?

Thank you

Common ancestor

 

[Andylusion]

Why should monkeys walk?
They are on a different evolutionary track

Nah. You guys use the same pics for now and earlier. None of it happened.

Tell us how all creatures were created by magic

Poof....there is a fish
Poof....there is a bird
Poof......look everyone...a dinosaur
Poof....there is a man
Wait, let me take a rib and poof.....there is a woman

I already posted the days of creation chart multiple times already. What good would it do you? Instead, your evolution charts show the same monkeys that we are familiar with today. Your scientists used the same pictures because that is what they said earlier. Yet, creationists found contradictions such as the "present is the key to the past," i.e. uniformitarianism, and that today's monkeys do not walk bipedal, so past monkeys did not walk bipedal. That blows up a huge example of macroevolution as shown in the chart above. Furthermore, we do not see tailed monkeys become tailless nor gorillas and chimps mating. Thus, the common ancestor hypothesis does not happen and did not happen. We do not even have a billions of years old Earth as you assume.

Moreover, creationists have found fraud in the evolution. It is laid out in the chart above. Ernst Haeckel also made up drawings in order to show evolution in embryos, but they were shown to be fake. He also was exposed as a racist. Certainly, your side has had some shady characters in order to further your atheist "faith-based" beliefs.

Are those the facts you were talking about?

Thank you

Common ancestor

Nah. Forget the goofy attempted connection between humans and apes.

There should be thousands, if not millions of intermediate transitional species throughout the entire planet, and throughout the entire fossil record. Instead there is none. In fact, we should be able to find more transitional species, than we find non-transitional.

Instead.... none.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You keep saying I have nothing, but I don't see any real counter in your posts to anything I have said.

Then you are blind. You simply claim, ad nauseum, that a code requires a designer. The only evidence you tried to present was to make up a code and ask me to decipher it. All that is necessary in my part is to point out the absurdity of that attempt, as it does not then follow that a code needs a designer, regardless of the outcome of your thought experiment. And you are back at square one, still without a shred of evidence.

You are free to believe any magical nonsense you wish. But insisting it is true is not compelling. Nor is it anyone's job to refute you.

 

[Frannie]

That's called faith.

Nope it's called science unless you believe that DNA the most complicated code in the known universe wrote itself in a pond one day

This post is correct.

DNA is a code. By definition.... a code cannot exist without an intelligence that knows the code. Even if the code, magically wrote itself, how would a living cell, know how to decode, the code? How would a cell know, that this arrangement of DNA, means to make an arm, or a leg, or even just a hair?

Fannie is being flippant about this, but her statement is utterly and entirely correct.

A code must by necessity, have a coder. Someone how knows what the code means. Someone that creates a living cell, with the capability to decode, the code in the DNA, to make a functioning cell.

Without an intelligence, a code has no meaning, and certainly no function.

I have read about DNA

Where, oh where, is that definition.

Is DNA a Code?

Is a fingerprint a code?

Prints are the result of the DNA code, which means that the fingerprint must be coded for either the finger or fingerprint to exist. The fingerprint is part of the physical body that the code assembles

The fingerprint also exist in coded form before the human form exist, at this point yes the fingerprint is code

Are you aware that a typical human has 10 fingers with fingerprints and 37 trillion sets of these fingerprints in coded form? as every cell contains the entire blueprint for forming a human

 

[rightwinger]

Why should monkeys walk?
They are on a different evolutionary track

Nah. You guys use the same pics for now and earlier. None of it happened.

Tell us how all creatures were created by magic

Poof....there is a fish
Poof....there is a bird
Poof......look everyone...a dinosaur
Poof....there is a man
Wait, let me take a rib and poof.....there is a woman

I already posted the days of creation chart multiple times already. What good would it do you? Instead, your evolution charts show the same monkeys that we are familiar with today. Your scientists used the same pictures because that is what they said earlier. Yet, creationists found contradictions such as the "present is the key to the past," i.e. uniformitarianism, and that today's monkeys do not walk bipedal, so past monkeys did not walk bipedal. That blows up a huge example of macroevolution as shown in the chart above. Furthermore, we do not see tailed monkeys become tailless nor gorillas and chimps mating. Thus, the common ancestor hypothesis does not happen and did not happen. We do not even have a billions of years old Earth as you assume.

Moreover, creationists have found fraud in the evolution. It is laid out in the chart above. Ernst Haeckel also made up drawings in order to show evolution in embryos, but they were shown to be fake. He also was exposed as a racist. Certainly, your side has had some shady characters in order to further your atheist "faith-based" beliefs.

Are those the facts you were talking about?

Thank you

Common ancestor

Nah. Forget the goofy attempted connection between humans and apes.

There should be thousands, if not millions of intermediate transitional species throughout the entire planet, and throughout the entire fossil record. Instead there is none. In fact, we should be able to find more transitional species, than we find non-transitional.

Instead.... none.

Why?
Who says evolution works like that?

Similar species may breed together and intermediates disappear

 

[Frannie]

Nah. You guys use the same pics for now and earlier. None of it happened.

Tell us how all creatures were created by magic

Poof....there is a fish
Poof....there is a bird
Poof......look everyone...a dinosaur
Poof....there is a man
Wait, let me take a rib and poof.....there is a woman

I already posted the days of creation chart multiple times already. What good would it do you? Instead, your evolution charts show the same monkeys that we are familiar with today. Your scientists used the same pictures because that is what they said earlier. Yet, creationists found contradictions such as the "present is the key to the past," i.e. uniformitarianism, and that today's monkeys do not walk bipedal, so past monkeys did not walk bipedal. That blows up a huge example of macroevolution as shown in the chart above. Furthermore, we do not see tailed monkeys become tailless nor gorillas and chimps mating. Thus, the common ancestor hypothesis does not happen and did not happen. We do not even have a billions of years old Earth as you assume.

Moreover, creationists have found fraud in the evolution. It is laid out in the chart above. Ernst Haeckel also made up drawings in order to show evolution in embryos, but they were shown to be fake. He also was exposed as a racist. Certainly, your side has had some shady characters in order to further your atheist "faith-based" beliefs.

Are those the facts you were talking about?

Thank you

Common ancestor

Nah. Forget the goofy attempted connection between humans and apes.

There should be thousands, if not millions of intermediate transitional species throughout the entire planet, and throughout the entire fossil record. Instead there is none. In fact, we should be able to find more transitional species, than we find non-transitional.

Instead.... none.

Why?
Who says evolution works like that?

Similar species may breed together and intermediates disappear

What are the similar species that may breed together?

 

[rightwinger]

Nothing really happens if you don’t believe in evolution

Just your kids will look at you like a moron

 

[rightwinger]

Tell us how all creatures were created by magic

Poof....there is a fish
Poof....there is a bird
Poof......look everyone...a dinosaur
Poof....there is a man
Wait, let me take a rib and poof.....there is a woman

I already posted the days of creation chart multiple times already. What good would it do you? Instead, your evolution charts show the same monkeys that we are familiar with today. Your scientists used the same pictures because that is what they said earlier. Yet, creationists found contradictions such as the "present is the key to the past," i.e. uniformitarianism, and that today's monkeys do not walk bipedal, so past monkeys did not walk bipedal. That blows up a huge example of macroevolution as shown in the chart above. Furthermore, we do not see tailed monkeys become tailless nor gorillas and chimps mating. Thus, the common ancestor hypothesis does not happen and did not happen. We do not even have a billions of years old Earth as you assume.

Moreover, creationists have found fraud in the evolution. It is laid out in the chart above. Ernst Haeckel also made up drawings in order to show evolution in embryos, but they were shown to be fake. He also was exposed as a racist. Certainly, your side has had some shady characters in order to further your atheist "faith-based" beliefs.

Are those the facts you were talking about?

Thank you

Common ancestor

Nah. Forget the goofy attempted connection between humans and apes.

There should be thousands, if not millions of intermediate transitional species throughout the entire planet, and throughout the entire fossil record. Instead there is none. In fact, we should be able to find more transitional species, than we find non-transitional.

Instead.... none.

Why?
Who says evolution works like that?

Similar species may breed together and intermediates disappear

What are the similar species that may breed together?

Homo Sapiens and Neanderthals

 

[DOTR]

Do you get raped by the Flying Spaghetti Monster and his gang of pirates? Discuss.

If not, then there's no reason to not believe in it, (assuming that elective belief is a thing).

In fact, it's probably one of the ugliest theories to be particularly invested in to begin with, with one's level of enthusiasm for evolutionary theory often being "inversely" proportional to their actual mating success, making one even wonder if it would better to "not" believe in it than to do so, as superstitious as the notion of "believing" in any body of theory or abstraction is to begin with.

I'd much rather study music theory, than evolutionary theory, to be honest, even as a scientific theory, it's entirely overrated, physics being much more fundamental than biology, and a hell of a lot cooler (in physics, you get to learn about black holes, in evolution you get to learn about cows humping each other).

And it seems to be common knowledge that musicians, whether Bach or Rock tend to do a lot more actual sexual reproduction than the average, overweight, white, male evolution fetishist on the internet does, likely having more in common with the mating and hygiene habits of a lesser ape than the average non-socially maladjusted person does, and much like an animal, likely isn't able to tell the difference between a Waifu and and actual woman, other than maybe when she pulls out the pepper spray - which a Waifu, of course can't do.

Hehehe

Evolution? My ass. More like devolution? Science? Nah, more like a failed HS science experiment come to life.

I don't think this strapping young fellow is particularly concerned about regurgitating ugly, banal factoids about evolution, and if anything he and his lovers are evolutionarily speaking, the better for it. Seems to work in reverse - the less you know about evolution, the more actual evolution you and the ladies end up doing. Mhmm.

Pathetic.

What happens if you dont believe in the periodic table? Or the co-formation theory in astronomy? Nothing...its irrelevant for most people though being intellectually curious would hopefully come into play.
But its been made a shibboleth because the Puritan Atheists among us believe it negates God.
It doesnt.