What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

25 Pages of Quotes By Scientists Refuting Darwinism

james bond

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Messages
13,362
Reaction score
1,768
Points
170
The angry, self-loathing religionist is reduced to cutting and pasting cartoons.
You should microwave your coffee in stryofoam cups.

 

james bond

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Messages
13,362
Reaction score
1,768
Points
170
Pointless.
Also, microwave to reheat your take out or take home Chinese food/any food in the styrofoam containers. It's too convenient.

People smoke and that's far worse.
 

Hollie

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
47,679
Reaction score
8,134
Points
2,030
Also, microwave to reheat your take out or take home Chinese food/any food in the styrofoam containers. It's too convenient.

People smoke and that's far worse.
Spamming threads is against the board rules.
 

Dagosa

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2012
Messages
11,084
Reaction score
2,707
Points
198
I posit science and she follows up with nothing worth reading.
You’ve yet to post anything but drivel .
You use the word science like a canary says hello. Neither one of you know wtf you’re talking about. You are a fraud. Don’t forget, every chem major knows what the name, “periodic table“ refers to. I’ve caught you several time BS ing about that to your ignorant bozo clan of science illiterates.
 

Dagosa

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2012
Messages
11,084
Reaction score
2,707
Points
198
You could come up with a quote by Darwin if you don't like Dawkins. Or it could be anyone else who believes in evolution.

iu


Evolution really doesn't explain things tho.
Really ? You ever been vaccinated ?
 

psikeyhackr

Silver Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2010
Messages
1,160
Reaction score
124
Points
98
Spontaneous generation that life arose from non-living matter was scientifically disproved 120 years ago by Louis Pasteur and others.
Is that true?
Did Pasteur know what conditions existed on Earth between 4 and 1 billion years ago?
 
OP
ChemEngineer

ChemEngineer

Diamond Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2019
Messages
4,776
Reaction score
4,269
Points
1,940
Is that true?
Did Pasteur know what conditions existed on Earth between 4 and 1 billion years ago?
One does not need to know what conditions were at that time. Simply assume ideal conditions for small organisms, viz., fresh water, temperate climate, sunlight, minerals in solution and throw in anything else your heart desires, say lightning bolts.

Biochemistry is extremely complex and difficult to master in a controlled laboratory, much less a muddy pond.

Our proteins consist of L-amino acids, bonded with peptide bonds, as opposed to non-peptide bonds. Given that "impossible" is 1 chance in 10 to the 50th probability, it only requires a very short sequence of amino acid residues, 27 in number, to get to 1 in 10 to the 50th when you raise 1/20th to the n times 1/2 to the n times 1/2 to the n.

There is no protein on earth with only 27 amino acid residues. None. Small ones have a few hundred sequences. Pasteur did not know that but I do. Biochemists do, but many of them simply ignore reality so that they are not ostracized by their peers who are bound and gagged.
 
Last edited:

Hollie

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
47,679
Reaction score
8,134
Points
2,030
One does not need to know what conditions were at that time. Simply assume ideal conditions for small organisms, viz., fresh water, temperate climate, sunlight, minerals in solution and throw in anything else your heart desires, say lightning bolts.

Biochemistry is extremely complex and difficult to master in a controlled laboratory, much less a muddy pond.

Our proteins consist of L-amino acids, bonded with peptide bonds, as opposed to non-peptide bonds. Given that "impossible" is 1 chance in 10 to the 50th probability, it only requires a very short sequence of amino acid residues, 27 in number, to get to 1 in 10 to the 50th when you raise 1/20th to the n times 1/2 to the n times 1/2 to the n.

There is no protein on earth with only 27 amino acid residues. None. Small ones have a few hundred sequences. Pasteur did not know that but I do. Biochemists do, but many of them simply ignore reality so that they are not ostracized by their peers who are bound and gagged.
I'm afraid the above is your usual cut and paste ''... it's just to complicated'', that you stole from the Disco'tute.
 

psikeyhackr

Silver Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2010
Messages
1,160
Reaction score
124
Points
98
One does not need to know what conditions were at that time. Simply assume ideal conditions for small organisms, viz., fresh water, temperate climate, sunlight, minerals in solution and throw in anything else your heart desires, say lightning bolts.
Small organisms that exist today after a billion years of evolution. What did they evolve from? Maybe those life forms could not exist today as today's life forms could not exist back then.

I am not a biologist but how can you KNOW life could not evolve from the inorganic under conditions that we have limited knowledge about? And certainly Pasteur knew less than we do know today. I simply believe in admitting that we don't know what we don't know.
 

Dagosa

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2012
Messages
11,084
Reaction score
2,707
Points
198
Small organisms that exist today after a billion years of evolution. What did they evolve from? Maybe those life forms could not exist today as today's life forms could not exist back then.

I am not a biologist but how can you KNOW life could not evolve from the inorganic under conditions that we have limited knowledge about? And certainly Pasteur knew less than we do know today. I simply believe in admitting that we don't know what we don't know.
Don’t let this fraud off the hook. He uses the handle of. “ chemengineer “ while claiming that the periodic table is a sham and he alone picked it up out of every HS and university in the world. Of course, he doesn’t even know what it is. He’s a BS artist.
 

Dagosa

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2012
Messages
11,084
Reaction score
2,707
Points
198
I'm afraid the above is your usual cut and paste ''... it's just to complicated'', that you stole from the Disco'tute.
Yup. Our friend the BS artist is at it again. He's the king-of woo woo.
 

abu afak

ALLAH SNACKBAR!
Joined
Mar 3, 2006
Messages
6,051
Reaction score
2,111
Points
315
You’ve yet to post anything but drivel .
You use the word science like a canary says hello. Neither one of you know wtf you’re talking about. You are a fraud. Don’t forget, every chem major knows what the name, “periodic table“ refers to. I’ve caught you several time BS ing about that to your ignorant bozo clan of science illiterates.
But you are WORSE because YOU BUMPED UP HIS STUPlD and MISLEADING 4 MONTH OLD HEADLINE AND GAVE IT LIFE when the last post was otherwise December 17, 2022 and several PAGES Back. (pg 3)
Congrats, you're a genius but a tactical Moron.
`
 
Last edited:
OP
ChemEngineer

ChemEngineer

Diamond Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2019
Messages
4,776
Reaction score
4,269
Points
1,940
Small organisms that exist today after a billion years of evolution. What did they evolve from? Maybe those life forms could not exist today as today's life forms could not exist back then.

I am not a biologist but how can you KNOW life could not evolve from the inorganic under conditions that we have limited knowledge about? And certainly Pasteur knew less than we do know today. I simply believe in admitting that we don't know what we don't know.
Your mistake is beginning with the assumption that evolution took place. Lose that thought. It is utterly worthless and leads to nothing good. Darwin's followers NEVER admit anything except that they are POSITIVE Darwin's archaic tautology is correct. "It survives because it was fitter and it was fitter because it survived." This tells you nothing.

You do have a basic understand of statistics, such as the probability of a coin toss and rolling 2 or 12 on fair dice, right?

Well take titin and explain how it was first synthesized in NATURE by "selecting" 1 out of 20 amino acids time and again to be joined 33,450 times. Each link was a peptide bond, instead of a non-peptide bond. One chance in 2. Each amino acid was L form instead of D form, 1 chance in 2. Multiply 1/2 to the 33,450th power twice times 1/20 to the 33,450th power and that is just ONE of the 20,000 proteins inside each of us.

Evolution? Not a chance.
 

abu afak

ALLAH SNACKBAR!
Joined
Mar 3, 2006
Messages
6,051
Reaction score
2,111
Points
315
Your mistake is beginning with the assumption that evolution took place. Lose that thought. It is utterly worthless and leads to nothing good. Darwin's followers NEVER admit anything except that they are POSITIVE Darwin's archaic tautology is correct. "It survives because it was fitter and it was fitter because it survived." This tells you nothing.

You do have a basic understand of statistics, such as the probability of a coin toss and rolling 2 or 12 on fair dice, right?

Well take titin and explain how it was first synthesized in NATURE by "selecting" 1 out of 20 amino acids time and again to be joined 33,450 times. Each link was a peptide bond, instead of a non-peptide bond. One chance in 2. Each amino acid was L form instead of D form, 1 chance in 2. Multiply 1/2 to the 33,450th power twice times 1/20 to the 33,450th power and that is just ONE of the 20,000 proteins inside each of us.

Evolution? Not a chance.

And now we await Evidence for Creationism, ID, the designER/god. Any evidence at all.​

Evidence of common descent - Wikipedia

Contents​


And now we await Evidence for Creationism, ID, the designER/god .. any evidence at all.
`
 

psikeyhackr

Silver Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2010
Messages
1,160
Reaction score
124
Points
98
Your mistake is beginning with the assumption that evolution took place. Lose that thought. It is utterly worthless and leads to nothing good.
You have excluded the possibility of me paying attention to you by presuming to tell me what to think.

Bye!
 

Dagosa

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2012
Messages
11,084
Reaction score
2,707
Points
198
Your mistake is beginning with the assumption that evolution took place. Lose that thought. It is utterly worthless and leads to nothing good. Darwin's followers NEVER admit anything except that they are POSITIVE Darwin's archaic tautology is correct. "It survives because it was fitter and it was fitter because it survived." This tells you nothing.

You do have a basic understand of statistics, such as the probability of a coin toss and rolling 2 or 12 on fair dice, right?

Well take titin and explain how it was first synthesized in NATURE by "selecting" 1 out of 20 amino acids time and again to be joined 33,450 times. Each link was a peptide bond, instead of a non-peptide bond. One chance in 2. Each amino acid was L form instead of D form, 1 chance in 2. Multiply 1/2 to the 33,450th power twice times 1/20 to the 33,450th power and that is just ONE of the 20,000 proteins inside each of us.

Evolution? Not a chance.
Where did you learn this babble. Your history is to deny the periodic table. How reliable are you…..not at all. More made up shit.

By denying evolution, chem engineer is denying modern medicine. How stupid is that ?
 

💲 Amazon Deals 💲

Forum List

Top