Criticisms of Evolution

[james bond]

The only reason you’re Likely alive today and making up ignorant shit is because of the science of evolution.

All of those quotes had to do with evidence against evolution.

What about the out of Africa stuff?

Evolution had to have humans evolving out of Africa. First, the evo scientists claimed that Africa is the most genetically diverse continent in the world. Microevolution happened by 1) losing genetic diversity out of Africa and 2) losing genetic diversity by adapting to local environments. We had this "bottleneck" or physical geography and weather that killed people, but smaller number of groups got thru to the Middle East. Then there was another bottleneck where the similar things happened, but some people were able to get out to the Americas. The people kept microevolving as their genetics changed. Less diverse genetically, but better off. I think it boils down to one race being superior to another as Darwin claimed,

'As attitudes to race became harsher, sympathies for black people in the Americas more scant, and the fate of "savages" a matter of indifference, Darwin's own sympathies were blunted by the prevailing fatalism. Starkly displaying his own readiness to apply his ideas to society, he observed in The Descent of Man that "the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world".

Though he hoped that man would by then have reached a "more civilised state ... even than the Caucasian," he expressed no hope that extermination might be prevented by the kind of moral and political pressure that had by then achieved the prohibition of slavery in the US. It was simply inevitable. Nature would take its course.'

Evolutionists do not want to address this today because they are afraid of being labeled racists. Yet, Darwinism is still alive and well today. We even have Darwin Day. Evolution is racism. It always was and always will.

Science | AAAS

www.sciencemag.org

Did Charles Darwin believe in racial inequality?

His anniversary has thrown a fresh spotlight on ideas about race that still excite his friends and foes. Marek Kohn looks at a troublesome legacy

www.independent.co.uk

 

[Dagosa]

The only reason you’re Likely alive today and making up ignorant shit is because of the science of evolution.

All of those quotes had to do with evidence against evolution.

What about the out of Africa stuff?

Evolution had to have humans evolving out of Africa. First, the evo scientists claimed that Africa is the most genetically diverse continent in the world. Microevolution happened by 1) losing genetic diversity out of Africa and 2) losing genetic diversity by adapting to local environments. We had this "bottleneck" or physical geography and weather that killed people, but smaller number of groups got thru to the Middle East. Then there was another bottleneck where the similar things happened, but some people were able to get out to the Americas. The people kept microevolving as their genetics changed. Less diverse genetically, but better off. I think it boils down to one race being superior to another as Darwin claimed,

'As attitudes to race became harsher, sympathies for black people in the Americas more scant, and the fate of "savages" a matter of indifference, Darwin's own sympathies were blunted by the prevailing fatalism. Starkly displaying his own readiness to apply his ideas to society, he observed in The Descent of Man that "the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world".

Though he hoped that man would by then have reached a "more civilised state ... even than the Caucasian," he expressed no hope that extermination might be prevented by the kind of moral and political pressure that had by then achieved the prohibition of slavery in the US. It was simply inevitable. Nature would take its course.'

Evolutionists do not want to address this today because they are afraid of being labeled racists. Yet, Darwinism is still alive and well today. We even have Darwin Day. Evolution is racism. It always was and always will.

Science | AAAS

www.sciencemag.org

Did Charles Darwin believe in racial inequality?

His anniversary has thrown a fresh spotlight on ideas about race that still excite his friends and foes. Marek Kohn looks at a troublesome legacy

www.independent.co.uk

Do you get regular flu shots ?

 

[james bond]

Google Groups

Many scientists have doubts about Darwin's theory.

1. so if you don't believe in evolution, you believe a full formed human just appeared.......?
2. give us the creationist's detailed theory in about 10 - 20 sentences ..and no bible crap

Even the evolutionists cannot explain themselves without the creationist view.

"... scientific creationists hold that plants and animals have not changed through time, but were created separately and in essentially their present forms. This separate or special creation occurred during 6 days of 24 hours each. Scientific creationists differ as to how long ago this creation event took place, but most place it within 6,000-20,000 years ago."

That's not entirely correct. We believe in species change through natural selection. However, there is no evolution through natural selection.

Evolution and the Origin of Races | National Center for Science Education

The movement called "scientific creationism" promotes the idea that a literal interpretation of the book of Genesis is scientifically demonstrable. Several organizations are attempting to have this view taught in American public school science classrooms.

ncse.ngo

 

[james bond]

The only reason you’re Likely alive today and making up ignorant shit is because of the science of evolution.

All of those quotes had to do with evidence against evolution.

What about the out of Africa stuff?

Evolution had to have humans evolving out of Africa. First, the evo scientists claimed that Africa is the most genetically diverse continent in the world. Microevolution happened by 1) losing genetic diversity out of Africa and 2) losing genetic diversity by adapting to local environments. We had this "bottleneck" or physical geography and weather that killed people, but smaller number of groups got thru to the Middle East. Then there was another bottleneck where the similar things happened, but some people were able to get out to the Americas. The people kept microevolving as their genetics changed. Less diverse genetically, but better off. I think it boils down to one race being superior to another as Darwin claimed,

'As attitudes to race became harsher, sympathies for black people in the Americas more scant, and the fate of "savages" a matter of indifference, Darwin's own sympathies were blunted by the prevailing fatalism. Starkly displaying his own readiness to apply his ideas to society, he observed in The Descent of Man that "the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world".

Though he hoped that man would by then have reached a "more civilised state ... even than the Caucasian," he expressed no hope that extermination might be prevented by the kind of moral and political pressure that had by then achieved the prohibition of slavery in the US. It was simply inevitable. Nature would take its course.'

Evolutionists do not want to address this today because they are afraid of being labeled racists. Yet, Darwinism is still alive and well today. We even have Darwin Day. Evolution is racism. It always was and always will.

Science | AAAS

www.sciencemag.org

Did Charles Darwin believe in racial inequality?

His anniversary has thrown a fresh spotlight on ideas about race that still excite his friends and foes. Marek Kohn looks at a troublesome legacy

www.independent.co.uk

Do you get regular flu shots ?

So you admit evolution is racist. Got it. It explains Darwin Day still going on. History shows social Darwinism, eugenics, the rise of the Nazis, Hitler, and the Holocaust happened due to Darwinism.

As for vaccines, we all are supposed to learn about the side effects or the pros and cons of receiving a vaccine. What is your point?

 

[Hollie]

Google Groups

Many scientists have doubts about Darwin's theory.

1. so if you don't believe in evolution, you believe a full formed human just appeared.......?
2. give us the creationist's detailed theory in about 10 - 20 sentences ..and no bible crap

Even the evolutionists cannot explain themselves without the creationist view.

"... scientific creationists hold that plants and animals have not changed through time, but were created separately and in essentially their present forms. This separate or special creation occurred during 6 days of 24 hours each. Scientific creationists differ as to how long ago this creation event took place, but most place it within 6,000-20,000 years ago."

That's not entirely correct. We believe in species change through natural selection. However, there is no evolution through natural selection.

Evolution and the Origin of Races | National Center for Science Education

The movement called "scientific creationism" promotes the idea that a literal interpretation of the book of Genesis is scientifically demonstrable. Several organizations are attempting to have this view taught in American public school science classrooms.

ncse.ngo

That’s really silly. None of the biological sciences make appeals to or requires the superstitions of religionism.

And yes, science clearly shows evolution through natural selection. That process is only in question within the fundamentalist Christian ministries.

 

[ChemEngineer]

That's not entirely correct. We believe in species change through natural selection.

Not "natural selection", adaptation.

If you will notice on every nature show, the announcer always claims that this animal and that are "perfectly adapted" to their habitat. Not perfectly evolved. Not perfectly selected. They invariably and correctly state "perfectly adapted."

 

[Hollie]

That's not entirely correct. We believe in species change through natural selection.

Not "natural selection", adaptation.

If you will notice on every nature show, the announcer always claims that this animal and that are "perfectly adapted" to their habitat. Not perfectly evolved. Not perfectly selected. They invariably and correctly state "perfectly adapted."

Your unsupported claim about “every nature show” is pretty typical of the unsupported claims by ID’iot creationers.

It would be appropriate for the religious extremists to explain how any adaptation would, or need, to occur on the planet where most forms of life have only existed for a few thousand years; since Noah’s pleasure cruise.

 

[Viktor]

Google Groups

Many scientists have doubts about Darwin's theory.

1. so if you don't believe in evolution, you believe a full formed human just appeared.......?
2. give us the creationist's detailed theory in about 10 - 20 sentences ..and no bible crap

Even the evolutionists cannot explain themselves without the creationist view.

"... scientific creationists hold that plants and animals have not changed through time, but were created separately and in essentially their present forms. This separate or special creation occurred during 6 days of 24 hours each. Scientific creationists differ as to how long ago this creation event took place, but most place it within 6,000-20,000 years ago."

That's not entirely correct. We believe in species change through natural selection. However, there is no evolution through natural selection.

Evolution and the Origin of Races | National Center for Science Education

The movement called "scientific creationism" promotes the idea that a literal interpretation of the book of Genesis is scientifically demonstrable. Several organizations are attempting to have this view taught in American public school science classrooms.

ncse.ngo

That’s really silly. None of the biological sciences make appeals to or requires the superstitions of religionism.

And yes, science clearly shows evolution through natural selection. That process is only in question within the fundamentalist Christian ministries.

WRONG. I'm not even a Christian and I question it. Most Moslems question it. Many Hindus question it. You're just making excuses.

 

[Viktor]

Google Groups

Many scientists have doubts about Darwin's theory.

Many.....wow. That’s a lot. Is it more then most ? Nope. Is it more then those at every institute of higher learning in the world ? Nope. Move on.

Go to your barber and get your money back. You got screwed.

 

[Viktor]

Science isn't perfect, nor does it ever claim to be. It admits that there is much we still don't know. But the exciting thing is that we're learning more every day.

Embracing science requires us to (a) be modest and patient enough to know that we are going to make mistakes, and (b) be intellecually curious enough to keep searching.

Modesty, patience, curiosity. Not everyone can commit to those qualities.

The HUGE problem with evolution is LACK OF OBSERVATION. Nobody has ever seen a dinosaur or a trilobite. We have fossils but those have been faked for years by greedy people all over the world.There are websites all over the internet that teach you how to make your own fossils. Accepting evolution requires faith, just as religion does.

 

[Hollie]

Google Groups

Many scientists have doubts about Darwin's theory.

1. so if you don't believe in evolution, you believe a full formed human just appeared.......?
2. give us the creationist's detailed theory in about 10 - 20 sentences ..and no bible crap

Even the evolutionists cannot explain themselves without the creationist view.

"... scientific creationists hold that plants and animals have not changed through time, but were created separately and in essentially their present forms. This separate or special creation occurred during 6 days of 24 hours each. Scientific creationists differ as to how long ago this creation event took place, but most place it within 6,000-20,000 years ago."

That's not entirely correct. We believe in species change through natural selection. However, there is no evolution through natural selection.

Evolution and the Origin of Races | National Center for Science Education

The movement called "scientific creationism" promotes the idea that a literal interpretation of the book of Genesis is scientifically demonstrable. Several organizations are attempting to have this view taught in American public school science classrooms.

ncse.ngo

That’s really silly. None of the biological sciences make appeals to or requires the superstitions of religionism.

And yes, science clearly shows evolution through natural selection. That process is only in question within the fundamentalist Christian ministries.

WRONG. I'm not even a Christian and I question it. Most Moslems question it. Many Hindus question it. You're just making excuses.

That’s fine that you question it. As you noted, religions have an agenda to protect so “questioning” the science supporting evolution is not surprising.

You just don‘t seem to have anything more than “Christians, most Moslems and many Hindus question it” to refute any of the evidence.

 

[ChemEngineer]

That’s really silly. None of the biological sciences make appeals to or requires (sic) the superstitions of religionism.

And yes, science clearly shows evolution through natural selection. That process is only in question within the fundamentalist Christian ministries.

WRONG. I'm not even a Christian and I question it. Most Moslems question it. Many Hindus question it. You're just making excuses.

*Selection* is not a "process." It is a tautology. Darwinists constantly move the target, the "process." First they aver unequivocally that there was a single common ancestor for all life on earth. When evidence pile on top of evidence contradicts their claim, then they fall back to "All we're saying is that alleles change frequency over time." HUGE FALLBACK position.

It is futile to argue with the likes of Hollie which is why I put her on Ignore long ago. Don't waste your time.

 

[task0778]

Science isn't perfect, nor does it ever claim to be. It admits that there is much we still don't know. But the exciting thing is that we're learning more every day.

Embracing science requires us to (a) be modest and patient enough to know that we are going to make mistakes, and (b) be intellecually curious enough to keep searching.

Modesty, patience, curiosity. Not everyone can commit to those qualities.

The HUGE problem with evolution is LACK OF OBSERVATION. Nobody has ever seen a dinosaur or a trilobite. We have fossils but those have been faked for years by greedy people all over the world.There are websites all over the internet that teach you how to make your own fossils. Accepting evolution requires faith, just as religion does.

Do you really think every fossil ever found is fake? Do you think carbon dating is fake?

 

[ChemEngineer]

Science isn't perfect, nor does it ever claim to be. It admits that there is much we still don't know. But the exciting thing is that we're learning more every day.
[WOW, DEEP! NO, REALLY]

Embracing science requires us to (a) be modest and patient enough to know that we are going to make mistakes, and (b) be intellecually (sic) curious enough to keep searching.

Modesty, patience, curiosity. Not everyone can commit to those qualities.

Yeah, that's a good one. "Modesty." So "modest" that
the proponents of Darwinism, climate change, you name it, express certainty, and repeat endlessly "fact, fact, fact."

One example is the long list of frauds such as Haeckel's drawings which were faked before 1868 and successfully challenged in court shortly thereafter. Nevertheless this "modest" science body continued to reproduce the fraudulent drawings through the twenty-first century at least. Over one hundred thirty years of fraud and "modesty" which you claim is "learning more each day."

Yeah, right.

 

[Dagosa]

Science isn't perfect, nor does it ever claim to be. It admits that there is much we still don't know. But the exciting thing is that we're learning more every day.

Embracing science requires us to (a) be modest and patient enough to know that we are going to make mistakes, and (b) be intellecually curious enough to keep searching.

Modesty, patience, curiosity. Not everyone can commit to those qualities.

The HUGE problem with evolution is LACK OF OBSERVATION. Nobody has ever seen a dinosaur or a trilobite. We have fossils but those have been faked for years by greedy people all over the world.There are websites all over the internet that teach you how to make your own fossils. Accepting evolution requires faith, just as religion does.

Huh ? Evolution exists in living organisms and is observable all around us. How do you think we develop vaccines ? Cellular division within one organism, cancer research and on and on are examples of the evolutionary process in action. There is nothing we eat in the modern world that has not been subject to manipulation using evolution and all the corollaries derived from it. You really need to open a biology book.

 

[Hollie]

That’s really silly. None of the biological sciences make appeals to or requires (sic) the superstitions of religionism.

And yes, science clearly shows evolution through natural selection. That process is only in question within the fundamentalist Christian ministries.

WRONG. I'm not even a Christian and I question it. Most Moslems question it. Many Hindus question it. You're just making excuses.

*Selection* is not a "process." It is a tautology. Darwinists constantly move the target, the "process." First they aver unequivocally that there was a single common ancestor for all life on earth. When evidence pile on top of evidence contradicts their claim, then they fall back to "All we're saying is that alleles change frequency over time." HUGE FALLBACK position.

It is futile to argue with the likes of Hollie which is why I put her on Ignore long ago. Don't waste your time.

Lacking a science vocabulary, you seem befuddled on the definition of tautology. ID'iot creationers commonly use the tautology argument and because it's shared among the ID'iot creation ministries, it follows a predictable theme: The Theory of evolution is built around the phrase "Survival of the Fittest", but since they claim the measure of "fitness" is the survival rate, the phrase actually resolves to "Survival of the survivors" which is circular and simply an empty tautology. However, what ID'iot creationers don't see is that their argument is an attack only against the wording used to describe one of the core concepts in evolution. It is not a challenge to the observable phenomenon to which "Survival of the Fittest" actually refers.

For some talking points at your Sunday madrassah meeting, you should know that it was Herbert Spencer who coined the phrase "survival of the fittest." Charles Darwin didn't use the phrase until the 6th edition of his Origin of Species as a substitute term for "natural selection."

I was not aware that Darwinists state "unequivocally that there was a single common ancestor for all life on earth." That may be something you were taught at your Christian madrassah but it's not a scientific claim.

You put me on ignore because your nonsensical claims don't hold up to even casual scrutiny.

 

[Dagosa]

Science isn't perfect, nor does it ever claim to be. It admits that there is much we still don't know. But the exciting thing is that we're learning more every day.
[WOW, DEEP! NO, REALLY]

Embracing science requires us to (a) be modest and patient enough to know that we are going to make mistakes, and (b) be intellecually (sic) curious enough to keep searching.

Modesty, patience, curiosity. Not everyone can commit to those qualities.

Yeah, that's a good one. "Modesty." So "modest" that
the proponents of Darwinism, climate change, you name it, express certainty, and repeat endlessly "fact, fact, fact."

One example is the long list of frauds such as Haeckel's drawings which were faked before 1868 and successfully challenged in court shortly thereafter. Nevertheless this "modest" science body continued to reproduce the fraudulent drawings through the twenty-first century at least. Over one hundred thirty years of fraud and "modesty" which you claim is "learning more each day."

Yeah, right.

The list of frauds includes you. For some reason you still think you’re smarter then all the research facilities in the world. Geesus.....tell us again how smart you are.

 

[Dagosa]

Science isn't perfect, nor does it ever claim to be. It admits that there is much we still don't know. But the exciting thing is that we're learning more every day.

Embracing science requires us to (a) be modest and patient enough to know that we are going to make mistakes, and (b) be intellecually curious enough to keep searching.

Modesty, patience, curiosity. Not everyone can commit to those qualities.

The HUGE problem with evolution is LACK OF OBSERVATION. Nobody has ever seen a dinosaur or a trilobite. We have fossils but those have been faked for years by greedy people all over the world.There are websites all over the internet that teach you how to make your own fossils. Accepting evolution requires faith, just as religion does.

So, are you willing to through away everything science has developed in all the areas you think are not knowledge worthy enough for you. There are no foods in t

As for vaccines, we all are supposed to learn about the side effects or the pros and cons of receiving a vaccine. What is your point?

So you don’t think evolution plays the major role in vaccine development?
I’m sure you don’t understand quantum theory also, but I bet you still use a computer and a cell phone. . You’re a hypocrite.

 

[Dagosa]

Google Groups

Many scientists have doubts about Darwin's theory.

1. so if you don't believe in evolution, you believe a full formed human just appeared.......?
2. give us the creationist's detailed theory in about 10 - 20 sentences ..and no bible crap

Even the evolutionists cannot explain themselves without the creationist view.

"... scientific creationists hold that plants and animals have not changed through time, but were created separately and in essentially their present forms. This separate or special creation occurred during 6 days of 24 hours each. Scientific creationists differ as to how long ago this creation event took place, but most place it within 6,000-20,000 years ago."

That's not entirely correct. We believe in species change through natural selection. However, there is no evolution through natural selection.

Evolution and the Origin of Races | National Center for Science Education

The movement called "scientific creationism" promotes the idea that a literal interpretation of the book of Genesis is scientifically demonstrable. Several organizations are attempting to have this view taught in American public school science classrooms.

ncse.ngo

Funny.

 

[Mac1958]

Science isn't perfect, nor does it ever claim to be. It admits that there is much we still don't know. But the exciting thing is that we're learning more every day.

Embracing science requires us to (a) be modest and patient enough to know that we are going to make mistakes, and (b) be intellecually curious enough to keep searching.

Modesty, patience, curiosity. Not everyone can commit to those qualities.

The HUGE problem with evolution is LACK OF OBSERVATION. Nobody has ever seen a dinosaur or a trilobite. We have fossils but those have been faked for years by greedy people all over the world.There are websites all over the internet that teach you how to make your own fossils. Accepting evolution requires faith, just as religion does.

Huh ? Evolution exists in living organisms and is observable all around us. How do you think we develop vaccines ? Cellular division within one organism, cancer research and on and on are examples of the evolutionary process in action. There is nothing we eat in the modern world that has not been subject to manipulation using evolution and all the corollaries derived from it. You really need to open a biology book.

They try to equate the two. They HAVE to.