Evolution: The Big Hoax of lefts

[alang1216]

They may be rejecting HIM; however, by doing so they are acknowledging that HE existed.

Here's an irony for you, Jesus was rejected by those who knew him and accepted by those who did not.

HIS disciples didn't all reject HIM. And HIS step brother (born to Mary and Joseph) finally came to accept Jesus and became a leader in the Church.

True enough, but I was referring to the thousands of Jewish people in Israel who heard him preach but never became his followers. Christianity didn't really become a thing until his small group of followers spread his message beyond Israel to people who never met or heard of Jesus and weren't Jews.

 

[gfm7175]

You obviously have little scientific education and use cherry-picked internet sources to attempt a valid argument.

I call this the 'you don't understand' mantra, and typically ignore it on sight, as it is not an argument. I didn't make use of any internet sources; I formed my own arguments.

First, you can say scientists have “faith” in their evidence and theoretical arguments based on them.

No, you can't say that. Science isn't having "faith" in "supporting evidence"; that is what RELIGION does...

That’s a far cry from no credible evidence (blind faith) on the religion side (pick one of MANY religions).

Argument From Ignorance Fallacy. In other words, absence of evidence is NOT evidence of absence...

Second, “scientific evidence” is based on research from scientific methods that one can replicate, not hearsay.

There is no "scientific evidence"; just 'evidence'... The word 'evidence' has the same definition whether it is about science or about something else... There are no 'scientific methods'; science is NOT a method. It is a set of falsifiable theories. Define these "scientific methods" you make reference to here; what are these mysterious 'methods'?

ALL scientists in the world deal with same or very similar methods in their specific field.

Again, what ARE these mysterious 'methods' that you make reference to?

Science isn't a 'method' of any sort. It is a set of falsifiable theories. That's all science is.

 

[tyroneweaver]

Probably only poor educated folks and liberals still believe in fairy-tale called 'Evolution', one of the biggest liberal lies in human history.Why liberals want to abolish God?Because only God can stop their insane LGBT, climate protection, genderism, satanism, NWO, white genocide, communism, feminism and other agendas.
Everywhere getting power liberals have fought against God.The Satan own people!

The great collection of proofs below destroys completely the Evolution-Lie

EVOLUTION: The Big Hoax!

Rightwingers insist that science is political because they can't accept truth. They prefer false witness over fact. Sad.

The Bible has stood the test of time, unchanged thru the centuries.
Yet your side redefines, falsifies data, and makes false prophecies about the future.

 

[alang1216]

The Bible has stood the test of time, unchanged thru the centuries.
Yet your side redefines, falsifies data, and makes false prophecies about the future.

Have you ever read the Bible? It has evolved over time like everything else. The polytheist religion of a bronze-age, Canaanite tribe evolved into Jewish, Christian, and Muslim religions we know today. Unchanged indeed.

If my "side" is science, I stand by it. It is a human endeavor so yes, it occasionally redefines, falsifies data, and makes false prophecies about the future. It is also a process than brought us a vast amount of knowledge that no religion has ever equaled.

 

[tyroneweaver]

The Bible has stood the test of time, unchanged thru the centuries.
Yet your side redefines, falsifies data, and makes false prophecies about the future.

Have you ever read the Bible? It has evolved over time like everything else. The polytheist religion of a bronze-age, Canaanite tribe evolved into Jewish, Christian, and Muslim religions we know today. Unchanged indeed.

If my "side" is science, I stand by it. It is a human endeavor so yes, it occasionally redefines, falsifies data, and makes false prophecies about the future. It is also a process than brought us a vast amount of knowledge that no religion has ever equaled.

Oh I get it. If I read the Bible today, tomorrow the words might be different. LOL
Whadda total misrepresentation of what I said.

 

[alang1216]

Oh I get it. If I read the Bible today, tomorrow the words might be different. LOL
Whadda total misrepresentation of what I said.

I was referring to the theology of the Bible, which I thought more important. As to the actual words, I'd say that if you read the Bible every day from when it was first written down until the invention of the printing press, then yes, the words would be different. The differences would not just be due to the translation from one language to another.

 

[denmark]

You obviously have little scientific education and use cherry-picked internet sources to attempt a valid argument.

I call this the 'you don't understand' mantra, and typically ignore it on sight, as it is not an argument. I didn't make use of any internet sources; I formed my own arguments.

First, you can say scientists have “faith” in their evidence and theoretical arguments based on them.

No, you can't say that. Science isn't having "faith" in "supporting evidence"; that is what RELIGION does...

That’s a far cry from no credible evidence (blind faith) on the religion side (pick one of MANY religions).

Argument From Ignorance Fallacy. In other words, absence of evidence is NOT evidence of absence...

Second, “scientific evidence” is based on research from scientific methods that one can replicate, not hearsay.

There is no "scientific evidence"; just 'evidence'... The word 'evidence' has the same definition whether it is about science or about something else... There are no 'scientific methods'; science is NOT a method. It is a set of falsifiable theories. Define these "scientific methods" you make reference to here; what are these mysterious 'methods'?

ALL scientists in the world deal with same or very similar methods in their specific field.

Again, what ARE these mysterious 'methods' that you make reference to?

Science isn't a 'method' of any sort. It is a set of falsifiable theories. That's all science is.

There is no mystery among scientists who conduct research using scientific methods.
Obviously, you are no scientist.
Perhaps, an amateur philosopher?

Scientific research reflects investigative processes that involve methods that vary somewhat among the specialties. The research produces data that are interpreted statistically and used to form, enhance, or refute a scientific theory.
You would do yourself a favor by reading some BASICS on “scientific method”:

Overview -Scientific Method
Scientific inquiry
Elements of the scientific method
Models of scientific inquiry
Science of complex systems
Communication and community
Philosophy and sociology of science
Relationship with mathematics

Scientific method - Wikipedia

 

[sealybobo]

Probably only poor educated folks and liberals still believe in fairy-tale called 'Evolution', one of the biggest liberal lies in human history.Why liberals want to abolish God?Because only God can stop their insane LGBT, climate protection, genderism, satanism, NWO, white genocide, communism, feminism and other agendas.
Everywhere getting power liberals have fought against God.The Satan own people!

The great collection of proofs below destroys completely the Evolution-Lie

EVOLUTION: The Big Hoax!

Evolution doesn’t disprove god it just goes against what your religion says.

Notice the pattern here. First they said global warming was a hoax. Today they admit it’s real they just don’t agree how much we are contributing.

Now you say evolution is a hoax. Like global warming there is a lot of evidence evolution is true.

Now global warming doesn’t have anything to do with religion so this is a great example of how they use religion to make us stupid controllable sheep.

It’s also not a hoax that trump is a horrible cheater and liar and he colluded with russia.