Human Evolution Is Not Taught In Public Schools

[Wuwei]

OTOH, how did heat get to quantum particles when matter had no energy?

That question makes no sense at all. Even if it did make sense the random sciencey words you put in that sentence has nothing to do with the OP concerning evolution and schools.
.

 

[james bond]

That question makes no sense at all. Even if it did make sense the random sciencey words you put in that sentence has nothing to do with the OP concerning evolution and schools.
.

One of the things students have fault with evolution is that it does not explain how our universe and Earth (solar system) came to be. Usually, the evolutionists think it was due to quantum mechanics or physics. Read Stephen Hawking. There is a lack of explanation of how QM came to be.

 

[Wuwei]

One of the things students have fault with evolution is that it does not explain how our universe and Earth (solar system) came to be.

You are conflating evolution with the formation of the universe!
Evolution is how living things developed.
The big bang is how the galaxies and contents developed.
Two totally different things.

Usually, the evolutionists think it was due to quantum mechanics or physics.

No, no they don't! quantum mechanics and physics are not the cause of anything! They are mathematical models of observations, not causes. That is tantamount to saying a book on Lincoln's death is the cause of his death.

.

 

[Hollie]

One of the things students have fault with evolution is that it does not explain how our universe and Earth (solar system) came to be. Usually, the evolutionists think it was due to quantum mechanics or physics. Read Stephen Hawking. There is a lack of explanation of how QM came to be.

Your comments reflect the problems students at your madrassah are having.

 

[james bond]

You are conflating evolution with the formation of the universe!
Evolution is how living things developed.
The big bang is how the galaxies and contents developed.
Two totally different things.

No, no they don't! quantum mechanics and physics are not the cause of anything! They are mathematical models of observations, not causes. That is tantamount to saying a book on Lincoln's death is the cause of his death.

.

I mentioned evolutionary thinking. It follows the stupid BS that is evolution which you readily believe and accept. Stupid is as stupid does.

>>Evolution is how living things developed.<<

That's a lie and false belief of evolutionists. We know it was natural selection which comes from creation science. Evos stole the concept for themselves which is the only truth.

The creationist chemist/zoologist Edward Blyth came up with natural selection about 25 years before Darwin stole it to support his theory of evolution. Yes, Darwin is a thief and liar and should be punished appropriately.

No, no they don't! quantum mechanics and physics are not the cause of anything! They are mathematical models of observations, not causes. That is tantamount to saying a book on Lincoln's death is the cause of his death.

Then just admit that evolution and evolutionary thinking is a huge lie and has no causes.

 

[james bond]

Your comments reflect the problems students at your madrassah are having.

>>The creationist chemist/zoologist Edward Blyth (1810–1873) wrote about natural selection about 25 years before Darwin misappropriated it to support his theory of evolution."<<

Why don't you point the finger at Wuwei lol? He's way behind in natural selection and lies of evolution and evolutionary thinking.

 

[BS Filter]

Conservatives were created by God. Lefties evolved from monkeys.

 

[Hollie]

>>The creationist chemist/zoologist Edward Blyth (1810–1873) wrote about natural selection about 25 years before Darwin misappropriated it to support his theory of evolution."<<

Why don't you point the finger at Wuwei lol? He's way behind in natural selection and lies of evolution and evolutionary thinking.

I have reason to accept your imposing the ''creationer'' label on anyone. That's a tactic employed by creation'istas in various threads. The Hyper-religious tend to to impose their extremist beliefs on long dead individuals.

"Writing about'' natural selection is far different from what Darwin accomplished. He set forth a comprehensive theory examined core precepts of ''descent with modification", "adaptation", "fitness for survival". The great contribution of Darwin’s original theory is that it identified and explained the process by which descent with modification could arise in an ordered way from the interaction between organisms and their environment. And yet, the creationists they never seem to notice that if creationism were true, there shouldn’t be any of that evidence of adaptation to require accommodation.

Organisms evolve through a combination of genetic mutation and natural selection. The data confirms that. And the evidence still reflects a common origin for all living things from a common ancestor via a process of descent with modification, no matter how life arose in the first place. That is the problem for the hyper-religious. If you have evidence for a supernatural causation, present it.

 

[Wuwei]

I mentioned evolutionary thinking. It follows the stupid BS that is evolution which you readily believe and accept. Stupid is as stupid does.

>>Evolution is how living things developed.<<

That's a lie and false belief of evolutionists. We know it was natural selection which comes from creation science. Evos stole the concept for themselves which is the only truth.

The creationist chemist/zoologist Edward Blyth came up with natural selection about 25 years before Darwin stole it to support his theory of evolution. Yes, Darwin is a thief and liar and should be punished appropriately.



Then just admit that evolution and evolutionary thinking is a huge lie and has no causes.

We went through that many times. We know you don't believe basic science. We know you hate atheists. We know you disbelieve evolution.

You simply have nothing more to say except repeating the same thing over and over.

.

 

[LittleNipper]

We went through that many times. We know you don't believe basic science. We know you hate atheists. We know you disbelieve evolution.

You simply have nothing more to say except repeating the same thing over and over.

.

We also know that "could have", "should have", "likely happened" and a "high probability" are not terns that should be found in "science" texts ----- but is.

 

[Wuwei]

We also know that "could have", "should have", "likely happened" and a "high probability" are not terns that should be found in "science" texts ----- but is.

Creationists sites are replete with those terms. You will never find those terms in basic science texts such as in quantum mechanics. You may find "high probability" in new incomplete experiments where there isn't enough data for a satisfactory statistical confidence interval. But that's it.

J. Bond wants to change basic physics such as quantum mechanics. Can you point out examples of basic physics texts that use those terms? Have you ever read basic physics texts?

.

 

[22lcidw]

I have reason to accept your imposing the ''creationer'' label on anyone. That's a tactic employed by creation'istas in various threads. The Hyper-religious tend to to impose their extremist beliefs on long dead individuals.

"Writing about'' natural selection is far different from what Darwin accomplished. He set forth a comprehensive theory examined core precepts of ''descent with modification", "adaptation", "fitness for survival". The great contribution of Darwin’s original theory is that it identified and explained the process by which descent with modification could arise in an ordered way from the interaction between organisms and their environment. And yet, the creationists they never seem to notice that if creationism were true, there shouldn’t be any of that evidence of adaptation to require accommodation.

Organisms evolve through a combination of genetic mutation and natural selection. The data confirms that. And the evidence still reflects a common origin for all living things from a common ancestor via a process of descent with modification, no matter how life arose in the first place. That is the problem for the hyper-religious. If you have evidence for a supernatural causation, present it.

The main issue is where and why did anything be existing in the first place? So you need to prove that evidence of evolutionists. Our civilizations are violent with periods of civility. In our nation today, we take things for granted in a world where reality is far different for billions of people compared to our living standards.

 

[Hollie]

The main issue is where and why did anything be existing in the first place? So you need to prove that evidence of evolutionists. Our civilizations are violent with periods of civility. In our nation today, we take things for granted in a world where reality is far different for billions of people compared to our living standards.

Biological evolution does not address the beginning of life.

 

[22lcidw]

Biological evolution does not address the beginning of life.

Then your view of the past is weak when the wars of debauchery occur over and over. And we are due again on a global scale.

 

[james bond]

I have reason to accept your imposing the ''creationer'' label on anyone. That's a tactic employed by creation'istas in various threads. The Hyper-religious tend to to impose their extremist beliefs on long dead individuals.

"Writing about'' natural selection is far different from what Darwin accomplished. He set forth a comprehensive theory examined core precepts of ''descent with modification", "adaptation", "fitness for survival". The great contribution of Darwin’s original theory is that it identified and explained the process by which descent with modification could arise in an ordered way from the interaction between organisms and their environment. And yet, the creationists they never seem to notice that if creationism were true, there shouldn’t be any of that evidence of adaptation to require accommodation.

Organisms evolve through a combination of genetic mutation and natural selection. The data confirms that. And the evidence still reflects a common origin for all living things from a common ancestor via a process of descent with modification, no matter how life arose in the first place. That is the problem for the hyper-religious. If you have evidence for a supernatural causation, present it.

Haha. How hypocritical of you. Charles Darwin and Charles Lyell are long dead and will be suffering for all eternity in hell. Aren't you the one imposing your extremist atheist beliefs on long dead individuals. Dr. Blyth came up with the concept of natural selection, but he didn't apply it to mean the lie of a common ancestor.

And there is no descent with modification if you cannot present transitional fossils. I have said this many, many, many times. Thus, your side has no evidence for evolution.

Yet, I found Stephen Hawking who backs up how the sky can become fire from global warming and kill all of the sinners and atheists remaining on Earth in the global fire. Start from 8:48 if you want to skip the rest. If I'm still around, then my fellow Christians and I will be saved and gone from Earth by the rapture.



The evidence for God is the EMS when he said, "Let there be light." He spoke it into existence. From this, he separated the lightness from the darkness and time began as well as space. All of the energy we need is contained in the universe.

 

[james bond]

We went through that many times. We know you don't believe basic science. We know you hate atheists. We know you disbelieve evolution.

You simply have nothing more to say except repeating the same thing over and over.

.

I've said many times that James Hutton and Charles Lyell admitted that evolution, evolutionary thinking, and uniformitarianism was based on the religion of atheism. It isn't based on basic science, but the religion of atheism. Uniformitarianism and evolution started out to contradict the Bible and creation science. Basic science would consider creationism and this is why it should be taught in schools as part of basic science.

I do admit I said many times that you and your side have their atheist science of evolution and beliefs while the creationists have their creation science and the Bible. We are on two different sides of science and religion. Why should I hate atheists for that? God hates sin, especially putting false gods/idols before him such as evolution and evolutionary thinking. He will take care of it during the rapture and global fire on Earth and the rest in the afterlife. It's his anger towards you and the atheists and not mine. Mine is only to present and argue creation science here. You have to recognize my side, too. We're not going to teach the rapture and end of the world.

Finally, there is no evidence for evolution because of there is no common ancestor. There are no transitional fossils. That fact destroys the lies of evolution.

 

[james bond]

J. Bond wants to change basic physics such as quantum mechanics. Can you point out examples of basic physics texts that use those terms? Have you ever read basic physics texts?

I can't help it if you do not understand the ramifications of quantum mechanics. I got it from Stephen Hawking and his multiverse theory.

 

[Hollie]

Haha. How hypocritical of you. Charles Darwin and Charles Lyell are long dead and will be suffering for all eternity in hell. Aren't you the one imposing your extremist atheist beliefs on long dead individuals. Dr. Blyth came up with the concept of natural selection, but he didn't apply it to mean the lie of a common ancestor.

And there is no descent with modification if you cannot present transitional fossils. I have said this many, many, many times. Thus, your side has no evidence for evolution.

Yet, I found Stephen Hawking who backs up how the sky can become fire from global warming and kill all of the sinners and atheists remaining on Earth in the global fire. Start from 8:48 if you want to skip the rest. If I'm still around, then my fellow Christians and I will be saved and gone from Earth by the rapture.



The evidence for God is the EMS when he said, "Let there be light." He spoke it into existence. From this, he separated the lightness from the darkness and time began as well as space. All of the energy we need is contained in the universe.

You should ease up on the tactic of using your gods as a vehicle to project your fears and prejudices. Your hysterical, anti-science rants are all the same nonsense you steal from the hysterical, anti-science fundi ministries.

 

[Hollie]

I've said many times that James Hutton and Charles Lyell admitted that evolution, evolutionary thinking, and uniformitarianism was based on the religion of atheism. It isn't based on basic science, but the religion of atheism. Uniformitarianism and evolution started out to contradict the Bible and creation science. Basic science would consider creationism and this is why it should be taught in schools as part of basic science.

I do admit I said many times that you and your side have their atheist science of evolution and beliefs while the creationists have their creation science and the Bible. We are on two different sides of science and religion. Why should I hate atheists for that? God hates sin, especially putting false gods/idols before him such as evolution and evolutionary thinking. He will take care of it during the rapture and global fire on Earth and the rest in the afterlife. It's his anger towards you and the atheists and not mine. Mine is only to present and argue creation science here. You have to recognize my side, too. We're not going to teach the rapture and end of the world.

Finally, there is no evidence for evolution because of there is no common ancestor. There are no transitional fossils. That fact destroys the lies of evolution.

There are many transitional fossils. You simply reinforce your profound ignorance by furthering falsehoods.

 

[james bond]

You should ease up on the tactic of using your gods as a vehicle to project your fears and prejudices. Your hysterical, anti-science rants are all the same nonsense you steal from the hysterical, anti-science fundi ministries.

Enough with the anti and no science "fundi ministries" lies. They're the creation science ones which follow the scientific method and the ways creation science has developed through its world renowned history. For example, we have Dr. Willard Libby who found radiocarbon dating which is more accurate about the age of palae-otologic and anthropologic articles. Your side has nothing like that.