Real Science…Not Darwin

[PoliticalChic]

More than six thousand years of breeding and artificial selection, barnyard and backyard, have never induced a chicken to lay a square egg or persuade a pig to develop wheels or ball bearings."
Berlinski

More evidence FOR evolution. Wheels have not evolved since the structures that might lead up to wheels offer no competitive advantage to the animal, just as the ToE would say. If a species was just created from scratch you'd expect to see wheels and a host of other bizarre structures. But you don't.

"Wheels????"


Gads, you're an imbecile.

 

[PoliticalChic]

A century and a half and still no proof of Darwin’s theory.
Lots of scientist are suspicious of the reasons, and doubtful of the truth of his theory….but Leftist academia is furious if any fail to bent the knee and the neck to their ‘religion.’


“Breeders have been using artificial selection to produce descent with modification for centuries—within existing species. Natural selection has also been observed to do the same in the wild—but again, only within existing species.”
Jonathan Wells



In 1997, evolutionary biologist Keith Stewart Thomson wrote: “A matter of unfinished business for biologists is the identification of evolution's smoking gun,” and “the smoking gun of evolution is speciation, not local adaptation and differentiation of populations.” Before Darwin, the consensus was that species can vary only within certain limits; indeed, centuries of artificial selection had seemingly demonstrated such limits experimentally.
“Darwin had to show that the limits could be broken,” wrote Thomson, “so do we.” Keith Stewart Thomson, “Natural Selection and Evolution’s Smoking Gun,” American Scientist 85 (1997): 516-518.




“Throughout 150 years of the science of bacteriology, there is no evidence that one species of bacteria has changed into another….. . Since there is no evidence for species changes between the simplest forms of unicellular life, it is not surprising that there is no evidence for evolution . . . throughout the whole array of higher multicellular organisms.” —Bacteriologist Alan Linton, “Scant Search for the Maker,” Times Higher Education Supplement, April 20, 2001, Book Section, 29. Available online with registration (January 2006) at:
http://www.thes.co.uk/search/story.aspx?story_id=72809.







Do you see how ignorant of the facts these government school believers are:



“Evolution is a fact.” Science Believers

And this…

“Evolution [Darwin’s Theory] is a fact and is the basis of all of biology. The theory of evolution is the most robust, well supported scientific theory in the history of mankind.” The Pretense Called Evolution


And this winner:

“Back long ago there was only species of human, now we have Whites, Blacks, Abos, Asians... that came from evolution.” The Most Famous Fakes In Science



Someone wants the science-illiterate to believe Darwin’s theory has been proven.

Why?

 

[alang1216]

More than six thousand years of breeding and artificial selection, barnyard and backyard, have never induced a chicken to lay a square egg or persuade a pig to develop wheels or ball bearings."
Berlinski

More evidence FOR evolution. Wheels have not evolved since the structures that might lead up to wheels offer no competitive advantage to the animal, just as the ToE would say. If a species was just created from scratch you'd expect to see wheels and a host of other bizarre structures. But you don't.

"Wheels????"


Gads, you're an imbecile.

Just quoting from your post so that makes you the...

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Is it just me thinking that this cutnpaste thread has not gone to plan ?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Is it just me thinking that this cutnpaste thread has not gone to plan ?

Of course it did.


It drew out and exposed all the morons who simply accept lies......and then try to deny that they are lies.


Let's prove it with you: any proof of Darwin's theory?


This is where you say.....'...duhhhhhh.......'

 

[alang1216]

Someone wants the science-illiterate to believe Darwin’s theory has been proven.

Why?

Why not? The science-literate believe Darwin’s theory has been proven, maybe the illiterate might learn something from them.

Three-quarters (75%) of all college graduates and fully 81% of those with a postgraduate degree believe that humans have evolved over time. By comparison, 56% of those with a high school diploma or less say evolution has occurred.

And you claim there is no radical Right.

Education and Knowledge

 

[Grumblenuts]

Someone wants the science-illiterate to believe Darwin’s theory has been proven.

Why?

Why not? The science-literate believe Darwin’s theory has been proven, maybe the illiterate might learn something from them.

Three-quarters (75%) of all college graduates and fully 81% of those with a postgraduate degree believe that humans have evolved over time. By comparison, 56% of those with a high school diploma or less say evolution has occurred.

And you claim there is no radical Right.

Education and Knowledge

Pew, pew!,..
Pew, pew, pew!

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Is it just me thinking that this cutnpaste thread has not gone to plan ?

Of course it did.


It drew out and exposed all the morons who simply accept lies......and then try to deny that they are lies.


Let's prove it with you: any proof of Darwin's theory?


This is where you say.....'...duhhhhhh.......'

Lol. I will just give you some space to respond to Hollie and others on this thread who arent buying your nonsense. Run along now.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Is it just me thinking that this cutnpaste thread has not gone to plan ?

Of course it did.


It drew out and exposed all the morons who simply accept lies......and then try to deny that they are lies.


Let's prove it with you: any proof of Darwin's theory?


This is where you say.....'...duhhhhhh.......'

Lol. I will just give you some space to respond to Hollie and others on this thread who arent buying your nonsense. Run along now.

I don't have anything to do with that one.

Stand on your own hind legs.

If you can't...just say so.

 

[Hollie]

Is it just me thinking that this cutnpaste thread has not gone to plan ?

Of course it did.


It drew out and exposed all the morons who simply accept lies......and then try to deny that they are lies.


Let's prove it with you: any proof of Darwin's theory?


This is where you say.....'...duhhhhhh.......'

Lol. I will just give you some space to respond to Hollie and others on this thread who arent buying your nonsense. Run along now.

I don't have anything to do with that one.

Stand on your own hind legs.

If you can't...just say so.

You have no option but to cower and dodge.

 

[Hollie]

How do you send the hyper-religious to their safe places of fear and ignorance?

Library Guides: Genetics, Developmental Biology, and Evolutionary Biology: Find Articles

Resources for Penn State students and faculty in genetics, developmental biology, and evolutionary biology.

guides.libraries.psu.edu

 

[Tommy Tainant]

How do you send the hyper-religious to their safe places of fear and ignorance?

Library Guides: Genetics, Developmental Biology, and Evolutionary Biology: Find Articles

Resources for Penn State students and faculty in genetics, developmental biology, and evolutionary biology.

guides.libraries.psu.edu

She does that every time she is called out on her crap.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Library Guides: Genetics, Developmental Biology, and Evolutionary Biology: Find Articles

Resources for Penn State students and faculty in genetics, developmental biology, and evolutionary biology.

guides.libraries.psu.edu

Bet she's a great librarian!

 

[Taz]

Why not tell the truth? To whom or to what would the truth be......dangerous, or damaging????

So what's the truth? The White man's bible?

The truth is that Darwin's theory is false.


As of this moment, there is no explanation for speciation.


The real question is why academia, government school, doesn't admit that.

So you have nothing. Got it.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Alexa, phone number for "academia" and "government school" please?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Why not tell the truth? To whom or to what would the truth be......dangerous, or damaging????

So what's the truth? The White man's bible?

The truth is that Darwin's theory is false.


As of this moment, there is no explanation for speciation.


The real question is why academia, government school, doesn't admit that.

So you have nothing. Got it.

That's no way to speak to your teacher.

 

[Taz]

Why not tell the truth? To whom or to what would the truth be......dangerous, or damaging????

So what's the truth? The White man's bible?

The truth is that Darwin's theory is false.


As of this moment, there is no explanation for speciation.


The real question is why academia, government school, doesn't admit that.

So you have nothing. Got it.

That's no way to speak to your teacher.

Your truth is non-existant apparently. All you can do is criticize others. And you're not even very good at that. You rely heavily on copy&paste, not your own mind.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Why not tell the truth? To whom or to what would the truth be......dangerous, or damaging????

So what's the truth? The White man's bible?

The truth is that Darwin's theory is false.


As of this moment, there is no explanation for speciation.


The real question is why academia, government school, doesn't admit that.

So you have nothing. Got it.

That's no way to speak to your teacher.

Your truth is non-existant apparently. All you can do is criticize others. And you're not even very good at that. You rely heavily on copy&paste, not your own mind.

What I have done is prove that Darwinism is false, and there is no reason to treat it as factual.


Further, I have provided you with a lesson on microevolution so you never embarrass yourself again with a dumb statement such as this:

"Back long ago there was only species of human, now we have Whites, Blacks, Abos, Asians... that came from evolution."




Don't forget...
After species, and speciation, the next important term for you government schoolies to learn is microevolution. Your lack of understanding of same is the reason you fall for the Darwinist’s spiel.





10. When a change suddenly occurs in a population….say blue hair, and let’s say that children inherit the change, Darwinists swoon! There is proof of evolution, they claim!!

No it isn’t. It’s known as microevolution…and has never led to the creation of a new species.



So one way of stating the importance of speciation is by distinguishing between “microevolution”—the uncontroversial changes within species that people observed long before Darwin—and “macroevolution”—the branching-tree pattern of evolution that is the essence of Darwinism. “ Futuyma, Evolution, p. 401.


“Microevolution does not lead beyond the confines of the species, and the typical products of microevolution, the geographic races, are not incipient species.” Richard Goldschmidt, The Material Basis of Evolution, p. 8, 396.



In 1996, biologists Scott Gilbert, John Opitz, and Rudolf Raff wrote in the journal Developmental Biology: “Genetics might be adequate for explaining

microevolution, but microevolutionary changes in gene frequency were not seen as able to turn a reptile into a mammal or to convert a fish into an amphibian. Microevolution looks at adaptations that concern the survival of the fittest, not the arrival of the fittest…. The origin of species—Darwin’s problem—remains unsolved.”







And in 2001, biologist Sean B. Carroll wrote in Nature: “A long-standing issue in evolutionary biology is whether the processes observable in extant populations and species (microevolution) are sufficient to account for the larger-scale changes evident over longer periods of life’s history (macroevolution).”





Great description of Darwin’s theory: survival of the fittest, not the arrival of the fittest!

 

[Taz]

Why not tell the truth? To whom or to what would the truth be......dangerous, or damaging????

So what's the truth? The White man's bible?

The truth is that Darwin's theory is false.


As of this moment, there is no explanation for speciation.


The real question is why academia, government school, doesn't admit that.

So you have nothing. Got it.

That's no way to speak to your teacher.

Your truth is non-existant apparently. All you can do is criticize others. And you're not even very good at that. You rely heavily on copy&paste, not your own mind.

What I have done is prove that Darwinism is false, and there is no reason to treat it as factual.


Further, I have provided you with a lesson on microevolution so you never embarrass yourself again with a dumb statement such as this:

"Back long ago there was only species of human, now we have Whites, Blacks, Abos, Asians... that came from evolution."




Don't forget...
After species, and speciation, the next important term for you government schoolies to learn is microevolution. Your lack of understanding of same is the reason you fall for the Darwinist’s spiel.





10. When a change suddenly occurs in a population….say blue hair, and let’s say that children inherit the change, Darwinists swoon! There is proof of evolution, they claim!!

No it isn’t. It’s known as microevolution…and has never led to the creation of a new species.



So one way of stating the importance of speciation is by distinguishing between “microevolution”—the uncontroversial changes within species that people observed long before Darwin—and “macroevolution”—the branching-tree pattern of evolution that is the essence of Darwinism. “ Futuyma, Evolution, p. 401.


“Microevolution does not lead beyond the confines of the species, and the typical products of microevolution, the geographic races, are not incipient species.” Richard Goldschmidt, The Material Basis of Evolution, p. 8, 396.



In 1996, biologists Scott Gilbert, John Opitz, and Rudolf Raff wrote in the journal Developmental Biology: “Genetics might be adequate for explaining

microevolution, but microevolutionary changes in gene frequency were not seen as able to turn a reptile into a mammal or to convert a fish into an amphibian. Microevolution looks at adaptations that concern the survival of the fittest, not the arrival of the fittest…. The origin of species—Darwin’s problem—remains unsolved.”







And in 2001, biologist Sean B. Carroll wrote in Nature: “A long-standing issue in evolutionary biology is whether the processes observable in extant populations and species (microevolution) are sufficient to account for the larger-scale changes evident over longer periods of life’s history (macroevolution).”





Great description of Darwin’s theory: survival of the fittest, not the arrival of the fittest!

First of all, nobody reads your long winded copy&pastes.
Secondly, you're totally willfully ignorant of real science, so even I can't help you there.
Thirdly, evolution is a fact. Deal with it.

 

[Hollie]

Why not tell the truth? To whom or to what would the truth be......dangerous, or damaging????

So what's the truth? The White man's bible?

The truth is that Darwin's theory is false.


As of this moment, there is no explanation for speciation.


The real question is why academia, government school, doesn't admit that.

So you have nothing. Got it.

That's no way to speak to your teacher.

Your truth is non-existant apparently. All you can do is criticize others. And you're not even very good at that. You rely heavily on copy&paste, not your own mind.

What I have done is prove that Darwinism is false, and there is no reason to treat it as factual.


Further, I have provided you with a lesson on microevolution so you never embarrass yourself again with a dumb statement such as this:

"Back long ago there was only species of human, now we have Whites, Blacks, Abos, Asians... that came from evolution."




Don't forget...
After species, and speciation, the next important term for you government schoolies to learn is microevolution. Your lack of understanding of same is the reason you fall for the Darwinist’s spiel.





10. When a change suddenly occurs in a population….say blue hair, and let’s say that children inherit the change, Darwinists swoon! There is proof of evolution, they claim!!

No it isn’t. It’s known as microevolution…and has never led to the creation of a new species.



So one way of stating the importance of speciation is by distinguishing between “microevolution”—the uncontroversial changes within species that people observed long before Darwin—and “macroevolution”—the branching-tree pattern of evolution that is the essence of Darwinism. “ Futuyma, Evolution, p. 401.


“Microevolution does not lead beyond the confines of the species, and the typical products of microevolution, the geographic races, are not incipient species.” Richard Goldschmidt, The Material Basis of Evolution, p. 8, 396.



In 1996, biologists Scott Gilbert, John Opitz, and Rudolf Raff wrote in the journal Developmental Biology: “Genetics might be adequate for explaining

microevolution, but microevolutionary changes in gene frequency were not seen as able to turn a reptile into a mammal or to convert a fish into an amphibian. Microevolution looks at adaptations that concern the survival of the fittest, not the arrival of the fittest…. The origin of species—Darwin’s problem—remains unsolved.”







And in 2001, biologist Sean B. Carroll wrote in Nature: “A long-standing issue in evolutionary biology is whether the processes observable in extant populations and species (microevolution) are sufficient to account for the larger-scale changes evident over longer periods of life’s history (macroevolution).”





Great description of Darwin’s theory: survival of the fittest, not the arrival of the fittest!

It's actually comical how easy it is to refute the ''quotes'' from religious extremists.

Observed Instances of Speciation

Some More Observed Speciation Events

CA520: "Origin of Species" on speciation.