Scientific Dissent From Darwinism

[Turtlesoup]

Perhaps it is isn't even a majority of scientists. It's really a minority who are atheists.

What's troublesome is lack of transitional fossils when it's main evidence is supposed to be fossils.

I guess you havent heard of DNA before nor do you care that fossils have been discovered showing evolutionary changes.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

guess you havent heard of DNA before nor do you care that fossils have been discovered showing evolutionary changes.

Of course he has. That dude has been spoonfed so much info and evidence that i am embarrassed for him as a fellow adult. He is a magical thinker. He thinks that, if he says there is no evidence, it becomes true.

 

[james bond]

Perhaps it is isn't even a majority of scientists. It's really a minority who are atheists.

What's troublesome is lack of transitional fossils when it's main evidence is supposed to be fossils.

I guess you havent heard of DNA before nor do you care that fossils have been discovered showing evolutionary changes.

Everyone has heard of DNA, but it's lacking when it comes to evolution. The critics, which I am one, do not accept the punctuated equilibrium and gradualism. What I was pointing out was that gradualism is not shown in transitional fossils. We can't get past the basic claims of Darwinism, so no need to go further. You don't seem like the type who can explain (similar to Fort Fun Indiana), so I can just lol.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Everyone has heard of DNA, but it's lacking when it comes to evolution.

Embarrassing lie.

 

[james bond]

science does not work on consensus

It doesn't, but the evolutionists can't get past 35% believers in evolution by natural causes so they made it up as by consensus.

 

[james bond]

Everyone has heard of DNA, but it's lacking when it comes to evolution.

Embarrassing lie.

All from you. It's no wonder posters do not reply with genuine intent to you any more.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

All from you.

Yet virtually every educated person and scientist on the planet agrees with me. While you are a laughingstock who would fail a 6th grade science quiz.

And surely you understand if i am not concerned with the opinions of the population of one of the nastiest white supremist shitstain websites on the internet.

 

[james bond]

We know that Hitler was the ultimate evolutionist.

“Thus there results the subjection of a number of people under the will, often of only a few persons, a subjection based simply upon the right of the stronger, a right which, as we see in Nature, can be regarded as the sole conceivable right, because it is founded on reason.”

—Adolf Hitler​

I've said it many times. Darwinism (Evolution) and eugenics led to the Holocaust.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

We know that Hitler was the ultimate evolutionist.

“Thus there results the subjection of a number of people under the will, often of only a few persons, a subjection based simply upon the right of the stronger, a right which, as we see in Nature, can be regarded as the sole conceivable right, because it is founded on reason.”

—Adolf Hitler​

I've said it many times. Darwinism (Evolution) and eugenics led to the Holocaust.

Sad old man trolling nobody.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Again for the slow and stupid provide a chart that lists ALL the connections to the supposed beginning of man that shows no breaks no missing connections and all connections are clearly connected one after the other.

Why would you need that? This would convince you? Why is a smooth line of nearly 100 such examples, with a smooth transition in physiology that aligns perfectly with mDNA studies not just as convincing? Be specific.

you can not provide the evidence so deflect.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

you can not provide the evidence so deflect.

What evidence, specifically? You are dodging all my questions.

Are you saying the only evidence you would consider is for someone to place in front of you 100s of 1000s of individual animals, all deceased long ago, with one from each generation of the ancestral line connecting humans to the last common ancestor of humans and chimps?

That's a yes or no question. If you would like to stop dodging and deflecting, yes or no will do.

If yes: Why would this be evidence to you? All you would have in front of you are 100s of 1000s of similar-looking individuals. We already have something like that, in the form of fossils. So why would this collection of individuals convince you? Appearance? Because the person who shows them to you says so? Be specific.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

you can not provide the evidence so deflect.

What evidence, specifically? You are dodging all my questions.

Are you saying the only evidence you would consider is for someone to place in front of you 100s of 1000s of individual animals, all deceased long ago, with one from each generation of the ancestral line connecting humans to the last common ancestor of humans and chimps?

That's a yes or no question. If you would like to stop dodging and deflecting, yes or no will do.

If yes: Why would this be evidence to you? All you would have in front of you are 100s of 1000s of similar-looking individuals. We already have something like that, in the form of fossils. So why would this collection of individuals convince you? Appearance? Because the person who shows them to you says so? Be specific.

yes and you cant do it cause there is no clear line you once listed what they do have on a chart it had HUGE holes and several points it had unrelated species to those before it and after it.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

yes and you cant do it cause there is no clear line

Okay. You can stop right there.

If there WAS a clear line, you think we could do it? You know that's nuts, right?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

yes and you cant do it cause there is no clear line

Okay. You can stop right there.

If there WAS a clear line, you think we could do it? You know that's nuts, right?

told ya so, you got no proof it is guess work.

 

[zaangalewa]

We know that Hitler was the ultimate evolutionist. ...

Hitler was what? He was no evolutionist at all. He made a "conservative", a "nazional", an "authoritarian" revolution. He was a Darwinist - a racist. He and his gang liked to be the new "elites"- and the old elites (also often called "intelligentia") had to die. He made a revolution with stupid assholes, while his leading gang members were often educated in humanistic schools - no joke. Somehow - what's still today not easily understandable - Hitler was able to conquer the middle of the society. An reaction to the mad winners of world war 1, I guess. The greedy and criminal allies of world war 1 made Germany to a mad country - and not only Germany - and so a mad man overtook the country and more madness followed.

 

[james bond]

We know that Hitler was the ultimate evolutionist.

“Thus there results the subjection of a number of people under the will, often of only a few persons, a subjection based simply upon the right of the stronger, a right which, as we see in Nature, can be regarded as the sole conceivable right, because it is founded on reason.”

—Adolf Hitler​

I've said it many times. Darwinism (Evolution) and eugenics led to the Holocaust.

Sad old man trolling nobody.

The rise of Nazism is part of world history that shocked the world due to its great evil and deliberate subjection of the Jews to the Holocaust and attempted genocide. It's evidence for the "god of the world and prince of the power of the air" or the evil of Satan who will one day become your master and subject all atheists to the same. Even the word holocaust itself is defined as "sacrifice by fire." This isn't a coincidence.

 

[Hollie]

science does not work on consensus

It doesn't, but the evolutionists can't get past 35% believers in evolution by natural causes so they made it up as by consensus.

Nonsense and typically incoherent.

 

[Turtlesoup]

We know that Hitler was the ultimate evolutionist.

“Thus there results the subjection of a number of people under the will, often of only a few persons, a subjection based simply upon the right of the stronger, a right which, as we see in Nature, can be regarded as the sole conceivable right, because it is founded on reason.”

—Adolf Hitler​

I've said it many times. Darwinism (Evolution) and eugenics led to the Holocaust.

Hitler was a catholic------he believed in eugenics not evolution as did most white people of his time both in europe and america. Evolution and eugenics are not the same thing..........although I believe in both and support both.

 

[james bond]

Hitler was what? He was no evolutionist at all. He made a "conservative", a "nazional", an "authoritarian" revolution. He was a Darwinist - a racist.

His big belief was that the Aryan race was superior to other races based on ToE. Your sad lacking of history and Hitler with his beliefs that he and his race were superior and had the right to "exterminate" the inferior races. This is based on his twisted and wrong notion that evolution is for the strong to survive. He wrote of evolution as such in his infamous Mein Kampf autobiography.

'Interestingly, I discovered that all these translators rendered “Entwicklung” as “evolution” in certain contexts, especially in the chapter on “Nation and Race.” The reason for this is rather obvious: In that chapter Hitler describes the struggle for existence among organisms as a natural process that improves the species. Sure sounds like evolution to me — and all these translators agree.
In any case, here are three brief passages from the Mussey translation (from the chapter “Nation and Race”), where Mussey translates “Entwicklung” as “evolution”:'

Evolutionists should own up to their evil past of their Aryanism. Perhaps Mein Kampf was supposed to be the twisted and evil equivalent of the Bible.

Did Hitler Use the Term “Evolution” in Mein Kampf? | Evolution News

Some critics of my scholarship have tried to argue that Hitler did not believe in human evolution at all.

evolutionnews.org

 

[Hollie]

Hitler was what? He was no evolutionist at all. He made a "conservative", a "nazional", an "authoritarian" revolution. He was a Darwinist - a racist.

His big belief was that the Aryan race was superior to other races based on ToE. Your sad lacking of history and Hitler with his beliefs that he and his race were superior and had the right to "exterminate" the inferior races. This is based on his twisted and wrong notion that evolution is for the strong to survive. He wrote of evolution as such in his infamous Mein Kampf autobiography.

'Interestingly, I discovered that all these translators rendered “Entwicklung” as “evolution” in certain contexts, especially in the chapter on “Nation and Race.” The reason for this is rather obvious: In that chapter Hitler describes the struggle for existence among organisms as a natural process that improves the species. Sure sounds like evolution to me — and all these translators agree.
In any case, here are three brief passages from the Mussey translation (from the chapter “Nation and Race”), where Mussey translates “Entwicklung” as “evolution”:'

Evolutionists should own up to their evil past of their Aryanism. Perhaps Mein Kampf was supposed to be the twisted and evil equivalent of the Bible.

Did Hitler Use the Term “Evolution” in Mein Kampf? | Evolution News

Some critics of my scholarship have tried to argue that Hitler did not believe in human evolution at all.

evolutionnews.org

None of that is true. Really shameful that you post such falsehoods.