Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Theories don't get "Proved" DOPE.Where's your proof, asshole? Post it or STFU.Oh boy, another claim that the "theory" of evolution is fact, without having to prove anything.And THAT Ladies and gentlemen is the sum total of TROLL S.J.'s contribution to this string and demonstrates his knowledge of this and all other science topics. -0-No. It's speculation.
Hey buddy.. WTF are you doing here is all you can do is say "no"?
`
Oh boy, another claim that the "theory" of evolution is fact, without having to prove anything.
No I didn't.
There is absolutely none.
No. It's speculation.
S.J. said:Where's your proof, asshole? Post it or STFU.
It's only "evidence" to a simple-minded fuckwad like you. You would look at a dog and a cat and say "Well, they both have 4 legs, a tail, and fur, therefore they are related". You are such an ignorant douchebag. And you have not presented even one fact. You post somebody else's speculation and call it fact. You are one gullible fucking idiot. Last chance, post some proof.Theories don't get "Proved" DOPE.Where's your proof, asshole? Post it or STFU.And THAT Ladies and gentlemen is the sum total of TROLL S.J.'s contribution to this string and demonstrates his knowledge of this and all other science topics. -0-
Hey buddy.. WTF are you doing here is all you can do is say "no"?
`
However, There is PLENTY of EVIDENCE and some already HAS been posted.
You rejected it out of hand as 'speculation'.
You are not Only Ignorant of facts, you are Too Stupid to even recognize them when posted.
You are - um REMAIN - a ONE-LINE TROLL and a discredit/BLIGHT on this message board.
UPDATE on the ALL the posts of NONconversant 70 IQ TROLL S.J., in this string:
No. It's speculation.S.J. said:Where's your proof, asshole? Post it or STFU.
`
When you have some proof let me know. Until then, it's speculation.No. It's speculation.
You can say you don't believe what the fossil record tells us. You can even say it's not proof.
But if you claim the fossil record is not evidence, you are telling a ridiculous falsehood. If there was no evidence as you falsely claim, there would be no Theory of Evolution.
The fossil record alone is enough evidence to support the Theory of Evolution which is the fundamental basis of all biological science. It's accepted as evidence by 99.99% of professional biologists.
Has God fooled the near unanimous consensus of scientists worldwide?
Not at all.Atoms magically randomly arranged themselves into nucleobases and magically realized that 4 different types were optimum, then they magically arranged themselves into DNA...it's just all to ridiculous to even contemplate
To you, anything that supports your theory is "evidence", whether it has any credibility or not. If your evidence doesn't pan out, it isn't really evidence, is it? You can call it evidence, but if it leads to a dead end, as it has so far, you've got nothing more than speculation. Try again.When you have some proof let me know. Until then, it's speculation.You can say you don't believe what the fossil record tells us. You can even say it's not proof.
But if you claim the fossil record is not evidence, you are telling a ridiculous falsehood. If there was no evidence as you falsely claim, there would be no Theory of Evolution.
The fossil record alone is enough evidence to support the Theory of Evolution which is the fundamental basis of all biological science. It's accepted as evidence by 99.99% of professional biologists.
Has God fooled the near unanimous consensus of scientists worldwide?
Ah, so now you are backtracking from claiming there is no evidence to saying there is no proof.
Here's some evidence...29+ Evidences for Macroevolution: The Scientific Case for Common Descent
This is evidence, not speculation. You can acknowledge my link or continue to spout your ignorance. I'm not wasting any more time on you.
Well, when you have something more solid than "may indeed be", let us know.Not at all.Atoms magically randomly arranged themselves into nucleobases and magically realized that 4 different types were optimum, then they magically arranged themselves into DNA...it's just all to ridiculous to even contemplate
Atoms and inorganic molecules routinely arrange themselves into Crystaline, Magnetic, and other Organized structure.
There are even self-replicating inorganic molecules that may indeed be precursors of life.
`
I was answering a/another clown that was suggesting any inorganic organization was "magic".Well, when you have something more solid than "may indeed be", let us know.Not at all.Atoms magically randomly arranged themselves into nucleobases and magically realized that 4 different types were optimum, then they magically arranged themselves into DNA...it's just all to ridiculous to even contemplate
Atoms and inorganic molecules routinely arrange themselves into Crystaline, Magnetic, and other Organized structure.
There are even self-replicating inorganic molecules that may indeed be precursors of life.
`
I don't need to have anything because I'm not trying to sell anything. You are, and the burden of proof is on you. If you had any, you would have posted it by now. In lieu of proof, you find comments by others who agree with you and call that "evidence" and somehow that's supposed to convince everyone that your theory holds water. You have nothing and call it something.I was answering a/another clown that was suggesting any inorganic organization was "magic".Well, when you have something more solid than "may indeed be", let us know.Not at all.
Atoms and inorganic molecules routinely arrange themselves into Crystaline, Magnetic, and other Organized structure.
There are even self-replicating inorganic molecules that may indeed be precursors of life.
`
Like you always are, he was wrong/loony.
When YOU have something more than.. Nothing.. let Us now.
I Have Evidence: god (incl the vast majority of deities that aren't Your god or Contradict him!) have None.
`
I met the Burden of Fact with regards my answer to Crusader Frank/Rabbit.I don't need to have anything because I'm not trying to sell anything. You are, and the burden of proof is on you. If you had any, you would have posted it by now. In lieu of proof, you find comments by others who agree with you and call that "evidence" and somehow that's supposed to convince everyone that your theory holds water. You have nothing and call it something.I was answering a/another clown that was suggesting any inorganic organization was "magic".Well, when you have something more solid than "may indeed be", let us know.
Like you always are, he was wrong/loony.
When YOU have something more than.. Nothing.. let Us now.
I Have Evidence: god (incl the vast majority of deities that aren't Your god or Contradict him!) have None.
`
You don't have shit. Your "overwhelming evidence" doesn't hold water and you know it. That's why you resort to personal attacks and try to change the subject to religion when you fail to make your case.I met the Burden of Fact with regards my answer to Crusader Frank/Rabbit.I don't need to have anything because I'm not trying to sell anything. You are, and the burden of proof is on you. If you had any, you would have posted it by now. In lieu of proof, you find comments by others who agree with you and call that "evidence" and somehow that's supposed to convince everyone that your theory holds water. You have nothing and call it something.I was answering a/another clown that was suggesting any inorganic organization was "magic".
Like you always are, he was wrong/loony.
When YOU have something more than.. Nothing.. let Us now.
I Have Evidence: god (incl the vast majority of deities that aren't Your god or Contradict him!) have None.
`
In regards the overall issue, I have met the Burden, which is NOT "Proof" but "Preponderance of the EVIDENCE": For which Evolution has an Overwhelming amount vs God NONE. Scientific Theories, including Gravity, do NOT/NEVER get "proved" they get affirmed over time.
You god-ist clowns abuse the same Dishonest semantic FALLACY daily.
I meet the Preponderance/Overwhelming Evidence Burden ALL the time:
See: http://www.usmessageboard.com/the-r...ve-to-say-about-evolution-11.html#post8386977
For Yesterday's.
You LOSE again Noah.
Try DuhitMustBeAllah.org
`
Besides what's ALREADY in this string, such as the OP, a Dufus like you dare not touch, there's the post I linked to above:You don't have shit. Your "overwhelming evidence" doesn't hold water and you know it. That's why you resort to personal attacks and try to change the subject to religion when you fail to make your case.I met the Burden of Fact with regards my answer to Crusader Frank/Rabbit.I don't need to have anything because I'm not trying to sell anything. You are, and the burden of proof is on you. If you had any, you would have posted it by now. In lieu of proof, you find comments by others who agree with you and call that "evidence" and somehow that's supposed to convince everyone that your theory holds water. You have nothing and call it something.
In regards the overall issue, I have met the Burden, which is NOT "Proof" but "Preponderance of the EVIDENCE": For which Evolution has an Overwhelming amount vs God NONE. Scientific Theories, including Gravity, do NOT/NEVER get "proved" they get affirmed over time.
You god-ist clowns abuse the same Dishonest semantic FALLACY daily.
I meet the Preponderance/Overwhelming Evidence Burden ALL the time:
See: http://www.usmessageboard.com/the-r...ve-to-say-about-evolution-11.html#post8386977
For Yesterday's.
You LOSE again Noah.
Try DuhitMustBeAllah.org
`
First: Please Note Vox above had NO ANSWER to the destruction of his False "proof" standard when I Blew it all to hell with the "Plenty of/Overwhelming Evidence" standard.
Again: Theories don't get proved, only continually affirmed.
Vox was Reduced to his ultimately Necessary Lost state in this debate- Empty, otherwise contentLESS cursing like the Stupid ahole he is.
Little Nipper's posts are incoherent religious delusions and he is a mental defective, incapable of logical, or even linear, debate.
Um... What would Holmes make of.. Anatomical VESTIGES of PREVIOUS Ancestors?
29+ Evidences for Macroevolution: Part 2
Prediction 2.1: Anatomical vestiges
Some of the most renowned Evidence for evolution are the various nonfunctional or rudimentary vestigial characters, both anatomical and molecular, that are found throughout biology. A vestige is defined, independently of evolutionary theory, as a reduced and rudimentary structure compared to the same complex structure in other organisms. Vestigial characters, if functional, perform relatively simple, minor, or inessential functions using structures that were clearly designed for other complex purposes. Though many vestigial organs have no function, complete non-functionality is not a requirement for vestigiality (Crapo 1985; Culver et al. 1995; Darwin 1872, pp. 601-609; Dodson 1960, p. 44; Griffiths 1992; Hall 2003; McCabe 1912, p. 264; Merrell 1962, p. 101; Moody 1962, p. 40; Muller 2002; Naylor 1982; Strickberger 2000; Weismann 1886, pp. 9-10; Wiedersheim 1893, p. 2, p. 200, p. 205).
[Figure2.1.1 (ostrich with wings extended)] [Figure2.1.1 (blind cave salamander)] [Figure2.1.1 (blind cave fish, the Mexican tetra)]
For example, wings are very complex anatomical structures specifically adapted for powered flight, yet ostriches have flightless wings. The vestigial wings of ostriches may be used for relatively simple functions, such as balance during running and courtship displays—a situation akin to hammering tacks with a computer keyboard. The specific complexity of the ostrich wing indicates a function which it does not perform, and it performs functions incommensurate with its complexity. Ostrich wings are not vestigial because they are useless structures per se, nor are they vestigial simply because they have different functions compared to wings in other birds. Rather, what defines ostrich wings as vestigial is that they are rudimentary wings which are useless as wings.
[.......]
Geoffroy was at a loss for why exactly nature "always leaves vestiges of an organ", yet he could not deny his empirical observations. Ten years later, Jean-Baptiste Lamarck (1744-1829) identified several vestigial structures in his Zoological Philosophy (Lamarck 1809, pp. 115-116):
[.......]
...these "Hypocritical" structures profess something that they do Not do—they clearly appear designed for a certain function which they do Not perform.
However, Common Descent provides a scientific explanation for these peculiar structures. Existing species have different structures and perform different functions. If all living organisms descended from a common ancestor, then both functions and structures necessarily have been gained and lost in each lineage during macroevolutionary history. Therefore, from Common Descent and the constraint of gradualism, we predict that many organisms should retain vestigial structures as structural remnants of lost functions. Note that the exact evolutionary mechanism which created a vestigial structure is irrelevant as long as the mechanism is a gradual one.
Confirmation:
[Pictures/Illustrations]
There are Many examples of rudimentary and nonfunctional vestigial characters carried by organisms, and these can very often be explained in terms of evolutionary histories.
For example, from independent phylogenetic evidence, snakes are known to be the descendants of four-legged reptiles.
Most Pythons (which are legless snakes) carry Vestigial Pelvises hidden beneath their skin.. The Vestigial pelvis in pythons is Not attached to vertebrae (as is the normal case in most vertebrates),and it simply floats in the abdominal cavity. Some lizards carry rudimentary, vestigial legs underneath their skin, undetectable from the outside...
Many cave dwelling animals, such as the fish Astyanax mexicanus (the Mexican tetra) and the salamander species Typhlotriton spelaeus and Proteus anguinus, are blind yet have rudimentary, Vestigial eyes.... The eyes of the Mexican tetra have a lens, a degenerate retina, a degenerate optic nerve, and a sclera, even though the tetra cannot see... The blind salamanders have eyes with retinas and lenses, yet the eyelids grow over the eye, sealing them from outside light....
Dandelions reproduce without fertilization (a condition known as apomixis), yet they retain flowers and produce pollen (both are sexual organs normally used for sexual fertilization).... Flowers and pollen are thus useless characters for dandelions in terms of sexual reproduction.
[.......]
The ancestors of Humans are known to have been herbivorous, and molar teeth are required for chewing and grinding plant material. Over 90% of all adult humans develop third molars (otherwise known as wisdom teeth).
Usually these teeth never erupt from the gums, and in one Third of all individuals they are Malformed and Impacted (Hattab et al. 1995; Schersten et al. 1989). These Useless teeth can cause significant pain, increased risk for injury, and may result in illness and even death (Litonjua 1996; Obiechina et al. 2001; Rakprasitkul 2001; Tevepaugh and Dodson 1995).
Another Vestige of our herbivorous ancestry is the vermiform appendix. While this intestinal structure may retain a function of some sort, perhaps in the development of the immune system, it is a rudimentary version of the much larger caecum that is essential for digestion of plants in other mammals. For a detailed discussion of the vestigiality of the human vermiform appendix, see The Vestigiality of the human vermiform appendix: A modern reappraisal.
Yet another human Vestigial structure is the coccyx, the four fused caudal vertebrae found at the base of the spine, exactly where most mammals and many other primates have external Tails protruding from the back. Humans and other apes are some of the only vertebrates that lack an external tail as an adult.
The coccyx is a developmental Remnant of the embryonic tail that forms in humans and then is degraded and eaten by our immune system (for more detail see the sections on the embryonic human tail and the atavistic human tail).
Our internal tail is Unnecessary for sitting, walking, and elimination (all of which are functions attributed to the coccyx by many anti-evolutionists). The caudal vertebrae of the coccyx can cause extreme and unnecessary chronic pain in some unfortunate people, a condition called coccydynia. The entire coccyx can be surgically removed without any ill effects (besides surgical complications), with the only complaint, in a small fraction of patients, being that the removal of the coccyx sadly did not remove their pain (Grossovan and Dam 1995; Perkins et al. 2003; Postacchini Massobrio 1983; Ramsey et al. 2003; Shaposhnikov 1997; Wray 1991). Our small, rudimentary, fused caudal vertebrae might have some minor and inessential functions, but these vertebrae are useless for balance and grasping, their usual functions in other mammals.
[.......]
Could you post something other than someone else's speculation? Face it, Dude, you've got nothing. Nothing but name calling. No facts, no evidence. The more you rant and rave, the more foolish you look. I'll bet you also believe in Global Warming and think Obamacare is great.Besides what's ALREADY in this string, such as the OP, a Dufus like you dare not touch, there's the post I linked to above:You don't have shit. Your "overwhelming evidence" doesn't hold water and you know it. That's why you resort to personal attacks and try to change the subject to religion when you fail to make your case.I met the Burden of Fact with regards my answer to Crusader Frank/Rabbit.
In regards the overall issue, I have met the Burden, which is NOT "Proof" but "Preponderance of the EVIDENCE": For which Evolution has an Overwhelming amount vs God NONE. Scientific Theories, including Gravity, do NOT/NEVER get "proved" they get affirmed over time.
You god-ist clowns abuse the same Dishonest semantic FALLACY daily.
I meet the Preponderance/Overwhelming Evidence Burden ALL the time:
See: http://www.usmessageboard.com/the-r...ve-to-say-about-evolution-11.html#post8386977
For Yesterday's.
You LOSE again Noah.
Try DuhitMustBeAllah.org
`
First: Please Note Vox above had NO ANSWER to the destruction of his False "proof" standard when I Blew it all to hell with the "Plenty of/Overwhelming Evidence" standard.
Again: Theories don't get proved, only continually affirmed.
Vox was Reduced to his ultimately Necessary Lost state in this debate- Empty, otherwise contentLESS cursing like the Stupid ahole he is.
Little Nipper's posts are incoherent religious delusions and he is a mental defective, incapable of logical, or even linear, debate.
Um... What would Holmes make of.. Anatomical VESTIGES of PREVIOUS Ancestors?
29+ Evidences for Macroevolution: Part 2
Prediction 2.1: Anatomical vestiges
Some of the most renowned Evidence for evolution are the various nonfunctional or rudimentary vestigial characters, both anatomical and molecular, that are found throughout biology. A vestige is defined, independently of evolutionary theory, as a reduced and rudimentary structure compared to the same complex structure in other organisms. Vestigial characters, if functional, perform relatively simple, minor, or inessential functions using structures that were clearly designed for other complex purposes. Though many vestigial organs have no function, complete non-functionality is not a requirement for vestigiality (Crapo 1985; Culver et al. 1995; Darwin 1872, pp. 601-609; Dodson 1960, p. 44; Griffiths 1992; Hall 2003; McCabe 1912, p. 264; Merrell 1962, p. 101; Moody 1962, p. 40; Muller 2002; Naylor 1982; Strickberger 2000; Weismann 1886, pp. 9-10; Wiedersheim 1893, p. 2, p. 200, p. 205).
[Figure2.1.1 (ostrich with wings extended)] [Figure2.1.1 (blind cave salamander)] [Figure2.1.1 (blind cave fish, the Mexican tetra)]
For example, wings are very complex anatomical structures specifically adapted for powered flight, yet ostriches have flightless wings. The vestigial wings of ostriches may be used for relatively simple functions, such as balance during running and courtship displaysa situation akin to hammering tacks with a computer keyboard. The specific complexity of the ostrich wing indicates a function which it does not perform, and it performs functions incommensurate with its complexity. Ostrich wings are not vestigial because they are useless structures per se, nor are they vestigial simply because they have different functions compared to wings in other birds. Rather, what defines ostrich wings as vestigial is that they are rudimentary wings which are useless as wings.
[.......]
Geoffroy was at a loss for why exactly nature "always leaves vestiges of an organ", yet he could not deny his empirical observations. Ten years later, Jean-Baptiste Lamarck (1744-1829) identified several vestigial structures in his Zoological Philosophy (Lamarck 1809, pp. 115-116):
[.......]
...these "Hypocritical" structures profess something that they do Not dothey clearly appear designed for a certain function which they do Not perform.
However, Common Descent provides a scientific explanation for these peculiar structures. Existing species have different structures and perform different functions. If all living organisms descended from a common ancestor, then both functions and structures necessarily have been gained and lost in each lineage during macroevolutionary history. Therefore, from Common Descent and the constraint of gradualism, we predict that many organisms should retain vestigial structures as structural remnants of lost functions. Note that the exact evolutionary mechanism which created a vestigial structure is irrelevant as long as the mechanism is a gradual one.
Confirmation:
[Pictures/Illustrations]
There are Many examples of rudimentary and nonfunctional vestigial characters carried by organisms, and these can very often be explained in terms of evolutionary histories.
For example, from independent phylogenetic evidence, snakes are known to be the descendants of four-legged reptiles.
Most Pythons (which are legless snakes) carry Vestigial Pelvises hidden beneath their skin.. The Vestigial pelvis in pythons is Not attached to vertebrae (as is the normal case in most vertebrates),and it simply floats in the abdominal cavity. Some lizards carry rudimentary, vestigial legs underneath their skin, undetectable from the outside...
Many cave dwelling animals, such as the fish Astyanax mexicanus (the Mexican tetra) and the salamander species Typhlotriton spelaeus and Proteus anguinus, are blind yet have rudimentary, Vestigial eyes.... The eyes of the Mexican tetra have a lens, a degenerate retina, a degenerate optic nerve, and a sclera, even though the tetra cannot see... The blind salamanders have eyes with retinas and lenses, yet the eyelids grow over the eye, sealing them from outside light....
Dandelions reproduce without fertilization (a condition known as apomixis), yet they retain flowers and produce pollen (both are sexual organs normally used for sexual fertilization).... Flowers and pollen are thus useless characters for dandelions in terms of sexual reproduction.
[.......]
The ancestors of Humans are known to have been herbivorous, and molar teeth are required for chewing and grinding plant material. Over 90% of all adult humans develop third molars (otherwise known as wisdom teeth).
Usually these teeth never erupt from the gums, and in one Third of all individuals they are Malformed and Impacted (Hattab et al. 1995; Schersten et al. 1989). These Useless teeth can cause significant pain, increased risk for injury, and may result in illness and even death (Litonjua 1996; Obiechina et al. 2001; Rakprasitkul 2001; Tevepaugh and Dodson 1995).
Another Vestige of our herbivorous ancestry is the vermiform appendix. While this intestinal structure may retain a function of some sort, perhaps in the development of the immune system, it is a rudimentary version of the much larger caecum that is essential for digestion of plants in other mammals. For a detailed discussion of the vestigiality of the human vermiform appendix, see The Vestigiality of the human vermiform appendix: A modern reappraisal.
Yet another human Vestigial structure is the coccyx, the four fused caudal vertebrae found at the base of the spine, exactly where most mammals and many other primates have external Tails protruding from the back. Humans and other apes are some of the only vertebrates that lack an external tail as an adult.
The coccyx is a developmental Remnant of the embryonic tail that forms in humans and then is degraded and eaten by our immune system (for more detail see the sections on the embryonic human tail and the atavistic human tail).
Our internal tail is Unnecessary for sitting, walking, and elimination (all of which are functions attributed to the coccyx by many anti-evolutionists). The caudal vertebrae of the coccyx can cause extreme and unnecessary chronic pain in some unfortunate people, a condition called coccydynia. The entire coccyx can be surgically removed without any ill effects (besides surgical complications), with the only complaint, in a small fraction of patients, being that the removal of the coccyx sadly did not remove their pain (Grossovan and Dam 1995; Perkins et al. 2003; Postacchini Massobrio 1983; Ramsey et al. 2003; Shaposhnikov 1997; Wray 1991). Our small, rudimentary, fused caudal vertebrae might have some minor and inessential functions, but these vertebrae are useless for balance and grasping, their usual functions in other mammals.
[.......]
OK beneath-Dufus - YOUR TURN.
Put up or Shut up You DOPE.
You know NOTHING. You post NO CONTENT Here, you're just a two-bit disagreeable ahole.
`
S.J. said:Oh boy, another claim that the "theory" of evolution is fact, without having to prove anything.
S.J. said:No I didn't.
S.J. said:There is absolutely none.
S.J. said:No. It's speculation
S.J. said:Where's your Proof, asshole? Post it or STFU.
It's only "evidence" to a simple-minded fuckwad like you. You would look at a dog and a cat and say "Well, they both have 4 legs, a tail, and fur, therefore they are related". You are such an ignorant douchebag. And you have not presented even one fact. You post somebody else's speculation and call it fact. You are one gullible fucking idiot. Last chance, post some proof.
To you, anything that supports your theory is "evidence", whether it has any credibility or not. If your evidence doesn't pan out, it isn't really evidence, is it? You can call it evidence, but if it leads to a dead end, as it has so far, you've got nothing more than speculation. Try again.
Well, when you have something more solid than "may indeed be", let us know.
I don't need to have anything because I'm not trying to sell anything. You are, and the burden of proof is on you. If you had any, you would have posted it by now. In lieu of proof, you find comments by others who agree with you and call that "evidence" and somehow that's supposed to convince everyone that your theory holds water. You have nothing and call it something.
You don't have shit. Your "overwhelming evidence" doesn't hold water and you know it. That's why you resort to personal attacks and try to change the subject to religion when you fail to make your case.
After pointing out his first five, ALL one liners, I've Embarrassed S.J.-the-Troll into Two-liners!Could you post something other than someone else's speculation? Face it, Dude, you've got nothing. Nothing but name calling. No facts, no evidence. The more you rant and rave, the more foolish you look. I'll bet you also believe in Global Warming and think Obamacare is great.
I notice you didn't post my responses where I explained why your "evidence" isn't really evidence if it leads to dead ends. If you would like to post one point at a time I would be happy to debunk your bullshit point by point but when you copy and paste 20 fucking pages of opinions from another whacko like yourself, then expect me to comment on the whole fucking thing, you can go pound sand. You aren't worth that much time and energy.UPDATE on the ALL the posts of NONconversant 70 IQ TROLL S.J., in this string:
S.J. said:Oh boy, another claim that the "theory" of evolution is fact, without having to prove anything.S.J. said:No I didn't.
You don't have shit. Your "overwhelming evidence" doesn't hold water and you know it. That's why you resort to personal attacks and try to change the subject to religion when you fail to make your case.After pointing out his first five, ALL one liners, I've Embarrassed S.J.-the-Troll into Two-liners!Could you post something other than someone else's speculation? Face it, Dude, you've got nothing. Nothing but name calling. No facts, no evidence. The more you rant and rave, the more foolish you look. I'll bet you also believe in Global Warming and think Obamacare is great.
But they still Never say ANYTHING.
the DOPE keeps asking for "proof" of a theory.
Theories don't have "proofs".
DUH.
So when EVIDENCE (the meat) IS posted, he rejects that as "speculation"/"other people's speculation" withOUT ever explaining WHY its Not evidence.
He is a Moron and NONCONVERSANT on this and All Science topics as we can see. Even HE knows it and trues to bluff his way thru.
Of course, If I posted it in my own words, he'd accuse that evidence of being "just my opinion" and also "speculation".
So there's No valid source. ('heads I win, tails you lose')
So the Two-Face ASSHOLE Never has to Answer ON TOPIC because he has these BS excuses about the source (me OR links), NEVER taking issue with the CONTENT about which we all know, he is Clueless. Even he knows it, obviously.
NEVER is there a topical response like/ie, "I don't think that's good Evidence and here's WHY."
LOFL With that huh!
SJ is a NONCONVERSANT/ILLITERATE Troll who Cannot answer thusly.
What we have here (and oft) is the invasion of the Stupid god-ists and 'political sciencers' goosed by this week's Hannity instead of any knowledge whatsoever. These turds are elementary school drop outs and literal creationist Retards.
What's a Disgrace is these ILLITERATE TROLLS are allowed to continue here without ever making or refuting ANY relevant point; just harass.
Just: "no", "it's not evidence", "not Proof", "speculation", "you suck".
And then the Stupid Hypocrite S.J. accuses others of personal insult when he has done NOTHING But Emptily TROLL and insult in the entire string.
`
Could you post something other than someone else's speculation? Face it, Dude, you've got nothing. Nothing but name calling. No facts, no evidence. The more you rant and rave, the more foolish you look. I'll bet you also believe in Global Warming and think Obamacare is great.Besides what's ALREADY in this string, such as the OP, a Dufus like you dare not touch, there's the post I linked to above:You don't have shit. Your "overwhelming evidence" doesn't hold water and you know it. That's why you resort to personal attacks and try to change the subject to religion when you fail to make your case.
First: Please Note Vox above had NO ANSWER to the destruction of his False "proof" standard when I Blew it all to hell with the "Plenty of/Overwhelming Evidence" standard.
Again: Theories don't get proved, only continually affirmed.
Vox was Reduced to his ultimately Necessary Lost state in this debate- Empty, otherwise contentLESS cursing like the Stupid ahole he is.
Little Nipper's posts are incoherent religious delusions and he is a mental defective, incapable of logical, or even linear, debate.
Um... What would Holmes make of.. Anatomical VESTIGES of PREVIOUS Ancestors?
29+ Evidences for Macroevolution: Part 2
OK beneath-Dufus - YOUR TURN.
Put up or Shut up You DOPE.
You know NOTHING. You post NO CONTENT Here, you're just a two-bit disagreeable ahole.
`
S.J. You DOPE, you've again pointed out one of the classic Fallacies of Other Dopes. THANKS!I notice you didn't post my responses where I explained why your "evidence" isn't really evidence if it leads to dead ends. If you would like to post one point at a time I would be happy to debunk your bullshit point by point but when you copy and paste 20 fucking pages of opinions from another whacko like yourself, then expect me to comment on the whole fucking thing, you can go pound sand. You aren't worth that much time and energy.UPDATE on the ALL the posts of NONconversant 70 IQ TROLL S.J., in this string: (Now 12 NON- one/two-liners)
S.J. said:Oh boy, another claim that the "theory" of evolution is fact, without having to prove anything.After pointing out his first five, ALL one liners, I've Embarrassed S.J.-the-Troll into Two-liners! [+10 Other One/Two-Liners]Could you post something other than someone else's speculation? Face it, Dude, you've got nothing. Nothing but name calling. No facts, no evidence. The more you rant and rave, the more foolish you look. I'll bet you also believe in Global Warming and think Obamacare is great.
But they still Never say ANYTHING.
the DOPE keeps asking for "proof" of a theory.
Theories don't have "proofs".
DUH.
So when EVIDENCE (the meat) IS posted, he rejects that as "speculation"/"other people's speculation" withOUT ever explaining WHY its Not evidence.
He is a Moron and NONCONVERSANT on this and All Science topics as we can see. Even HE knows it and trues to bluff his way thru.
Of course, If I posted it in my own words, he'd accuse that evidence of being "just my opinion" and also "speculation".
So there's No valid source. ('heads I win, tails you lose')
So the Two-Face ASSHOLE Never has to Answer ON TOPIC because he has these BS excuses about the source (me OR links), NEVER taking issue with the CONTENT about which we all know, he is Clueless. Even he knows it, obviously.
NEVER is there a topical response like/ie, "I don't think that's good Evidence and here's WHY."
LOFL With that huh!
SJ is a NONCONVERSANT/ILLITERATE Troll who Cannot answer thusly.
What we have here (and oft) is the invasion of the Stupid god-ists and 'political sciencers' goosed by this week's Hannity instead of any knowledge whatsoever. These turds are elementary school drop outs and literal creationist Retards.
What's a Disgrace is these ILLITERATE TROLLS are allowed to continue here without ever making or refuting ANY relevant point; just harass.
Just: "no", "it's not evidence", "not Proof", "speculation", "you suck".
And then the Stupid Hypocrite S.J. accuses others of personal insult when he has done NOTHING But Emptily TROLL and insult in the entire string.
`
But why continue anyway, you've just admitted all you have is a theory, so anything after that is speculation or flat out guessing. I would feel sorry for you if you weren't so obnoxious.
Of course, Gravity is also "Only a Theory".1. Evolution is only a theory. It is not a fact or a scientific law.
Many people learned in elementary school that a theory falls in the middle of a hierarchy of certainty -- above a mere hypothesis but below a law.
Scientists do NOT use the terms that way, however. According to the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), a scientific theory is "a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses."
No amount of validation changes a theory into a law, which is a descriptive generalization about nature. So when scientists talk about the theory of evolution -- or the atomic theory or the theory of relativity, for that matter -- they are NOT expressing reservations about its truth.
In addition to the theory of evolution, meaning the idea of descent with modification, one may also speak of the FACT of evolution."..."
What is it with you Morons?I wouldn't use SJG as a rebuttal for anything. He's been proven wrong, for the most part, by science in the intervening years between his publishing.
