Where is this mountain of evidence for evolution?

[orogenicman]

Yes I can but it would not be a 3 word sentence which you and your ilk are looking for. You have all demonstrated that you refuse to read any of the body of work in the links provided and that you do not understand basic concepts of science. I am not a scientist so I felt for a better explanation on anything to do with evolution that it should be left up to a scientist to explain it. There have been several links to papers, articles and videos explaining the many complexities of evolution yet none of you take the time to actually read or watch them. This is demonstrated in your questions which have nothing to do with the content provided.

Most of us have already seen this evidence. We find it lacking. If you are gullible enough to believe it, that's your problem.

Really? How many hours have you spent in a science laboratory or in the field collecting data? None. And any evidence presented here you don't look at either. So you are not only intellectually dishonest about the science, you are not even honest enough to look at the science.

Berlinski was a research assistant in molecular biology at Columbia University,[3] and was a research fellow at the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis

Yeah, he was a lab assistant. You don't even need to have a degree to be a lab assistant. A student can do that. I did that for a while when I was a student. The fact of the matter is that he is not a scientist, and works for the Discovery Institute, home of Intelligent Design. By the way, you should watch his debate with Christopher Hitchens. It's on youtube. Hitchens destroys him.

In your dreams..

Don't believe me. Go watch it and weep.

 

[orogenicman]

More evidence:

3.3-million-year-old stone tools are world s oldest - UPI.com

SAN FRANCISCO, April 16 (UPI) -- A group of archaeologists say they've uncovered the world's oldest tools. At 3.3 million years old, the newly unearthed tools predate the evolution of modern humans.

Researchers, who presented their findings Tuesday at the annual meeting of the Paleoanthropology Society in San Francisco, said the primitive stone tools were likely made by one of modern man's ancestors, a hominid from the genus Australopithecus.
"The artifacts were clearly knapped [created by intentional flaking] and not the result of accidental fracture of rocks," lead researcher Sonia Harmand, an archaeologist at Stony Brook University in New York, told the meeting, according to Science Magazine.
Until now, the record was held by a set of stone tools dated at 2.6 million years old, around the time the first evidence of Homo lineages appear. But the new set of tools -- 20 well-preserved flakes, cores and anvils found just three miles west of Kenya's Lake Turkana -- suggest stone tool-making wasn't exclusive to the first fully fledged humans.
"The obvious implication is that stone tools were invented and used by multiple lineages of early hominins," John Hawks, a University of Wisconsin anthropologist who wasn't involved in the discovery, explained on his blog. "Just as there were different styles of body shape and bipedal mechanics among early hominins, there were likely different styles of technical traditions."
Hawks says the discovery isn't all that surprising, given the fact chimpanzee populations have been shown to use rather complex tool sets, and to occasionally incorporate objects made from stone.
"All hominins added initially was the deliberate flaking of stone to make objects recognizable in the archaeological record," Hawks added. "That is to say, humans have elaborated upon a technical ability that is latent among all the apes."
In 2010, archaeologists reported finding animal bone incisions made by stone blades in Dikika region of Ethiopia. The bones and incisions were found to be more than 3 million years old, and were uncovered near the remains of an Australopithecus child. That discovery was treated with much skepticism, but the latest findings seem to corroborate the fact that stone tool-making isn't the domain of modern man alone.
"With the cut marks from Dikika we had the victim," Zeresenay Alemseged, a paleoanthropologist at the California Academy of Sciences and member of the 2010 research team, told the Independent. "Harmand's discovery gives us the smoking gun."

 

[S.J.]

I want YOU to explain it (when you stop ducking and dodging). Oh, I forgot. You CAN'T because you don't know.

Oh. Batshit crazy meets foot stamping tantrum.

Can't understand explanations, can't explain why he can't understand explanations, demands more explanations he won't be able to explain why he can't understand.

Unvanquished ignorance, champion of the world.

Still waiting for you to explain it in your own words. Cat got your tongue?

 

[Mr.Right]

I want YOU to explain it (when you stop ducking and dodging). Oh, I forgot. You CAN'T because you don't know.

Oh. Batshit crazy meets foot stamping tantrum.

Can't understand explanations, can't explain why he can't understand explanations, demands more explanations he won't be able to explain why he can't understand.

Unvanquished ignorance, champion of the world.

Still waiting for you to explain it in your own words. Cat got your tongue?

Allow me to refresh everyone's memory. I'm looking for evidence for evolution. So far, I haven't seen any. What I have seen is speculation. I've seen stories fabricated from whole Cloth. I've even seen some blatant lies. No evidence. There is nothing you can point to and say that this is proof of evolution.

 

[orogenicman]

I want YOU to explain it (when you stop ducking and dodging). Oh, I forgot. You CAN'T because you don't know.

Oh. Batshit crazy meets foot stamping tantrum.

Can't understand explanations, can't explain why he can't understand explanations, demands more explanations he won't be able to explain why he can't understand.

Unvanquished ignorance, champion of the world.

Still waiting for you to explain it in your own words. Cat got your tongue?

Allow me to refresh everyone's memory. I'm looking for evidence for evolution. So far, I haven't seen any. What I have seen is speculation. I've seen stories fabricated from whole Cloth. I've even seen some blatant lies. No evidence. There is nothing you can point to and say that this is proof of evolution.

Actually, what you mean to say is that there is nothing you will accept as evidence because you don't actually want evidence, since you are spamming the science forums. If that is not true, and you really cannot see any evidence, may I suggest a pair of these?

 

[cnm]

Still waiting for you to explain it in your own words. Cat got your tongue?

I can't imagine why you think I'd waste the time on an invincibly ignorant batshit crazy.

If you refuse to understand the clear explanations you've already had nor can explain what you can't understand about them then there's not much point further explaining the reality based world.

Perhaps you should look at faith based stories of the world, then you won't have to bother about demanding evidence based explanations you can't understand.

I'm sure you'll be happier in fantasy land where every question has the same easy to remember answer.

'YHWH done it', in case you were wondering.

 

[cnm]

Allow me to refresh everyone's memory. I'm looking for evidence for evolution. So far, I haven't seen any. What I have seen is speculation. I've seen stories fabricated from whole Cloth. I've even seen some blatant lies. No evidence. There is nothing you can point to and say that this is proof of evolution.

Still you conflate proof and evidence. Will it never stop?

 

[S.J.]

Still waiting for you to explain it in your own words. Cat got your tongue?

I can't imagine why you think I'd waste the time on an invincibly ignorant batshit crazy.

If you refuse to understand the clear explanations you've already had nor can explain what you can't understand about them then there's not much point further explaining the reality based world.

Perhaps you should look at faith based stories of the world, then you won't have to bother about demanding evidence based explanations you can't understand.

I'm sure you'll be happier in fantasy land where every question has the same easy to remember answer.

'YWHW done it', in case you were wondering.

Won't waste time giving me proof but you'll waste time responding to every one of my posts with name calling and adolescent put downs? You do know other people are reading your posts, right?

 

[orogenicman]

Still waiting for you to explain it in your own words. Cat got your tongue?

I can't imagine why you think I'd waste the time on an invincibly ignorant batshit crazy.

If you refuse to understand the clear explanations you've already had nor can explain what you can't understand about them then there's not much point further explaining the reality based world.

Perhaps you should look at faith based stories of the world, then you won't have to bother about demanding evidence based explanations you can't understand.

I'm sure you'll be happier in fantasy land where every question has the same easy to remember answer.

'YWHW done it', in case you were wondering.

Won't waste time giving me proof but you'll waste time responding to every one of my posts with name calling and adolescent put downs? You do know other people are reading your posts, right?

Yes indeed, others are reading this. And he's right. You people wouldn't know evidence if it bit you in the arse. And the fact is, evidence isn't what you people want. What you people want is to spam science forums like this one with your scam queries about "evidence" that you don't actually give a shite about. Seems you can't argue the evidence, and so this is all you can manage with your weak minds. My advice? Take a pill. And get some therapy.

 

[cnm]

Won't waste time giving me proof but you'll waste time responding to every one of my posts with name calling and adolescent put downs? You do know other people are reading your posts, right?

I don't think my time is wasted pointing out to invincibly ignorant batshit crazies that they are in fact behaving like invincibly ignorant batshit crazies. It may be a dirty job but someone has to do it.

 

[eots]

irrelevant ? it is the supposed cosmic evolution that lead to our earthly and human evolution is it not ?

It is the best current knowledge, but who knows? In any case it is irrelevant to a discussion on the evidence for evolution.

so you are convinced with certainty on the mainstream science random accident theory of creation at the primordial soup stage ?

Biochemical reactions are not random, but rather, obey the laws and principles of physics and chemistry.

then in a controlled environment you should nave no problem creating a one cell lil beasty...get at it

 

[eots]

Still waiting for you to explain it in your own words. Cat got your tongue?

I can't imagine why you think I'd waste the time on an invincibly ignorant batshit crazy.

If you refuse to understand the clear explanations you've already had nor can explain what you can't understand about them then there's not much point further explaining the reality based world.

Perhaps you should look at faith based stories of the world, then you won't have to bother about demanding evidence based explanations you can't understand.

I'm sure you'll be happier in fantasy land where every question has the same easy to remember answer.

'YWHW done it', in case you were wondering.

Won't waste time giving me proof but you'll waste time responding to every one of my posts with name calling and adolescent put downs? You do know other people are reading your posts, right?

Yes indeed, others are reading this. And he's right. You people wouldn't know evidence if it bit you in the arse. And the fact is, evidence isn't what you people want. What you people want is to spam science forums like this one with your scam queries about "evidence" that you don't actually give a shite about. Seems you can't argue the evidence, and so this is all you can manage with your weak minds. My advice? Take a pill. And get some therapy.

• 
  I don't think I'm misrepresenting Evolution by saying that it is randomness and accidental. That's all you guys leave us to conclude, since you don't allow God or some higher intelligence to be involved.

There is nothing about random and accidental about a nut with a soft shell developing a harder shell as a result of predation.

Scientists don't throw up their hands in frustration and proclaim "god did it" because such a tautology doesn't explain anything. That is something we leave to the faithful, and as we all know, faith is a belief in something not in evidence.

natural selection not evolution

 

[Hollie]

Ignorance of the facts on your part is no ones fault but your own.

Thanks for confirming. Your posts are probably the best example.

You poor dear. Your tender sensibilities are offended by those evilutionists who dare challenge the superstitions that cause you to live in trembling fear of angry gawds.

If nothing else, this thread has served to display the profound ignorance of the religious zealot who lives in fear and denial of contingent reality.

Thanks for confirming (again).

I just find it remarkable that faced with facts supporting biological evolution, you're left stuttering and mumbling as you simply have no counter argument.

I DON'T find it amazing that when you're challenged to provide proof and can't, your only response is personal attacks and empty remarks. BTW, I'm still waiting for you to explain how one species became another.

I see you're still defending both your self imposed ignorance and the goofy conspiracy theories about science so common among Christian Taliban.

 

[eots]

Thanks for confirming. Your posts are probably the best example.

You poor dear. Your tender sensibilities are offended by those evilutionists who dare challenge the superstitions that cause you to live in trembling fear of angry gawds.

If nothing else, this thread has served to display the profound ignorance of the religious zealot who lives in fear and denial of contingent reality.

Thanks for confirming (again).

I just find it remarkable that faced with facts supporting biological evolution, you're left stuttering and mumbling as you simply have no counter argument.

I DON'T find it amazing that when you're challenged to provide proof and can't, your only response is personal attacks and empty remarks. BTW, I'm still waiting for you to explain how one species became another.

I see you're still defending both your self imposed ignorance and the goofy conspiracy theories about science so common among Christian Taliban.

sounds like you are the one with the conspiracy...goofy

 

[Hollie]

[...] BTW, I'm still waiting for you to explain how one species became another.

You've had that explained. How about you explaining why you can't understand it?

You haven't explained a damn thing.

The explanations have been provided. You just find it perfectly acceptable to defend your ignorance.

 

[Hollie]

You poor dear. Your tender sensibilities are offended by those evilutionists who dare challenge the superstitions that cause you to live in trembling fear of angry gawds.

If nothing else, this thread has served to display the profound ignorance of the religious zealot who lives in fear and denial of contingent reality.

Thanks for confirming (again).

I just find it remarkable that faced with facts supporting biological evolution, you're left stuttering and mumbling as you simply have no counter argument.

I DON'T find it amazing that when you're challenged to provide proof and can't, your only response is personal attacks and empty remarks. BTW, I'm still waiting for you to explain how one species became another.

I see you're still defending both your self imposed ignorance and the goofy conspiracy theories about science so common among Christian Taliban.

sounds like you are the one with the conspiracy...goofy

It doesn't like that at all.

Now run along and find more space alien conspiracies to keep you entertained.

 

[Hollie]

Still waiting for you to explain it in your own words. Cat got your tongue?

I can't imagine why you think I'd waste the time on an invincibly ignorant batshit crazy.

If you refuse to understand the clear explanations you've already had nor can explain what you can't understand about them then there's not much point further explaining the reality based world.

Perhaps you should look at faith based stories of the world, then you won't have to bother about demanding evidence based explanations you can't understand.

I'm sure you'll be happier in fantasy land where every question has the same easy to remember answer.

'YWHW done it', in case you were wondering.

Won't waste time giving me proof but you'll waste time responding to every one of my posts with name calling and adolescent put downs? You do know other people are reading your posts, right?

Yes indeed, others are reading this. And he's right. You people wouldn't know evidence if it bit you in the arse. And the fact is, evidence isn't what you people want. What you people want is to spam science forums like this one with your scam queries about "evidence" that you don't actually give a shite about. Seems you can't argue the evidence, and so this is all you can manage with your weak minds. My advice? Take a pill. And get some therapy.

• 
  I don't think I'm misrepresenting Evolution by saying that it is randomness and accidental. That's all you guys leave us to conclude, since you don't allow God or some higher intelligence to be involved.

There is nothing about random and accidental about a nut with a soft shell developing a harder shell as a result of predation.

Scientists don't throw up their hands in frustration and proclaim "god did it" because such a tautology doesn't explain anything. That is something we leave to the faithful, and as we all know, faith is a belief in something not in evidence.

natural selection not evolution

Yours is a common error among the science illiterate.

 

[eots]

[...] BTW, I'm still waiting for you to explain how one species became another.

You've had that explained. How about you explaining why you can't understand it?

You haven't explained a damn thing.

The explanations have been provided. You just find it perfectly acceptable to defend your ignorance.

some offered the reasons for thier belifes

 

[eots]

Still waiting for you to explain it in your own words. Cat got your tongue?

I can't imagine why you think I'd waste the time on an invincibly ignorant batshit crazy.

If you refuse to understand the clear explanations you've already had nor can explain what you can't understand about them then there's not much point further explaining the reality based world.

Perhaps you should look at faith based stories of the world, then you won't have to bother about demanding evidence based explanations you can't understand.

I'm sure you'll be happier in fantasy land where every question has the same easy to remember answer.

'YWHW done it', in case you were wondering.

Won't waste time giving me proof but you'll waste time responding to every one of my posts with name calling and adolescent put downs? You do know other people are reading your posts, right?

Yes indeed, others are reading this. And he's right. You people wouldn't know evidence if it bit you in the arse. And the fact is, evidence isn't what you people want. What you people want is to spam science forums like this one with your scam queries about "evidence" that you don't actually give a shite about. Seems you can't argue the evidence, and so this is all you can manage with your weak minds. My advice? Take a pill. And get some therapy.

• 
  I don't think I'm misrepresenting Evolution by saying that it is randomness and accidental. That's all you guys leave us to conclude, since you don't allow God or some higher intelligence to be involved.

There is nothing about random and accidental about a nut with a soft shell developing a harder shell as a result of predation.

Scientists don't throw up their hands in frustration and proclaim "god did it" because such a tautology doesn't explain anything. That is something we leave to the faithful, and as we all know, faith is a belief in something not in evidence.

natural selection not evolution

Yours is a common error among the science illiterate.

science literate.. is that taking a theory offered and regurgitating it back?

 

[Hollie]

[...] BTW, I'm still waiting for you to explain how one species became another.

You've had that explained. How about you explaining why you can't understand it?

You haven't explained a damn thing.

The explanations have been provided. You just find it perfectly acceptable to defend your ignorance.

some offered the reasons for thier belifes

That nice, dear. However, space aliens and conspiracy theories I'll leave to you of the more, how shall we say.... easily persuaded types.