Why Darwinists call non-Darwinists "Flat Earthers"

[Seymour Flops]

It's wishful thinking.

They wish that the untestable quasi-scientific hypothesis promulgated by Darwin could be as easily proven as the round Earth model.

That Earth is round, and travels around the sun while rotating, can be demonstrated to middle school kids through simple experiments that they can understand. They can even perform many of these experiments themselves, any day of the week, any time of year, and get the same results confirming the round Earth.

Not so with Darwinism. Darwinism is untestable. No experiment could prove it is false, so of course no experiment can prove it is true.

Judging from their childish insults, many of the fanatical Darwinists here are either still in middle school or have never outgrown the middle school mentality.

So, if a genuine flat earther came on this forum, they would simply recite the proofs of the round Earth that they learned in middle school.* Obviously accompanies by a lot of name calling, because that's what middle schoolers do.

But when it comes to defending Darwinian theory, name calling is their main "argument," along with demanding that non-Darwinists prove that their untestable and non-falsifiable hypothesis is false.

*I may be giving them too much credit. Likely many of the Darwinists on here paid no attention to subjects like Math and Science, and are now googling "experiments to prove the earth is round," to see what I'm talking about.

 

[Ringtone]

Evolution is a myth, a fairytale.

 

[rightwinger]

Evolution is a FACT
God is a Theory

 

[Hollie]

It's wishful thinking.

They wish that the untestable quasi-scientific hypothesis promulgated by Darwin could be as easily proven as the round Earth model.

That Earth is round, and travels around the sun while rotating, can be demonstrated to middle school kids through simple experiments that they can understand. They can even perform many of these experiments themselves, any day of the week, any time of year, and get the same results confirming the round Earth.

Not so with Darwinism. Darwinism is untestable. No experiment could prove it is false, so of course no experiment can prove it is true.

Judging from their childish insults, many of the fanatical Darwinists here are either still in middle school or have never outgrown the middle school mentality.

So, if a genuine flat earther came on this forum, they would simply recite the proofs of the round Earth that they learned in middle school.* Obviously accompanies by a lot of name calling, because that's what middle schoolers do.

But when it comes to defending Darwinian theory, name calling is their main "argument," along with demanding that non-Darwinists prove that their untestable and non-falsifiable hypothesis is false.

*I may be giving them too much credit. Likely many of the Darwinists on here paid no attention to subjects like Math and Science, and are now googling "experiments to prove the earth is round," to see what I'm talking about.

As the model of Darwinian evolution (change in species over time), has been proven, yours is just another of the frantic, anti-science tirades that typifies so much of the religionist agenda.

 

[DudleySmith]

Yes. From the very beginning, Darwinism was just a political tool for sociopaths to use against Da Evul Xians and their annoying morality and principles getting in the way of greed and good times. As for the 'Flat Earth' rubbish, even one of their own Darwinists called them out on that lie.

The myth of the flat Earth, or the flat earth error, is a modern historical misconception that European scholars and educated people during the Middle Ages believed the Earth to be flat.[1][2]

The earliest clear documentation of the idea of a spherical Earth comes from the ancient Greeks (5th century BC). The belief was widespread in the Greek world when Eratosthenes calculated the circumference of Earth around 240 BC. This knowledge spread with Greek influence such that during the Early Middle Ages (~600–1000 AD), most European and Middle Eastern scholars espoused Earth's sphericity.[3] Belief in a flat Earth among educated Europeans was almost nonexistent from the Late Middle Ages onward, though fanciful depictions appear in art, such as the exterior panels of Hieronymus Bosch's famous triptych The Garden of Earthly Delights, in which a disc-shaped Earth is shown floating inside a transparent sphere.[4]

According to Stephen Jay Gould, "there never was a period of 'flat Earth darkness' among scholars, regardless of how the public at large may have conceptualized our planet both then and now. Greek knowledge of sphericity never faded, and all major medieval scholars accepted the Earth's roundness as an established fact of cosmology."[5] Historians of science David Lindberg and Ronald Numbers point out that "there was scarcely a Christian scholar of the Middle Ages who did not acknowledge [Earth's] sphericity and even know its approximate circumference".[6]

Historian Jeffrey Burton Russell says the flat-Earth error flourished most between 1870 and 1920, and had to do with the ideological setting created by struggles over biological evolution. Russell claims "with extraordinary few exceptions no educated person in the history of Western Civilization from the third century B.C. onward believed that the Earth was flat", and ascribes popularization of the flat-Earth myth to histories by John William Draper, Andrew Dickson White, and Washington Irving.[2][7][8]

Myth of the flat Earth - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The evolution cultists have been lying from the start.

 

[Hollie]

Evolution is a myth, a fairytale.

You used the wrong link to your Flat Earth Society meeting,

 

[alang1216]

It's wishful thinking.

They wish that the untestable quasi-scientific hypothesis promulgated by Darwin could be as easily proven as the round Earth model.

That Earth is round, and travels around the sun while rotating, can be demonstrated to middle school kids through simple experiments that they can understand. They can even perform many of these experiments themselves, any day of the week, any time of year, and get the same results confirming the round Earth.

Not so with Darwinism. Darwinism is untestable. No experiment could prove it is false, so of course no experiment can prove it is true.

Judging from their childish insults, many of the fanatical Darwinists here are either still in middle school or have never outgrown the middle school mentality.

So, if a genuine flat earther came on this forum, they would simply recite the proofs of the round Earth that they learned in middle school.* Obviously accompanies by a lot of name calling, because that's what middle schoolers do.

But when it comes to defending Darwinian theory, name calling is their main "argument," along with demanding that non-Darwinists prove that their untestable and non-falsifiable hypothesis is false.

*I may be giving them too much credit. Likely many of the Darwinists on here paid no attention to subjects like Math and Science, and are now googling "experiments to prove the earth is round," to see what I'm talking about.

I'm not in favor of insulting anyone (though I'm hardly perfect). What may get 'Darwinists' irate at non-Darwinists is that the mantra of the non-Darwinists is 'where is the proof'. No matter how much evidence there is for evolution the demand is for proof. What is equally frustrating for Darwinists is there is never evidence for an alternative theory offered, let alone one that meets this requirement for 'proof'.

 

[Seymour Flops]

I'm not in favor of insulting anyone (though I'm hardly perfect). What may get 'Darwinists' irate at non-Darwinists is that the mantra of the non-Darwinists is 'where is the proof'. No matter how much evidence there is for evolution the demand is for proof. What is equally frustrating for Darwinists is there is never evidence for an alternative theory offered, let alone one that meets this requirement for 'proof'.

Notice how you shift gears in two sentences:

What may get 'Darwinists' irate at non-Darwinists is that the mantra of the non-Darwinists is 'where is the proof'. No matter how much evidence there is for evolution the demand is for proof.


So what is there evidence for, evolution or Darwin?

If there is evidence for Darwinism, please present it.

 

[rightwinger]

Evolution occurs, that is a proven fact
How and why it occurs are subject to theories. But evolution occurring is a FACT

Simple creatures evolved into complex creatures
That is undeniable

 

[Ringtone]

Most evolutionists don't know dick about the theory of evolution, not really. Most are not even cognizant of the real reason they believe the theory is true.

 

[Ringtone]

I'm not in favor of insulting anyone (though I'm hardly perfect). What may get 'Darwinists' irate at non-Darwinists is that the mantra of the non-Darwinists is 'where is the proof'. No matter how much evidence there is for evolution the demand is for proof. What is equally frustrating for Darwinists is there is never evidence for an alternative theory offered, let alone one that meets this requirement for 'proof'.

That's a flat-out lie. Shame on you.

 

[westwall]

Evolution is a FACT
God is a Theory

They are both theories. Uneducated dolts, like you, don't seem to understand.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Yes. From the very beginning, Darwinism was just a political tool for sociopaths to use against Da Evul Xians and their annoying morality and principles getting in the way of greed and good times. As for the 'Flat Earth' rubbish, even one of their own Darwinists called them out on that lie.

The myth of the flat Earth, or the flat earth error, is a modern historical misconception that European scholars and educated people during the Middle Ages believed the Earth to be flat.[1][2]

The earliest clear documentation of the idea of a spherical Earth comes from the ancient Greeks (5th century BC). The belief was widespread in the Greek world when Eratosthenes calculated the circumference of Earth around 240 BC. This knowledge spread with Greek influence such that during the Early Middle Ages (~600–1000 AD), most European and Middle Eastern scholars espoused Earth's sphericity.[3] Belief in a flat Earth among educated Europeans was almost nonexistent from the Late Middle Ages onward, though fanciful depictions appear in art, such as the exterior panels of Hieronymus Bosch's famous triptych The Garden of Earthly Delights, in which a disc-shaped Earth is shown floating inside a transparent sphere.[4]

According to Stephen Jay Gould, "there never was a period of 'flat Earth darkness' among scholars, regardless of how the public at large may have conceptualized our planet both then and now. Greek knowledge of sphericity never faded, and all major medieval scholars accepted the Earth's roundness as an established fact of cosmology."[5] Historians of science David Lindberg and Ronald Numbers point out that "there was scarcely a Christian scholar of the Middle Ages who did not acknowledge [Earth's] sphericity and even know its approximate circumference".[6]

Historian Jeffrey Burton Russell says the flat-Earth error flourished most between 1870 and 1920, and had to do with the ideological setting created by struggles over biological evolution. Russell claims "with extraordinary few exceptions no educated person in the history of Western Civilization from the third century B.C. onward believed that the Earth was flat", and ascribes popularization of the flat-Earth myth to histories by John William Draper, Andrew Dickson White, and Washington Irving.[2][7][8]

Myth of the flat Earth - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The evolution cultists have been lying from the start.

Yes, these myths are still taught to school children. It makes a good story, the dumb ol' people of hundreds of years ago who thought Earth was flat. Kids love stories of stupid grownups so it keeps their attention.

As a child, I heard stories of people warning Columbus that his ships would fall off the edge of the Earth. In fact, as I learned as an adult, he was told by astronomers of the day that his voyage would take longer than he realized because they had estimated the size of Earth with considerable accuracy. Some of them told him that a space that large was unlikely to be empty, so he would likely find previously uncharted land masses as he tried to sail to India from western Europe.

For those Darwinists who did not pay attention to their world history class, Columbus did find the predicted land masses, which were the Americas. Because he did not accept the advice of the intelligent astronomers, he believed that he had proved them wrong by landing in India much sooner than they predicted he would. He called the people he met "Indians," due to this error.

True story, bruh . . .

 

[Seymour Flops]

Evolution occurs, that is a proven fact
How and why it occurs are subject to theories. But evolution occurring is a FACT

Simple creatures evolved into complex creatures
That is undeniable

Your evidence for this is literally your all caps and your flat statement that it is undeniable?

 

[Seymour Flops]

Most evolutionists don't know dick about the theory of evolution, not really. Most are not even cognizant of the real reason they believe the theory is true.

Correct. They are followers.

They notice that Darwinists constantly insult anyone who questions that theory, and they want to avoid being on the receiving end of the insults.

 

[rightwinger]

Your evidence for this is literally your all caps and your flat statement that it is undeniable?

Evolution occurs
There is no denying it

God is just a theory
A theory without any supporting facts

 

[Hollie]

Most evolutionists don't know dick about the theory of evolution, not really. Most are not even cognizant of the real reason they believe the theory is true.

Not so. The responses from the science-minded types are typically precise, accurate and sourced in response to creationers and their falsehoods about evolutionary biology.

You must have missed the litany of threads opened by the really, really, angry creationer who refuses to support his claims to designer gods yet insists his claims are true until disproven.

That’s ridiculous.

 

[rightwinger]

This video will explain it all to you

 

[alang1216]

Notice how you shift gears in two sentences:

What may get 'Darwinists' irate at non-Darwinists is that the mantra of the non-Darwinists is 'where is the proof'. No matter how much evidence there is for evolution the demand is for proof.


So what is there evidence for, evolution or Darwin?

If there is evidence for Darwinism, please present it.

Maybe I don't know what 'Darwinism' is. Please enlighten us.

 

[Hollie]

I'm not in favor of insulting anyone (though I'm hardly perfect). What may get 'Darwinists' irate at non-Darwinists is that the mantra of the non-Darwinists is 'where is the proof'. No matter how much evidence there is for evolution the demand is for proof. What is equally frustrating for Darwinists is there is never evidence for an alternative theory offered, let alone one that meets this requirement for 'proof'.

I suspect for many creationers, even a perfectly preserved chain of fossil evidence for every intermediary species of every species that ever existed would not meet their standard of proof.

The re-branding of what was once “Biblical Creationism" which became “Scientific Creationism”, later changed to “Intelligent Design Creationism”, later becoming “Intelligent Design” has always been a product of fundamentalist Christianity.

You can take the fundamentalist out of the church but you can’t take the church out of the fundamentalist.