Bitcoin Forum
November 15, 2018, 10:27:39 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.17.0 [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 [132] 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 ... 190 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Evolution is a hoax  (Read 82471 times)
Przemax
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 546
Merit: 500


View Profile
February 20, 2018, 08:32:50 AM
 #2621

Quote
Religious people lie and cheat too, all the indirect evidence for evolution is more than enough for scientists to conclude evolution is a fact. Even if there weren't any cases of observed evolution, which there are, evolution would still be true.

Yeah. True. Religious people lie. Bible don't as far as I am aware.

Quote
No one has ever seen plenty of things in action, we wouldn't have homicides detectives if you always had to observe someone killing another person,

Well... No. Actually the staging of the crime scene is a very weak empirical evidence, but evidence none the less if it is enacted with the logical framework of other clues. Noone had staged the evolution. Find another similiarities.

Quote
Most religious people actually agree that evolution is real,

No. Not most of them. You lie. The data shows something close to 50% depending on religion. I have nothing to do with them. Why do you compare me with them? That is not an argument.

I have told you. There are a lot of atheist that deny evolution. And I was one of them.

You make yet another logical fallacy - now using the error of equivocation.

Quote
Good luck in real life dude.

Good that you have pointed that out - in my real life I have not seen evolution, nor anyone for that matter. So yeah.... who is detached from reality here?

Quote
are able to conclude that evolution exists based on the VAST evidence out there

Like what evidence? I have just told you noone had ever made a new specie, and by specie I mean the new speciment that cannot interbreed with any other speciments of the same specie, but can interbreed with the similiar speciments.

AND THAT IS THE EVOLUTION.
1542320859
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1542320859

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1542320859
Reply with quote  #2

1542320859
Report to moderator
1542320859
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1542320859

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1542320859
Reply with quote  #2

1542320859
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1542320859
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1542320859

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1542320859
Reply with quote  #2

1542320859
Report to moderator
Astargath
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 910
Merit: 586


View Profile
February 20, 2018, 01:30:07 PM
 #2622

Quote
Religious people lie and cheat too, all the indirect evidence for evolution is more than enough for scientists to conclude evolution is a fact. Even if there weren't any cases of observed evolution, which there are, evolution would still be true.

Yeah. True. Religious people lie. Bible don't as far as I am aware.

Quote
No one has ever seen plenty of things in action, we wouldn't have homicides detectives if you always had to observe someone killing another person,

Well... No. Actually the staging of the crime scene is a very weak empirical evidence, but evidence none the less if it is enacted with the logical framework of other clues. Noone had staged the evolution. Find another similiarities.

Quote
Most religious people actually agree that evolution is real,

No. Not most of them. You lie. The data shows something close to 50% depending on religion. I have nothing to do with them. Why do you compare me with them? That is not an argument.

I have told you. There are a lot of atheist that deny evolution. And I was one of them.

You make yet another logical fallacy - now using the error of equivocation.

Quote
Good luck in real life dude.

Good that you have pointed that out - in my real life I have not seen evolution, nor anyone for that matter. So yeah.... who is detached from reality here?

Quote
are able to conclude that evolution exists based on the VAST evidence out there

Like what evidence? I have just told you noone had ever made a new specie, and by specie I mean the new speciment that cannot interbreed with any other speciments of the same specie, but can interbreed with the similiar speciments.

AND THAT IS THE EVOLUTION.

Why people that know nothing about evolution think they can come to a forum and explain to us how evolution is not real? Shouldn't you go publish a paper dismissing evolution? Why do you think 99.99% of the scientific community agrees that evolution is a fact? You think you are smarter than them because you read a few religious articles about evolution? What makes you think you you would even understand the evidence for it if you never studied about it?



                        █████
                        █████
                        █████
                        █████
                        █████
                        █████
                        █████
        █████           █████
        █████   █████   █████
        █████   █████   █████
        █████   █████   █████   █████
        █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████
█████   █████
        █████
        █████



   Borderless Trading with Jarvis Exchange
Whitepaper | Twitter | Facebook | Medium | Instagram
BADecker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848
Merit: 1081


View Profile
February 20, 2018, 01:40:04 PM
 #2623

Quote
Religious people lie and cheat too, all the indirect evidence for evolution is more than enough for scientists to conclude evolution is a fact. Even if there weren't any cases of observed evolution, which there are, evolution would still be true.

Yeah. True. Religious people lie. Bible don't as far as I am aware.

Quote
No one has ever seen plenty of things in action, we wouldn't have homicides detectives if you always had to observe someone killing another person,

Well... No. Actually the staging of the crime scene is a very weak empirical evidence, but evidence none the less if it is enacted with the logical framework of other clues. Noone had staged the evolution. Find another similiarities.

Quote
Most religious people actually agree that evolution is real,

No. Not most of them. You lie. The data shows something close to 50% depending on religion. I have nothing to do with them. Why do you compare me with them? That is not an argument.

I have told you. There are a lot of atheist that deny evolution. And I was one of them.

You make yet another logical fallacy - now using the error of equivocation.

Quote
Good luck in real life dude.

Good that you have pointed that out - in my real life I have not seen evolution, nor anyone for that matter. So yeah.... who is detached from reality here?

Quote
are able to conclude that evolution exists based on the VAST evidence out there

Like what evidence? I have just told you noone had ever made a new specie, and by specie I mean the new speciment that cannot interbreed with any other speciments of the same specie, but can interbreed with the similiar speciments.

AND THAT IS THE EVOLUTION.

Why people that know nothing about evolution think they can come to a forum and explain to us how evolution is not real? Shouldn't you go publish a paper dismissing evolution? Why do you think 99.99% of the scientific community agrees that evolution is a fact? You think you are smarter than them because you read a few religious articles about evolution? What makes you think you you would even understand the evidence for it if you never studied about it?

Why do people who can't find any proof for evolution, continually talk like it is real, when all it is, is a religion? It's amazing that people talk themselves into believing something as silly as evolution, based on a lot of talk, and on a handful of things that can easily be judged to be something other than evolution.

Evolution at best is a religion, but because it is a false religion...

Evolution is a hoax.

Cool
Przemax
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 546
Merit: 500


View Profile
February 20, 2018, 02:45:26 PM
 #2624

Quote
Why people that know nothing about evolution think they can come to a forum and explain to us how evolution is not real? Shouldn't you go publish a paper dismissing evolution? Why do you think 99.99% of the scientific community agrees that evolution is a fact? You think you are smarter than them because you read a few religious articles about evolution? What makes you think you you would even understand the evidence for it if you never studied about it?

Why do you think I know nothing of evolution? I know more than you. I know there is no empirical evidence for it. Just a possibilities and assumptions. Those in my humble opinion should not be the basis to create your life ideology around. Just that.

I am not smarter than anyone. I admire someone spending so much energy and devotion to defend such a ridiculous idea to make it more believable. So I not only think Im not smarter than those people I am a lot less devoted than them.

Oh I do not even need to write anything on the subject of evolution. There are a lot of materials on the internet that absolutely demolish evolution. For example:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38VngsfvMOs&index=6&list=PLvi3DA39DmAFRwMmadh6Nrkf8ognXmgnB

I would add that the unused organs dissapear - called Atrophy, that would prove evolution wrong as well, as the evolution claims that proves are within the remains of now unused organs. That is simply impossible because it violates the law of Atrophy of unused organs.

So the only one claim that is shouted everywhere, about supposedly unusuful part of the body, that was used by the specie that was evolved from is just impossible to happen as it violates scientific law.

That one is enough to prove that "evolutionists" are not credible, to say the least to be called a knowledgable and critically thinking people.
wpalczynski
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1428
Merit: 1000


View Profile
February 20, 2018, 04:21:11 PM
 #2625

This is so ridiculous, we didn't evolve from monkey... Nowaday monkeys and us evolved from a common ancestor which disappeared since then. Evolution is the only theory that actually makes some sense. It might be proven wrong one day and I am sure that scientists will recongnize another truth if evolution gets overruled by evidence.
Astargath
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 910
Merit: 586


View Profile
February 20, 2018, 04:29:51 PM
 #2626

Quote
Why people that know nothing about evolution think they can come to a forum and explain to us how evolution is not real? Shouldn't you go publish a paper dismissing evolution? Why do you think 99.99% of the scientific community agrees that evolution is a fact? You think you are smarter than them because you read a few religious articles about evolution? What makes you think you you would even understand the evidence for it if you never studied about it?

Why do you think I know nothing of evolution? I know more than you. I know there is no empirical evidence for it. Just a possibilities and assumptions. Those in my humble opinion should not be the basis to create your life ideology around. Just that.

I am not smarter than anyone. I admire someone spending so much energy and devotion to defend such a ridiculous idea to make it more believable. So I not only think Im not smarter than those people I am a lot less devoted than them.

Oh I do not even need to write anything on the subject of evolution. There are a lot of materials on the internet that absolutely demolish evolution. For example:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38VngsfvMOs&index=6&list=PLvi3DA39DmAFRwMmadh6Nrkf8ognXmgnB

I would add that the unused organs dissapear - called Atrophy, that would prove evolution wrong as well, as the evolution claims that proves are within the remains of now unused organs. That is simply impossible because it violates the law of Atrophy of unused organs.

So the only one claim that is shouted everywhere, about supposedly unusuful part of the body, that was used by the specie that was evolved from is just impossible to happen as it violates scientific law.

That one is enough to prove that "evolutionists" are not credible, to say the least to be called a knowledgable and critically thinking people.

Thanks for the video, It's a great example of how I know you don't know shit about evolution. It's also in the comments.

''This video begins with a straight-out lie, and gets worse throughout. In science, a theory is not a law, and never will be one. A theory is an explanation of a phenomenon that is consistent with many observations of the phenomenon. A law is a simple statement of the relation between two or more quantities.''

''First of all, Law =/= theory. This is the first two fucking sentences in your video. A theory is an explanation based on evidence that has not been proven beyond a doubt but is most likely true. A law has been proven. If evolution had been disproven, it would be considered a debunked theory, and it wouldn't be a law even if it was proven, it would just be a phenomenon.''

See, how hard was it to read the first few comments or to actually understand that the first premise of the video is just wrong?



                        █████
                        █████
                        █████
                        █████
                        █████
                        █████
                        █████
        █████           █████
        █████   █████   █████
        █████   █████   █████
        █████   █████   █████   █████
        █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████
█████   █████
        █████
        █████



   Borderless Trading with Jarvis Exchange
Whitepaper | Twitter | Facebook | Medium | Instagram
angelinakorenovskaya
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 59
Merit: 0


View Profile
February 20, 2018, 04:46:54 PM
 #2627

There is no axioms for the evolution, no metrics, no algebra, it's barely a science at all.
Przemax
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 546
Merit: 500


View Profile
February 20, 2018, 05:01:52 PM
 #2628

"See, how hard was it to read the first few comments or to actually understand that the first premise of the video is just wrong?"

Ok. You win by a word game. That was all that the modern science begun. "Scientists" were discussing words. Francis Bacon generally have said - words are not important. What is important is the reality. That is how science developed. Sadly now science look exactly the same way as in the times of F. Bacon.

It DOES NOT MATTER how you will call it a theory/diaper/superman/batman if it violates known laws it cannot exist or the laws it violates can not exist.

It cannot be called anything scientific at all as the premise had not even been tested and/or no new specie have been found because that is the hypothesis of evolution. I have no idea why it is called a theory honestly. IT SHOULD NOT. No new specie have been found on the experiment.


 It is a mind boggling what happened to the scientific method if people are not mad at this obvious fraud.

According to this diagram of scientific method it should still be called a hypothesis.



Maybe they say that partially the theory of evolution works because there exist a natural selection or something like that. Or another type of word games like:

The test should prove to produce new species/ and or speciments should produce urine. Ok there was no new specie but a speciment urinated. Is that how this fraud got the status of theory? Or what other fraud was there?

I guess it was stated that although no new specie have been observed the natural selection occurs. So that should be the theory of natural selection that is 100% accurate. Yes natural selection happens within the limits of genepool of a specie. But that is not what it's all about.

Ok the guy in the video took hypothesis for a theory. I knew you would be nitpicky on that. For the sake of argument - pretend he had ment a hypothesis and not a theory, and watch the rest ok?

We must know what are we talking about. You say that I don't know. But do you know? What is the theory evolution in your understanding of it? Maybe we are talking about two different things.

As I understand it. It is a theory that states what Darwin stated. "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life".

If that is the case - IT IS WRONG. No new specie originated by that means. But yes natural selection occurs and is 100% verifiable.
Astargath
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 910
Merit: 586


View Profile
February 20, 2018, 07:07:17 PM
 #2629

"See, how hard was it to read the first few comments or to actually understand that the first premise of the video is just wrong?"

Ok. You win by a word game. That was all that the modern science begun. "Scientists" were discussing words. Francis Bacon generally have said - words are not important. What is important is the reality. That is how science developed. Sadly now science look exactly the same way as in the times of F. Bacon.

It DOES NOT MATTER how you will call it a theory/diaper/superman/batman if it violates known laws it cannot exist or the laws it violates can not exist.

It cannot be called anything scientific at all as the premise had not even been tested and/or no new specie have been found because that is the hypothesis of evolution. I have no idea why it is called a theory honestly. IT SHOULD NOT. No new specie have been found on the experiment.


 It is a mind boggling what happened to the scientific method if people are not mad at this obvious fraud.

According to this diagram of scientific method it should still be called a hypothesis.



Maybe they say that partially the theory of evolution works because there exist a natural selection or something like that. Or another type of word games like:

The test should prove to produce new species/ and or speciments should produce urine. Ok there was no new specie but a speciment urinated. Is that how this fraud got the status of theory? Or what other fraud was there?

I guess it was stated that although no new specie have been observed the natural selection occurs. So that should be the theory of natural selection that is 100% accurate. Yes natural selection happens within the limits of genepool of a specie. But that is not what it's all about.

Ok the guy in the video took hypothesis for a theory. I knew you would be nitpicky on that. For the sake of argument - pretend he had ment a hypothesis and not a theory, and watch the rest ok?

We must know what are we talking about. You say that I don't know. But do you know? What is the theory evolution in your understanding of it? Maybe we are talking about two different things.

As I understand it. It is a theory that states what Darwin stated. "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life".

If that is the case - IT IS WRONG. No new specie originated by that means. But yes natural selection occurs and is 100% verifiable.

The theory of evolution does not violate any scientific law, so I don't know what the fuck you are talking about, again you are wrong, no big surprise.

''Critics of evolution often fall back on the maxim that no one has ever seen one species split into two. While that's clearly a straw man, because most speciation takes far longer than our lifespan to occur, it's also not true. We have seen species split, and we continue to see species diverging every day.

For example, there were the two new species of American goatsbeards (or salsifies, genus Tragopogon) that sprung into existence in the past century. In the early 1900s, three species of these wildflowers - the western salsify (T. dubius), the meadow salsify (T. pratensis), and the oyster plant (T. porrifolius) - were introduced to the United States from Europe. As their populations expanded, the species interacted, often producing sterile hybrids. But by the 1950s, scientists realized that there were two new variations of goatsbeard growing. While they looked like hybrids, they weren't sterile. They were perfectly capable of reproducing with their own kind but not with any of the original three species - the classic definition of a new species.''

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/science-sushi/evolution-watching-speciation-occur-observations/
https://www.sciencealert.com/darwin-s-finches-evolve-into-new-species-in-real-time-two-generations-galapagos
http://www.iflscience.com/plants-and-animals/a-new-species-of-darwins-finch-evolved-in-just-two-generations/

Now shut the fuck up, you are annoying.



                        █████
                        █████
                        █████
                        █████
                        █████
                        █████
                        █████
        █████           █████
        █████   █████   █████
        █████   █████   █████
        █████   █████   █████   █████
        █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████
█████   █████
        █████
        █████



   Borderless Trading with Jarvis Exchange
Whitepaper | Twitter | Facebook | Medium | Instagram
Przemax
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 546
Merit: 500


View Profile
February 20, 2018, 07:39:57 PM
 #2630

"See, how hard was it to read the first few comments or to actually understand that the first premise of the video is just wrong?"

Ok. You win by a word game. That was all that the modern science begun. "Scientists" were discussing words. Francis Bacon generally have said - words are not important. What is important is the reality. That is how science developed. Sadly now science look exactly the same way as in the times of F. Bacon.

It DOES NOT MATTER how you will call it a theory/diaper/superman/batman if it violates known laws it cannot exist or the laws it violates can not exist.

It cannot be called anything scientific at all as the premise had not even been tested and/or no new specie have been found because that is the hypothesis of evolution. I have no idea why it is called a theory honestly. IT SHOULD NOT. No new specie have been found on the experiment.


 It is a mind boggling what happened to the scientific method if people are not mad at this obvious fraud.

According to this diagram of scientific method it should still be called a hypothesis.



Maybe they say that partially the theory of evolution works because there exist a natural selection or something like that. Or another type of word games like:

The test should prove to produce new species/ and or speciments should produce urine. Ok there was no new specie but a speciment urinated. Is that how this fraud got the status of theory? Or what other fraud was there?

I guess it was stated that although no new specie have been observed the natural selection occurs. So that should be the theory of natural selection that is 100% accurate. Yes natural selection happens within the limits of genepool of a specie. But that is not what it's all about.

Ok the guy in the video took hypothesis for a theory. I knew you would be nitpicky on that. For the sake of argument - pretend he had ment a hypothesis and not a theory, and watch the rest ok?

We must know what are we talking about. You say that I don't know. But do you know? What is the theory evolution in your understanding of it? Maybe we are talking about two different things.

As I understand it. It is a theory that states what Darwin stated. "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life".

If that is the case - IT IS WRONG. No new specie originated by that means. But yes natural selection occurs and is 100% verifiable.

The theory of evolution does not violate any scientific law, so I don't know what the fuck you are talking about, again you are wrong, no big surprise.

''Critics of evolution often fall back on the maxim that no one has ever seen one species split into two. While that's clearly a straw man, because most speciation takes far longer than our lifespan to occur, it's also not true. We have seen species split, and we continue to see species diverging every day.

For example, there were the two new species of American goatsbeards (or salsifies, genus Tragopogon) that sprung into existence in the past century. In the early 1900s, three species of these wildflowers - the western salsify (T. dubius), the meadow salsify (T. pratensis), and the oyster plant (T. porrifolius) - were introduced to the United States from Europe. As their populations expanded, the species interacted, often producing sterile hybrids. But by the 1950s, scientists realized that there were two new variations of goatsbeard growing. While they looked like hybrids, they weren't sterile. They were perfectly capable of reproducing with their own kind but not with any of the original three species - the classic definition of a new species.''

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/science-sushi/evolution-watching-speciation-occur-observations/
https://www.sciencealert.com/darwin-s-finches-evolve-into-new-species-in-real-time-two-generations-galapagos
http://www.iflscience.com/plants-and-animals/a-new-species-of-darwins-finch-evolved-in-just-two-generations/

Now shut the fuck up, you are annoying.

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/science-sushi/evolution-watching-speciation-occur-observations/

"From the description, one would think that this was a very convincing example of macroevolution in action. Obviously, there must have been quite a number of massive mutations to produce an entirely new species that could not interbreed with the original. Right? Actually, every statement above is absolutely true. However, some of the important details have been intentionally left out, in order to make this example sound much better than it really is. Here is what actually happened.

The example above is not macroevolution, but is simply due to a single genetic event known as polyploidy. The original goatsbeards from Europe were standard diploid (two copies of each chromosome) plants. However, plants often do not undergo complete monoploidy during meiosis (during the formation of the sex cells, or gametes). This means that the gametes may remain diploid. When diploid gametes fuse, a new polyploid "species" is formed. No new information is created (Do you have twice as much information if you copy one book to produce an identical copy? No!), but the chromosomes are duplicated. The new "species" cannot produce viable offspring with the original species simply because of the difference in number of chromosomes.  With goatsbeards, the process has happened more than once. Of course, the two "new" species have the same number of chromosomes and can produce viable offspring, since they are virtually identical.

If you look at the speciation events that are listed as evidence of evolution, most of them will fall into the polyploidy plant category. Evolutionists often "forget" to tell the reader that the new "species" are unable to produce viable offspring with the parental species simply because of a chromosomal duplication event. A casual oversight on the part of the writers? I think not! How much new information added to the new species? None!!! Were you deceived into thinking that the example given above was a dramatic example of evolution in action? Be wary of evolutionists bearing examples of "speciation.""

Quote
The theory of evolution does not violate any scientific law, so I don't know what the fuck you are talking about, again you are wrong, no big surprise.

You conveniently leave out the parts of the movie I had gave you. And now you play ignorant that you do not know what I am talking about. How convenient. Just like your "evolutionists" masters of omision.

Quote
Now shut the fuck up, you are annoying.

Nervous?

Now I know why it is called a theory - by ommision the unconvenient truth by a half truths. That is trully wicked way of tricking the science community. And to think all of that effort just to discredit the Holy Word.

Quote

That does not meet the criterium of a definition of a new specie. Sorry to say that. It is just "so called" hybrydisation which means a breeding within the same specie, but for a convenience sake, and sake of their taxonomy called a different specie.

How come - when it came to the polyploid plants so called "evilutionists" knows exactly what is the definition of the specie, and when it come to the other species - they forget that? Im talking about this part:

Quote
They were perfectly capable of reproducing with their own kind but not with any of the original three species - the classic definition of a new species.''


Classic definition.............. There is no other. At least there shouldn't be a switchy switchy with the definitions for convenience sake. That just proves we live in a totally wicked world if something like that happens.

Stop and think for a second. Doesn't that bother you? Are you so hopelessly tuned on to evolution that you are not even slightly critical, that something fishy is going on?

In one article they say that it is normal for hybridisation to have fertile offspring, on the other they say that hybrids are infertile. That should make your red light off - they are messing with your head by contradictory informations ok? They are preying on your ignorance.

If I will call myself a Cyborg and everybody would agree would that make me one? According to some self proclaimed scientist yeah.

Yeah I know you will say that my sources are not credible because they have God in the name of the page. You guys are predictible. You do not want to double check if that is true, you will just assume they are wrong because you are so SCIENCE POWER RANGERS... Sigh..... ehhhhh
Astargath
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 910
Merit: 586


View Profile
February 20, 2018, 08:31:08 PM
 #2631

And you think evolution is wrong simply because in your mind it's against your god and you don't want any evidence against your fairy tail, otherwise what would you do, right? It's better to believe in a stupid religion, randomly chosen because you obviously do not believe in any of the other hundreds of religions, than accepting a well documented fact, evolution. Even if evolution was a total hoax your god would still be a fairy tail. You are not a scientist, are you? You just read articles, same as other people and them make your own conclusions, those conclusions are probably wrong since you don't know what you are talking about. You also probably never question anything else that doesn't attack your personal god like gravity or any other scientific theory because you don't care.

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB910.html

The age of the earth is 4.5 billion years. The universe is shown to be old by several independent types of measurements.
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CH/CH210.html

There is a ton of evidence against your god yet you still believe all that crap.



                        █████
                        █████
                        █████
                        █████
                        █████
                        █████
                        █████
        █████           █████
        █████   █████   █████
        █████   █████   █████
        █████   █████   █████   █████
        █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████
█████   █████
        █████
        █████



   Borderless Trading with Jarvis Exchange
Whitepaper | Twitter | Facebook | Medium | Instagram
Przemax
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 546
Merit: 500


View Profile
February 20, 2018, 09:07:11 PM
 #2632

Quote
And you think evolution is wrong simply because in your mind it's against your god

I have told you two times it is not so. I was atheist the moment i figured out the evolution theory is highly unlikely for various of reasons. Mostly because of the writings of Lamarck - he was an atheist. I was not convinced what made life. But I was convinced it was some kind of will behind that. I was I suppose a bit gnostic by that time and I was convinced that the will of organisms make them so to speak, by their own actions and not by random mutations. I was a quasi evolutionist so to speak, but I was convinced that random mutations go against the biology and how it organise itself by acting and reacting.

So you completly read me wrong and judge me wrong.

Quote
you don't want any evidence against your fairy tail

Well... Again you read me wrong. I just proved your evidence is not true. That is a manipulation by omission.

Quote
otherwise what would you do, right?

If not believing in a supreme will -GOD I would believe in a creative force of action and will of living organisms that would make a lot more sense to me than a randomness that goes against the biology of organisms. So again - wrong.

Quote
It's better to believe in a stupid religion, randomly chosen because you obviously do not believe in any of the other hundreds of religions,

No... Most religions are very similiar to eachother and they are all wrong. Nevertheless God exists, and it is as said in the Bible God cannot lie, so he is the truth. You completly ignored my post and rant about me. Why? Have I said something that bothered you? Do you want to divert the subject from the manipulations that evolutionists make to justify their lack of success?

Quote
You are not a scientist, are you?

Science should be demonstrable and presentable to the non-scientist community. If it is not, it is not science, so your question is irrelevant, or at least it should be irrelevant in a world, that manipulation is not the key to success. If you ask if I have a higher degree from University, then yes I have. And I had the methodology of science studied there. I had also logic courses and courses how to aply logic and scientific methodology in my field. Not to mention the courses in statistics.

Quote
You just read articles, same as other people and them make your own conclusions, those conclusions are probably wrong since you don't know what you are talking about.

Those conclusions base on the basic informations that one can get in the biology classes in school where I live. That is not a secret to me how plants reproduce - that is a normal school curriculum here.

Quote
You also probably never question anything else that doesn't attack your personal god like gravity or any other scientific theory because you don't care.

Oh... I question everything my friend. Especially gravity. Ofcourse gravity exists but on some other principles - mainly electrical. It is 100% verifiable that one can make antigrav field using simple electro static charges.

I care about everything that is interesting. So again you judge me wrongly.

Quote
The age of the earth is 4.5 billion years. The universe is shown to be old by several independent types of measurements.
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CH/CH210.html

So why they are admitting to only one? Because they know more than you know. They know it is a bull crap. And the ones they are using is the hardest to disprove because it involves having the expensive tools to experiment with radioactive izotopes.

Quote
There is a ton of evidence against your god yet you still believe all that crap.

Like? Listen....... 6k years people played your silly game of judging God. All were proven wrong. What makes you think you are special? All of them were fully convinced they had the reasons and "evidences" that the world had made itself. Epicureans, Libertines, Maniheists and so on and so forth. They were convinced in their "evidences". All are proven to worth nothing, as noone believes what they did back then. So will happen with the likes of you. There is no reason to suspect the otherwise. But history proves that it does not prove anything to anyone.
Goldenoaks
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 75
Merit: 0


View Profile
February 20, 2018, 09:37:17 PM
 #2633

There's pretty clear proof behind evolution. How could something so universally accepted be a hoax?
Przemax
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 546
Merit: 500


View Profile
February 20, 2018, 09:52:58 PM
 #2634

There's pretty clear proof behind evolution. How could something so universally accepted be a hoax?

Maybe because people do not understand the term evolution, and everyone is using their own definition. If evolution would mean what most people think it means - and that is - things change. Hey.... I would believe in evolution as well. Damn... things change... that's a fact. Some people think that evolution means natural selection and things change. So I am an evolutionist in that case. There are others that think that organisms adapts and that is an evolution. Well... then I am an evolutionists.... again. I agree with everything of that. So that leaves out 95% population that understand evolution wrong. The rest 5% of "evolutionists" think that Tiger and Lion can reproduce, even if they are a separate species in their point of view. Hey.... that means I am not an evolutionist only slightly. I agree they can reproduce, but then again calling them separate specie if they can produce the offsprings is wrong.. Only the 1% of evolutionist understand and believes that the evolution had created a new classically defined specie - a specie that is separate in breeding capabilities with other members of the previous specie.

In that case - I do not believe that. And Im not that kind of evolutionist. The funny thing is - 99% of people that think they understand evolution, thinks about other things, that is not an evolution, and call it evolution.
Astargath
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 910
Merit: 586


View Profile
February 20, 2018, 10:04:33 PM
 #2635

''Nevertheless God exists, and it is as said in the Bible God cannot lie, so he is the truth.'' The logic of religious folks right there.

>The bible says god cannot lie
>Therefore god cannot lie
> I know this because it is said in the bible

There is 1 major problem, though. How do you know what the bible says is actually real? There are hundreds of other religious books and fictional books just like the bible



                        █████
                        █████
                        █████
                        █████
                        █████
                        █████
                        █████
        █████           █████
        █████   █████   █████
        █████   █████   █████
        █████   █████   █████   █████
        █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████
█████   █████
        █████
        █████



   Borderless Trading with Jarvis Exchange
Whitepaper | Twitter | Facebook | Medium | Instagram
Przemax
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 546
Merit: 500


View Profile
February 20, 2018, 10:08:06 PM
 #2636

''Nevertheless God exists, and it is as said in the Bible God cannot lie, so he is the truth.'' The logic of religious folks right there.

>The bible says god cannot lie
>Therefore god cannot lie
> I know this because it is said in the bible

There is 1 major problem, though. How do you know what the bible says is actually real? There are hundreds of other religious books and fictional books just like the bible

How do you know the world is real? You experience it that way right? The same with me and God. I have weird experiences, other people as well... and we all agree its God, as we have no other explanation for our sensations. If you would explain it to me how can I explain my feeling of being loved when there is absolutely no rational explanation for it I am all ears.

I might be making that up. But what is the difference if I feel it realisticly? Rational people should try everything, and if there would be a rational reason to believe evolution I would be first to study it. Convince me, or convince yourself to God.
Astargath
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 910
Merit: 586


View Profile
February 20, 2018, 10:19:10 PM
 #2637

''Nevertheless God exists, and it is as said in the Bible God cannot lie, so he is the truth.'' The logic of religious folks right there.

>The bible says god cannot lie
>Therefore god cannot lie
> I know this because it is said in the bible

There is 1 major problem, though. How do you know what the bible says is actually real? There are hundreds of other religious books and fictional books just like the bible

How do you know the world is real? You experience it that way right? The same with me and God. I have weird experiences, other people as well... and we all agree its God, as we have no other explanation for our sensations. If you would explain it to me how can I explain my feeling of being loved when there is absolutely no rational explanation for it I am all ears.

I might be making that up. But what is the difference if I feel it realisticly? Rational people should try everything, and if there would be a rational reason to believe evolution I would be first to study it. Convince me, or convince yourself to God.

Every single religious person would claim the same but with different gods and religions so clearly what you are experiencing can't be real, at all the others must be false but if you acknowledge that possibility then you understand that what you feel might be false as well. Having weird experiences can have a ton of different causes, the brain is capable of producing illusions so real that you could think they are real, that's why there are diseases like schizophrenia and others similar.



                        █████
                        █████
                        █████
                        █████
                        █████
                        █████
                        █████
        █████           █████
        █████   █████   █████
        █████   █████   █████
        █████   █████   █████   █████
        █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████
█████   █████   █████
█████   █████
        █████
        █████



   Borderless Trading with Jarvis Exchange
Whitepaper | Twitter | Facebook | Medium | Instagram
Przemax
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 546
Merit: 500


View Profile
February 20, 2018, 10:29:09 PM
 #2638

''Nevertheless God exists, and it is as said in the Bible God cannot lie, so he is the truth.'' The logic of religious folks right there.

>The bible says god cannot lie
>Therefore god cannot lie
> I know this because it is said in the bible

There is 1 major problem, though. How do you know what the bible says is actually real? There are hundreds of other religious books and fictional books just like the bible

How do you know the world is real? You experience it that way right? The same with me and God. I have weird experiences, other people as well... and we all agree its God, as we have no other explanation for our sensations. If you would explain it to me how can I explain my feeling of being loved when there is absolutely no rational explanation for it I am all ears.

I might be making that up. But what is the difference if I feel it realisticly? Rational people should try everything, and if there would be a rational reason to believe evolution I would be first to study it. Convince me, or convince yourself to God.

Every single religious person would claim the same but with different gods and religions so clearly what you are experiencing can't be real, at all the others must be false but if you acknowledge that possibility then you understand that what you feel might be false as well. Having weird experiences can have a ton of different causes, the brain is capable of producing illusions so real that you could think they are real, that's why there are diseases like schizophrenia and others similar.

If you are convinced you know everything and that you would rather believe a doctor rather than yourself - it is your choice.

It would be foolish to deny there is some higher force that was not guiding my life, especially when I had a blockades that I just could not do the things I wanted for some ultrastrange reasons.

Everyone have such a feelings it is just that the world now nurture people to be extravertic not intravertic to be able to reason their way up to God.

Every people regardless of religion have the experiences because everyone is the child of God. Religion using the words of Christ to the scribe said that religion can only block you in your way to the Kingdom of God. He said to him - What is the greatest commandment? The God is one. They both agreed, and Jesus said - you are not far from the Kingdom of God by saying that. So it is not what one do - but all depends on not doing things that separate us from God. It is a love of God regardless of religion and boundaries. Not to mention the dark forces that are in action as well.

You think that religious people are having a contact with the spiritual world because of religion. That makes no sense. They are in the religion because of the contact with the spiritual world.
BADecker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848
Merit: 1081


View Profile
February 20, 2018, 11:32:08 PM
 #2639

''Nevertheless God exists, and it is as said in the Bible God cannot lie, so he is the truth.'' The logic of religious folks right there.

>The bible says god cannot lie
>Therefore god cannot lie
> I know this because it is said in the bible

There is 1 major problem, though. How do you know what the bible says is actually real? There are hundreds of other religious books and fictional books just like the bible

How do you know the world is real? You experience it that way right? The same with me and God. I have weird experiences, other people as well... and we all agree its God, as we have no other explanation for our sensations. If you would explain it to me how can I explain my feeling of being loved when there is absolutely no rational explanation for it I am all ears.

I might be making that up. But what is the difference if I feel it realisticly? Rational people should try everything, and if there would be a rational reason to believe evolution I would be first to study it. Convince me, or convince yourself to God.

Every single religious person would claim the same but with different gods and religions so clearly what you are experiencing can't be real, at all the others must be false but if you acknowledge that possibility then you understand that what you feel might be false as well. Having weird experiences can have a ton of different causes, the brain is capable of producing illusions so real that you could think they are real, that's why there are diseases like schizophrenia and others similar.

However. Since the things you are expressing are simply your religion, which religion is more accurate? I have shown you the proof that God exists and that evolution is a hoax, but you keep on believing your religion of evolution without God.

Sometime you really need to get out of your religion enough so that you can look at reality.

Cool
Scorpion
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 714
Merit: 516


Binance Exchange The World


View Profile WWW
February 20, 2018, 11:34:37 PM
 #2640

Apes and humans both evolved from primates, humans didn't even from apes. That's a terrible conclusion you can came to without much research or knowledge of the science behind evolution.

████████████▀▀████████████
██████████▀    ▀██████████
████████▀        ▀████████
██████▀     ▄▄     ▀██████
██████▄   ▄████▄   ▄██████
██▀ ▀███▄███▀▀███▄███▀ ▀██
█     █████    █████     █
██▄ ▄███▀███▄▄███▀███▄ ▄██
██████▀   ▀████▀   ▀██████
██████▄     ▀▀     ▄██████
████████▄        ▄████████
██████████▄    ▄██████████
████████████▄▄████████████
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███████████
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███████████
FAST WALLET VERIFICATION
OVER 7 MILLION+ USERS
SECURE AND TRUSTED
███████████
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███████████
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
.JOIN NOW.
Pages: « 1 ... 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 [132] 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 ... 190 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!