Evolution is a hoax

[BADecker]

''They, themselves, say that they don't know.''

''Probably close to less than 5% of the scientists accept evolution theory as accurate. They have scientifically seen the flaws in it.''

Yet you never provided anything close to evidence for these claims. You won't find any evidence because they are false.

''When you rely on the sayings of others without understanding what you are talking about '' I don't understand how computers work yet I don't deny their existence. I might not understand evolution with all the technical details but the concept is extremely easy to understand, you are the only one who denies it, the problem is that you deny it to be able to believe in your fictional god not because you actually thought it was wrong. You already had the idea that it has to be wrong because your god wouldn't exist if it wasnt.

Evolution works. How? Understanding of evolution is evolving.

Scientists not involved in evolution studies simply accept the word of scientists that are. But the scientists that are involved in evolution studies are finding that evolution doesn't work. Their evolution of old evolution talk into new evolution talk simply hasn't come about in great detail yet. So, other scientists who are not evolution scientists continue to believe the unevolved word of the evolution scientists.

Evolution is evolving into something that is impossible in the minds of evolution scientists. These scientists are starting to accept evolution on faith that it MUST be real... rather than on knowledge. One of the rather out-in-the-open ways that I have shown in different posts in this thread is, dating of fossils is so mixed up that there is no clear pattern for how evolution might work by the physical evidence.

How do WE, the more-or-less laymen of science, know this is true? We can see it in many of the books, and in websites that talk about the fallacies of evolution. Once we look at the fallacies, even if we are layman, we in the same way as the scientists that are NOT evolution scientists, see that it takes a whole lot more faith to believe in evolution than it does to believe that evolution is a hoax.

Supposed evidence for evolution is evidence for ways other than evolution, way more than it is evidence for evolution. Evolution people are simply waking up to this fact that has been there all along.

Isn't it about time that you come out of evolution silliness? Join the many people - many of them evolution scientists - who are realizing that evolution has been a big mistake all along.

Evolution is a hoax.

''But the scientists that are involved in evolution studies are finding that evolution doesn't work.'' Where is the evidence for this, though?

''We can see it in many of the books, and in websites that talk about the fallacies of evolution.'' It's hard to find a website that is not religious talking about how evolution is impossible, I wonder why...

Evolution is a fact, explained by the evolution theory which is a scientific theory. A hypothesis is an idea that hasn't been proven yet. If enough evidence accumulates to support a hypothesis, it moves to the next step — known as a theory — in the scientific method and becomes accepted as a valid explanation of a phenomenon.

Tanner further explained that a scientific theory is the framework for observations and facts. Theories may change, or the way that they are interpreted may change, but the facts themselves don't change. Tanner likens theories to a basket in which scientists keep facts and observations that they find. The shape of that basket may change as the scientists learn more and include more facts. "For example, we have ample evidence of traits in populations becoming more or less common over time (evolution), so evolution is a fact but the overarching theories about evolution, the way that we think all of the facts go together might change as new observations of evolution are made.

You ask "Where is the evidence for this, though?" But your eyes forget to look at the post directly above the one wherein you ask this question, to find the answer.

That same post presents a smattering of evolutionists talking about how evolution is little more than faith in its theory. Evolution theory exists; that is fact. The other fact is that it is kept alive as a theory by people who want it to be true... not by any fact of the existence of evolution.

Tanner talks about evolution. He bases his points on the idea of evolution that has been shown to be a metaphysical thing rather than a factual thing. There are reasons other than evolution for Tanner's "For example, we have ample evidence of traits in populations becoming more or less common over time (evolution), so evolution is a fact..." The "overarching theories about evolution" are simply that so little evolution fact exists that evolution is a religion for lack of these fact. See https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1917510.msg29686165#msg29686165, which is only a smattering of logic expressed by the great thinkers of evolution and science.

''It's hard to find a website that is not religious talking about how evolution is impossible, I wonder why...'' And what does badecker do, post a link of a creationist website, what a surprise eh?

Any website can post factual information... even a religious website. However, not all religious websites post factual information.

For example, the religious website that I posted (https://answersingenesis.org/public-school/religion-in-schools/the-religion-of-evolution/) has factual info in it. One of the pieces of factual info in it, is that honest evolutionists know that evolution doesn't really have a leg to stand on.

What does this mean? It means that all the websites and books that promote evolution as fact are religious websites and books. Why? Because they are promoting something (evolution) that doesn't have a leg to stand on.

The hoax of evolution isn't in the theory of evolution, or the talk about supposed evolution findings. The hoax is when the theory and the findings are promoted as fact by evolutionists who know that evolution doesn't have a leg to stand on. For people who believe that evolution is fact, without knowing it from personal observation, study, and thought... these people are religious people regarding evolution.

Evolution is a hoax.



EDIT: Btw, Astargath. Thank you for helping me to show folks that evolution is a hoax.

[Zandar]

Evolution is indeed the biggest hoax there is. If there was it would still be ongoing and yet every human all over the planet is still the same. The changes in nature aren't evolution, it is adaptation. Most scientific facts turn out to be nonsense when examined closely anyway. They are just theories voted by other scientists to be promoted as facts.

[Astargath]

''They, themselves, say that they don't know.''

''Probably close to less than 5% of the scientists accept evolution theory as accurate. They have scientifically seen the flaws in it.''

Yet you never provided anything close to evidence for these claims. You won't find any evidence because they are false.

''When you rely on the sayings of others without understanding what you are talking about '' I don't understand how computers work yet I don't deny their existence. I might not understand evolution with all the technical details but the concept is extremely easy to understand, you are the only one who denies it, the problem is that you deny it to be able to believe in your fictional god not because you actually thought it was wrong. You already had the idea that it has to be wrong because your god wouldn't exist if it wasnt.

Evolution works. How? Understanding of evolution is evolving.

Scientists not involved in evolution studies simply accept the word of scientists that are. But the scientists that are involved in evolution studies are finding that evolution doesn't work. Their evolution of old evolution talk into new evolution talk simply hasn't come about in great detail yet. So, other scientists who are not evolution scientists continue to believe the unevolved word of the evolution scientists.

Evolution is evolving into something that is impossible in the minds of evolution scientists. These scientists are starting to accept evolution on faith that it MUST be real... rather than on knowledge. One of the rather out-in-the-open ways that I have shown in different posts in this thread is, dating of fossils is so mixed up that there is no clear pattern for how evolution might work by the physical evidence.

How do WE, the more-or-less laymen of science, know this is true? We can see it in many of the books, and in websites that talk about the fallacies of evolution. Once we look at the fallacies, even if we are layman, we in the same way as the scientists that are NOT evolution scientists, see that it takes a whole lot more faith to believe in evolution than it does to believe that evolution is a hoax.

Supposed evidence for evolution is evidence for ways other than evolution, way more than it is evidence for evolution. Evolution people are simply waking up to this fact that has been there all along.

Isn't it about time that you come out of evolution silliness? Join the many people - many of them evolution scientists - who are realizing that evolution has been a big mistake all along.

Evolution is a hoax.

''But the scientists that are involved in evolution studies are finding that evolution doesn't work.'' Where is the evidence for this, though?

''We can see it in many of the books, and in websites that talk about the fallacies of evolution.'' It's hard to find a website that is not religious talking about how evolution is impossible, I wonder why...

Evolution is a fact, explained by the evolution theory which is a scientific theory. A hypothesis is an idea that hasn't been proven yet. If enough evidence accumulates to support a hypothesis, it moves to the next step — known as a theory — in the scientific method and becomes accepted as a valid explanation of a phenomenon.

Tanner further explained that a scientific theory is the framework for observations and facts. Theories may change, or the way that they are interpreted may change, but the facts themselves don't change. Tanner likens theories to a basket in which scientists keep facts and observations that they find. The shape of that basket may change as the scientists learn more and include more facts. "For example, we have ample evidence of traits in populations becoming more or less common over time (evolution), so evolution is a fact but the overarching theories about evolution, the way that we think all of the facts go together might change as new observations of evolution are made.

You ask "Where is the evidence for this, though?" But your eyes forget to look at the post directly above the one wherein you ask this question, to find the answer.

That same post presents a smattering of evolutionists talking about how evolution is little more than faith in its theory. Evolution theory exists; that is fact. The other fact is that it is kept alive as a theory by people who want it to be true... not by any fact of the existence of evolution.

Tanner talks about evolution. He bases his points on the idea of evolution that has been shown to be a metaphysical thing rather than a factual thing. There are reasons other than evolution for Tanner's "For example, we have ample evidence of traits in populations becoming more or less common over time (evolution), so evolution is a fact..." The "overarching theories about evolution" are simply that so little evolution fact exists that evolution is a religion for lack of these fact. See https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1917510.msg29686165#msg29686165, which is only a smattering of logic expressed by the great thinkers of evolution and science.

''It's hard to find a website that is not religious talking about how evolution is impossible, I wonder why...'' And what does badecker do, post a link of a creationist website, what a surprise eh?

Any website can post factual information... even a religious website. However, not all religious websites post factual information.

For example, the religious website that I posted (https://answersingenesis.org/public-school/religion-in-schools/the-religion-of-evolution/) has factual info in it. One of the pieces of factual info in it, is that honest evolutionists know that evolution doesn't really have a leg to stand on.

What does this mean? It means that all the websites and books that promote evolution as fact are religious websites and books. Why? Because they are promoting something (evolution) that doesn't have a leg to stand on.

The hoax of evolution isn't in the theory of evolution, or the talk about supposed evolution findings. The hoax is when the theory and the findings are promoted as fact by evolutionists who know that evolution doesn't have a leg to stand on. For people who believe that evolution is fact, without knowing it from personal observation, study, and thought... these people are religious people regarding evolution.

Evolution is a hoax.



EDIT: Btw, Astargath. Thank you for helping me to show folks that evolution is a hoax.

Well, let's dissect the information given in your religious link shall we?

1. Michael Ruse acknowledges that evolution is religious.

Surely just because a professor in philosophy and history says he doesn't believe in evolution it doesn't mean that almost all scientists don't believe in it too.

2. But since evolution asks the same questions as religion—telling us where we came from, where we’re going, and what we should do on the way.

Does evolution tell us where we came from? Not really, that's still up to debate, there are various scientific fields trying to explain how we originated but that's not part of evolution.
It also doesn't tell us where we are going, no one knows what's going to happen, I don't really understand this point.
When does evolution tell you what to do along the way exactly? This is just plain stupid.


So to recap, you claim that 95% or more scientists do not believe in evolution yet you failed to provide evidence for it. The only thing you did is post a link of a religious websites that talks about 3-4 people that do not believe in evolution.

[BADecker]

EDIT: Btw, Astargath. Thank you for helping me to show folks that evolution is a hoax.

Well, let's dissect the information given in your religious link shall we?

1. Michael Ruse acknowledges that evolution is religious.

Surely just because a professor in philosophy and history says he doesn't believe in evolution it doesn't mean that almost all scientists don't believe in it too.

2. But since evolution asks the same questions as religion—telling us where we came from, where we’re going, and what we should do on the way.

Does evolution tell us where we came from? Not really, that's still up to debate, there are various scientific fields trying to explain how we originated but that's not part of evolution.
It also doesn't tell us where we are going, no one knows what's going to happen, I don't really understand this point.
When does evolution tell you what to do along the way exactly? This is just plain stupid.


So to recap, you claim that 95% or more scientists do not believe in evolution yet you failed to provide evidence for it. The only thing you did is post a link of a religious websites that talks about 3-4 people that do not believe in evolution.

Ninety-five percent is way to generous of a number. It is actually so close to 100% that it is almost 100%. The thing that isn't said is that scientists who seem to believe in evolution, don't really. What they believe is that they have found evidence of evolution.

Zandar says it well when he says that they have found evidence of adaptation rather than evolution. If any and all scientists would examine their their so-called evolution in the light of adaptation, they would see that they are only attempting to believe.

If I were to show you and explain to you thousands of websites and books where so-called evolutionists were really only attempting to believe in evolution, but were not really believing it, according to the writings that they provided, you would only downplay the things that I showed you.

You are kinda right in talking religious talk. You are only doing the one thing that you can do... continue to promote evolution in a religious way. What else do you have? Certainly you don't have real evolution science on your side.

I am not going to provide you with more evidence for scientists who believe rather than know. Why not? Because essentially all evolution scientists are believers rather than those who know. Whatever of their writings you look at, you will find that the language they use shows that they are believers rather than knowledgeable "understanderers." It's in the language they use.

Evolution is a hoax.

[Astargath]

EDIT: Btw, Astargath. Thank you for helping me to show folks that evolution is a hoax.

Well, let's dissect the information given in your religious link shall we?

1. Michael Ruse acknowledges that evolution is religious.

Surely just because a professor in philosophy and history says he doesn't believe in evolution it doesn't mean that almost all scientists don't believe in it too.

2. But since evolution asks the same questions as religion—telling us where we came from, where we’re going, and what we should do on the way.

Does evolution tell us where we came from? Not really, that's still up to debate, there are various scientific fields trying to explain how we originated but that's not part of evolution.
It also doesn't tell us where we are going, no one knows what's going to happen, I don't really understand this point.
When does evolution tell you what to do along the way exactly? This is just plain stupid.


So to recap, you claim that 95% or more scientists do not believe in evolution yet you failed to provide evidence for it. The only thing you did is post a link of a religious websites that talks about 3-4 people that do not believe in evolution.

Ninety-five percent is way to generous of a number. It is actually so close to 100% that it is almost 100%. The thing that isn't said is that scientists who seem to believe in evolution, don't really. What they believe is that they have found evidence of evolution.

Zandar says it well when he says that they have found evidence of adaptation rather than evolution. If any and all scientists would examine their their so-called evolution in the light of adaptation, they would see that they are only attempting to believe.

If I were to show you and explain to you thousands of websites and books where so-called evolutionists were really only attempting to believe in evolution, but were not really believing it, according to the writings that they provided, you would only downplay the things that I showed you.

You are kinda right in talking religious talk. You are only doing the one thing that you can do... continue to promote evolution in a religious way. What else do you have? Certainly you don't have real evolution science on your side.

I am not going to provide you with more evidence for scientists who believe rather than know. Why not? Because essentially all evolution scientists are believers rather than those who know. Whatever of their writings you look at, you will find that the language they use shows that they are believers rather than knowledgeable "understanderers." It's in the language they use.

Evolution is a hoax.

You keep saying that and yet you fail to provide any meaningful data to sustain your argument. I also pointed out numerous times that not only scientists say that evolution is a fact, religious people, like you, also accept evolution as fact. In fact more and more every year. Pope Francis and several other popes also accept evolution as a fact and why wouldn't they? It's really hard to keep denying evolution with all the evidence out there. Take a step back and think about that.

[Rsocks]

The theory of evolution is an invention to confuse people's brains

[BADecker]

EDIT: Btw, Astargath. Thank you for helping me to show folks that evolution is a hoax.

Well, let's dissect the information given in your religious link shall we?

1. Michael Ruse acknowledges that evolution is religious.

Surely just because a professor in philosophy and history says he doesn't believe in evolution it doesn't mean that almost all scientists don't believe in it too.

2. But since evolution asks the same questions as religion—telling us where we came from, where we’re going, and what we should do on the way.

Does evolution tell us where we came from? Not really, that's still up to debate, there are various scientific fields trying to explain how we originated but that's not part of evolution.
It also doesn't tell us where we are going, no one knows what's going to happen, I don't really understand this point.
When does evolution tell you what to do along the way exactly? This is just plain stupid.


So to recap, you claim that 95% or more scientists do not believe in evolution yet you failed to provide evidence for it. The only thing you did is post a link of a religious websites that talks about 3-4 people that do not believe in evolution.

Ninety-five percent is way to generous of a number. It is actually so close to 100% that it is almost 100%. The thing that isn't said is that scientists who seem to believe in evolution, don't really. What they believe is that they have found evidence of evolution.

Zandar says it well when he says that they have found evidence of adaptation rather than evolution. If any and all scientists would examine their their so-called evolution in the light of adaptation, they would see that they are only attempting to believe.

If I were to show you and explain to you thousands of websites and books where so-called evolutionists were really only attempting to believe in evolution, but were not really believing it, according to the writings that they provided, you would only downplay the things that I showed you.

You are kinda right in talking religious talk. You are only doing the one thing that you can do... continue to promote evolution in a religious way. What else do you have? Certainly you don't have real evolution science on your side.

I am not going to provide you with more evidence for scientists who believe rather than know. Why not? Because essentially all evolution scientists are believers rather than those who know. Whatever of their writings you look at, you will find that the language they use shows that they are believers rather than knowledgeable "understanderers." It's in the language they use.

Evolution is a hoax.

You keep saying that and yet you fail to provide any meaningful data to sustain your argument. I also pointed out numerous times that not only scientists say that evolution is a fact, religious people, like you, also accept evolution as fact. In fact more and more every year. Pope Francis and several other popes also accept evolution as a fact and why wouldn't they? It's really hard to keep denying evolution with all the evidence out there. Take a step back and think about that.

The goal of Pope Francis and the Church leaders is to rule the world as a nation under their control. They will say anything to achieve this goal.

Since, as Steven Gould said, there is so extremely little SOLID scientific evidence for evolution, and essentially no fact at all, we see that any Church that accepts evolution as fact, is simply a deceptive church.

This is the basis of the fact that evolution is a religion right along with the Pope who supports it. Evolution is part of the religion of the Church.

Wake up and see that you are part of the Church by believing the religion of evolution that the Church supports. And thank you for prompting me to bring the logic of this evolution/Church religion to light, along with the fact that you are a religious person, right in the wording that you used. You said it yourself.

Now that we know that the Church and evolution are not righteous...

Evolution is a hoax.

[Astargath]

EDIT: Btw, Astargath. Thank you for helping me to show folks that evolution is a hoax.

Well, let's dissect the information given in your religious link shall we?

1. Michael Ruse acknowledges that evolution is religious.

Surely just because a professor in philosophy and history says he doesn't believe in evolution it doesn't mean that almost all scientists don't believe in it too.

2. But since evolution asks the same questions as religion—telling us where we came from, where we’re going, and what we should do on the way.

Does evolution tell us where we came from? Not really, that's still up to debate, there are various scientific fields trying to explain how we originated but that's not part of evolution.
It also doesn't tell us where we are going, no one knows what's going to happen, I don't really understand this point.
When does evolution tell you what to do along the way exactly? This is just plain stupid.


So to recap, you claim that 95% or more scientists do not believe in evolution yet you failed to provide evidence for it. The only thing you did is post a link of a religious websites that talks about 3-4 people that do not believe in evolution.

Ninety-five percent is way to generous of a number. It is actually so close to 100% that it is almost 100%. The thing that isn't said is that scientists who seem to believe in evolution, don't really. What they believe is that they have found evidence of evolution.

Zandar says it well when he says that they have found evidence of adaptation rather than evolution. If any and all scientists would examine their their so-called evolution in the light of adaptation, they would see that they are only attempting to believe.

If I were to show you and explain to you thousands of websites and books where so-called evolutionists were really only attempting to believe in evolution, but were not really believing it, according to the writings that they provided, you would only downplay the things that I showed you.

You are kinda right in talking religious talk. You are only doing the one thing that you can do... continue to promote evolution in a religious way. What else do you have? Certainly you don't have real evolution science on your side.

I am not going to provide you with more evidence for scientists who believe rather than know. Why not? Because essentially all evolution scientists are believers rather than those who know. Whatever of their writings you look at, you will find that the language they use shows that they are believers rather than knowledgeable "understanderers." It's in the language they use.

Evolution is a hoax.

You keep saying that and yet you fail to provide any meaningful data to sustain your argument. I also pointed out numerous times that not only scientists say that evolution is a fact, religious people, like you, also accept evolution as fact. In fact more and more every year. Pope Francis and several other popes also accept evolution as a fact and why wouldn't they? It's really hard to keep denying evolution with all the evidence out there. Take a step back and think about that.

The goal of Pope Francis and the Church leaders is to rule the world as a nation under their control. They will say anything to achieve this goal.

Since, as Steven Gould said, there is so extremely little SOLID scientific evidence for evolution, and essentially no fact at all, we see that any Church that accepts evolution as fact, is simply a deceptive church.

This is the basis of the fact that evolution is a religion right along with the Pope who supports it. Evolution is part of the religion of the Church.

Wake up and see that you are part of the Church by believing the religion of evolution that the Church supports. And thank you for prompting me to bring the logic of this evolution/Church religion to light, along with the fact that you are a religious person, right in the wording that you used. You said it yourself.

Now that we know that the Church and evolution are not righteous...

Evolution is a hoax.

Your whole argument is starting to sound like: everyone is wrong but me. All scientists are wrong but they don't know it, all religious people that also support evolution (the majority) are also wrong, even the pope is wrong.

Some people like badecker think that in science, you have a theory, and once it's proven, it becomes a law because laws are the absolute best. That's not how it works. In science, we collect facts, or observations, we use laws to describe them, and a theory to explain them. You don't promote a theory to a lawby proving it. A theory never becomes a law.
Just because it's called a theory of gravity, doesn't mean that it's just a guess. It's been tested. All our observations are supported by it, as well as its predictions that we've tested. Evolution is the same.
The Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection is our best explanation for the fact of evolution. It has been tested and scrutinised for over 150 years, and is supported by all the relevant observations.

If you really wanted to research, you would. There are a ton of examples and evidence that supports evolution.

''There is a species of fish currently in the process of becoming two separate species. There are multiple species of fish which have evolved to tolerate short periods on land.

There is a species of mini horse on an island off America's east coast which genetic testing shows evolved from European stock. (From survivors of a ship wreck.)

In the last 10,400 years evolution has produced a mutation in humans called lactase persistence. Some 90% of adult humans continue to produce this enzyme essential to digesting milk sugar.

And then there are genetic throwbacks who exhibit atavistic characteristics not seen in species for thousands or even millions of years. The webbing between human fingers is generally vestigial, but in some people it is pronounced enough that they may opt for surgical reduction. And others have more than the usual compliment of nipples, and even breasts.''

[leevine77]

I guess the theory of evolution pump up to the question where human come from.? The answered is base on what they think it was, in a possible right solution just to prove human came from this line of evolution. No need to argue with this coz the author was silent.

[GamingBro]

I don't think so because evolution of human and evolution of monkey is different stuff and when i'm looking at my self i can see that many years ago people wasn't the same.

[BADecker]

EDIT: Btw, Astargath. Thank you for helping me to show folks that evolution is a hoax.

Well, let's dissect the information given in your religious link shall we?

1. Michael Ruse acknowledges that evolution is religious.

Surely just because a professor in philosophy and history says he doesn't believe in evolution it doesn't mean that almost all scientists don't believe in it too.

2. But since evolution asks the same questions as religion—telling us where we came from, where we’re going, and what we should do on the way.

Does evolution tell us where we came from? Not really, that's still up to debate, there are various scientific fields trying to explain how we originated but that's not part of evolution.
It also doesn't tell us where we are going, no one knows what's going to happen, I don't really understand this point.
When does evolution tell you what to do along the way exactly? This is just plain stupid.


So to recap, you claim that 95% or more scientists do not believe in evolution yet you failed to provide evidence for it. The only thing you did is post a link of a religious websites that talks about 3-4 people that do not believe in evolution.

Ninety-five percent is way to generous of a number. It is actually so close to 100% that it is almost 100%. The thing that isn't said is that scientists who seem to believe in evolution, don't really. What they believe is that they have found evidence of evolution.

Zandar says it well when he says that they have found evidence of adaptation rather than evolution. If any and all scientists would examine their their so-called evolution in the light of adaptation, they would see that they are only attempting to believe.

If I were to show you and explain to you thousands of websites and books where so-called evolutionists were really only attempting to believe in evolution, but were not really believing it, according to the writings that they provided, you would only downplay the things that I showed you.

You are kinda right in talking religious talk. You are only doing the one thing that you can do... continue to promote evolution in a religious way. What else do you have? Certainly you don't have real evolution science on your side.

I am not going to provide you with more evidence for scientists who believe rather than know. Why not? Because essentially all evolution scientists are believers rather than those who know. Whatever of their writings you look at, you will find that the language they use shows that they are believers rather than knowledgeable "understanderers." It's in the language they use.

Evolution is a hoax.

You keep saying that and yet you fail to provide any meaningful data to sustain your argument. I also pointed out numerous times that not only scientists say that evolution is a fact, religious people, like you, also accept evolution as fact. In fact more and more every year. Pope Francis and several other popes also accept evolution as a fact and why wouldn't they? It's really hard to keep denying evolution with all the evidence out there. Take a step back and think about that.

The goal of Pope Francis and the Church leaders is to rule the world as a nation under their control. They will say anything to achieve this goal.

Since, as Steven Gould said, there is so extremely little SOLID scientific evidence for evolution, and essentially no fact at all, we see that any Church that accepts evolution as fact, is simply a deceptive church.

This is the basis of the fact that evolution is a religion right along with the Pope who supports it. Evolution is part of the religion of the Church.

Wake up and see that you are part of the Church by believing the religion of evolution that the Church supports. And thank you for prompting me to bring the logic of this evolution/Church religion to light, along with the fact that you are a religious person, right in the wording that you used. You said it yourself.

Now that we know that the Church and evolution are not righteous...

Evolution is a hoax.

Your whole argument is starting to sound like: everyone is wrong but me. All scientists are wrong but they don't know it, all religious people that also support evolution (the majority) are also wrong, even the pope is wrong.

Some people like badecker think that in science, you have a theory, and once it's proven, it becomes a law because laws are the absolute best. That's not how it works. In science, we collect facts, or observations, we use laws to describe them, and a theory to explain them. You don't promote a theory to a lawby proving it. A theory never becomes a law.

While you make me the focus, you forget one very important thing. It doesn't matter what I think. All that matters is what is right and what is wrong.

Just because it's called a theory of gravity, doesn't mean that it's just a guess. It's been tested. All our observations are supported by it, as well as its predictions that we've tested. Evolution is the same.
The Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection is our best explanation for the fact of evolution. It has been tested and scrutinised for over 150 years, and is supported by all the relevant observations.

This, also, is where you are wrong. What is really happening is that scientists are taking flawed basic evolution science, and building on it some aspect of science that is true. In other words, since the foundation of evolution is flawed, everything built on it is going to be flawed.

If you really wanted to research, you would. There are a ton of examples and evidence that supports evolution.

''There is a species of fish currently in the process of becoming two separate species. There are multiple species of fish which have evolved to tolerate short periods on land.

Simple adaptation. Not evolution in the sense of evolution theory. Complete misinterpretation by scientists who want evolution to exist really bad.

There is a species of mini horse on an island off America's east coast which genetic testing shows evolved from European stock. (From survivors of a ship wreck.)

In the last 10,400 years evolution has produced a mutation in humans called lactase persistence. Some 90% of adult humans continue to produce this enzyme essential to digesting milk sugar.

And then there are genetic throwbacks who exhibit atavistic characteristics not seen in species for thousands or even millions of years. The webbing between human fingers is generally vestigial, but in some people it is pronounced enough that they may opt for surgical reduction. And others have more than the usual compliment of nipples, and even breasts.''

Change is happening all around us. It doesn't have anything to do with evolution theory as evolutionists state it. How do we know? By the language of fundamental evolution writings. These writings state that they don't know if evolution is factual in the way that they are stating or not. And since they don't know it to be true as they are stating, why would they know it just had to be true at all?

They don't know. They simply wish. They hope. They dream. There is no fact for evolution theory type of evolution.

Evolution theory constantly changes. Tons of theoretical points have been thought up and proven wrong since the time of Darwin. All that there is, is theory stated in the way that it is only ideas that scientists are trying to prove. There is no evolution fact except the fact of evolution theory. Evolution theory factually does exist. Evolution is not known to exist at all.

What we HAVEN'T done in this little post, is to point out all the facts that are against evolution and evolution theory. All we are suggesting is to look at the way in which foundational evolution writings state evolution. They state it is such a way with wording that shows that they do not know if evolution is factual or not. Take the evolution wording apart word by word. The sentences and paragraphs state that they don't know.

Obviously you can find media people who will take evolution and run with it as though it were factual. But the real scientists doing the work realize that their ideas are simply interpretations that may be wrong. Look again at https://answersingenesis.org/public-school/religion-in-schools/the-religion-of-evolution/ which shows some of the honesty that some of the evolutionists are using to show that evolution doesn't have a leg to stand on.

Evolution is a complete and pure nonsensical hoax.

[Astargath]

EDIT: Btw, Astargath. Thank you for helping me to show folks that evolution is a hoax.

Well, let's dissect the information given in your religious link shall we?

1. Michael Ruse acknowledges that evolution is religious.

Surely just because a professor in philosophy and history says he doesn't believe in evolution it doesn't mean that almost all scientists don't believe in it too.

2. But since evolution asks the same questions as religion—telling us where we came from, where we’re going, and what we should do on the way.

Does evolution tell us where we came from? Not really, that's still up to debate, there are various scientific fields trying to explain how we originated but that's not part of evolution.
It also doesn't tell us where we are going, no one knows what's going to happen, I don't really understand this point.
When does evolution tell you what to do along the way exactly? This is just plain stupid.


So to recap, you claim that 95% or more scientists do not believe in evolution yet you failed to provide evidence for it. The only thing you did is post a link of a religious websites that talks about 3-4 people that do not believe in evolution.

Ninety-five percent is way to generous of a number. It is actually so close to 100% that it is almost 100%. The thing that isn't said is that scientists who seem to believe in evolution, don't really. What they believe is that they have found evidence of evolution.

Zandar says it well when he says that they have found evidence of adaptation rather than evolution. If any and all scientists would examine their their so-called evolution in the light of adaptation, they would see that they are only attempting to believe.

If I were to show you and explain to you thousands of websites and books where so-called evolutionists were really only attempting to believe in evolution, but were not really believing it, according to the writings that they provided, you would only downplay the things that I showed you.

You are kinda right in talking religious talk. You are only doing the one thing that you can do... continue to promote evolution in a religious way. What else do you have? Certainly you don't have real evolution science on your side.

I am not going to provide you with more evidence for scientists who believe rather than know. Why not? Because essentially all evolution scientists are believers rather than those who know. Whatever of their writings you look at, you will find that the language they use shows that they are believers rather than knowledgeable "understanderers." It's in the language they use.

Evolution is a hoax.

You keep saying that and yet you fail to provide any meaningful data to sustain your argument. I also pointed out numerous times that not only scientists say that evolution is a fact, religious people, like you, also accept evolution as fact. In fact more and more every year. Pope Francis and several other popes also accept evolution as a fact and why wouldn't they? It's really hard to keep denying evolution with all the evidence out there. Take a step back and think about that.

The goal of Pope Francis and the Church leaders is to rule the world as a nation under their control. They will say anything to achieve this goal.

Since, as Steven Gould said, there is so extremely little SOLID scientific evidence for evolution, and essentially no fact at all, we see that any Church that accepts evolution as fact, is simply a deceptive church.

This is the basis of the fact that evolution is a religion right along with the Pope who supports it. Evolution is part of the religion of the Church.

Wake up and see that you are part of the Church by believing the religion of evolution that the Church supports. And thank you for prompting me to bring the logic of this evolution/Church religion to light, along with the fact that you are a religious person, right in the wording that you used. You said it yourself.

Now that we know that the Church and evolution are not righteous...

Evolution is a hoax.

Your whole argument is starting to sound like: everyone is wrong but me. All scientists are wrong but they don't know it, all religious people that also support evolution (the majority) are also wrong, even the pope is wrong.

Some people like badecker think that in science, you have a theory, and once it's proven, it becomes a law because laws are the absolute best. That's not how it works. In science, we collect facts, or observations, we use laws to describe them, and a theory to explain them. You don't promote a theory to a lawby proving it. A theory never becomes a law.

While you make me the focus, you forget one very important thing. It doesn't matter what I think. All that matters is what is right and what is wrong.

Just because it's called a theory of gravity, doesn't mean that it's just a guess. It's been tested. All our observations are supported by it, as well as its predictions that we've tested. Evolution is the same.
The Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection is our best explanation for the fact of evolution. It has been tested and scrutinised for over 150 years, and is supported by all the relevant observations.

This, also, is where you are wrong. What is really happening is that scientists are taking flawed basic evolution science, and building on it some aspect of science that is true. In other words, since the foundation of evolution is flawed, everything built on it is going to be flawed.

If you really wanted to research, you would. There are a ton of examples and evidence that supports evolution.

''There is a species of fish currently in the process of becoming two separate species. There are multiple species of fish which have evolved to tolerate short periods on land.

Simple adaptation. Not evolution in the sense of evolution theory. Complete misinterpretation by scientists who want evolution to exist really bad.

There is a species of mini horse on an island off America's east coast which genetic testing shows evolved from European stock. (From survivors of a ship wreck.)

In the last 10,400 years evolution has produced a mutation in humans called lactase persistence. Some 90% of adult humans continue to produce this enzyme essential to digesting milk sugar.

And then there are genetic throwbacks who exhibit atavistic characteristics not seen in species for thousands or even millions of years. The webbing between human fingers is generally vestigial, but in some people it is pronounced enough that they may opt for surgical reduction. And others have more than the usual compliment of nipples, and even breasts.''

Change is happening all around us. It doesn't have anything to do with evolution theory as evolutionists state it. How do we know? By the language of fundamental evolution writings. These writings state that they don't know if evolution is factual in the way that they are stating or not. And since they don't know it to be true as they are stating, why would they know it just had to be true at all?

They don't know. They simply wish. They hope. They dream. There is no fact for evolution theory type of evolution.

Evolution theory constantly changes. Tons of theoretical points have been thought up and proven wrong since the time of Darwin. All that there is, is theory stated in the way that it is only ideas that scientists are trying to prove. There is no evolution fact except the fact of evolution theory. Evolution theory factually does exist. Evolution is not known to exist at all.

What we HAVEN'T done in this little post, is to point out all the facts that are against evolution and evolution theory. All we are suggesting is to look at the way in which foundational evolution writings state evolution. They state it is such a way with wording that shows that they do not know if evolution is factual or not. Take the evolution wording apart word by word. The sentences and paragraphs state that they don't know.

Obviously you can find media people who will take evolution and run with it as though it were factual. But the real scientists doing the work realize that their ideas are simply interpretations that may be wrong. Look again at https://answersingenesis.org/public-school/religion-in-schools/the-religion-of-evolution/ which shows some of the honesty that some of the evolutionists are using to show that evolution doesn't have a leg to stand on.

Evolution is a complete and pure nonsensical hoax.

You really just love to spread just plain wrong information, don't you? ''Change is happening all around us. It doesn't have anything to do with evolution theory'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution

Evolution is change in the heritable...

I will comeback to destroy more of your bullshit tomorrow.

[BADecker]

EDIT: Btw, Astargath. Thank you for helping me to show folks that evolution is a hoax.

Well, let's dissect the information given in your religious link shall we?

1. Michael Ruse acknowledges that evolution is religious.

Surely just because a professor in philosophy and history says he doesn't believe in evolution it doesn't mean that almost all scientists don't believe in it too.

2. But since evolution asks the same questions as religion—telling us where we came from, where we’re going, and what we should do on the way.

Does evolution tell us where we came from? Not really, that's still up to debate, there are various scientific fields trying to explain how we originated but that's not part of evolution.
It also doesn't tell us where we are going, no one knows what's going to happen, I don't really understand this point.
When does evolution tell you what to do along the way exactly? This is just plain stupid.


So to recap, you claim that 95% or more scientists do not believe in evolution yet you failed to provide evidence for it. The only thing you did is post a link of a religious websites that talks about 3-4 people that do not believe in evolution.

Ninety-five percent is way to generous of a number. It is actually so close to 100% that it is almost 100%. The thing that isn't said is that scientists who seem to believe in evolution, don't really. What they believe is that they have found evidence of evolution.

Zandar says it well when he says that they have found evidence of adaptation rather than evolution. If any and all scientists would examine their their so-called evolution in the light of adaptation, they would see that they are only attempting to believe.

If I were to show you and explain to you thousands of websites and books where so-called evolutionists were really only attempting to believe in evolution, but were not really believing it, according to the writings that they provided, you would only downplay the things that I showed you.

You are kinda right in talking religious talk. You are only doing the one thing that you can do... continue to promote evolution in a religious way. What else do you have? Certainly you don't have real evolution science on your side.

I am not going to provide you with more evidence for scientists who believe rather than know. Why not? Because essentially all evolution scientists are believers rather than those who know. Whatever of their writings you look at, you will find that the language they use shows that they are believers rather than knowledgeable "understanderers." It's in the language they use.

Evolution is a hoax.

You keep saying that and yet you fail to provide any meaningful data to sustain your argument. I also pointed out numerous times that not only scientists say that evolution is a fact, religious people, like you, also accept evolution as fact. In fact more and more every year. Pope Francis and several other popes also accept evolution as a fact and why wouldn't they? It's really hard to keep denying evolution with all the evidence out there. Take a step back and think about that.

The goal of Pope Francis and the Church leaders is to rule the world as a nation under their control. They will say anything to achieve this goal.

Since, as Steven Gould said, there is so extremely little SOLID scientific evidence for evolution, and essentially no fact at all, we see that any Church that accepts evolution as fact, is simply a deceptive church.

This is the basis of the fact that evolution is a religion right along with the Pope who supports it. Evolution is part of the religion of the Church.

Wake up and see that you are part of the Church by believing the religion of evolution that the Church supports. And thank you for prompting me to bring the logic of this evolution/Church religion to light, along with the fact that you are a religious person, right in the wording that you used. You said it yourself.

Now that we know that the Church and evolution are not righteous...

Evolution is a hoax.

Your whole argument is starting to sound like: everyone is wrong but me. All scientists are wrong but they don't know it, all religious people that also support evolution (the majority) are also wrong, even the pope is wrong.

Some people like badecker think that in science, you have a theory, and once it's proven, it becomes a law because laws are the absolute best. That's not how it works. In science, we collect facts, or observations, we use laws to describe them, and a theory to explain them. You don't promote a theory to a lawby proving it. A theory never becomes a law.

While you make me the focus, you forget one very important thing. It doesn't matter what I think. All that matters is what is right and what is wrong.

Just because it's called a theory of gravity, doesn't mean that it's just a guess. It's been tested. All our observations are supported by it, as well as its predictions that we've tested. Evolution is the same.
The Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection is our best explanation for the fact of evolution. It has been tested and scrutinised for over 150 years, and is supported by all the relevant observations.

This, also, is where you are wrong. What is really happening is that scientists are taking flawed basic evolution science, and building on it some aspect of science that is true. In other words, since the foundation of evolution is flawed, everything built on it is going to be flawed.

If you really wanted to research, you would. There are a ton of examples and evidence that supports evolution.

''There is a species of fish currently in the process of becoming two separate species. There are multiple species of fish which have evolved to tolerate short periods on land.

Simple adaptation. Not evolution in the sense of evolution theory. Complete misinterpretation by scientists who want evolution to exist really bad.

There is a species of mini horse on an island off America's east coast which genetic testing shows evolved from European stock. (From survivors of a ship wreck.)

In the last 10,400 years evolution has produced a mutation in humans called lactase persistence. Some 90% of adult humans continue to produce this enzyme essential to digesting milk sugar.

And then there are genetic throwbacks who exhibit atavistic characteristics not seen in species for thousands or even millions of years. The webbing between human fingers is generally vestigial, but in some people it is pronounced enough that they may opt for surgical reduction. And others have more than the usual compliment of nipples, and even breasts.''

Change is happening all around us. It doesn't have anything to do with evolution theory as evolutionists state it. How do we know? By the language of fundamental evolution writings. These writings state that they don't know if evolution is factual in the way that they are stating or not. And since they don't know it to be true as they are stating, why would they know it just had to be true at all?

They don't know. They simply wish. They hope. They dream. There is no fact for evolution theory type of evolution.

Evolution theory constantly changes. Tons of theoretical points have been thought up and proven wrong since the time of Darwin. All that there is, is theory stated in the way that it is only ideas that scientists are trying to prove. There is no evolution fact except the fact of evolution theory. Evolution theory factually does exist. Evolution is not known to exist at all.

What we HAVEN'T done in this little post, is to point out all the facts that are against evolution and evolution theory. All we are suggesting is to look at the way in which foundational evolution writings state evolution. They state it is such a way with wording that shows that they do not know if evolution is factual or not. Take the evolution wording apart word by word. The sentences and paragraphs state that they don't know.

Obviously you can find media people who will take evolution and run with it as though it were factual. But the real scientists doing the work realize that their ideas are simply interpretations that may be wrong. Look again at https://answersingenesis.org/public-school/religion-in-schools/the-religion-of-evolution/ which shows some of the honesty that some of the evolutionists are using to show that evolution doesn't have a leg to stand on.

Evolution is a complete and pure nonsensical hoax.

You really just love to spread just plain wrong information, don't you? ''Change is happening all around us. It doesn't have anything to do with evolution theory'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution

Evolution is change in the heritable...

I will comeback to destroy more of your bullshit tomorrow.

And now you are finally taking us all the way.

Evolution and change have always been synonymous. But, they have been synonymous with the simple meanings of change. Evolution as change has never been synonymous with evolution theory.

Over the years, science findings have destroyed evolution theory point by point by point. As evolution theory has changed, there is nowhere else for it to go other than to become simple or adaptive change. Finally evolution theory has come full circle. Evolution is change. But that change is neither according to evolution theory, nor to the origins suggested by evolution theory.

It's time for you to wake up and understand what evolution theory really is, and where it comes from and why. It is faith in something so tenuous that it doesn't really exist in reality. Evolution is essentially like a religion. It is a hocus pocus. It is a digging around after ancient bones like they have any kind of meaning for living man. It is becoming like a shaman teaching.

Check, again, https://answersingenesis.org/public-school/religion-in-schools/the-religion-of-evolution/. Look at the evolution believers words in that link, and see what they are saying. Then go on to see that all the basic evolution scientists understand the same thing... that evolution is something that has at best vague evidence, and no fact... no fact other than change and adaptation.

Evolution is a hoax. But worse than that, it is a religion that is becoming akin to the black arts.

[langka1213]

There has been no definite evidence to prove these theories at all. Shouldn't all monkeys have evolved to being man by now.

That's right sir there is no evidence to prove that because it is an theories, but there's a big chance that is theory is true. but for me I don't believe it is true facts.

[Astargath]

''Evolution is change in the heritable characteristics of biological populations over successive generations.''

There is a species of fish currently in the process of becoming two separate species. There are multiple species of fish which have evolved to tolerate short periods on land.

''Simple adaptation. Not evolution in the sense of evolution theory.'' This is exactly evolution in the sense of evolution theory. Becoming a new species is not adaptation.

''There is a species of mini horse on an island off America's east coast which genetic testing shows evolved from European stock. (From survivors of a ship wreck.)

In the last 10,400 years evolution has produced a mutation in humans called lactase persistence. Some 90% of adult humans continue to produce this enzyme essential to digesting milk sugar.

And then there are genetic throwbacks who exhibit atavistic characteristics not seen in species for thousands or even millions of years. The webbing between human fingers is generally vestigial, but in some people it is pronounced enough that they may opt for surgical reduction. And others have more than the usual compliment of nipples, and even breasts.''


All of those are also examples of evolution in the sense of evolution theory.

[BADecker]

''Evolution is change in the heritable characteristics of biological populations over successive generations.''

There is a species of fish currently in the process of becoming two separate species. There are multiple species of fish which have evolved to tolerate short periods on land.

''Simple adaptation. Not evolution in the sense of evolution theory.'' This is exactly evolution in the sense of evolution theory. Becoming a new species is not adaptation.

''There is a species of mini horse on an island off America's east coast which genetic testing shows evolved from European stock. (From survivors of a ship wreck.)

In the last 10,400 years evolution has produced a mutation in humans called lactase persistence. Some 90% of adult humans continue to produce this enzyme essential to digesting milk sugar.

And then there are genetic throwbacks who exhibit atavistic characteristics not seen in species for thousands or even millions of years. The webbing between human fingers is generally vestigial, but in some people it is pronounced enough that they may opt for surgical reduction. And others have more than the usual compliment of nipples, and even breasts.''


All of those are also examples of evolution in the sense of evolution theory.

All those are examples of evolution points that have been disproven or dropped for lack of real evidence as being part of evolution. If you believe them to be true, evolution is at least part of your personal religion.



EDIT: All of the popular science fiction stories have potentially truthful information and science in them. Some of these stories use actual science to make the story seem real. Yet, the story never happened. If it had, it would be science documentary rather than science fiction.

The only reason evolution theory remains is, it has become a popular theory. It never happened. If it had, there would be some scientists that could point to actual, factual happenings that show that evolution happened or is happening. So far, none of the actual factual happenings can factually be attributed to evolution. Why not? Because they fit adaptation or creation better and easier than they fit evolution.

[Vod]

All of those are also examples of evolution in the sense of evolution theory.

All those are examples of evolution points that have been disproven or dropped for lack of real evidence as being part of evolution. If you believe them to be true, evolution is at least part of your personal religion.

SO easy to post that any evidence for evolution has been "disproven" (without backing it up with facts), yet you continue pushing your god fantasy.  :/

[Vod]

How you actually explain bones dating back millions of years?

The same way he "explains" everything else.  With his belief system - no facts.

It works well when he is talking to himself - it only breaks down when he tries to explain it to others.  :/

[BADecker]

All of those are also examples of evolution in the sense of evolution theory.

All those are examples of evolution points that have been disproven or dropped for lack of real evidence as being part of evolution. If you believe them to be true, evolution is at least part of your personal religion.

SO easy to post that any evidence for evolution has been "disproven" (without backing it up with facts), yet you continue pushing your god fantasy.  :/

It's so easy to post that any evidence for evolution has been "proven" (without backing it up with facts), yet you continue pushing your evolution fantasy.

[Astargath]

All of those are also examples of evolution in the sense of evolution theory.

All those are examples of evolution points that have been disproven or dropped for lack of real evidence as being part of evolution. If you believe them to be true, evolution is at least part of your personal religion.

SO easy to post that any evidence for evolution has been "disproven" (without backing it up with facts), yet you continue pushing your god fantasy.  :/

It's so easy to post that any evidence for evolution has been "proven" (without backing it up with facts), yet you continue pushing your evolution fantasy.

Nah, you are just like notbatman, a liar. I posted examples of evolution and you simply said ''All those are examples of evolution points that have been disproven or dropped for lack of real evidence '' Rofl. You don't even have an argument anymore.