Evolution is a hoax

[o_e_l_e_o]

But you haven't provided even one concretely factual piece of evidence for evolution. Not even one! Sll evolution evidence fits something else (like adaptation) better than it fits evolution.

So unlike Przemax, who tries and spectacularly fails to discredit the evidence, you choose just to completely ignore it even exists. I suppose that's almost a smarter way of approaching it, since you know your factless arguments will get utterly destroyed if you engage with the evidence.

[popcorn1]

But you haven't provided even one concretely factual piece of evidence for evolution. Not even one! Sll evolution evidence fits something else (like adaptation) better than it fits evolution.

So unlike Przemax, who tries and spectacularly fails to discredit the evidence, you choose just to completely ignore it even exists. I suppose that's almost a smarter way of approaching it, since you know your factless arguments will get utterly destroyed if you engage with the evidence.

The earth was made in 6 days  YES he got tired on the 7th day so we all get to rest ..

Evolution in Action: Ring Species - YouTube
Video for salamander evolution▶ 3:17
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PjcFSy1KCTI
17 Sep 2007 - Uploaded by phoenixshade3
This video presents to the layman an example of evolution as an ongoing process: The Ensatina salamanders ..

Have you ever thought maybe religion was always meant to be WHY you ask..
Well maybe the earth programmed us to have religion so we could kill each other thus lowering the population thus keeping the earth lower of humans ..

You are programmed to eat ? so why do you put food to your mouth because your programmed to eat .
So maybe religion was always meant to be so the population could kill each other because if you look around we humans act like a cancer to the earth..

Don't you think it's crazy to be killing each other over something that's not there?..
So maybe the earth programmed human brains to squabble over NOTHING to lower the population ..

Imagine if we never had wars how much would this planet have on it's back ..

As bitcoin evolved       So what about the power consumption   

Evolution is fact      EARTH MADE US ..So worship the earth if you likes because the earth is your creator ..
I just find it very strange how people can kill each other over something that's not there      VERY MAD humans indeed  ..

[Przemax]

But you haven't provided even one concretely factual piece of evidence for evolution. Not even one! Sll evolution evidence fits something else (like adaptation) better than it fits evolution.

So unlike Przemax, who tries and spectacularly fails to discredit the evidence, you choose just to completely ignore it even exists. I suppose that's almost a smarter way of approaching it, since you know your factless arguments will get utterly destroyed if you engage with the evidence.

No... It is not me who fail to discredit. It was you failed to provide it and you called redoing the experiment when you showed just different experiments. You failed to stay on track and you manipulated the reader - of my credibility when it was you who was ought to be thought what is to redo the experiment.

It is you who fails to recognize what is science and what is experiment and what is the need of critical inquiry when it comes to science.

You told me you had the proves they had redone the experiments when the scientific experiment are ought to have the repeatability. You seem to don't know what that is.

You seem to be fine with the antiscientific premise that it is ok for an experiment to give the different result each time. It is not the same experiment if it gives the different results. If the results are somehow different one as a scientist should be extremely cautious why. And you just bash me for being cautious - when that is what scientific premise is all about - being critical and cautious.

Failing to see that - you call me in the whole dialogue not knowing how science works when it is you who do not event understand what is an experiment and how to redo it.

All you achieved is me wanting to puke how insencere a human being can be. I get the goose bumps once I see such a people that does not know the importance of honesty, critical thinking if it comes to science, having the importance to define the matters what they speak - the core values of a good scientist and call others - non scientific, because they have that values and they do not. Such a behaviour would be mind blowing, if that would not be so often in a carnal human mind without the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

I am just discouraged heavily to even want to show you how many logical error you had made. It would take a loooooong time and would achieve nothing, because people in this forum might be ignorant, so you appealing to their ignorance might have worked. Sadly. Know one thing... Every dirty tricks and every lie is seen by the almighty..... You will be really shocked in the end.....

And yes sadly - that might be called scientific if one makes the re-examination of experiment and they get the right result - the most recent is being thought to be the truth, so people ignore the others. You can fake the results of the last experiment - that is from 2008. And if everyone would be discouraged from redoing the experiment - it sadly will be called a science. It would have nothing to do with honesty, truth and critical thinking, but it will sadly be called science... until someone would have enough courage and support to prove it is wrong, but it would mean nothing if noone would be willing to publish it.

You are right... It is scientific on paper. It defies and corrupts everything that science stands for, but if someone would be judged in court he could defend the case - that yes it is scientific on paper.

And every little evolutionist would call themselves scientist because they are only quoting the "scientific work" they had not lied themselves. Such a white washing remind me of Nazis, that were just saying - I was only following orders... I didnt knew it was a fraud - I was only quoting orders.... I mean papers, without checking their vailidty. They wouldnt lie to me would they? Like nazis would say - they would not want any bad things would they?

If you are not disgusted by that...... What can I say.......

[Astargath]

When are you providing proof of creationism?

The start of the proof for creationism is showing the fact that evolution is a hoax. The rest of the proof is for a different topic.

It's really not and you never proved that evolution is a hoax. You are like notbatman, you think somehow evolution is a global conspiracy for some unknown reason.

[squog]

Why there are still monkeys around if they were part of our evolutionary beginnings ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cz0gFarCfBE

Actually they're still monkeys because they could still survive their environment with the genetic mutation they still have. Much like the crocodile, it's design is from the basic dinosaur's but still they didn't become birds at all. Much like how we breed toy dogs but there are still wolves. The reason a species survives because they could still adapt to their environment. Evolution actually explains all these. I just hope we don't put creationism into this.

[o_e_l_e_o]

No... It is not me who fail to discredit. It was you failed to provide it and you called redoing the experiment when you showed just different experiments. You failed to stay on track and you manipulated the reader - of my credibility when it was you who was ought to be thought what is to redo the experiment.

It is you who fails to recognize what is science and what is experiment and what is the need of critical inquiry when it comes to science.

You told me you had the proves they had redone the experiments when the scientific experiment are ought to have the repeatability. You seem to don't know what that is.

You seem to be fine with the antiscientific premise that it is ok for an experiment to give the different result each time. It is not the same experiment if it gives the different results. If the results are somehow different one as a scientist should be extremely cautious why. And you just bash me for being cautious - when that is what scientific premise is all about - being critical and cautious.

Again, I assumed you understood that experiments that are repeated and redone are generally modified in some small ways to prove some new points. There is zero point exactly repeating an experiment that has already been proved. This is basic science 101. Again, my mistake for assuming you understood this.

My original points still stand, however. There are literally hundreds of experiments of different early Earth conditions, all producing amino acids. You have failed to discredit this in any way shape or form.

All you achieved is me wanting to puke how insencere a human being can be. I get the goose bumps once I see such a people that does not know the importance of honesty, critical thinking if it comes to science, having the importance to define the matters what they speak - the core values of a good scientist and others non scientific because they have that values.

I am just discouraged heavily to even want to show you how many logical error you had made. It would take a loooooong time and would achieve nothing, because people in this forum might be ignorant, so you appealing to their ignorance might have worked. Sadly. Know one thing... Every dirty tricks and every lie is seen by the almighty..... You will be really shocked in the end.....

And yes sadly - that might be called scientific if one makes experiment until finally they get the right result - the most recent is being thought to be the truth, so people ignore the others. I know. You can fake the results of the last experiment - that is from 2008. And if everyone would be discouraged from redoing the experiment - it sadly will be called a science. It would have nothing to do with honesty, truth and critical thinking, but it will sadly be called science...

You are right... It is scientific on paper. It defies and corrupts everything that science stands for, but if someone would be judged in court he could defend the case - that yes it is scientific on paper.

And every little evolutionist would call themselves scientist because they are only quoting the "scientific work" they had not lied themselves. Such a white washing resembles me of Nazi's that were just saying - I was only following orders... I didnt knew it was a fraud - I was only quoting orders.... I mean papers, without checking their vailidty. They wouldnt lie to me would they? Like nazis would say - they would not want any bad things would they?

If you are not disgusted by that...... What can I say.......

Incoherent rambling. Invoking Godwin's Law is widely accepted to mean you have lost the argument.

I would ask for maybe the tenth time (I've lost count) for you to provide a single shred of evidence for your position, but I know that you have none. Unless you can provide some new evidence, rather than just rambling nonsensically about the Nazis, this argument is over.

[Przemax]

There is zero point exactly repeating an experiment that has already been proved

Yeah.... It has been proved to have produced 5 amino acids........................ It was an experiment with a failed premise. And yet you say the what you call experiments with successful premise of reaching 20 amino acids are based on this experiment? How? If one is a failure and the other is supposed success? Those are clearly not the same thing. By their definition.

And yet..... yet you said they did redo the experiment. Man.... I guess you do not know what are we even talking about.... Do you? It was not disproven to not produce the 5 amino acids. It was re-examined not to produce 5 amino acids, in a scientific theory - to disprove it they would have to redo the experiment exactly how it was intentionally made - that you failed to deliver that they did. If the problem was the aparature to find the traces of amino acids - it should pose no problem the experiment should confirm their re-evaluation of experiment. That is so simple as that...... What don't you understand?

Changed experiment is NOT THE SAME EXPERIMENT......... FFS!!!!

Again, my mistake for assuming you understood this.

WTF MAN.... You do not even understand the scientific theory and you constantly harass me..... That I don't know it. You are annoying......

IM DONE..... Your constant ill treating your debater and not understanding the principles of what we are talking about makes IT POINTLESS.

[Astargath]

There is zero point exactly repeating an experiment that has already been proved

Yeah.... It has been proved to have produced 5 amino acids........................ And yet..... yet you said they did redo the experiment. Man.... I guess you do not know what are we even talking about.... Do you?

Again, my mistake for assuming you understood this.

WTF MAN.... You do not even understand the scientific theory and you constantly harass me..... That I don't know it. You are annoying......

IM DONE..... Your constant ill treating your debater and not understanding the principles of what we are talking about makes IT POINTLESS.

So you admit it did produce amino acids? We are done, then. Now we are waiting for your evidence.

[o_e_l_e_o]

There is zero point exactly repeating an experiment that has already been proved

Yeah.... It has been proved to have produced 5 amino acids........................ And yet..... yet you said they did redo the experiment. Man.... I guess you do not know what are we even talking about.... Do you?

Again, my mistake for assuming you understood this.

WTF MAN.... You do not even understand the scientific theory and you constantly harass me..... That I don't know it. You are annoying......

IM DONE..... Your constant ill treating your debater and not understanding the principles of what we are talking about makes IT POINTLESS.

So you admit it did produce amino acids? We are done, then. Now we are waiting for your evidence.

It took a while of going in increasingly moronic circles, but we got there in the end. He finally accept the facts.

Also, if the past 30-ish posts taught us anything, it is that you will be waiting a loooong time for any creationist evidence whatsoever.

[Przemax]

There is zero point exactly repeating an experiment that has already been proved

Yeah.... It has been proved to have produced 5 amino acids........................ And yet..... yet you said they did redo the experiment. Man.... I guess you do not know what are we even talking about.... Do you?

Again, my mistake for assuming you understood this.

WTF MAN.... You do not even understand the scientific theory and you constantly harass me..... That I don't know it. You are annoying......

IM DONE..... Your constant ill treating your debater and not understanding the principles of what we are talking about makes IT POINTLESS.

So you admit it did produce amino acids? We are done, then. Now we are waiting for your evidence.

It took a while of going in increasingly moronic circles, but we got there in the end. He finally accept the facts.

Also, if the past 30-ish posts taught us anything, it is that you will be waiting a loooong time for any creationist evidence whatsoever.

There was no other circle than in your head ok? All you can do is insulting your debater... Thats all you are suceeding in. And yes i feel enoughly insulted.

So you admit it did produce amino acids? We are done, then. Now we are waiting for your evidence.

What? Do you even know what is the debate about? Wheter the Miller experiment was proven to yield more than 20 amino acids. Ofcourse I claim that experiment had yielded amino acids? It was not proven to give more than 20 amino acids, it was ofcourse proven to yield some amino acids. Because their re-evaluation is not based on the scientific method - redoing the tests so that it yield the repeatable results.

Making fools from yourself by pretending not to understand what are we talking about will not make you truthful. It could only make people angry at you. That you had suceeded in.

[o_e_l_e_o]

There was no other circle than in your head ok? All you can do is insulting your debater... Thats all you are suceeding in. And yes i feel enoughly insulted.

You compare me to a Nazi then complain about being insulted? Wow.

[Przemax]

There was no other circle than in your head ok? All you can do is insulting your debater... Thats all you are suceeding in. And yes i feel enoughly insulted.

You compare me to a Nazi then complain about being insulted? Wow.

Ok I insulted you. Once... And you did that constantly.

[o_e_l_e_o]

There was no other circle than in your head ok? All you can do is insulting your debater... Thats all you are suceeding in. And yes i feel enoughly insulted.

You compare me to a Nazi then complain about being insulted? Wow.

Ok I insulted you. Once... And you did that constantly.

It was not a lie to point out that you do not understand the scientific process.

[Przemax]

There was no other circle than in your head ok? All you can do is insulting your debater... Thats all you are suceeding in. And yes i feel enoughly insulted.

You compare me to a Nazi then complain about being insulted? Wow.

Ok I insulted you. Once... And you did that constantly.

It was not a lie to point out that you do not understand the scientific process.

changed experiment is not the same experiment. Failed experiment is not the same as succesful experiment. If one denies a simple logical and language constructs like you do - there is no point in even talking to such a person because he is illogical.

If one denies language and his rules, you cannot convince him to stick to rules of logic and language using the language and logic that you constantly violate by calling things the same when they are not the same.

[o_e_l_e_o]

There was no other circle than in your head ok? All you can do is insulting your debater... Thats all you are suceeding in. And yes i feel enoughly insulted.

You compare me to a Nazi then complain about being insulted? Wow.

Ok I insulted you. Once... And you did that constantly.

It was not a lie to point out that you do not understand the scientific process.

changed experiment is not the same experiment. Failed experiment is not the same as succesful experiment. If one denies a simple logical and language constructs like you do - there is no point in even talking to such a person because he is illogical.

If one denies language and his rules, you cannot convince him to stick to rules of logic and language using the language and logic that you constantly violate by calling things the same when they are not the same.

As I explained above, I was using general scientific terminology, and it was my mistake for assuming you understood that.

Again, I assumed you understood that experiments that are repeated and redone are generally modified in some small ways to prove some new points. There is zero point exactly repeating an experiment that has already been proved. This is basic science 101. Again, my mistake for assuming you understood this.

My original points still stand, however. There are literally hundreds of experiments of different early Earth conditions, all producing amino acids. You have failed to discredit this in any way shape or form.

[Przemax]

There was no other circle than in your head ok? All you can do is insulting your debater... Thats all you are suceeding in. And yes i feel enoughly insulted.

You compare me to a Nazi then complain about being insulted? Wow.

Ok I insulted you. Once... And you did that constantly.

It was not a lie to point out that you do not understand the scientific process.

changed experiment is not the same experiment. Failed experiment is not the same as succesful experiment. If one denies a simple logical and language constructs like you do - there is no point in even talking to such a person because he is illogical.

If one denies language and his rules, you cannot convince him to stick to rules of logic and language using the language and logic that you constantly violate by calling things the same when they are not the same.

As I explained above, I was using general scientific terminology, and it was my mistake for assuming you understood that.

Again, I assumed you understood that experiments that are repeated and redone are generally modified in some small ways to prove some new points. There is zero point exactly repeating an experiment that has already been proved. This is basic science 101. Again, my mistake for assuming you understood this.

My original points still stand, however. There are literally hundreds of experiments of different early Earth conditions, all producing amino acids. You have failed to discredit this in any way shape or form.

Those are wrong premises. You cannot assume the changed experiments are the same experiments... Repeated means repeated. Should I give you dictionary? It means making the same once again.........

You have just a big problems with words.... You need better dictionaries. You cannot say something is repeated when it is not repeated.... clearly........

Maybe they taught you wrong that words can be interpreted as you please but that makes unable to communicate with the outside world ok?

I dont know what they have taught you - but that is clearly violating the rules of logic and language.

[Astargath]

There was no other circle than in your head ok? All you can do is insulting your debater... Thats all you are suceeding in. And yes i feel enoughly insulted.

You compare me to a Nazi then complain about being insulted? Wow.

Ok I insulted you. Once... And you did that constantly.

It was not a lie to point out that you do not understand the scientific process.

changed experiment is not the same experiment. Failed experiment is not the same as succesful experiment. If one denies a simple logical and language constructs like you do - there is no point in even talking to such a person because he is illogical.

If one denies language and his rules, you cannot convince him to stick to rules of logic and language using the language and logic that you constantly violate by calling things the same when they are not the same.

As I explained above, I was using general scientific terminology, and it was my mistake for assuming you understood that.

Again, I assumed you understood that experiments that are repeated and redone are generally modified in some small ways to prove some new points. There is zero point exactly repeating an experiment that has already been proved. This is basic science 101. Again, my mistake for assuming you understood this.

My original points still stand, however. There are literally hundreds of experiments of different early Earth conditions, all producing amino acids. You have failed to discredit this in any way shape or form.

Those are wrong premises. You cannot assume the changed experiments and not the same experiments... Repeated means repeated. Should I give you dictionary? It means making the same once again.........

You have just a big problems with words.... You need better dictionaries. You cannot say something is repeated when it is not repeated.... clearly........

Maybe they taught you wrong that words can be interpreted as you please but that makes unable to communicate with the outside world ok?

I dont know what they have taught you - but that is clearly violating the rules of logic and language.

But the evidence for creationism, we are still waiting.

[Przemax]

There was no other circle than in your head ok? All you can do is insulting your debater... Thats all you are suceeding in. And yes i feel enoughly insulted.

You compare me to a Nazi then complain about being insulted? Wow.

Ok I insulted you. Once... And you did that constantly.

It was not a lie to point out that you do not understand the scientific process.

changed experiment is not the same experiment. Failed experiment is not the same as succesful experiment. If one denies a simple logical and language constructs like you do - there is no point in even talking to such a person because he is illogical.

If one denies language and his rules, you cannot convince him to stick to rules of logic and language using the language and logic that you constantly violate by calling things the same when they are not the same.

As I explained above, I was using general scientific terminology, and it was my mistake for assuming you understood that.

Again, I assumed you understood that experiments that are repeated and redone are generally modified in some small ways to prove some new points. There is zero point exactly repeating an experiment that has already been proved. This is basic science 101. Again, my mistake for assuming you understood this.

My original points still stand, however. There are literally hundreds of experiments of different early Earth conditions, all producing amino acids. You have failed to discredit this in any way shape or form.

Those are wrong premises. You cannot assume the changed experiments and not the same experiments... Repeated means repeated. Should I give you dictionary? It means making the same once again.........

You have just a big problems with words.... You need better dictionaries. You cannot say something is repeated when it is not repeated.... clearly........

Maybe they taught you wrong that words can be interpreted as you please but that makes unable to communicate with the outside world ok?

I dont know what they have taught you - but that is clearly violating the rules of logic and language.

But the evidence for creationism, we are still waiting.

Again this is wrong. Logic implies something is wrong or right. It cannot be almost right because someone is wrong. Do you even understand such a simple rules of truth? Just because I might be wrong does not make YOU RIGHT? Ok? Or maybe you are not interested in being right....

[o_e_l_e_o]

Those are wrong premises. You cannot assume the changed experiments and not the same experiments... Repeated means repeated. Should I give you dictionary? It means making the same once again.........

You have just a big problems with words.... You need better dictionaries. You cannot say something is repeated when it is not repeated.... clearly........

You've made it abundantly clear you don't understand the scientific process or scientific terminology. You can stop repeating the same incorrect point over and over again. It's boring.

Now, if you would like to actually disprove any of the studies or offer some of your own evidence, rather than squabbling about terminology, I'm listening. If not, I'll assume that you agree with me regarding the spontaneous production of amino acids.

[Przemax]

Those are wrong premises. You cannot assume the changed experiments and not the same experiments... Repeated means repeated. Should I give you dictionary? It means making the same once again.........

You have just a big problems with words.... You need better dictionaries. You cannot say something is repeated when it is not repeated.... clearly........

You've made it abundantly clear you don't understand the scientific process. You can stop repeating the same incorrect point over and over again. It's boring.

No my friend you dont understand the process... You repeat the experiment wheter it is boring or not. It is either succesfull or not.

If you make another experiment it is not the same experiment . It is a rules of language and scientific methology uses rules of language and logic. Scientific theory cannot violate the rules of logic.

Now, if you would like to actually disprove any of the studies or offer some of your own evidence, rather than squabbling about terminology, I'm listening. If not, I'll assume that you agree with me regarding the spontaneous production of amino acids.

Lets assume im deluded and complete moron. That does not make you right.