Bitcoin Forum
November 18, 2018, 07:08:17 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.17.0 [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 [179] 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Evolution is a hoax  (Read 82478 times)
twthmoses
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 300
Merit: 103


View Profile
September 07, 2018, 06:46:20 AM
Merited by Astargath (2)
 #3561

So I am finally shaking the foundations of your evolution religion! Good. You just might come to reality and realize evolution is a hoax.

Where is your example of beneficial mutation? Just because a bunch of people think that a mutation might be beneficial, do we take a vote to see who is right? How do we know that a critter thinks that the change is beneficial?

If a fish grew legs via evolution, where did the legs start? They started as nubs, or even less. No benefit in nubs. Do you think the fish foresaw that one of its descendants thousands or hundreds of thousands of years later would benefit from legs?

Where are your DNA samples for any of the fossils that are considered missing links? Without them, there is no way to tell that all the so-called missing links were not their own animal brought about by some non-evolution method that we don't understand yet.

What about the fact that there are multitudes of fossil creatures that just appeared, fully developed, without something to have developed from?

Where is your proof of even one pure random happening, so that we can see that there is a possibility that things were not programmed to exist as they are? After all, physics doesn't deviate in producing results. If it did, nobody could expect to ever get the same result from the same scientific experiment.

Where is natural selection? After all, nature has made multitudes of fantastic forms of life. Scientists and engineers can't make even one. And nature has fantastic reproduction in all its life forms. Scientists don't even entirely understand how it works. Why is nature so smart beyond all scientists and engineers?

When you look at the answers evolution people give to these and many other questions, you don't even realize that the answers skirt the questions, rather than answering them. But that is all right for you. You need to keep your evolution religion intact, right?

Evolution isn't just a hoax. It's a complete fabrication.

Cool

You have points in your questions, and even if answers skirt the questions, as you say, how come you so easily accept another solution to the questions, one which has absolutely zero proof?  Why don’t you apply the same suspicion and scrutiny to this solution?

500 years ago, we did not even know electricity existed. Might have experienced it via static electricity, but did not really know what it was.  Just because we don’t know – yet – does not mean it is not true. 2-4000 years ago, people believed in a multitude of gods, as an absolutely undisputed fact. They would think you were crazy if you told them there was only one. How were they less correct vs. your beliefs now? I think you would say they are, because it’s obvious and maybe even downright insane to you – but prove it to me!

Just because scientists and engineers can’t make life yet, has zero to do with if any given thing is true or not.

│      Whitepaper      │              BITHOST                          The Coin With Implemented Project            │      Announce      │
―――――            COMPLETE SOLUTION FOR HOSTING WITH CRYPTOCURRENCY            ―――――
│     Telegram     │     Twitter     │     Facebook     │     Github     │     Discord     │
1542524897
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1542524897

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1542524897
Reply with quote  #2

1542524897
Report to moderator
1542524897
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1542524897

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1542524897
Reply with quote  #2

1542524897
Report to moderator
1542524897
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1542524897

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1542524897
Reply with quote  #2

1542524897
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1542524897
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1542524897

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1542524897
Reply with quote  #2

1542524897
Report to moderator
Astargath
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 910
Merit: 589


View Profile
September 07, 2018, 12:18:33 PM
 #3562

So I am finally shaking the foundations of your evolution religion! Good. You just might come to reality and realize evolution is a hoax.

Where is your example of beneficial mutation? Just because a bunch of people think that a mutation might be beneficial, do we take a vote to see who is right? How do we know that a critter thinks that the change is beneficial?

If a fish grew legs via evolution, where did the legs start? They started as nubs, or even less. No benefit in nubs. Do you think the fish foresaw that one of its descendants thousands or hundreds of thousands of years later would benefit from legs?

Where are your DNA samples for any of the fossils that are considered missing links? Without them, there is no way to tell that all the so-called missing links were not their own animal brought about by some non-evolution method that we don't understand yet.

What about the fact that there are multitudes of fossil creatures that just appeared, fully developed, without something to have developed from?

Where is your proof of even one pure random happening, so that we can see that there is a possibility that things were not programmed to exist as they are? After all, physics doesn't deviate in producing results. If it did, nobody could expect to ever get the same result from the same scientific experiment.

Where is natural selection? After all, nature has made multitudes of fantastic forms of life. Scientists and engineers can't make even one. And nature has fantastic reproduction in all its life forms. Scientists don't even entirely understand how it works. Why is nature so smart beyond all scientists and engineers?

When you look at the answers evolution people give to these and many other questions, you don't even realize that the answers skirt the questions, rather than answering them. But that is all right for you. You need to keep your evolution religion intact, right?

Evolution isn't just a hoax. It's a complete fabrication.

Cool

You have points in your questions, and even if answers skirt the questions, as you say, how come you so easily accept another solution to the questions, one which has absolutely zero proof?  Why don’t you apply the same suspicion and scrutiny to this solution?

500 years ago, we did not even know electricity existed. Might have experienced it via static electricity, but did not really know what it was.  Just because we don’t know – yet – does not mean it is not true. 2-4000 years ago, people believed in a multitude of gods, as an absolutely undisputed fact. They would think you were crazy if you told them there was only one. How were they less correct vs. your beliefs now? I think you would say they are, because it’s obvious and maybe even downright insane to you – but prove it to me!

Just because scientists and engineers can’t make life yet, has zero to do with if any given thing is true or not.


That's exactly the problem with these people. They are extremely skeptical about evolution, for example and yet accept other ridiculous claims so easily. He said numerous times that he knows the bible is real because ''eye witnesses'' rofl.



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



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

Activity: 1848
Merit: 1081


View Profile
September 07, 2018, 03:24:11 PM
 #3563

So I am finally shaking the foundations of your evolution religion! Good. You just might come to reality and realize evolution is a hoax.

Where is your example of beneficial mutation? Just because a bunch of people think that a mutation might be beneficial, do we take a vote to see who is right? How do we know that a critter thinks that the change is beneficial?

If a fish grew legs via evolution, where did the legs start? They started as nubs, or even less. No benefit in nubs. Do you think the fish foresaw that one of its descendants thousands or hundreds of thousands of years later would benefit from legs?

Where are your DNA samples for any of the fossils that are considered missing links? Without them, there is no way to tell that all the so-called missing links were not their own animal brought about by some non-evolution method that we don't understand yet.

What about the fact that there are multitudes of fossil creatures that just appeared, fully developed, without something to have developed from?

Where is your proof of even one pure random happening, so that we can see that there is a possibility that things were not programmed to exist as they are? After all, physics doesn't deviate in producing results. If it did, nobody could expect to ever get the same result from the same scientific experiment.

Where is natural selection? After all, nature has made multitudes of fantastic forms of life. Scientists and engineers can't make even one. And nature has fantastic reproduction in all its life forms. Scientists don't even entirely understand how it works. Why is nature so smart beyond all scientists and engineers?

When you look at the answers evolution people give to these and many other questions, you don't even realize that the answers skirt the questions, rather than answering them. But that is all right for you. You need to keep your evolution religion intact, right?

Evolution isn't just a hoax. It's a complete fabrication.

Cool

You have points in your questions, and even if answers skirt the questions, as you say, how come you so easily accept another solution to the questions, one which has absolutely zero proof?  Why don’t you apply the same suspicion and scrutiny to this solution?

500 years ago, we did not even know electricity existed. Might have experienced it via static electricity, but did not really know what it was.  Just because we don’t know – yet – does not mean it is not true. 2-4000 years ago, people believed in a multitude of gods, as an absolutely undisputed fact. They would think you were crazy if you told them there was only one. How were they less correct vs. your beliefs now? I think you would say they are, because it’s obvious and maybe even downright insane to you – but prove it to me!

Just because scientists and engineers can’t make life yet, has zero to do with if any given thing is true or not.


The ancient Greeks and Egyptians knew of electricity.

The whole point isn't about accepting something other than evolution. The whole point is finding a reason to accept evolution.

There are so many things against evolution as it is expressed in its theory, that the whole theory should be scrapped. The evolution story keeps changing because it is make believe. In fact, we can't even imagine a form of evolution that would fit the facts of reality.

The point is, if you want evolution to be real, find some way to formulate it that makes sense and fits the facts. If you can't, drop it, and find what is real. Evolution doesn't fit the facts, and hasn't even been proven to exist, once. All the talk about evolution is simply talk without proof.

Evolution is a hoax.

Cool

EDIT: Do you see what you and Astargath (in the previous post) are doing? You can't answer the questions that I asked, scientifically. So you bring my religion into it. By bringing religion into it, rather than answering scientifically, you are showing what you really think evolution is. To you, evolution seems to be a religion.
af_newbie
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1498
Merit: 1137



View Profile
September 07, 2018, 04:32:17 PM
 #3564

So I am finally shaking the foundations of your evolution religion! Good. You just might come to reality and realize evolution is a hoax.

Where is your example of beneficial mutation? Just because a bunch of people think that a mutation might be beneficial, do we take a vote to see who is right? How do we know that a critter thinks that the change is beneficial?

If a fish grew legs via evolution, where did the legs start? They started as nubs, or even less. No benefit in nubs. Do you think the fish foresaw that one of its descendants thousands or hundreds of thousands of years later would benefit from legs?

Where are your DNA samples for any of the fossils that are considered missing links? Without them, there is no way to tell that all the so-called missing links were not their own animal brought about by some non-evolution method that we don't understand yet.

What about the fact that there are multitudes of fossil creatures that just appeared, fully developed, without something to have developed from?

Where is your proof of even one pure random happening, so that we can see that there is a possibility that things were not programmed to exist as they are? After all, physics doesn't deviate in producing results. If it did, nobody could expect to ever get the same result from the same scientific experiment.

Where is natural selection? After all, nature has made multitudes of fantastic forms of life. Scientists and engineers can't make even one. And nature has fantastic reproduction in all its life forms. Scientists don't even entirely understand how it works. Why is nature so smart beyond all scientists and engineers?

When you look at the answers evolution people give to these and many other questions, you don't even realize that the answers skirt the questions, rather than answering them. But that is all right for you. You need to keep your evolution religion intact, right?

Evolution isn't just a hoax. It's a complete fabrication.

Cool

You have points in your questions, and even if answers skirt the questions, as you say, how come you so easily accept another solution to the questions, one which has absolutely zero proof?  Why don’t you apply the same suspicion and scrutiny to this solution?

500 years ago, we did not even know electricity existed. Might have experienced it via static electricity, but did not really know what it was.  Just because we don’t know – yet – does not mean it is not true. 2-4000 years ago, people believed in a multitude of gods, as an absolutely undisputed fact. They would think you were crazy if you told them there was only one. How were they less correct vs. your beliefs now? I think you would say they are, because it’s obvious and maybe even downright insane to you – but prove it to me!

Just because scientists and engineers can’t make life yet, has zero to do with if any given thing is true or not.


The ancient Greeks and Egyptians knew of electricity.

blah, blah...ya-ba-da-ba-doo, and other flintstones shit..., blah, blah
They knew Zeus was angry every time there was lightning.  That is how much they knew of electricity.

BADecker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848
Merit: 1081


View Profile
September 08, 2018, 01:29:05 AM
 #3565

They knew Zeus was angry every time there was lightning.  That is how much they knew of electricity.



Wow! Just wow! I knew you guys were treating evolution as a religion, in a religious way. But I didn't really expect one of you to actually come out and express it!

Evolution is a hoax, and you just showed that you agree.

Cool
verwas
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 8
Merit: 0


View Profile
September 09, 2018, 06:38:18 PM
 #3566

I really disagree with this theory, I am not also a considerate to any perspective of anybody...
twthmoses
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 300
Merit: 103


View Profile
September 10, 2018, 08:43:04 PM
 #3567

So I am finally shaking the foundations of your evolution religion! Good. You just might come to reality and realize evolution is a hoax.

Where is your example of beneficial mutation? Just because a bunch of people think that a mutation might be beneficial, do we take a vote to see who is right? How do we know that a critter thinks that the change is beneficial?

If a fish grew legs via evolution, where did the legs start? They started as nubs, or even less. No benefit in nubs. Do you think the fish foresaw that one of its descendants thousands or hundreds of thousands of years later would benefit from legs?

Where are your DNA samples for any of the fossils that are considered missing links? Without them, there is no way to tell that all the so-called missing links were not their own animal brought about by some non-evolution method that we don't understand yet.

What about the fact that there are multitudes of fossil creatures that just appeared, fully developed, without something to have developed from?

Where is your proof of even one pure random happening, so that we can see that there is a possibility that things were not programmed to exist as they are? After all, physics doesn't deviate in producing results. If it did, nobody could expect to ever get the same result from the same scientific experiment.

Where is natural selection? After all, nature has made multitudes of fantastic forms of life. Scientists and engineers can't make even one. And nature has fantastic reproduction in all its life forms. Scientists don't even entirely understand how it works. Why is nature so smart beyond all scientists and engineers?

When you look at the answers evolution people give to these and many other questions, you don't even realize that the answers skirt the questions, rather than answering them. But that is all right for you. You need to keep your evolution religion intact, right?

Evolution isn't just a hoax. It's a complete fabrication.

Cool

You have points in your questions, and even if answers skirt the questions, as you say, how come you so easily accept another solution to the questions, one which has absolutely zero proof?  Why don’t you apply the same suspicion and scrutiny to this solution?

500 years ago, we did not even know electricity existed. Might have experienced it via static electricity, but did not really know what it was.  Just because we don’t know – yet – does not mean it is not true. 2-4000 years ago, people believed in a multitude of gods, as an absolutely undisputed fact. They would think you were crazy if you told them there was only one. How were they less correct vs. your beliefs now? I think you would say they are, because it’s obvious and maybe even downright insane to you – but prove it to me!

Just because scientists and engineers can’t make life yet, has zero to do with if any given thing is true or not.


The ancient Greeks and Egyptians knew of electricity.

The whole point isn't about accepting something other than evolution. The whole point is finding a reason to accept evolution.

There are so many things against evolution as it is expressed in its theory, that the whole theory should be scrapped. The evolution story keeps changing because it is make believe. In fact, we can't even imagine a form of evolution that would fit the facts of reality.

The point is, if you want evolution to be real, find some way to formulate it that makes sense and fits the facts. If you can't, drop it, and find what is real. Evolution doesn't fit the facts, and hasn't even been proven to exist, once. All the talk about evolution is simply talk without proof.

Evolution is a hoax.

Cool

EDIT: Do you see what you and Astargath (in the previous post) are doing? You can't answer the questions that I asked, scientifically. So you bring my religion into it. By bringing religion into it, rather than answering scientifically, you are showing what you really think evolution is. To you, evolution seems to be a religion.

We have answered you points many times, but we don’t know it all either – that does not mean it’s not true. So here goes again, and I don’t even have to look any of this up.

1) Dinosaurs, Tyrannosaurus Rex, had tiny useless for arms. How did they get so useless? They devolved, probably from an ancestor, smaller, that needed them. Or you suggest that they were created useless? (Yes I know there are other theories). What’s the purpose of programming, if it’s useless what you program? This big meat eater found out, generation after generator, I don’t need arms, I just need size, big legs and a hug month, and I’ll do just fine.

2) There really exist no missing link, - I’m a missing link, you are a missing link, we are all missing links. Humans have leftovers, tail bone, thirteenth rib, appendix, little toe, wisdom teeth, neck rib, third eyelid, extrinsic ear muscles (like dogs and cats) and male nipples and body hair. They are all missing link between those that have and not have – that’s just humans!

3) No species appeared fully developed. There is no such thing as fully developed in evolution.  We are all in a transition state, between now and the next “new” species.

4) Our proof of random is the billion billion of individuals of each species that live right now – we are going in circles here!

5) Why is nature smarter than our scientists and engineers?!? I don’t know, it just is! We are not there yet; it’s as simple as that!

There you go, now answer mine!

Evolution is fact, there is no programming!


│      Whitepaper      │              BITHOST                          The Coin With Implemented Project            │      Announce      │
―――――            COMPLETE SOLUTION FOR HOSTING WITH CRYPTOCURRENCY            ―――――
│     Telegram     │     Twitter     │     Facebook     │     Github     │     Discord     │
Astargath
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 910
Merit: 589


View Profile
September 10, 2018, 09:49:59 PM
 #3568

So I am finally shaking the foundations of your evolution religion! Good. You just might come to reality and realize evolution is a hoax.

Where is your example of beneficial mutation? Just because a bunch of people think that a mutation might be beneficial, do we take a vote to see who is right? How do we know that a critter thinks that the change is beneficial?

If a fish grew legs via evolution, where did the legs start? They started as nubs, or even less. No benefit in nubs. Do you think the fish foresaw that one of its descendants thousands or hundreds of thousands of years later would benefit from legs?

Where are your DNA samples for any of the fossils that are considered missing links? Without them, there is no way to tell that all the so-called missing links were not their own animal brought about by some non-evolution method that we don't understand yet.

What about the fact that there are multitudes of fossil creatures that just appeared, fully developed, without something to have developed from?

Where is your proof of even one pure random happening, so that we can see that there is a possibility that things were not programmed to exist as they are? After all, physics doesn't deviate in producing results. If it did, nobody could expect to ever get the same result from the same scientific experiment.

Where is natural selection? After all, nature has made multitudes of fantastic forms of life. Scientists and engineers can't make even one. And nature has fantastic reproduction in all its life forms. Scientists don't even entirely understand how it works. Why is nature so smart beyond all scientists and engineers?

When you look at the answers evolution people give to these and many other questions, you don't even realize that the answers skirt the questions, rather than answering them. But that is all right for you. You need to keep your evolution religion intact, right?

Evolution isn't just a hoax. It's a complete fabrication.

Cool

You have points in your questions, and even if answers skirt the questions, as you say, how come you so easily accept another solution to the questions, one which has absolutely zero proof?  Why don’t you apply the same suspicion and scrutiny to this solution?

500 years ago, we did not even know electricity existed. Might have experienced it via static electricity, but did not really know what it was.  Just because we don’t know – yet – does not mean it is not true. 2-4000 years ago, people believed in a multitude of gods, as an absolutely undisputed fact. They would think you were crazy if you told them there was only one. How were they less correct vs. your beliefs now? I think you would say they are, because it’s obvious and maybe even downright insane to you – but prove it to me!

Just because scientists and engineers can’t make life yet, has zero to do with if any given thing is true or not.


The ancient Greeks and Egyptians knew of electricity.

The whole point isn't about accepting something other than evolution. The whole point is finding a reason to accept evolution.

There are so many things against evolution as it is expressed in its theory, that the whole theory should be scrapped. The evolution story keeps changing because it is make believe. In fact, we can't even imagine a form of evolution that would fit the facts of reality.

The point is, if you want evolution to be real, find some way to formulate it that makes sense and fits the facts. If you can't, drop it, and find what is real. Evolution doesn't fit the facts, and hasn't even been proven to exist, once. All the talk about evolution is simply talk without proof.

Evolution is a hoax.

Cool

EDIT: Do you see what you and Astargath (in the previous post) are doing? You can't answer the questions that I asked, scientifically. So you bring my religion into it. By bringing religion into it, rather than answering scientifically, you are showing what you really think evolution is. To you, evolution seems to be a religion.

We have answered you points many times, but we don’t know it all either – that does not mean it’s not true. So here goes again, and I don’t even have to look any of this up.

1) Dinosaurs, Tyrannosaurus Rex, had tiny useless for arms. How did they get so useless? They devolved, probably from an ancestor, smaller, that needed them. Or you suggest that they were created useless? (Yes I know there are other theories). What’s the purpose of programming, if it’s useless what you program? This big meat eater found out, generation after generator, I don’t need arms, I just need size, big legs and a hug month, and I’ll do just fine.

2) There really exist no missing link, - I’m a missing link, you are a missing link, we are all missing links. Humans have leftovers, tail bone, thirteenth rib, appendix, little toe, wisdom teeth, neck rib, third eyelid, extrinsic ear muscles (like dogs and cats) and male nipples and body hair. They are all missing link between those that have and not have – that’s just humans!

3) No species appeared fully developed. There is no such thing as fully developed in evolution.  We are all in a transition state, between now and the next “new” species.

4) Our proof of random is the billion billion of individuals of each species that live right now – we are going in circles here!

5) Why is nature smarter than our scientists and engineers?!? I don’t know, it just is! We are not there yet; it’s as simple as that!

There you go, now answer mine!

Evolution is fact, there is no programming!



5) Also this argument is meaningless because it doesn't take in count time. Complexity can arise from very simple rules, if you also add millions and millions of years to that you get the complexity you see today without us being able to ''replicate it''. Scientists have developed countless cures for countless natural and unnatural diseases, scientists have developed planes,cars,rockets, what more do you really want to consider them ''smarter'' than nature?



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



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

Activity: 1848
Merit: 1081


View Profile
September 11, 2018, 12:44:34 AM
 #3569


We have answered you points many times, but we don’t know it all either – that does not mean it’s not true. So here goes again, and I don’t even have to look any of this up. - Just remember where we are. We are in a thread that either shows evolution to be a hoax, or shows it to NOT be a hoax.

Talk, alone, doesn't do anything. It is the substance of the talk - the proof - that counts.


1) Dinosaurs, Tyrannosaurus Rex, had tiny useless for arms. How did they get so useless? They devolved, probably from an ancestor, smaller, that needed them. Or you suggest that they were created useless? (Yes I know there are other theories). What’s the purpose of programming, if it’s useless what you program? This big meat eater found out, generation after generator, I don’t need arms, I just need size, big legs and a hug month, and I’ll do just fine. - Why do you think that such arms are useless? T-Rex, and others like him, needed tiny arms to sort through the things he had just torn apart with his big legs and tail and jaws. The idea that small legs were useless is simply the idea of people who didn't exist with T-Rex to see how things really were. To show you that this whole point is stupid, consider how useful the small arms of a kangaroo are.

Useless for proving or disproving evolution.


2) There really exist no missing link, - I’m a missing link, you are a missing link, we are all missing links. Humans have leftovers, tail bone, thirteenth rib, appendix, little toe, wisdom teeth, neck rib, third eyelid, extrinsic ear muscles (like dogs and cats) and male nipples and body hair. They are all missing link between those that have and not have – that’s just humans! - Why do you think they are missing links? So far, there are other reason for these things. One of the best creation ideas for these is simply for variety. But there could be many others when you consider the fall into sin, and the Bible record of angels (aliens) on the earth, tampering with our DNA.

As it stands, useless for proving or disproving evolution.


3) No species appeared fully developed. There is no such thing as fully developed in evolution.  We are all in a transition state, between now and the next “new” species. - The fossil record says you are wrong.

4) Our proof of random is the billion billion of individuals of each species that live right now – we are going in circles here! - Our proof of no random is the fact that all scientific operations can be performed with exactly the same results if done exactly the same way, every time. The problem with the word "random" in evolution is semantics.

The original word "random" was injected into early evolution theory at a time when scientists did not understand random very well. It was a time when a roll of the dice, or the toss of a coin, was considered to be random. We now understand that there are multitudes of forces that act on the dice and the coin... forces that determine exactly the way the dice or coin act... and none of it is really random.

Evolution theory simply has not upgraded its use of "random" to take into account these findings. This makes evolution theory vague at its best, because random is one of the most important "items" in determining ETE.


5) Why is nature smarter than our scientists and engineers?!? I don’t know, it just is! We are not there yet; it’s as simple as that! - Is nature smarter than our scientists? No! Nature is at least billions of times smarter than our scientists. All one need do is look at all the life in nature, along with its reproductive abilities.

What don't we have in "smart" nature? We don't have a source for the intelligence. This points to Intelligent Design, not intelligent nature, and certainly not evolution.


There you go, now answer mine!

Evolution is fact, there is no programming!



5) Also this argument is meaningless because it doesn't take in count time. Complexity can arise from very simple rules, if you also add millions and millions of years to that you get the complexity you see today without us being able to ''replicate it''. Scientists have developed countless cures for countless natural and unnatural diseases, scientists have developed planes,cars,rockets, what more do you really want to consider them ''smarter'' than nature?

Immune systems are designed to destroy differences. Even if we perceive a beneficial difference, immune systems are designed to destroy them whatever they are. The more the time, the greater chance that changes are destroyed by immune systems. Scientists are grasping at straws by trying to reverse the natural order when the say that long time gives better odds. The only better odds long time gives is better odds for immune systems to destroy changes. No evolution there.

Most of the stuff scientists have developed has an overall detrimental result for nature. So, even if the scientific developments could begin to approach nature's in complexity, they would be destructive, helping entropy, rather than building anything up into complexity.

If scientists weren't part of nature... if they were on the outside... their inventions might not affect gradual destruction on them as well as everyone/everything else. But because they are part of the nature that they are slowly destroying, they will be stopped by their own destructive inventions.

Nothing to do with proving evolution or not. No proof for evolution has been found. Evolution is still a hoax.



Find a natural change in the DNA over at least several thousand years, where critter A has this change, and critter B has the first change plus another, and critter C has both of these changes plus a third, but in every other way the critters are entirely the same. Do that, and you will have a tiny start towards evolution proof.

Then, amidst the countless C&E affects in nature, find even one pure random affect that is for sure a pure random affect. Add it to the DNA thing in the previous paragraph, and you will have a little bit more of a start towards proving evolution.

The thing that doesn't prove the existence of evolution is, thousands of words that shout that evolution is real. Proof is necessary.

Evolution is a hoax.


Cool
kemswag
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 34
Merit: 0


View Profile
September 11, 2018, 11:28:11 AM
 #3570

Throughout my days school in school,  one  biology topic I have had problems with over the years is evolution, I find it very difficult to comprehend this concept by Charles Darwin because it does not look real.
FortFC
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 84
Merit: 0


View Profile WWW
September 11, 2018, 01:26:17 PM
 #3571

At least evolution explains more details of our origin rather that church or any other religious institutions
BADecker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848
Merit: 1081


View Profile
September 11, 2018, 09:22:54 PM
 #3572

At least evolution explains more details of our origin rather that church or any other religious institutions

And science fiction stories about the moon over the last hundred+ years, explain way more about the moon than the astronauts' visits.

Cool
Moloch
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 798
Merit: 709



View Profile
September 12, 2018, 12:01:58 PM
 #3573

BADecker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848
Merit: 1081


View Profile
September 12, 2018, 04:12:14 PM
 #3574


You have points in your questions, and even if answers skirt the questions, as you say, how come you so easily accept another solution to the questions, one which has absolutely zero proof?  Why don’t you apply the same suspicion and scrutiny to this solution?
The two solutions with relation to this topic are:
1. Evolution is a hoax;
2. Evolution is not a hoax.
To remain on-topic, there is no other easy/simple solution. It has to be one of these.

Evolution has enough flaws in all of its theory, and scientists know about the flaws, and could think of more flaws if they put their minds to it, so that they know that evolution is impossible in any way that we understand, theoretically. The point isn't why scientists promote something that they know doesn't exist - evolution. The point is that they DO promote evolution, which doesn't exist... at least not in the evolution theory way.

If you promote as truth something that you know isn't true, or even if you promote as truth something that you know is doubtful, aren't you really making a hoax out of it? What else is there to say? Hoax!

If the thing you are questioning has to do with religion, or has to do with my personal religion, there are religious topics all over the Politics & Society and Off Topic, or you can PM me.



500 years ago, we did not even know electricity existed. Might have experienced it via static electricity, but did not really know what it was.  Just because we don’t know – yet – does not mean it is not true.
And this is the point. In what way? Essentially, the topic is not about knowing or not knowing. The topic is about hoax. What I mean is, if all the books about evolution said, "We think evolution might be true, but we do not know that evolution is true for a fact," evolution would not be a hoax. In fact, if all the books said, "We know that evolution is true," but everybody was innocently mistaken, even then evolution would not be a hoax.

The thing that makes evolution to be a hoax is that thousands of scientists and other people know that evolution might not be true... or they absolutely know that it isn't true. But what do many of these people do? They keep on saying, "Evolution is real, evolution is true." When they speak against what they know this way, they are promoting it in hoax fashion.


2-4000 years ago, people believed in a multitude of gods, as an absolutely undisputed fact. They would think you were crazy if you told them there was only one. How were they less correct vs. your beliefs now? I think you would say they are, because it’s obvious and maybe even downright insane to you – but prove it to me!
You seem to be asking about religious beliefs here. Evolution scientists are trying to find out scientific reasons why evolution is true. Are you finally agreeing that the scientists have been proven wrong, and that they know it, and that in their evolution hoaxing they are trying to make evolution into a religion for people? Are you really trying to say that you are starting to understand that evolution is a hoax, but that you don't want to believe that it is a hoax, so you are making evolution into a religion for yourself?

Evolution isn't about my religious beliefs. Evolution theory evolution is about scientific proof, which is about a method that can be proven true using physical laws... especially that it can be duplicated using the same physical criteria. Are you suggesting that evolution has been a religion all along?





Just because scientists and engineers can’t make life yet, has zero to do with if any given thing is true or not.


If Manufacturing Company A made billions of cars in millions of models, and Manufacturing Company B couldn't even make one car, why would you believe anything that Manufacturing Company B said about how to make cars, especially if it contradicted Manufacturing Company A, and especially if there was all kinds of evidence, and even some proof, that Manufacturing Company B was wrong?

Cool
BADecker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848
Merit: 1081


View Profile
September 12, 2018, 04:24:28 PM
 #3575


A religious preacher says, "God did it!"

A scientist says, "Just shut up!"

Is that what you are trying to say? Don't tell people the truth that God did it?

You are way into religion. What are you doing in this thread? Scientists might get angry or frustrated at times. But they don't say, "Just shut up!" Rather, they go find what is real. Such is what science is all about.

Cool
twthmoses
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 300
Merit: 103


View Profile
September 13, 2018, 06:39:00 AM
Merited by Astargath (1)
 #3576

Why are you defining the thread tropic? The thread started with Evolution is a hoax, on account of that there are monkeys around. When you invoke programming as a means of explaining away evolution, you automatic open the door for a “higher power”. Super intelligent aliens or some form of god, cause I don’t know how else to define a “higher power”, responsible for this programming, which you state is around.

A Hoax is to deliberately and knowing falsifying the truth. The waste majority of scientists believe in evolution. In order for evolution to qualify as a hoax, we must have a conspiracy of millions of people, spanning 100+ years. Best conspiracy ever!

If you yourself want to keep strict to thread tropic, you should stop all the programming stuff and explaining why evolution is not possible – and concentrate on, that the waste majority of scientists are in a global conspiracy, lasting well past 100 some years. By default statistic is on my side, it is not possible, there is no such conspiracy, even with a reasonable margin. So many people, over such a long time, cannot run a conspiracy of this magnitude and not get called out.


Thus end of tropic, Evolution cannot be a hoax.

│      Whitepaper      │              BITHOST                          The Coin With Implemented Project            │      Announce      │
―――――            COMPLETE SOLUTION FOR HOSTING WITH CRYPTOCURRENCY            ―――――
│     Telegram     │     Twitter     │     Facebook     │     Github     │     Discord     │
BADecker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848
Merit: 1081


View Profile
September 13, 2018, 05:12:20 PM
 #3577

Why are you defining the thread tropic? The thread started with Evolution is a hoax, on account of that there are monkeys around. When you invoke programming as a means of explaining away evolution, you automatic open the door for a “higher power”. Super intelligent aliens or some form of god, cause I don’t know how else to define a “higher power”, responsible for this programming, which you state is around.

A Hoax is to deliberately and knowing falsifying the truth. The waste majority of scientists believe in evolution. In order for evolution to qualify as a hoax, we must have a conspiracy of millions of people, spanning 100+ years. Best conspiracy ever!

If you yourself want to keep strict to thread tropic, you should stop all the programming stuff and explaining why evolution is not possible – and concentrate on, that the waste majority of scientists are in a global conspiracy, lasting well past 100 some years. By default statistic is on my side, it is not possible, there is no such conspiracy, even with a reasonable margin. So many people, over such a long time, cannot run a conspiracy of this magnitude and not get called out.


Thus end of tropic, Evolution cannot be a hoax.


You seem to be the only one who has said anything about "tropic."

Evolution is a hoax, yes or no. Anybody can say a simple "yes" or "no." But simple yes or no isn't much of a discussion. In a forum we have discussion. That is why I bring in reasons to show that evolution is a hoax, and you attempt to bring in reasons to show why it isn't. Don't you even understand this about a forum, yet?

You have defined what a hoax is. Then you say that scientists believe. If a scientist believes something, isn't it true that he doesn't know? If he knew that evolution was real, he wouldn't have to believe that it was real. He would know that it is real.

Now, here is where the hoax part comes in. The scientists only believe. They don't know, and they know that they don't know. But they proclaim that evolution is real when they know it isn't. That is the hoax. The hoax is not knowing, but proclaiming that they know.

Since scientists don't know and yet hoax that they do, when the hoax is discovered, don't honest people start looking for the thing that is real? Then they see that the "higher power" idea fits the whole operation of nature far better than the evolution hoax. So, why suouldn't people start looking at the "higher power" idea?

The programming (C&E) stuff shows that evolution theory evolution (ETE) is not real. ETE doesn't talk about C&E in nature, but all we see is C&E in nature. Science knows that everything operates by C&E. But they don't seem to realize that there isn't any C&E in ETE. In other words, they don't want to recognize that ETE doesn't exist, as proven by C&E.

Are scientists that stupid? NO, of course not! They know that there isn't any C&E in ETE. They also know that the whole operation of nature works by C&E. So, they are hoaxing us when they say that ETE is real.

Evolution is a hoax.

Cool
twthmoses
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 300
Merit: 103


View Profile
September 14, 2018, 05:56:28 AM
 #3578

You seem to be the only one who has said anything about "tropic."

Evolution is a hoax, yes or no. Anybody can say a simple "yes" or "no." But simple yes or no isn't much of a discussion. In a forum we have discussion. That is why I bring in reasons to show that evolution is a hoax, and you attempt to bring in reasons to show why it isn't. Don't you even understand this about a forum, yet?

You have defined what a hoax is. Then you say that scientists believe. If a scientist believes something, isn't it true that he doesn't know? If he knew that evolution was real, he wouldn't have to believe that it was real. He would know that it is real.

Now, here is where the hoax part comes in. The scientists only believe. They don't know, and they know that they don't know. But they proclaim that evolution is real when they know it isn't. That is the hoax. The hoax is not knowing, but proclaiming that they know.

Since scientists don't know and yet hoax that they do, when the hoax is discovered, don't honest people start looking for the thing that is real? Then they see that the "higher power" idea fits the whole operation of nature far better than the evolution hoax. So, why suouldn't people start looking at the "higher power" idea?

The programming (C&E) stuff shows that evolution theory evolution (ETE) is not real. ETE doesn't talk about C&E in nature, but all we see is C&E in nature. Science knows that everything operates by C&E. But they don't seem to realize that there isn't any C&E in ETE. In other words, they don't want to recognize that ETE doesn't exist, as proven by C&E.

Are scientists that stupid? NO, of course not! They know that there isn't any C&E in ETE. They also know that the whole operation of nature works by C&E. So, they are hoaxing us when they say that ETE is real.

Evolution is a hoax.

Cool

I’m not in agreement with that. Believing in something to be true, does not qualify as a hoax, whether it is actually true or not. We just don’t know better. Knowing something is not true, and then spreading that as the truth, qualifies as a hoax.

Whether your take on Evolution ultimate turns out be correct, or my version, shared by the majority of people, or none of us,-  none of us qualifies for preforming a hoax. We believe what we are propagating to actually be the truth.

Again C&E shows no such thing, if fact it shows the direct opposite, Evolution is a fact. C&E is a transition state, not the tool. It required identical input to produce identical outputs. Never ever in the history of the Universe has identical inputs been available in two situations, thus never ever has the output been identical. Pure Random from the beginning of the Universe till now. Evolution is a fact.

│      Whitepaper      │              BITHOST                          The Coin With Implemented Project            │      Announce      │
―――――            COMPLETE SOLUTION FOR HOSTING WITH CRYPTOCURRENCY            ―――――
│     Telegram     │     Twitter     │     Facebook     │     Github     │     Discord     │
BADecker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848
Merit: 1081


View Profile
September 14, 2018, 01:45:35 PM
 #3579

You seem to be the only one who has said anything about "tropic."

Evolution is a hoax, yes or no. Anybody can say a simple "yes" or "no." But simple yes or no isn't much of a discussion. In a forum we have discussion. That is why I bring in reasons to show that evolution is a hoax, and you attempt to bring in reasons to show why it isn't. Don't you even understand this about a forum, yet?

You have defined what a hoax is. Then you say that scientists believe. If a scientist believes something, isn't it true that he doesn't know? If he knew that evolution was real, he wouldn't have to believe that it was real. He would know that it is real.

Now, here is where the hoax part comes in. The scientists only believe. They don't know, and they know that they don't know. But they proclaim that evolution is real when they know it isn't. That is the hoax. The hoax is not knowing, but proclaiming that they know.

Since scientists don't know and yet hoax that they do, when the hoax is discovered, don't honest people start looking for the thing that is real? Then they see that the "higher power" idea fits the whole operation of nature far better than the evolution hoax. So, why suouldn't people start looking at the "higher power" idea?

The programming (C&E) stuff shows that evolution theory evolution (ETE) is not real. ETE doesn't talk about C&E in nature, but all we see is C&E in nature. Science knows that everything operates by C&E. But they don't seem to realize that there isn't any C&E in ETE. In other words, they don't want to recognize that ETE doesn't exist, as proven by C&E.

Are scientists that stupid? NO, of course not! They know that there isn't any C&E in ETE. They also know that the whole operation of nature works by C&E. So, they are hoaxing us when they say that ETE is real.

Evolution is a hoax.

Cool

I’m not in agreement with that. Believing in something to be true, does not qualify as a hoax, whether it is actually true or not. We just don’t know better. Knowing something is not true, and then spreading that as the truth, qualifies as a hoax.

Whether your take on Evolution ultimate turns out be correct, or my version, shared by the majority of people, or none of us,-  none of us qualifies for preforming a hoax. We believe what we are propagating to actually be the truth.

Again C&E shows no such thing, if fact it shows the direct opposite, Evolution is a fact. C&E is a transition state, not the tool. It required identical input to produce identical outputs. Never ever in the history of the Universe has identical inputs been available in two situations, thus never ever has the output been identical. Pure Random from the beginning of the Universe till now. Evolution is a fact.


If you are not a person who has found that evolution is false, evolution may not be a hoax for you. But science is open for everyone. All the scientists who have studied evolution know that it doesn't exist in the form of current evolution theory. Some of these scientists push evolution as being true, even though they know it isn't, necessarily. That's the hoax.

If they said - as a few of them have - "We CAN'T tell for sure that evolution exists," then those scientists are not the hoaxers. It's the ones that state that evolution is true and real, when they know that it might not be... those are the hoaxers. They have turned evolution into a hoax.



For example, suppose that metal detectors can only detect underground gold accurately down to 8 feet below the surface. And a scientist using a metal detector, detects gold 10 feet down. Has he really detected gold down there? No! Metal detectors can only detect gold 8 feet down.

What does the scientist do regarding what he has detected? He might say, "I have detected gold 10 feet down." Or he might say, "I think that I have detected gold 10 feet down." If he says he HAS detected the gold, he is a liar. Why? Because metal detectors only detect 8 feet down. If he spreads the lie, he is hoaxing people.



Regarding evolution, nobody has ever found that it exists, factually. There is not one piece of evidence that fits evolution theory enough to factually say that it is evolution. Or show us one, and line up all the points of the theory and explain how each point fits. You can't. They don't all fit.

So far, everything that is called evolution is a guess, fits adaptation better, fits like-begets-like better, or can be shown to be completely false, or even fits the creation idea better. Most scientists know this. Most of them even state it when they say modifying words like "if, we think, maybe, it's possible," and a whole host of other words that show that they do not know. But when you look in the books, evolution is touted as truth. Somebody is a hoaxer.

Evolution is a hoax.

Cool
af_newbie
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1498
Merit: 1137



View Profile
September 14, 2018, 01:49:10 PM
 #3580

You seem to be the only one who has said anything about "tropic."

Evolution is a hoax, yes or no. Anybody can say a simple "yes" or "no." But simple yes or no isn't much of a discussion. In a forum we have discussion. That is why I bring in reasons to show that evolution is a hoax, and you attempt to bring in reasons to show why it isn't. Don't you even understand this about a forum, yet?

You have defined what a hoax is. Then you say that scientists believe. If a scientist believes something, isn't it true that he doesn't know? If he knew that evolution was real, he wouldn't have to believe that it was real. He would know that it is real.

Now, here is where the hoax part comes in. The scientists only believe. They don't know, and they know that they don't know. But they proclaim that evolution is real when they know it isn't. That is the hoax. The hoax is not knowing, but proclaiming that they know.

Since scientists don't know and yet hoax that they do, when the hoax is discovered, don't honest people start looking for the thing that is real? Then they see that the "higher power" idea fits the whole operation of nature far better than the evolution hoax. So, why suouldn't people start looking at the "higher power" idea?

The programming (C&E) stuff shows that evolution theory evolution (ETE) is not real. ETE doesn't talk about C&E in nature, but all we see is C&E in nature. Science knows that everything operates by C&E. But they don't seem to realize that there isn't any C&E in ETE. In other words, they don't want to recognize that ETE doesn't exist, as proven by C&E.

Are scientists that stupid? NO, of course not! They know that there isn't any C&E in ETE. They also know that the whole operation of nature works by C&E. So, they are hoaxing us when they say that ETE is real.

Evolution is a hoax.

Cool

I’m not in agreement with that. Believing in something to be true, does not qualify as a hoax, whether it is actually true or not. We just don’t know better. Knowing something is not true, and then spreading that as the truth, qualifies as a hoax.

Whether your take on Evolution ultimate turns out be correct, or my version, shared by the majority of people, or none of us,-  none of us qualifies for preforming a hoax. We believe what we are propagating to actually be the truth.

Again C&E shows no such thing, if fact it shows the direct opposite, Evolution is a fact. C&E is a transition state, not the tool. It required identical input to produce identical outputs. Never ever in the history of the Universe has identical inputs been available in two situations, thus never ever has the output been identical. Pure Random from the beginning of the Universe till now. Evolution is a fact.


If you are not a person who has found that evolution is false, evolution may not be a hoax for you. But science is open for everyone. All the scientists who have studied evolution know that it doesn't exist in the form of current evolution theory. Some of these scientists push evolution as being true, even though they know it isn't, necessarily. That's the hoax.

If they said - as a few of them have - "We CAN'T tell for sure that evolution exists," then those scientists are not the hoaxers. It's the ones that state that evolution is true and real, when they know that it might not be... those are the hoaxers. They have turned evolution into a hoax.



For example, suppose that metal detectors can only detect underground gold accurately down to 8 feet below the surface. And a scientist using a metal detector, detects gold 10 feet down. Has he really detected gold down there? No! Metal detectors can only detect gold 8 feet down.

What does the scientist do regarding what he has detected? He might say, "I have detected gold 10 feet down." Or he might say, "I think that I have detected gold 10 feet down." If he says he HAS detected the gold, he is a liar. Why? Because metal detectors only detect 8 feet down. If he spreads the lie, he is hoaxing people.



Regarding evolution, nobody has ever found that it exists, factually. There is not one piece of evidence that fits evolution theory enough to factually say that it is evolution. Or show us one, and line up all the points of the theory and explain how each point fits. You can't. They don't all fit.

So far, everything that is called evolution is a guess, fits adaptation better, fits like-begets-like better, or can be shown to be completely false, or even fits the creation idea better. Most scientists know this. Most of them even state it when they say modifying words like "if, we think, maybe, it's possible," and a whole host of other words that show that they do not know. But when you look in the books, evolution is touted as truth. Somebody is a hoaxer.

Evolution is a hoax.

Cool

What evidence would change your mind?
Pages: « 1 ... 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 [179] 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

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