Evolution is a Bad Idea (Page 7)
Blackshoes: Please Show these facts .
Assumptions and conclusion because (Species Adaptation ) does not even suggest Evolution',
PeterW60: It doesn't? Do you know the meaning of the word?
Okay, you attempt to use science to refute evolution. Explain your alternate theory for the diversity of life
Blackshoes: I don't need too have a theory ! Not every Question has and answer, that will satisfy those that need one !The facts ,and evidence show any honest intelligent person ', that Evolution is false !
I could state', what the facts, and evidence show .However; fools would argue that it 's impossible , therefore they put they're faith ', in something even less possible called Evolution
"And we only have a one half chromosome difference from a chimpanzee. I'd call that compelling evidence of common ancestry"
Bad argument ',Which doesn't take in account all of microbiological roadblocks which doesn't allow ( the assumption that ) this can happen !
The following species have the same number of chromosome as humans
The following have one pair less chromosome as humans
So according Evolutionary Science ',Human are also common to these species
IMO assumptions ,and conclusion, is the mother of all ignorance
PeterW60: "common to these species" YES! By jove, I think you've got it. Oh, now you're resorting to insults. I believe different, I am therefor ignorant. You offer no alternative explanation. You don't even know the definition of evolution. You have nothing.
calynonos, how many times had I recommended buying leather shoes? Pistachio shoes just don't last.
Blackshoes: Really Please enlighten me ? What is your definition Of Evolution ?
I have a alternative to the religion of Evolution ! I said it's not the Point ! You will just deny the facts, and evidence so /as to promote your bias Faith in assumptions ,and conclusions rather than argue the facts !
Again you show no evidence. and no fact !
Because all you have is illustrations , opinions ,assumptions, and conclusions
Of those that accept the so called Science of evolution.
When confronted with the facts', you as all do', just whine about those that know better
Geoff: The number of chromosomes a species has is in no way indicative of anything other than the species has evolved to require that level of genetic code.
Frogs have more genetic information in their DNA than human because they need it during as the develop in eggs; humans have evolved to develop in a climate controlled environment (the mother, like all mammals) but frogspawn needs to have genetic instructions to develop proteins in different conditions (most notably temperature).
Blackshoes: Thinking oneself wise ?
Does not make it so !
“I think, however, that we must go further than this and admit that the only acceptable explanation is creation. I know that this is anathema to physicists, as indeed it is to me, but we must not reject a theory that we do not like if the experimental evidence supports it.”—*H. Lipson, “A Physicist Looks at Evolution,” Physics Bulletin, 31 (1980), p. 138.
“The hold of the evolutionary paradigm [theoretical system] is so powerful that an idea which is more like a principle of medieval astrology than a serious twentieth century scientific theory has become a reality for evolutionary biologists.”—*Michael Denton, Evolution: A Theory in Crisis (1985), p. 306 [Australian molecular biologist].
“It was because Darwinian theory broke man’s link with God and set him adrift in a cosmos without purpose or end that its impact was so fundamental. No other intellectual revolution in modern times . . so profoundly affected the way men viewed themselves and their place in the universe.”—*Michael Denton, Evolution: A Theory in Crisis (1985), p. 67 [Australian molecular biologist].
“Scientists have no proof that life was not the result of an act of creation.”—*Robert Jastrow, The Enchanted Loom: Mind in the Universe (1981), p. 19.
“In fact, evolution became in a sense a scientific religion; almost all scientists have accepted it and many are prepared to `bend’ their observations to fit in with it.”—*H. Lipson, “A Physicist Looks at Evolution,” Physics Bulletin, 31 (1980), p. 138.
“When Darwin presented a paper [with Alfred Wallace] to the Linnean Society in 1858, a Professor Haugton of Dublin remarked, `All that was new was false, and what was true was old.’ This, we think, will be the final verdict on the matter, the epitaph on Darwinism.”—*Fred Hoyle and N. Chandra Wickramasinghe, Evolution from Space (1981), p. 159.
“Creation and evolution, between them, exhaust the possible explanations for the origin of living things. Organisms either appeared on the earth fully developed or they did not. If they did not, they must have developed from pre-existing species by some process of modification. If they did appear in a fully developed state, they must have been created by some omnipotent intelligence.”—*D.J. Futuyma, Science on Trial (1983), p. 197.
“The over-riding supremacy of the myth has created a widespread illusion that the theory of evolution was all but proved one hundred years ago and that all subsequent biological research—paleontological, zoological, and in the newer branches of genetics and molecular biology—has provided ever-increasing evidence for Darwinian ideas.”—*Michael Denton, Evolution: A Theory in Crisis (1985), p. 327.
“Today our duty is to destroy the myth of evolution, considered as a simple, understood and explained phenomenon which keeps rapidly unfolding before us. Biologists must be encouraged to think about the weaknesses and extrapolations that the theoreticians put forward or lay down as established truths. The deceit is sometimes unconscious, but not always, since some people, owing to their sectarianism, purposely overlook reality and refuse to acknowledge the inadequacies and falsity of their beliefs.”—*Pierre-Paul de Grasse, Evolution of Living Organisms (1977), p. 8."
Evolution was about the origin of the species and not about species themselves.
Um, the late Triassic had a very dry climate, because the dinosaurs (and birds which evolved from them) wasted very little water in their excretia, they were able to thrive.
Most other large reptiles at the time died out. Because of the traits of the dinosaurs, when the environment cooled (over millions of years), they developed feathers to keep warm.
And the common species of moron, that developed when people thought that having other people do their thinking for them would be a good idea. Well done for accepting a beta role in society.
Well it is what Charles Darwin said ....if you know better then you need tell him.
I think you are really confused. Why does reading two or more idiots ideas and saying you now understand make you a better person. And anyway the Beta version of software is the original idea at the source.
Blackshoes: Geoff Arrogant's isn't a sign of Intelligences. It's just a produce of ignorance '.If you had a clue,you already understand the difference between A theory and the truth.
Interseting how the only evidence of dinosaurs developing feathers is so rare and sparse .limited too only a few fossils ? Wile Birds were contemporaries of later dinosaurs
Showing according too the Evolutionary theory developed quickly ,wile Insects never changed
In other words', It appears that the Evolutionary Scientists make it up as they go
"One of the biggest stumbling blocks to the idea that dinosaurs evolved into birds continues to be the lack of fossil support. Shipman commented, "The bipedal ancestor hypothesis, while favored strongly by logic, has little direct evidence from the fossil record to support or refute it."8 The best fossil evidence for a link is the historical confusion between Archaeopteryx and Compsognathus. At least three of the Archaeopteryx specimens were initially misidentified as either a Compsognathus or a pterosaur. Unfortunately, these two animals are found in the same strata, making it difficult to argue that Compsognathus was the ancestor of Archaeopteryx. Advocates for the dinosaur/bird hypothesis are left claiming that something yet unknown was the ancestor to Archaeopteryx. "This may be true, but balancing on a hypothetical ancestor is an even shakier proposition than balancing on one leg while the other moves forward," stated Shipman.9 "
Hmm: Lack of fossil evidence
It's all rhetoric :Just look at the wording " Shipman commented, "The bipedal ancestor hypothesis, while favored strongly by logic"
This, and many other examples explain why Evolutionary theory is nothing more than a religious belief !
Masquerading as Science !
How can logic strongly support anything without evidence !
Blackshoes: Dogmatism and skepticism are both, in a sense, absolute philosophies; one is certain of knowing, the other of not knowing. What philosophy should dissipate is certainty, whether of knowledge or ignorance. Bertrand Russell
Blackshoes: I asked you to enlighten me Peter
Yet; like most Evolutionist ',You cannot ! I can only assume ',that you either are talking out you ass', or you will be shown ( as I already know ',that Evolution doesn't have one theory', but hundred ) and many conflict with each others assumptions and conclusions
Example : Why did according to the Evolutionary theory ',all species are said to have evolved wile insects", remain today as they were 600 million years ago.
Why there's no evolutionary example during the last 80 years of Trans species development '.
Why hasn't the fossil recorded proven the theory', rather than showing only that species came into existence and many just disappeared ?
The list is long !
Saying that someone doesn't understand the Pseudoscience of Evolution , Is like saying', that one doesn't understand that the world is flat