Do you believe in the Theory of Evolution?

[Chinese Regions]

Evolution as a theory won't exist in the next 3 decades. People are waking up to the biggest fraud in the history of science.

I mean if it was true, why do Evolutionists argue amongst themselves and have like 50 different versions.

There's only two, Lamarckian and Darwinian, the latter has been proven numerous times

The truth is only one and doesn't need to be revised.

Yes Evolution true, end of.

Whereas a lie like Evolution needs constant revision.

Oh you are referring to how science does experiments to know what they already know? That's to prove to the dimwitted that what it tells us it is true.

How many people here reject Evolution? I mean who in their right mind would accept that their great ancestor is an ape.

46 People Humans are apes either way it is an undeniable fact.

Besides there's a ridiculously easy argument against Evolution.

Oh do go on

Three in fact.

Oh my fucking god THREE?

First of all, a living organism can only come from a living thing, not a non living organism.

Evolution does not explain how life started, evolution explain why life changes. Also ask your non-existent god how he made people from dirt. I'd rather be descended from an ape than mud. Though if I recall correctly Muslims believe god made life from water don't they?

Second, lets assume that an animal evolved and had its genes mutated so that it was no longer the same organism, in order to reproduce and exist, it would need another organism that was similar enough to breed with to reproduce fertile offspring.

Mutations exist and they exist. Natural selection determines which mutation/genes are best for the environment and carry it on the next generation. Evolution in a nutshell.

Third, if Evolution is indeed real, why have we never observed it now or at other times in the past.

Please, just see MRSA, the numerous strains of the flu virus and please don't give us that "micro-evolution" bullshit. For bigger examples, the white and black moths in the industrial revolution and how many breeds of dog exist again?

[Somali Caliphate]

The Cambrian Explosion, in which almost all complex lifeforms from every single phyla known to mankind simultaneously destroys the explanation that is given by Evolution. In the Cambric layer of the geologic column, almost all complex organisms appear. Below this layer, the few complex organisms that can be found are soft bodied organisms like worms. And surprisingly, above this layer, the number of complex organisms successively decrease. This shows that almost all complex organisms we know today appeared simultaneously and not over a long period of time as a result of evolution. Even Darwin himself knew the great problem that the Cambrian explosion posed and he hoped that more evidence would be found in the fossil record for Evolution which explains the Cambrian Explosion in terms of Evolution and such fossils have not been found. So if all these complex organisms are appearing all at once, is it not fair to say that they can't have appeared as a result of evolution. if not, what other cause is there for the appearance of virtually all organisms known to man?

[Chinese Regions]

Yes it will.




Yep. S'called creationism.



Because that's how science works.



The truth does not need to be revised, no. But our understanding of it does, as we discover more.



It's not a lie.



Few.



Most people.

And you are an ape. So am I. Humans are apes.



Easy =/= Good



Incorrect. Shit's gotta start somewhere.



Species interbreed. Hence mules.

Are you actually suggesting that a living organism can come from a non-living thing? Even hard-core Evolutionists would never say that. One thing that Evolutionists and everyone in the mainstream scientific community agree on is that it is impossible for a living organism to come from a non-living thing. Period.

And yet you believe the first humans are made from dirt or water or whatever.
Evolution has nothing to do with how life started. It is not meant to explain that so stop using it as one of your arguments (if you can call it that).

[Salandriagado]

The Cambrian Explosion, in which almost all complex lifeforms from every single phyla known to mankind simultaneously destroys the explanation that is given by Evolution.

That isn't what the Cambrian explosion was.

In the Cambric layer of the geologic column, almost all complex organisms appear.

Bullshit.

Below this layer, the few complex organisms that can be found are soft bodied organisms like worms.

Largely true.

And surprisingly, above this layer, the number of complex organisms successively decrease.

Bullshit.

This shows that almost all complex organisms we know today appeared simultaneously and not over a long period of time as a result of evolution.

Bullshit. Even if all of the above were true, the Cambrian Explosion lasted 80 million years.

Even Darwin himself knew the great problem that the Cambrian explosion posed

Bullshit.

and he hoped that more evidence would be found in the fossil record for Evolution which explains the Cambrian Explosion in terms of Evolution and such fossils have not been found.

Bullshit on all accounts.

So if all these complex organisms are appearing all at once,

They didn't.

is it not fair to say that they can't have appeared as a result of evolution.

It isn't.

if not, what other cause is there for the appearance of virtually all organisms known to man?

Evolution.





Now, kindly stop posting terrible copypasta and start responding to points.

[Ifreann]

So if all these complex organisms are appearing all at once, is it not fair to say that they can't have appeared as a result of evolution

Nope.

[Sociobiology]

Are you actually suggesting that a living organism can come from a non-living thing?

yes, there is nothing special about the chemistry of life.

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/05/ribonucleotides/

Even hard-core Evolutionists would never say that.

that is not a word
Biologists on the other hand would, have, and are.

One thing that Evolutionists and everyone in the mainstream scientific community agree on is that it is impossible for a living organism to come from a non-living thing. Period.

again nope
http://exploringorigins.org/rnaworld.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis

[Chinese Regions]

The Cambrian Explosion, in which almost all complex lifeforms from every single phyla known to mankind simultaneously destroys the explanation that is given by Evolution. In the Cambric layer of the geologic column, almost all complex organisms appear. Below this layer, the few complex organisms that can be found are soft bodied organisms like worms. And surprisingly, above this layer, the number of complex organisms successively decrease. This shows that almost all complex organisms we know today appeared simultaneously and not over a long period of time as a result of evolution. Even Darwin himself knew the great problem that the Cambrian explosion posed and he hoped that more evidence would be found in the fossil record for Evolution which explains the Cambrian Explosion in terms of Evolution and such fossils have not been found. So if all these complex organisms are appearing all at once, is it not fair to say that they can't have appeared as a result of evolution. if not, what other cause is there for the appearance of virtually all organisms known to man?

Modern vertebrates be it Humans, monkeys or reptiles are not a direct result of the Cambrian explosion. We still share a common ancestor with apes any way you look at it.

[Farnhamia]

The Cambrian Explosion, in which almost all complex lifeforms from every single phyla known to mankind simultaneously destroys the explanation that is given by Evolution. In the Cambric layer of the geologic column, almost all complex organisms appear. Below this layer, the few complex organisms that can be found are soft bodied organisms like worms. And surprisingly, above this layer, the number of complex organisms successively decrease. This shows that almost all complex organisms we know today appeared simultaneously and not over a long period of time as a result of evolution. Even Darwin himself knew the great problem that the Cambrian explosion posed and he hoped that more evidence would be found in the fossil record for Evolution which explains the Cambrian Explosion in terms of Evolution and such fossils have not been found. So if all these complex organisms are appearing all at once, is it not fair to say that they can't have appeared as a result of evolution. if not, what other cause is there for the appearance of virtually all organisms known to man?

The Ediacaran biota called and ... it was hard to understand them but they seemed to be very upset.

Really, the Cambrian explosion has nicely defined predecessors. You can look this stuff up, you know.

[Immoren]

The Cambrian Explosion, in which almost all complex lifeforms from every single phyla known to mankind simultaneously destroys the explanation that is given by Evolution. In the Cambric layer of the geologic column, almost all complex organisms appear. Below this layer, the few complex organisms that can be found are soft bodied organisms like worms. And surprisingly, above this layer, the number of complex organisms successively decrease. This shows that almost all complex organisms we know today appeared simultaneously and not over a long period of time as a result of evolution. Even Darwin himself knew the great problem that the Cambrian explosion posed and he hoped that more evidence would be found in the fossil record for Evolution which explains the Cambrian Explosion in terms of Evolution and such fossils have not been found. So if all these complex organisms are appearing all at once, is it not fair to say that they can't have appeared as a result of evolution. if not, what other cause is there for the appearance of virtually all organisms known to man?

Cambrian explosion took more time than its name would suggest.

[Farnhamia]

Evolution as a theory won't exist in the next 3 decades. People are waking up to the biggest fraud in the history of science. I mean if it was true, why do Evolutionists argue amongst themselves and have like 50 different versions. The truth is only one and doesn't need to be revised. Whereas a lie like Evolution needs constant revision. How many people here reject Evolution? I mean who in their right mind would accept that their great ancestor is an ape. Besides there's a ridiculously easy argument against Evolution. Three in fact. First of all, a living organism can only come from a living thing, not a non living organism. Second, lets assume that an animal evolved and had its genes mutated so that it was no longer the same organism, in order to reproduce and exist, it would need another organism that was similar enough to breed with to reproduce fertile offspring. Third, if Evolution is indeed real, why have we never observed it now or at other times in the past.

30 years from now you'll still be posting this and people will still be going, "Dude, What? No."

[Nordenkalt]

It's the theory of evolution, not the law of evolution.

[Somali Caliphate]

Evolution as a theory won't exist in the next 3 decades. People are waking up to the biggest fraud in the history of science.

I mean if it was true, why do Evolutionists argue amongst themselves and have like 50 different versions.

There's only two, Lamarckian and Darwinian, the latter has been proven numerous times

The truth is only one and doesn't need to be revised.

Yes Evolution true, end of.

Whereas a lie like Evolution needs constant revision.

Oh you are referring to how science does experiments to know what they already know? That's to prove to the dimwitted that what it tells us it is true.

How many people here reject Evolution? I mean who in their right mind would accept that their great ancestor is an ape.

46 People Humans are apes either way it is an undeniable fact.

Besides there's a ridiculously easy argument against Evolution.

Oh do go on

Three in fact.

Oh my fucking god THREE?

First of all, a living organism can only come from a living thing, not a non living organism.

Evolution does not explain how life started, evolution explain why life changes. Also ask your non-existent god how he made people from dirt. I'd rather be descended from an ape than mud. Though if I recall correctly Muslims believe god made life from water don't they?

Second, lets assume that an animal evolved and had its genes mutated so that it was no longer the same organism, in order to reproduce and exist, it would need another organism that was similar enough to breed with to reproduce fertile offspring.

Mutations exist and they exist. Natural selection determines which mutation/genes are best for the environment and carry it on the next generation. Evolution in a nutshell.

Third, if Evolution is indeed real, why have we never observed it now or at other times in the past.

Please, just see MRSA, the numerous strains of the flu virus and please don't give us that "micro-evolution" bullshit. For bigger examples, the white and black moths in the industrial revolution and how many breeds of dog exist again?

Lets not get rude. Yes, whilst the Lamarckian and the Darwinian models are the two main ones, there are numerous different theories within those two main models. That's what I meant. As for what you said about the new strains of flue, yes there are mutated, but they are not new species, just different sub species, just like different breeds of dogs. As for the numerous breeds of dogs that exist, humans domesticated and tamed the ancestors of dogs (which if I remember are wolves) and the numerous breeds came about as a result of selective breeding.


Answer these questions for me, if anyone here can actually prove that Evolution is true (no BS answers, something that is logical please)

How did blind chemistry create mind/ intelligence, meaning, altruism and morality?

Where are the scientific breakthroughs due to evolution?

How do ‘living fossils’ remain unchanged over supposed hundreds of millions of years,

How did sex originate?

How did new biochemical pathways, which involve multiple enzymes working together in sequence, originate?

Living things look like they were designed, so how do evolutionists know that they were not designed?

How could mutations—accidental copying mistakes (DNA ‘letters’ exchanged, deleted or added, genes duplicated, chromosome inversions, etc.)—create the huge volumes of information in the DNA of living things? How could such errors create 3 billion letters of DNA information to change a microbe into a microbiologist?

How did the DNA code originate?
What other coding system has existed without intelligent design? How did the DNA coding system arise without it being created?

The Theory of Evolution dictates that all organisms descended from single celled bacteria. Considering that bacteria is, and always has been, the most successful group of organisms, covering all areas of the globe in some of the most extreme environments, why would it have been advantageous to evolve into organisms that are so much more limited to the environments they can inhabit? Surely, staying as bacteria would be far more advantageous, due to their tolerence of extreme conditions, quick reproduction time, etc.

The Law of Large Numbers states that things tend to revert to their average over time (the large number of examples), while evolution requires the opposite: that things become more complex and depart further from their average over time and large numbers of examples.

[Great Nepal]

Nice try, but better luck next time. The Miller-Urey experiment was flawed on so many levels, the most basic being that assuming that a single protein formed somewhere on Earth, it would quickly degrade and cease to exist due to high temperatures, lots of UV radiation because of the lack of a ozone layer, etc).

Or, it could have formed under water or under a rock etc. Either way, your claim about organic matter not being able to form from inorganic one is false. Not to mention, that has shit all to do with evolution.

And your comment about people with different colored eyes breeding is just stupid. That's not what I meant. I said that two species that are completely dissimilar can not breed or produce fertile offspring for that matter. Can a spider and a lion breed? I thought not.

And my comment about evolution not working like in pokemon.
Lion didn't come by spider fucking spider. Spider with ability to build stronger webs may have, spiders with poision may have, spiders with better sense of sight and hearing might have etc.

And besides do you know how many proteins the human body produces and is composed of. The complexity of even a single cell belies Evolution, because it is impossible according to probability for even a single cell and the countless components, many of which we don't even know to assemble in PERFECT form.

Probability is meaningless.
Probability approaches 1 when same process could have happened in billions of planets around the universe. It worked on this one: and thus we are here.
Not to mention, evolution doesn't say it was in perfect form.

And even if one living cell somehow assembled, how would it live? Its not just going to reproduce because it isn't a bacteria and it depends on other cells to obtain energy (i.e glucose) to survive and not counting the infavourable conditions on Earth for the formation of life (high temperatures, a very weak ozone layer that couldn't protect any living thing from UV rays, etc). So any living cell that formed would have just died. So actually maybe its you that needs to go to science lessons and maybe cut out the arrogance whilst you're at it.

Or, you know it reproduces by cell division like simple cell organism do today?

I've shown that not even a single protein or living cell would have formed,

Didn't see it.
Mind showing a experiment carried out by scientist worth their pay?

so Evolution is already screwed.

...no, its not. Partially because it doesn't deal with formation of life and partially because you haven't done shit.

[Immoren]

It's the theory of evolution, not the law of evolution.

But it includes laws.

[Tsuntion]

It's the theory of evolution, not the law of evolution.

You just killed a kitten.

[Sociobiology]

Evolution as a theory won't exist in the next 3 decades.

Poe or source.

I mean if it was true, why do Evolutionists argue amongst themselves and have like 50 different versions.

They don't No scientist argues with natural selection, some argue about whether isolation or drift caused an particular individual evolutionary change, none argue that they do not occur.

The truth is only one and doesn't need to be revised.

So none of medical science is true?

Whereas a lie like Evolution needs constant revision.

All science is cosntanly being revised, that is what seperates it from religion. Natural selection however is one of the most rigourly robust principles in ALL of science.

How many people here reject Evolution?

None of the scientists

I mean who in their right mind would accept that their great ancestor is an ape.

living humans are apes, your an ape whether you believe in evolution or not.

Besides there's a ridiculously easy argument against Evolution. Three in fact. First of all, a living organism can only come from a living thing, not a non living organism.

Already showed to be wrong. in my previous post to you.

Second, lets assume that an animal evolved and had its genes mutated so that it was no longer the same organism, in order to reproduce and exist, it would need another organism that was similar enough to breed with to reproduce fertile offspring.

look up a ring species.
Then look up how evolution actually works.

Third, if Evolution is indeed real, why have we never observed it now or at other times in the past.

it is observed, mathmatically predictable and repeatable in mabratory setting.
http://myxo.css.msu.edu/ecoli/

[Somali Caliphate]

The Cambrian Explosion, in which almost all complex lifeforms from every single phyla known to mankind simultaneously destroys the explanation that is given by Evolution. In the Cambric layer of the geologic column, almost all complex organisms appear. Below this layer, the few complex organisms that can be found are soft bodied organisms like worms. And surprisingly, above this layer, the number of complex organisms successively decrease. This shows that almost all complex organisms we know today appeared simultaneously and not over a long period of time as a result of evolution. Even Darwin himself knew the great problem that the Cambrian explosion posed and he hoped that more evidence would be found in the fossil record for Evolution which explains the Cambrian Explosion in terms of Evolution and such fossils have not been found. So if all these complex organisms are appearing all at once, is it not fair to say that they can't have appeared as a result of evolution. if not, what other cause is there for the appearance of virtually all organisms known to man?

Cambrian explosion took more time than its name would suggest.

And even if it did, that doesn't address how such a vast number of organisms could have suddenly come into existence SIMULTANEOUSLY, whilst the layers before show hardly any complex organisms, except soft bodied organisms like worms.

[Great Nepal]

It's the theory of evolution, not the law of evolution.

Kitten isn't working.
Now, every time someone says evolution is just a theory, I am going to kill a kitten and puppy.

[Dyakovo]

It's the theory of evolution, not the law of evolution.

You don't know what a scientific theory is, do you?

[Rudie]

It's the theory of evolution, not the law of evolution.

Kitten isn't working.
Now, every time someone says evolution is just a theory, I am going to kill a kitten and puppy.

Gentleman, at the rate you'll be mass murdering innocent domestic pets, I'd be willing to mock-convert to Mormonism to end the bloodshed.

[Dyakovo]

Cambrian explosion took more time than its name would suggest.

And even if it did, that doesn't address how such a vast number of organisms could have suddenly come into existence SIMULTANEOUSLY, whilst the layers before show hardly any complex organisms, except soft bodied organisms like worms.

80 million years...

[Immoren]

Cambrian explosion took more time than its name would suggest.

And even if it did, that doesn't address how such a vast number of organisms could have suddenly come into existence SIMULTANEOUSLY, whilst the layers before show hardly any complex organisms, except soft bodied organisms like worms.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambrian_e ... n.E2.80.9D

[Farnhamia]

And even if it did, that doesn't address how such a vast number of organisms could have suddenly come into existence SIMULTANEOUSLY, whilst the layers before show hardly any complex organisms, except soft bodied organisms like worms.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambrian_e ... n.E2.80.9D

I'm getting the impression he's not really listening.

[Dyakovo]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambrian_e ... n.E2.80.9D

I'm getting the impression he's not really listening.

Ya think?

[L Ron Cupboard]

You would think he would at least have the decency to own up to just cut and pasting from Conservapedia.

The Law of Large Numbers states that things tend to revert to their average over time (the large number of examples), while evolution requires the opposite: that things become more complex and depart further from their average over time and large numbers of examples.

The Law of Large Numbers states that things tend to revert to their average over time (the large number of examples), while evolution requires the opposite: that things become more complex and depart further from their average over time and large numbers of examples.