Evolution question.

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Are you denying that there is much disagreement in the scientific community regarding evolution?

This red herring won't help you. You cannot produce a shred of evidence or argument. You are the kid in the back row babbling, while failing the science class.

 

[Woodznutz]

Your religion is based upon assumptions.

True. I assume it's true.

Here's a brief article about the disagreements of scientists.

Scientists are still fleshing out Darwinâs theory of evolution | Letters

Letters: There can be no one unifying theory, writes Prof Jonathan Bard, while Nicholas Maxwell looks to the role of purposive actions and Pete Bibby says the fittest theory will survive

www.theguardian.com

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

True. I assume it's true.

Here's a brief article about the disagreements of scientists.

Scientists are still fleshing out Darwinâs theory of evolution | Letters

Letters: There can be no one unifying theory, writes Prof Jonathan Bard, while Nicholas Maxwell looks to the role of purposive actions and Pete Bibby says the fittest theory will survive

www.theguardian.com

Oh look, an article you didn't read.

Scientists are 100% in agreement on the fundamental Theory of Evolution.

 

[Woodznutz]

This red herring won't help you. You cannot produce a shred of evidence or argument. You are the kid in the back row babbling, while failing the science class.

Produce evidence that proves me wrong.

 

[Woodznutz]

Oh look, an article you didn't read.

Scientists are 100% in agreement on the fundamental Theory of Evolution.

I read every word. I especially liked the example of circular reasoning regarding the foxes and rabbits (that if true would produce foxes and rabbits that could outrun a cheetah).

Of course, they're in agreement. Why wouldn't they be?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Produce evidence that proves me wrong.

As soon as you make a specific argument against one fundamental part of evolution, I will obliterate it.

Which will be never. Because you know less than nothing about evolution.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I read every word. I especially liked the example of circular reasoning regarding the foxes and rabbits.

Of course, they're in agreement. Why wouldn't they be?

Why wouldn't they be? Is this a joke?

For the same reason they aren't in agreement that exorcism cures mental illness: if the evidence did not all show the same thing.

You're just here to waste people's time. You are not a serious person.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

False. If it is random, why aren't there cubical planets?

It is most assuredly not random. The laws of physics are the same everywhere





The laws of physics.

Same, correct answer as the 20 other times you asked the EXACT SAME QUESTION.

So you're saying its the force of gravity (maybe) that binds molecules together into proteins?

 

[Woodznutz]

Why wouldn't they be? Is this a joke?

For the same reason they aren't in agreement that exorcism cures mental illness: if the evidence did not all show the same thing.

You're just here to waste people's time. You are not a serious person.

I'm very serious.

Your belief in evolution is transitory. Tomorrow's scientists may evolve a different point of view and abandon it altogether. My belief in creation isn't subject to evolution.

 

[Woodznutz]

Why wouldn't they be? Is this a joke?

For the same reason they aren't in agreement that exorcism cures mental illness: if the evidence did not all show the same thing.

You're just here to waste people's time. You are not a serious person.

Scientists are in agreement about the overall theory, but disagree over the details. It's the 'details' that hold the whole thing together. Agree?

 

[Woodznutz]

As soon as you make a specific argument against one fundamental part of evolution, I will obliterate it.

Which will be never. Because you know less than nothing about evolution.

I'm just pointing out that there are disagreements and assumptions, which don't make for a sound theory.

 

[Woodznutz]

Which will be never. Because you know less than nothing about evolution.

I've read enough scientific articles on evolution to realize that no one knows anything about it. It's all gobbledygook. Read it for yourself some time.

 

[Hollie]

True. I assume it's true.

Here's a brief article about the disagreements of scientists.

Scientists are still fleshing out Darwinâs theory of evolution | Letters

Letters: There can be no one unifying theory, writes Prof Jonathan Bard, while Nicholas Maxwell looks to the role of purposive actions and Pete Bibby says the fittest theory will survive

www.theguardian.com

What is the “unifying theory” that is required in biological evolution?

What disagreements are there among scientists?

 

[Hollie]

I'm just pointing out that there are disagreements and assumptions, which don't make for a sound theory.

You’re relying completely on the slogan, “assumptions”, yet you can’t identify any.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

So you're saying its the force of gravity (maybe) that binds molecules together into proteins?

No, I gave an example of selection.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I've read enough scientific articles on evolution to realize that no one knows anything about it. It's all gobbledygook. Read it for yourself some time.

Now you are just shamelessly lying. This is embarrassing behavior, for a grown man.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I'm just pointing out that there are disagreements and assumptions, which don't make for a sound theory.

A strange, ad hoc lie, as one would ecxpect from someone trying to fudge their way through a book report

 

[Woodznutz]

Now you are just shamelessly lying. This is embarrassing behavior, for a grown man.

I'm not trying to convince you to believe what I believe about evolution. I do want to convince you that I don't believe it. Why would that require proof?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I'm not trying to convince you to believe what I believe about evolution. I do want to convince you that I don't believe it. Why would that require proof?

We already understand each other, on that front. What a strange post.

 

[Woodznutz]

We already understand each other, on that front. What a strange post.

I'm a strange guy. My late boss used the term 'interesting'.