Debating With Evolution Deniers is Just Like This

by cofty 218 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Landy
    Is evolutionism not based on chance?

    No, no, no, no, no, no.

    This is basic stuff ffs, get a grip.

  • DJS


    My estimate of you may be wrong, but right now you aren't swimming in a pool of credibility. One would need a shovel and a confined space permit to find your creds.

    Riddle me this, Vidman. Why did you make pejorative assertions about atheists' behaviors and motivations when you knew they were 100% inaccurate?

    Or, as Nancy Kerrigan once whined, WHYYYY?

    Making definitive. erroneous statements that could mislead others and potentially cause harm to innocent people is a despicable thing, as was seeking refuge behind the bible condemnation stick.

    You are presenting yourself as a most unpleasant character.

    A wise Ryan Lochte would use this opportunity for some serious mea culpa right now.

    This is your opoortunity. The world, well this site, is watching.

    You can thank me later.

  • cofty

    Vidqun - I have covered every one of your other objections in detail already.

    Encode, neutral mutations, "junk DNA", evolution of DNA, Cambrian "explosion" etc.

    You are too lazy or dishonest to do a google search to find the answers and too superstitious to consider them. You are the scientist who thinks that your fellow scientists who accept the fact of evolution are disciples of Dagon!

    All of them have been or will be covered in my Evolution is a Fact series...

  • Vidiot
    Vidqun - "...evolutionism..."

    Makes me think of this:

  • Vidiot

    Know what's really funny?

    When you type "evolutionism" into a thread entry, a squiggly red line appears underneath...

    ...i.e.: the forum's automatic spell-checker doesn't even acknowledge it as an actual word. :smirk:

  • redpilltwice

    What a childish attitude.

    This is precisely why evolution deniers are mocked.

    wizzstick (this reply was supposed to be posted much earlier, but it somehow delayed), why do call that childish? Isn't vidqun just describing evolution in a nuttshell? I don't deny evolution as observed, but how the hell do you turn a jellyfish into a fish with a skull, brains, eyes, backbone, gills etc.?

  • cofty
    how the hell do you turn a jellyfish into a fish with a skull, brains, eyes, backbone, gills etc.

    You don't. Neither do you turn an octopus into a rabbit or a Kangaroo into a polar bear.

    If you are really interested in the evolution of tetrapods from fish read this...

    and this...

    Isn't vidqun just describing evolution in a nuttshell?

    No he isn't. He is describing what somebody might think evolution is about if they have never read any books about it in their entire adult life.

  • Vidiot

    Just because they're called "jellyfish" doesn't mean that they're actual fish.

    They are, in fact, invertebrates. Completely different family tree.

    Another example; "pilot fish" are actually a type of porpoise.

  • Vidqun

    Sorry, I was sidetracked by another matter, as you might have noticed. Back to the business at hand.

    Chance is certainly a factor in evolution, but there are also non-random evolutionary mechanisms. Random mutation is the ultimate source of genetic variation, however natural selection, the process by which some variants survive and others do not, is not random – Berkeley – Understanding Evolution.

    So contrary to your opinion, according to the experts, a certain amount of chance is involved in the process of evolution. Wait, I am for design and against chance. You are supposed to be against design and for chance. But actually you are against chance and against design. This is very confusing. My agent of design is God. Your agent of design, let me see now, the process of natural selection. The mechanism you put your money on, random mutations. So we should not bring abiogenesis into this equation. There it is all chance.

    Cofty: The differences in sequence of cytochrome C between different species.

    Common ancestry or design? You scream common ancestry. It smacks of design to me. The same entity designed life on earth using the same blueprint/template or whatever you want to call it.

    Vidiot, first things first. I refer you to no. 6 in Webster. One is never too old to learn. 6. a process in which the whole universe is a progression of interrelated phenomena - evolutionarily adverb, evolutionary adjective, evolutionism noun, evolutionist adjective. Evolutionism means the whole package and everything related to it. Don’t rely too much on Spellcheckers of Word processing programs. They are not all that good.

    Secondly, it's easy to draw a tree of life on paper. It is not so easy to connect the dots in real life. You'll see there's lots and lots of versions of the tree of life. Few can agree on the details.

    Redpilltwice, I also find it hard to connect the dots from sea creature to land creature back to sea creature (in some cases, e.g., dolphins, whales).

    DJS, Western civilization is based on our Judaeo-Christian-Roman background. That's where our laws and ethics come from, whether you like it or not. Take that away, and what do you have?

  • cofty

    Vidiot - it is impossible to have a reasonable conversation with you.

    I don't know why you claimed to be a professional microbiologist when you lack knowledge of the most basic science.

    Your confusion over the role of chance and you misunderstanding about "design" should be very easy to clear up. But we both know that any attempt to explain will result in more obtuse verbiage in reply. You have absolutely no interest in learning anything that challenges your religious superstitions.

    Thank you for illustrating the OP so well...

Share this