Fallacies of Evolution Redux

Discussion in 'Science' started by ChemEngineer, May 9, 2017.

  1. Cosmo

    Cosmo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2015
    Messages:
    1,421
    Likes Received:
    588
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Let's see,
    You never have provided evidence that refutes evolution. Check.
    You can't provide evidence that refutes evolution. Check.
    You won't provide evidence that refutes evolution. Check.

    Congratulations on your inability trifecta.
     
    Derideo_Te likes this.
  2. Cosmo

    Cosmo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2015
    Messages:
    1,421
    Likes Received:
    588
    Trophy Points:
    113
    >snip<
    I read the articles,they support evolution.
     
    Derideo_Te likes this.
  3. Cosmo

    Cosmo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2015
    Messages:
    1,421
    Likes Received:
    588
    Trophy Points:
    113
    >snip<
    Because you can't defend your position.
     
    Derideo_Te likes this.
  4. iamanonman

    iamanonman Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2016
    Messages:
    4,757
    Likes Received:
    1,554
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Don't you think this is silly though? What happens if someone points out something wrong with one of your claims? Don't want to know about it? I certainly do. And I'll be the first to admit that I make mistakes in the context of science all of the time. I want people to challenge my claims and point out where I may not be right. Admittedly it does eat at my ego a little bit, but I can take it on the chin knowing that I won't repeat that mistake in the future. But either way in the process of defending my claims I usually learn more about the topic than I did before. It makes me a more knowledgeable scientist.
     
    Cosmo and Derideo_Te like this.
  5. Skruddgemire

    Skruddgemire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2017
    Messages:
    718
    Likes Received:
    353
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Oh for the love of [bleep]! I'm the one asking the question. I have actually stated that I'm willing to look at an alternative theory. if anyone could be arsed to present one.

    You know, at least with the Flat Earthers...they're more than happy to present a contrary argument. Tons of websites, papers from experts...they at least put in some game.

    But when I ask "If not evolution, then what explains the animals that are here now that weren't in existence back then?" All I get is "Don't know, don't care."
     
    Cosmo and Derideo_Te like this.
  6. Skruddgemire

    Skruddgemire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2017
    Messages:
    718
    Likes Received:
    353
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Why?
     
    Derideo_Te likes this.
  7. ChemEngineer

    ChemEngineer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2016
    Messages:
    1,818
    Likes Received:
    812
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Learn something about science, and display such knowledge. THEN you can have an intelligent discussion.
    You're in way over your head and all you can do is keep squawking inane blather.

    Now join your friends on my Ignore List. Long overdue.

    ~ciao
     
  8. Skruddgemire

    Skruddgemire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2017
    Messages:
    718
    Likes Received:
    353
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    I am aware of science. I'm aware that theories get adopted and often rejected as we learn more. I am also aware that the first part of science is the question of "Why?"

    A question that I've asked here over an over again. I am giving everyone here a chance to present their side of the argument. That side has not been forthcoming. No counter arguments, no alternative theories...nothing. As I said previously, at least the Flat Earthers will put forth a little effort and answer questions like "What explains eclipses?". Granted their theories may make little sense, but at least they have them. At least they have the courage to pursue their side of the argument and don't just go "Nuh-uh" and leave it at that.

    Ok...maybe my idea of what science is dead wrong. Maybe I'm not asking the right question. Maybe I'm being a petty minded annoyance by asking it over and over again.

    But I do know what science is not. It is not a bunch of people saying "I don't believe" and then doing nothing about it. Science doesn't go "Well I was wrong about this. Might as well hang up my lab coat and take up crochet since I'm such a moron."

    You want to add me to your ignore list? Fine. You do that. Put your fingers in your ears, hum really loudly and pretend I and my question don't exist. That's your right.
     
    Cosmo and Derideo_Te like this.
  9. yguy

    yguy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2010
    Messages:
    17,640
    Likes Received:
    718
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Seeing they don't even know what life is, I'm hard pressed to find the question interesting.
     
  10. ESTT

    ESTT Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2017
    Messages:
    1,144
    Likes Received:
    274
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I've been curious about this. If evolution were ever proven to be true what is the worst that can happen? Would it truly be so bad?
     
  11. Strasser

    Strasser Banned

    Joined:
    May 6, 2012
    Messages:
    4,219
    Likes Received:
    526
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Indeed. According to some of them, there is no difference between conception and a two year old, so along with 'normalizing' pedophilia we can see abortion being extended to babies as old as two being the hot new 'progressive' agendas in the very near future. Of course being able to peddle this sort of sociopathic stuff is why there are so many who need to brainwash as many ignorant people as possible that 'evolution is a scientific fact'. It's not about 'science', it's about politics and Xian Bashing, mindless self-indulgence being the Holy Grail for the cultists.
     
    Last edited: May 31, 2017
    ChemEngineer likes this.
  12. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    34,815
    Likes Received:
    26,875
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ironic!

    :roflol:
     
    Cosmo likes this.
  13. Strasser

    Strasser Banned

    Joined:
    May 6, 2012
    Messages:
    4,219
    Likes Received:
    526
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It will never be proven in your lifetime, so it's a moot issue. Not nearly enough money and people to scour the planet and digging it all up, much less by people with any genuine objectivity, mostly just the usual attempts at indulging in confirmation bias.
     
    Last edited: May 31, 2017
  14. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    34,815
    Likes Received:
    26,875
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Thanks for tactily admitting to being a theist by quoting Proverbs 26:3.

    Hard to be more of a science denialist than to quote bible verses advocating senseless violence against animals and your fellow Americans!

    :roflol:
     
    Cosmo likes this.
  15. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    34,815
    Likes Received:
    26,875
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ironic given that you have quoted theist doctrine to deny science!
     
    Cosmo likes this.
  16. Strasser

    Strasser Banned

    Joined:
    May 6, 2012
    Messages:
    4,219
    Likes Received:
    526
    Trophy Points:
    113
    dble post
     
    Last edited: May 31, 2017
  17. Strasser

    Strasser Banned

    Joined:
    May 6, 2012
    Messages:
    4,219
    Likes Received:
    526
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Re 'scientific papers', fakery is very common.

    https://www.bing.com/search?q=35%+of+scientific+papers+faked&pc=MOZI&form=MOZSBR

    http://www.livescience.com/27255-bad-science-retracted-papers.html

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who's_Afraid_of_Peer_Review?

    http://www.economist.com/news/china...earch-leading-academic-fraud-looks-good-paper

    ... and on and on and on. the so-called 'mental health sciences' are particularly notorious for sloppy methodologies and claiming conclusions that don't exist.The 'Gay Rights' hoax is built entirely on total crap methodologies, combined with a media campaign built entirely around a hate speech campaign.Most of the 'evolution is science' is motivated by that sort of activism, not 'rationalism'.
     
    Last edited: May 31, 2017
    ChemEngineer likes this.
  18. tecoyah

    tecoyah Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Messages:
    27,729
    Likes Received:
    8,725
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Are biology, Geology, Genetics, Archeology not science?

    Evolution confirmation is based upon these things.
     
    Cosmo and Derideo_Te like this.
  19. iamanonman

    iamanonman Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2016
    Messages:
    4,757
    Likes Received:
    1,554
    Trophy Points:
    113
    How can evolution be that bad if, despite it's weaknesses, it still yields some useful explanatory and predictive power? Can someone provide a better alternative that we can use as a yardstick to gauge or rank how good or bad it is?
     
    Last edited: May 31, 2017
  20. ChemEngineer

    ChemEngineer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2016
    Messages:
    1,818
    Likes Received:
    812
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Strasser, I would be proud to call you my Friend. God bless you and increase your territory. - This is the Prayer of Jabez.
     
    Strasser likes this.
  21. Strasser

    Strasser Banned

    Joined:
    May 6, 2012
    Messages:
    4,219
    Likes Received:
    526
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm an agnostic, and I sleep just fine not knowing the answers to everything, and I don't need to invent fake 'facts' to justify a belief system. A lot of assorted deviants, gimps, and sociopaths do, however, and despite all their noise about 'science n stuff', they want to peddle false narratives as a phony buttress for very unscientific and very harmful social and political agendas.
     
    Last edited: May 31, 2017
  22. Strasser

    Strasser Banned

    Joined:
    May 6, 2012
    Messages:
    4,219
    Likes Received:
    526
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No, it isn't.
     
  23. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    34,815
    Likes Received:
    26,875
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Denial of reality does not alter reality!
     
    Cosmo likes this.
  24. Strasser

    Strasser Banned

    Joined:
    May 6, 2012
    Messages:
    4,219
    Likes Received:
    526
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I agree. You should stop doing that.

    Tell us some more about about all that 'chemistry stuff', wherein you posted that if you put certain kinds of atoms together they will form moelcules n stuff. That was some pretty hilarious ad hoc reductionism claiming it proved 'evolution'. Did you learn this from your first chemistry set?
     
  25. iamanonman

    iamanonman Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2016
    Messages:
    4,757
    Likes Received:
    1,554
    Trophy Points:
    113
    For some of us it's only about science. I have no interest in bashing Christians. That's not my style. In fact, I feel it necessary to defend them. With that said what's so bad about evolution? God could have created life by using evolution as the mechanism could he not? That is a far more fascinating, majestic, and satisfying explanation IMHO than if he had just snapped his fingers. And, if true, it's not like it would rock a Christian's faith would it? Of course not. So why the pretense that it's a bad thing? And here's another question to ponder. If he just snapped his fingers to bring life into existence then why does he make it seem like evolution is involved somehow?
     
    Last edited: May 31, 2017
    Derideo_Te likes this.

Share This Page