GoodScienceForYou Neutral Evolution Forum - For Evolution to be true..............

GoodScienceForYou

YaBB Administrator

Offline

The obvious isn't obvious
until it is obvious

Posts: 1361
United States
Gender: male

For Evolution to be true..............
Nov 7^th, 2009 at 9:12pm

We need evidence. Simple as that.

We need to have DNA from these fossils so that the "indoctrinated" people who believe this nonsense have something besides their brainwashed belief to base it on.

There is no evidence of any creature ever changing into a new species with totally new morphology. No fish has ever become a land creature..Not ever. There is no empirical and absolute evidence for it.

There are no transitional fossils either. There are fossil remains of creatures that came into existence, remained much the same, then went extinct. The ones that are still around have been here for over 50,000 years relatively unchanged and none have jumped genus as is the belief of evodelusionism.

There is no DNA in fossils, but there are a lot of brainwashed believers. This has been going on for centuries in science. I call it "the world is flat" syndrome. If you get enough believers then it becomes real.

What evidence do you have to show evolution as absolutely real, with NO opinions from anyone. I have asked at least 1000 people who believe in this nonsense and they never answer that question. Guess why? It is all based on opinions and nothing else.

I have read at least 200,000 of these papers, skimmed many of them looking for this evidence and there is none. There is a projection of belief on evidence, and nothing else. There is an "assumption in the mind of the follower of this cult" that this "must be real", "has to be real because so many experts and people with credentials have told me so" and that is at the basic foundation of this Religion.
I am different. I never believe anyone who tells me anything and take it as if it was real. My father taught me that. I look at the evidence with out the BS of indoctrination having any affect on my mind.

Whenever there is "evidence" that can be seen and logically tested in many ways, they never test it by anything but "evodelusionism". That is fraud. Most of those ways to test this "evidence" is not even an indication of or "proof". It destroys it as "for evolution" or "neutralizes" it as proof of anything.

They really have no understanding of this evidence, but they always say it "suggests evolution". When it actually suggest many other concepts that have no connection to this theory of evolution.

If you would like to discuss this in detail and bring forth your evidence, I would love to see it. You can post up to 6000 characters, and if you need more, I can change to forum to accept it.

Back to top

"Putting your faith in humanity has historically not been a good concept. Why do you think it is "different" now?"
"Find the truth for yourself and don't succumb to indoctrination."

IP Logged

prolescum

Junior Member

Offline

LoLtering for the sake
of it

Posts: 93

Re: For Evolution to be true..............
Reply #1 - Nov 8^th, 2009 at 10:38am

GoodScienceForYou wrote on Nov 7^th, 2009 at 9:12pm:

We need evidence. Simple as that.

We need to have DNA from these fossils so that the "indoctrinated" people who believe this nonsense have something besides their brainwashed belief to base it on.

There is no evidence of any creature ever changing into a new species with totally new morphology. No fish has ever become a land creature..Not ever. There is no empirical and absolute evidence for it.

There doesn't need to be a totally new morphology for natural selection to be true.
Quote:

There are no transitional fossils either. There are fossil remains of creatures that came into existence, remained much the same, then went extinct. The ones that are still around have been here for over 50,000 years relatively unchanged and none have jumped genus as is the belief of evodelusionism.

Actually, that's not quite true; there are many species that have been observed to have mutated, and evolutionary theory doesn't require a genus jump.
Quote:

There is no DNA in fossils, but there are a lot of brainwashed believers. This has been going on for centuries in science. I call it "the world is flat" syndrome. If you get enough believers then it becomes real.

That's all very well, but, forgive me if this seems rude, it's not meant to be, your manner in this thread is quite the blanket 'I'm right, you're wrong' that you're accusing the advocates of evolution of being. I understand that you're often required to use a certain forcefulness over on youtube, but this is your own forum; you can temper your text and have two way discussions without the need for the proverbial caps lock. I only say this because I saw you on there and genuinely want to discuss the subject. If you only want trolls, I'll get me coat...
Quote:

What evidence do you have to show evolution as absolutely real, with NO opinions from anyone. I have asked at least 1000 people who believe in this nonsense and they never answer that question. Guess why? It is all based on opinions and nothing else.

Well, to be honest, this isn't really an argument; if you ask a thousand people how bread is made, I imagine few know an actual recipe.
Quote:

I have read at least 200,000 of these papers, skimmed many of them looking for this evidence and there is none. There is a projection of belief on evidence, and nothing else. There is an "assumption in the mind of the follower of this cult" that this "must be real", "has to be real because so many experts and people with credentials have told me so" and that is at the basic foundation of this Religion.

Well, I think you can see that I tend to disagree with you about its validity, but we'll get to that in due course, and perhaps one will convince the other Wink

I do, however, seriously dispute calling a religion or even a cult. You have to remember that most people don't care (which is unfortunate, obviously) so they have vague assumptions about how the world works. This is true of almost any doctrine you can think of; people have what they consider more pressing needs, ie they don't care. Whether they've had a state funded education and been taught evolutionary theory or not.
Quote:

I am different. I never believe anyone who tells me anything and take it as if it was real. My father taught me that. I look at the evidence with out the BS of indoctrination having any affect on my mind.

That's all very well then. Let's discuss something that evolutionary proponents fundamentally believe. Something specific.
Quote:

Whenever there is "evidence" that can be seen and logically tested in many ways, they never test it by anything but "evodelusionism". That is fraud. Most of those ways to test this "evidence" is not even an indication of or "proof". It destroys it as "for evolution" or "neutralizes" it as proof of anything.

I'm not quite sure what you mean here, you'll need to give examples.

NB. I don't really want to read a host of links though, I'd rather discuss the points you're making.

Quote:

They really have no understanding of this evidence, but they always say it "suggests evolution". When it actually suggest many other concepts that have no connection to this theory of evolution.

Are you proposing an alternative? Perhaps you could articulate it in a thread.
Quote:

If you would like to discuss this in detail and bring forth your evidence, I would love to see it. You can post up to 6000 characters, and if you need more, I can change to forum to accept it.

I would very much like to discuss it in detail, however, you are the OP, you have to state the details to be discussed or at least which part of your OP you'd like to get into first

Back to top

http://dictionary.reference.com/

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/

http://www.merriam-webster.com/

IP Logged

GoodScienceForYou

YaBB Administrator

Offline

The obvious isn't obvious
until it is obvious

Posts: 1361
United States
Gender: male

Re: For Evolution to be true..............
Reply #2 - Nov 8^th, 2009 at 10:58am

prolescum wrote on Nov 8^th, 2009 at 10:38am:

[quote author=595C555156380 link=1257653566/0#0 date=1257653566]We need evidence. Simple as that.

We need to have DNA from these fossils so that the "indoctrinated" people who believe this nonsense have something besides their brainwashed belief to base it on.

There is no evidence of any creature ever changing into a new species with totally new morphology. No fish has ever become a land creature..Not ever. There is no empirical and absolute evidence for it.

There doesn't need to be a totally new morphology for natural selection to be true.
Quote:

Natural Selection is a made up term to try and understand all of this, but it is not even a scientific principle because it has no way to be tested by the scientific method. It is not science, but a dogma of belief projected on what is observed. The idea of 'natural selection' is only as related to breeding of animals, but no animals have ever evolved into a totally new species.

The final premises of evodelusionism religion is that by some magic all creatures on the land were once marine life. There is no evidence that any marine life has ever "mutated" into a reptile. It is the most ridiculous idea that by some "reason" a fish would "need" to breath air, grow legs and step out of the water. By what reason would that happen? It is utterly illogical and is an abortion of logic and reason to think that any fish would "need" to walk on land by some fictitious fantasy of "evolutionary pressure".

The only results of evolutionary pressure in evidence is extinction or mass migration to find food. If the food supply is gone; extinction. If the flood comes and the creature can't eat, extinction. If the earth tilts and everything freezes; extinction. There is not 2 million years for a gradual transformation required for evolutionary pressure to function. This is according to the common beliefs of evodelusionsts. Evolution does not happen "overnight" but over millions of years. There is not millions of years to find food or to swim to a new warm climate in order to survive.
This is why the fossil record ONLY shows extinction not any form of transformation of any species.

The actual premises of evolution has nothing to do with "natural selection". It is the idea that creatures have magical ability to transform into totally new genus with new DNA base pair counts and a drastically changed number of chromosomes because of some fantasy "evolutionary pressure".

"Evolutionary pressure" is not even a scientific term. It is made up dogma to try and fill in the gaps of no evidence with faith and belief. This idea of evolutionary pressure has never been tested by any scientific method, yet it is accepted as "rational" dogma of this religion. Have you ever seen any scientific experiment or detailed study that proves this is even a scientific term? It isn't until it has some data to prove it to be true.

The only evidence we have is of a complete genealogy of the parent group (genus) of a line of species and adaptation to the environment. This is not the foundational definition of evolution, but normal adaptation to the environment and is only natural genetics.

And this idea that not being able to breed has some relationship showing evolution. This is not true, because as the environment changes the food changes, the creatures lose features and do not gain. Evolution specifically states that creatures get more complex, but they also become less complex as the environment changes and food becomes easier to eat and digest. And creatures can re-adapt to the old conditions as needed for survival. All there is in evidence is creatures adapt in order to survive as the same species.

There are no transitional fossils either. There are fossil remains of creatures that came into existence, remained much the same, then went extinct. This is what is in evidence. The ones that are still around have been here for over 50,000,000 years (by the screwed up dating methods) relatively unchanged and none have jumped genus as is the belief of evodelusionism.

Actually, that's not quite true; there are many species that have been observed to have mutated, and evolutionary theory doesn't require a genus jump.
Quote:

There are no creatures that have mutated and can breed and reproduce. "Mutants" do not make it. The term mutation is strictly referred to the disintegration of the chromosomes and has nothing to do with normal adaptations of a creature. (These jerks have changed the foundational meanings of scientific terms to match this religion. It is called side stepping to perpetuate belief.)

As people go from one generation to the next there are changes in the DNA of the offspring. They do not know if this is from ancient hereditary traits that are showing in the offspring, or from environment or from just the traits mixing of the parents, but it is not evidence of any mutation from the original chromosome count or from the parents species. It is just genealogy and nothing else.

There is no DNA in fossils, but there are a lot of brainwashed believers. This has been going on for centuries in science. I call it "the world is flat" syndrome. If you get enough believers then it becomes "real".

That's all very well, but, forgive me if this seems rude, it's not meant to be, your manner in this thread is quite the blanket 'I'm right, you're wrong' that you're accusing the advocates of evolution of being. I understand that you're often required to use a certain forcefulness over on youtube, but this is your own forum; you can temper your text and have two way discussions without the need for the proverbial caps lock. I only say this because I saw you on there and genuinely want to discuss the subject. If you only want trolls, I'll get me coat...
Quote:

I am an expert on this subject. I can speak as an expert because I am. If you find that difficult to deal with, I am sorry for you. I have a lot to teach you on how to be a free thinker and not lay down for false ideas.
I teach people to think for themselves, because that ability has been taught out of most people by societal pressures to conform.

Over on youtube, anyone with brains is not allowed to show the facts on this subject. They are immediately attacked by your friends.

Nobody wants to admit that some form of science is actually a religion and it is extremely obvious to me that it is. Nobody wants to realize that they have been duped by societies indoctrination methods on children. If you listen to the videos that I present, I clearly show how indoctrination takes place. If you are not capable of seeing that you have been indoctrinated then that is your problem. I was able to avoid indoctrination and to remove any indoctrination by society by pure logic and reason and by the fact that my father told me point blank that people are full of agendas in all areas and when you have no evidence to back up your beliefs, then it is religion. His father was a fanatical fundamentalist who taught the bible with a stick beating. So, I was not raised with any religion.

What evidence do you have to show evolution as absolutely real, with NO opinions from anyone. I have asked at least 1000 people who believe in this nonsense and they never answer that question. Guess why? It is all based on opinions and nothing else.

Well, to be honest, this isn't really an argument; if you ask a thousand people how bread is made, I imagine few know an actual recipe.
Quote:

This IS the argument! If you have no obvious and absolutely empirical nor absolute evidence of anything, then why are you a believer? All I have read in my 40 years almost 41 is opinions disguised as "scientific papers", and not any absolute evidence. Most of the evidence can easily be destroyed by pure logic and because all of the evidence can be explained by genetics and nothing else. Genetics disproves this idea of creatures coming from common ancestors that are not in the same genus.

I have read at least 200,000 of these papers, skimmed many of them looking for this evidence and there is none. There is a projection of belief on evidence, and nothing else. There is an "assumption in the mind of the follower of this religion" that this "must be real", "has to be real because so many experts and people with credentials have told me so" and that is at the basic foundation of this Religion.

Well, I think you can see that I tend to disagree with you about its validity, but we'll get to that in due course, and perhaps one will convince the other Wink

I do, however, seriously dispute calling a religion or even a cult. You have to remember that most people don't care (which is unfortunate, obviously) so they have vague assumptions about how the world works. This is true of almost any doctrine you can think of; people have what they consider more pressing needs, ie they don't care. Whether they've had a state funded education and been taught evolutionary theory or not.
Quote:

I am different. I never believe anyone who tells me anything and take it as if it was real. My father taught me that. I look at the evidence with out the BS of indoctrination having any affect on my mind.

That's all very well then. Let's discuss something that evolutionary proponents fundamentally believe. Something specific.
Quote:

Whenever there is "evidence" that can be seen and logically tested in many ways, they never test it by anything but "evodelusionism". That is fraud. Most of those ways to test this "evidence" is not even an indication of or "proof". It destroys it as "for evolution" or "neutralizes" it as proof of anything.

I'm not quite sure what you mean here, you'll need to give examples.

NB. I don't really want to read a host of links though, I'd rather discuss the points you're making.

Quote:

They really have no understanding of this evidence, but they always say it "suggests evolution". When it actually suggest many other concepts that have no connection to this theory of evolution.

Are you proposing an alternative? Perhaps you could articulate it in a thread.
Quote:

If you would like to discuss this in detail and bring forth your evidence, I would love to see it. You can post up to 6000 characters, and if you need more, I can change to forum to accept it.

I would very much like to discuss it in detail, however, you are the OP, you have to state the details to be discussed or at least which part of your OP you'd like to get into first

I want you to show me what evidence you find so compelling that you would believe in this belief system?
I am patient and have read, most all of the papers on this.
If you want to find out the truth that I know then ask.
I am prepared to answer any scientist and explain in detail the truth of any "idea" in this belief system.

Back to top

"Putting your faith in humanity has historically not been a good concept. Why do you think it is "different" now?"
"Find the truth for yourself and don't succumb to indoctrination."

IP Logged

GoodScienceForYou

YaBB Administrator

Offline

The obvious isn't obvious
until it is obvious

Posts: 1361
United States
Gender: male

Re: For Evolution to be true..............
Reply #3 - Nov 9^th, 2009 at 11:26am

"Are you proposing an alternative? Perhaps you could articulate it in a thread."

This is where people get all screwed up. The need to understand how life got here is the cause of all sorts of religions false sciences and utter nonsense.

You need to get rid of that need or desire to know things that we have absolutely no way to understand, except by some messed up beliefs. The need is a weakness that causes delusions and fantasy.

If you don't have absolute evidence for anything in your life, and you need to believe, then recognize that it has no validity in reality, until you actually have absolute empirical and obvious evidence, with no interpretation by anyone.

This religion of Evodelusionism, is no different than any of the prior mythological religions that have plagued science since the beginning of science. If you believe in this you must be brainwashed, because it has no empirical absolute evidence that can be verified.

If it did these discussions would not exist.

Back to top

"Putting your faith in humanity has historically not been a good concept. Why do you think it is "different" now?"
"Find the truth for yourself and don't succumb to indoctrination."

IP Logged

GoodScienceForYou

YaBB Administrator

Offline

The obvious isn't obvious
until it is obvious

Posts: 1361
United States
Gender: male

Re: For Evolution to be true..............
Reply #4 - Nov 9^th, 2009 at 12:55pm

prolescum wrote on Nov 9^th, 2009 at 12:24pm:

I see. I came here expecting to have a debate with you outside the idiocy of youtube, but it seems that your detractors are right; everything is stupid except whatever YOU say. I get it, this 'forum' is for you to proselytize, not to discuss whether your wild claims have any merit. Well, all I can say is good luck. Your ignorance is magnified by your stupidity. I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, thought you may actually be adult enough to discuss, at length, how YOUR beliefs (yes, that's what they are, even by your own definition) are true.

Feel free to delete my messages and posts, as they don't further your ridiculous cause. I hope you enjoy the trolls, because it is now evident that your ego is the only reason for this forum's existence.

You have my pity and sincere apologies for presuming you were capable of discussion.

Apparently you don't have any answers to the questions I pose. That is sad. Cry

I had hoped that you had the capability to get free of this nonsense. I had great hopes for you as a human being that you would be curious enough to just try to get free. It takes courage to face what has happened to you by the life and circumstances that you think or are led to believe to be good.

In India they have class systems in which the Adiwassi live in huts and they accept that as a good life. This is the nature of cultural brainwashing and laying down to this sort of thing.

I have gotten free of all that HEMG, and if you want to you too can be free of it, but you have to be absolutely honest with yourself.

All people afflicted with this religion, need to read all that I present, if anyone wants to be a free thinker and get outside of other people's nonsensical and absolutely not proved beliefs. Once you are brainwashed and you are "one of them", it is difficult to get free. The pressure to conform is very strong on children. The crap on TV just supports this delusional belief system, that has no empirical evidence.

Brainwashing is a very powerful thing done to children today. It is also the cause of much suffering in this world.

If you think about this for a moment and answer these questions to yourself:
(You do not have to answer to me or this forum, just in private.)
1/ What was the process used on you that got you to believe in evolution without ever examining it away from the indoctrination?
2/ Did you believe in evolution before you took even one classroom on this? (This is how children are set up to fail at free thought. TV, parents, friends, and the culture in general.)
3/ Why do you not look outside of the "indoctrinators" propaganda to seek the truth? You must know they all have monetary agendas to perpetuate this.
4/ How much of this is cultural and peer pressure to conform and be accepted by friends and schoolmates and society?
5/ Cults will offer a "pledge of allegiance" to the cult. In this case it is a complete drop of reason and willingness to conform and NOT study this away from the "brainwashers" This is the conformity and a declaration of "I believe in Evolution" in some form, even a test or a classroom presentation is used to confirm your allegiance to the cult. In other religions it is a baptism in front of other people or coming to the "front" and declare your "faith". Do you remember when this happened to you? When you "crossed the line" of being an observer and real scientist to the point of making your declaration of faith and belief?

Once you declare belief, you have no credibility as a scientist, when this is a totally unproven theory based on mythology from over 2000 years ago.
The mantra "evolution is real" is deep in these brainwashed students. It becomes the "view" of all they see, and so they can only see with "evodelusion glasses".

It is amazing that evodelusionists can see this in other people and their beliefs (religions), but believers are too egotistical and lost in belief to even listen. They are controlled by fear and never want to go "there".

This site is here to get you to think beyond the indoctrination. To get people outside of that tiny box of indoctrination in which they (indoctrinators) leave out all the important "stuff" and only feed you what causes belief.
If you don't have any doubts about evolution then you are not human.

The indoctrinators do to you exactly what happened to them. They give you all sorts of reasons why you should never listen to anyone outside the cult. That is how you know it is a cult. They tell you to only listen to fully indoctrinated cult members and to never listen to anyone else. You know in your heart I am right on this, because I see it all the time. Only the great high priests have control over your mind and you are to listen to no one else.

From my perspective I feel deep compassion for your condition of mind and soul. You are taught to be controlled by fear and that God is the delusion. That means your life is hopeless in your own eyes. This is the communist agenda by the way that Karl Popper put into science so this crap could go on. The first thing communist do is to eradicate God from the populous, burn all religious books and make you have allegiance to the "mother land" or some other disgusting crap that feeds their pockets.

If you don't know this, you do now.

Listen carefully to my video!

Back to top

"Putting your faith in humanity has historically not been a good concept. Why do you think it is "different" now?"
"Find the truth for yourself and don't succumb to indoctrination."

IP Logged

Squawk

Ex Member

Re: For Evolution to be true..............
Reply #5 - Nov 21^st, 2009 at 12:40pm

GoodScienceForYou wrote on Nov 7^th, 2009 at 9:12pm:

We need evidence. Simple as that.

We need to have DNA from these fossils so that the "indoctrinated" people who believe this nonsense have something besides their brainwashed belief to base it on.

How was it that Charles Darwin could formulate a theory of evolution without knowing that genetics even existed?

GoodScienceForYou wrote on Nov 7^th, 2009 at 9:12pm:

There is no evidence of any creature ever changing into a new species with totally new morphology. No fish has ever become a land creature..Not ever. There is no empirical and absolute evidence for it.

That's a good thing, since it would falsify neo-darwinian evolution, the idea of gradual changes accumulating. Glad you agree with this.

GoodScienceForYou wrote on Nov 7^th, 2009 at 9:12pm:

There are no transitional fossils either. There are fossil remains of creatures that came into existence, remained much the same, then went extinct. The ones that are still around have been here for over 50,000 years relatively unchanged and none have jumped genus as is the belief of evodelusionism.

Could you identify a single instance of a scientific paper on evolution suggesting that a species can jump genus? I contend you are making it up. Further, can you explain to me what characteristics you would look for in a species that would fall between panderichthys and acanthostega would have. Show how this is different to the features of tiktaalik, and then explain how the features that are present in Tiktaalik match the predictions of the scientists who went in search of it, predictions formed from looking at the two species I mentioned.

GoodScienceForYou wrote on Nov 7^th, 2009 at 9:12pm:

This has been going on for centuries in science. I call it "the world is flat" syndrome. If you get enough believers then it becomes real.

You seem to have science confused with religion.

GoodScienceForYou wrote on Nov 7^th, 2009 at 9:12pm:

What evidence do you have to show evolution as absolutely real, with NO opinions from anyone. I have asked at least 1000 people who believe in this nonsense and they never answer that question. Guess why? It is all based on opinions and nothing else.

Tell me, do you believe in gravity? Do you have anything other than an opinion on the matter?

GoodScienceForYou wrote on Nov 7^th, 2009 at 9:12pm:

I have read at least 200,000 of these papers, skimmed many of them looking for this evidence and there is none. There is a projection of belief on evidence, and nothing else.

Could you link to a single one of these papers and deconstrut it for us, line by line. I presume that you have understood it properly to be able to say it doesn't show that it purports to.

It should be noted that 200,000 is 14 papers per day every day for the last 14 years. I further contend that this is not possible to achieve. Your assertions about evolution attest that you understood little of what was presented, but I am prepared to be corrected here. So, pick a paper, link to where it was published, and dissect it line by line or paragraph by paragraph.

GoodScienceForYou wrote on Nov 7^th, 2009 at 9:12pm:

There is an "assumption in the mind of the follower of this cult" that this "must be real", "has to be real because so many experts and people with credentials have told me so" and that is at the basic foundation of this Religion.

Interesting. It would seem that you recognise that faith and religion are inherrantly weak positions since you wish to demote science to such a status. Can you tell me why you feel a need to adhere to religion when you clearly value it so low?

GoodScienceForYou wrote on Nov 7^th, 2009 at 9:12pm:

I am different. I never believe anyone who tells me anything and take it as if it was real. My father taught me that. I look at the evidence with out the BS of indoctrination having any affect on my mind.

I pretty much contend precisely the opposite is true, since you demonstrate essentially zero understanding of any of the evidence presented.

GoodScienceForYou wrote on Nov 7^th, 2009 at 9:12pm:

Whenever there is "evidence" that can be seen and logically tested in many ways, they never test it by anything but "evodelusionism". That is fraud. Most of those ways to test this "evidence" is not even an indication of or "proof". It destroys it as "for evolution" or "neutralizes" it as proof of anything.

40 years and still on proof. Tell me, do you honestly think proof has any part of science. Do you understand statistical significance and confidence levels?

GoodScienceForYou wrote on Nov 7^th, 2009 at 9:12pm:

They really have no understanding of this evidence, but they always say it "suggests evolution". When it actually suggest many other concepts that have no connection to this theory of evolution.

Examples please, citing both the evidence in question and the other possible conclusions.

GoodScienceForYou wrote on Nov 7^th, 2009 at 9:12pm:

If you would like to discuss this in detail and bring forth your evidence, I would love to see it. You can post up to 6000 characters, and if you need more, I can change to forum to accept it.

Oh I will, but I'd like to see your breakdown of any of the 200,000 papers you supposedly read.

Back to top

IP Logged

GoodScienceForYou

YaBB Administrator

Offline

The obvious isn't obvious
until it is obvious

Posts: 1361
United States
Gender: male

Re: For Evolution to be true..............
Reply #6 - Nov 21^st, 2009 at 7:47pm

Quote:

[quote author=6A6F6662650B0 link=1257653566/0#0 date=1257653566]We need evidence. Simple as that.

We need to have DNA from these fossils so that the "indoctrinated" people who believe this nonsense have something besides their brainwashed belief to base it on.

Quote:

How was it that Charles Darwin could formulate a theory of evolution without knowing that genetics even existed?

Charles Darwin did not formulate this theory. It is a religious dogma from an ancient culture, well documented. He is not original at all. It is based on a belief in what he thinks he saw in the physical world, but had absolutely no reason to believe it was real, except in fantasy. You cannot call it science ever, because it has never passed as single experiment that could even remotely be called using the scientific method.

This "Darwin comment" has nothing to do with the statement. It is called sidestepping the issue. I don't think Darwin has any credibility, because he had no real evidence either. All he really had was the standard questions that we still have no answers to. This pseudo science is so messed up with religious belief that it is totally worthless.Even if any part might be true, most of it is bovine garbage.

When I was about 16 years old, I took a look at the evidence they had back then and said to my fellow students: "These morons are believers in things they have no proof of. They are categorizing creatures when they have no idea what they are. They make up bovine garbage names for them that sound important with "Latin" and other such flim flam bovine garbage.
They make cartoons of these creatures and put them in science books. It is obvious to any thinking person that you cannot recreate these creatures at all. There is no way to make a photo of any of these "Latin" bovine garbage creatures from fragments of bones that all all distorted to begin with."

I concluded that Evolution is not proven and needs a hell of a lot more work. In the 45 years since then, I have been keeping up with all the latest, and with each finding evolution keeps becoming farther and farther away from being true.
There are many contradictions and f**ked up opinions in this that it really is disgusting to call it science.

It was easy to see that belief is not science, even when I was that young.

How many creatures in existence and in the past had a spine, head, four appendages (legs arms, paws, feet), rib cage?
Maybe, most! Could it be that any believer could miss-categorize most all of these fossils? That their belief is all they had to work with and still to this day?
That the entire "tree of life" is utter bovine garbage?

Have you ever really thought about this? These humans are flawed and deeply delusional to think that they have the right to tell me what a creature was, and categorize it with only their eyes and belief as tools?

Only a stupid student would accept human opinion as evidence.

Without any DNA evidence in these fossils they are negated as any form of evidence. The fossil record is basically just a bunch of curios to be put on the book shelf with NO meaning at all.
If you accept this crap as absolute evidence for evolution, you are not a scientist, but a weak person who would think there is any authority over how you think!

Never surrender to bovine garbage, that can NEVER be verified.

These morons are the people you let control your thinking??

With no DNA in these fossils these weak humans can make up as much fantasy as they want, and nobody is going to stop them, because they are the "experts" in bovine garbage (Evolution). This is the people you put your faith and belief in. These are some of the "high priests" of this religion.

Back to top

"Putting your faith in humanity has historically not been a good concept. Why do you think it is "different" now?"
"Find the truth for yourself and don't succumb to indoctrination."

IP Logged

GoodScienceForYou

YaBB Administrator

Offline

The obvious isn't obvious
until it is obvious

Posts: 1361
United States
Gender: male

Re: For Evolution to be true..............
Reply #7 - Nov 21^st, 2009 at 7:52pm

GoodScienceForYou wrote on Nov 7^th, 2009 at 9:12pm:

There is no evidence of any creature ever changing into a new species with totally new morphology. No fish has ever become a land creature..Not ever. There is no empirical and absolute evidence for it.

Quote:

That's a good thing, since it would falsify neo-darwinian evolution, the idea of gradual changes accumulating. Glad you agree with this.

You are a moron. This is exactly what your belief is.
You actually believe that some fish became a land creature and that fish are our human common ancestor.
That over some immense time this garbage can happen.

Now you must prove this absolutely to all the readers.

You cannot use any opinions by any expert, nor can you use any evidence that is not physical, obvious and irrefutable.

Your turn. Put up your absolute evidence for this taking place.

Back to top

"Putting your faith in humanity has historically not been a good concept. Why do you think it is "different" now?"
"Find the truth for yourself and don't succumb to indoctrination."

IP Logged

GoodScienceForYou

YaBB Administrator

Offline

The obvious isn't obvious
until it is obvious

Posts: 1361
United States
Gender: male

Re: For Evolution to be true..............
Reply #8 - Nov 21^st, 2009 at 8:55pm

This is just too good to pass by. Roll Eyes

GoodScienceForYou wrote on Nov 7^th, 2009 at 9:12pm:

What evidence do you have to show evolution as absolutely real, with NO opinions from anyone. I have asked at least 1000 people who believe in this nonsense and they never answer that question. Guess why? It is all based on opinions and nothing else.

Quote:

Tell me, do you believe in gravity? Do you have anything other than an opinion on the matter?

How about a billion or so experiments (with proper scientific method) using gravity showing that it always works the same way under the same conditions. This is empirical absolute evidence. Something not found in Evodelusionism.

You have been taught out of logic and reason?

Even your delusional radiometric dating relies on gravity in the testing.

The entire chemical periodic table of the elements is founded on the weight (gravity) of the chemical elements.

This is obvious and irrefutable evidence and you have been deluded into thinking this is not real. My goodness! What have these weak humans done to your mind?

Even though science has no idea at all what gravity is, it never fails to operate the same way. That is why it is called a law of gravity.

It is called the "Law of Gravity"; not theory.

These morons have taken a law and downgraded it so that they could elevate the bovine garbage of Evolution. They are trying to use a smoke screen to stop you from realizing what actual physical evidence is.

Using gravity, one of the laws of physics we can calculate the exact projectile of a space craft to within a few square meters from a starting position of thousands of miles away from the landing spot. The only variable is wind that has to be adjusted for.

Are you really that messed up? Is this "modern" science? Is this the reason why science is so messed up and retarded now after it has been taken over by morons?

The word scientist has been turned into "voodoo priest".

Now answer the original question and get real?

Back to top

"Putting your faith in humanity has historically not been a good concept. Why do you think it is "different" now?"
"Find the truth for yourself and don't succumb to indoctrination."

IP Logged

Squawk

Ex Member

Re: For Evolution to be true..............
Reply #9 - Nov 22^nd, 2009 at 3:28am

45 years and you still think any aspect of science involves proof. Once again, as in many other threads, I ask you to present a single one of the papers you claim to have read, cited properly, and break it down to show that

1. You understand it
2. You can pick holes in it.

Until you do I contend that you are simply lying about your research.

Back to top

IP Logged

Squawk

Ex Member

Re: For Evolution to be true..............
Reply #10 - Nov 22^nd, 2009 at 3:41am

GoodScienceForYou wrote on Nov 21^st, 2009 at 8:55pm:

This is just too good to pass by. Roll Eyes

Oh I agree. Its amusing, and extremely revealing

GoodScienceForYou wrote on Nov 7^th, 2009 at 9:12pm:

What evidence do you have to show evolution as absolutely real, with NO opinions from anyone. I have asked at least 1000 people who believe in this nonsense and they never answer that question. Guess why? It is all based on opinions and nothing else.

Quote:

Tell me, do you believe in gravity? Do you have anything other than an opinion on the matter?

How about a billion or so experiments (with proper scientific method) using gravity showing that it always works the same way under the same conditions. This is empirical absolute evidence. Something not found in Evodelusionism.
[/quote]

You had better go and tell that to all the people working on quantum mechanics who will tell you that all working theories on gravity break down on the quantum level.

Quantum mechanics works, it makes predictions accurate to 15 decimal places. Relativity works, it makes predictions of equal accuracy. It is not possible for both to be correct since they contradict one another at a singularity.

So, absolute evidence? No, yet again a demonstration that you have no idea what you are talking about with respect to science.

GoodScienceForYou wrote on Nov 21^st, 2009 at 8:55pm:

You have been taught out of logic and reason?

Even your delusional radiometric dating relies on gravity in the testing.

Could you tell me which aspect of radiometric dating relies upon gravity?

GoodScienceForYou wrote on Nov 21^st, 2009 at 8:55pm:

The entire chemical periodic table of the elements is founded on the weight (gravity) of the chemical elements.

Not even close. You need to look into the four fundamental forces, in particular the strong weak and electromagnetic forces. Gravity is inconsequential at such small scales and has nothing to do with particles of this size.

GoodScienceForYou wrote on Nov 21^st, 2009 at 8:55pm:

This is obvious and irrefutable evidence and you have been deluded into thinking this is not real. My goodness! What have these weak humans done to your mind?

It would seem I have just refuted it. Oh noes.

GoodScienceForYou wrote on Nov 21^st, 2009 at 8:55pm:

Even though science has no idea at all what gravity is, it never fails to operate the same way. That is why it is called a law of gravity.

Ahh, 40 years (or is it 45 years) of study and you are not aware of the nature of a scientific law. Tell me, what happened to Newtons laws when Einstein showed them to be inaccurate? Actually, he showed them to be a special case of general relativity.

Einsteins laws of gravity superceded Newtons, and in time they too will likely be superceded. It would be enormously arrogant for us to claim that present understanding is infalliable. Laws can and do change. I've just provided you with a clear cut example, care for more?

GoodScienceForYou wrote on Nov 21^st, 2009 at 8:55pm:

It is called the "Law of Gravity"; not theory.

So we can add a lack of understanding of basic science terms to your 45 years of research then? You don't understand that laws are actually of less merit than theories in science? That theories explain? Very revealing.

GoodScienceForYou wrote on Nov 21^st, 2009 at 8:55pm:

These morons have taken a law and downgraded it so that they could elevate the bovine garbage of Evolution. They are trying to use a smoke screen to stop you from realizing what actual physical evidence is.

Downgraded a law to what? You do realise that theory is the ultimate accolade in science, the result of a well tested hypothesis, and nothing to do with law, not even in the same hierachy? You realise that, don't you? DON'T YOU?

GoodScienceForYou wrote on Nov 21^st, 2009 at 8:55pm:

Using gravity, one of the laws of physics we can calculate the exact projectile of a space craft to within a few square meters from a starting position of thousands of miles away from the landing spot. The only variable is wind that has to be adjusted for.

Better go and tell that the the scientists who are currently trying to understand why certain space craft are a few hundred meteres off course for no apparent reason.

GoodScienceForYou wrote on Nov 21^st, 2009 at 8:55pm:

Are you really that messed up? Is this "modern" science? Is this the reason why science is so messed up and retarded now after it has been taken over by morons?

You had better display a basic level of understanding of science, in particular any notion of what a scientific theory is and how it is different to a law, before you attempt to label as morons those who do understand these terms.

GoodScienceForYou wrote on Nov 21^st, 2009 at 8:55pm:

The word scientist has been turned into "voodoo priest".

Again, a recognition that religion is an inherantly weak position.

GoodScienceForYou wrote on Nov 21^st, 2009 at 8:55pm:

Now answer the original question and get real?

Get real? Original question, which was that, the one on absolute evidence? Did you not read my bit on speciation?

Back to top

IP Logged

Squawk

Ex Member

Re: For Evolution to be true..............
Reply #11 - Nov 22^nd, 2009 at 3:52am

GoodScienceForYou wrote on Nov 21^st, 2009 at 7:52pm:

GoodScienceForYou wrote on Nov 7^th, 2009 at 9:12pm:

There is no evidence of any creature ever changing into a new species with totally new morphology. No fish has ever become a land creature..Not ever. There is no empirical and absolute evidence for it.

Quote:

That's a good thing, since it would falsify neo-darwinian evolution, the idea of gradual changes accumulating. Glad you agree with this.

You are a moron. This is exactly what your belief is.

Err, I tell you that that is not what I believe, and you tell me it is what I believe and then call me a moron for believing it.

Very revealing, again. So what we can see hear is that when you are told what a person believes, and you don't like that position because it doesn't give you something to argue against, you instead erect a straw man of that persons belief and then proceed to attack the straw man rather than the person actual position.

Which of us does that make the moron? I'd suggest it's the one erecting and then attacking the straw man.

GoodScienceForYou wrote on Nov 21^st, 2009 at 7:52pm:

You actually believe that some fish became a land creature and that fish are our human common ancestor.
That over some immense time this garbage can happen.

Since you refer to tetrapod evolution (the evolution, over a period of 10's of millions of years, of the first creatures that walked on land) I reiterate my question from the other thread.

Namely, what characteristics would you expect to find in a species that was transitional between acanthostega and panderichthys. Then tell me how these features are different to those observed in Tiktaalik, since real scientists made the prediction of Tiktaalik before it was discovered, said what characteristics it would have, where in the world it would be located, and in which level of strata it would occur.

Now, clearly you must have done a lot of research on tetrapod evolution to be able to make such sweeping statements. So, could you tell me what features the scientists overlooked? Which aspect of the transition did they get wrong? What features does Tiktaalik not possess that it should have?

GoodScienceForYou wrote on Nov 21^st, 2009 at 7:52pm:

Now you must prove this absolutely to all the readers.

Why? When the readers, yourself mainly, seem to have no clue what proof is and that it has no part of science I see no point in even attempting to do so. I merely argue here to show your arguments for the hubris and waffle that they are, and to demonstrate that you have not done the research you claim to have since you remain ignorant of basic scientific principles. You can prove me wrong on this, I even gave you a method. Go find any scientific paper from the last 30 years, published in a recognised scientific journal, and show how it matches your claims of logical fallacy and religious indoctrination.

I contend that you are lying about it and that you won't be able to do the above. You can show me wrong in an instant, by doing it.

GoodScienceForYou wrote on Nov 21^st, 2009 at 7:52pm:

You cannot use any opinions by any expert, nor can you use any evidence that is not physical, obvious and irrefutable.

Your turn. Put up your absolute evidence for this taking place.

As has been asked in another thread, what is absolute evidence? I made notes on gravity above.

Back to top

IP Logged

Squawk

Ex Member

Re: For Evolution to be true..............
Reply #12 - Nov 22^nd, 2009 at 3:59am

Oh, and I didn't bother dissecting your "Darwin wasn't original" bit, because it was so amusing. Best to leave it as it.

However, I will pick up on one point. You think most creatures that have lived have been vertebrates? Very interesting. Even a quick look at wikipedia shows this up for the nonsense that it is.

58,000 species of vertebrate have been described thus far (give or take).

Contrast this with the million or so insects that have been described, and the current thinking that approximately 90% of all life on earth is insect, and we note that, once again, 45 years of research that you have done has left you with an empty head.

Back to top

IP Logged

GoodScienceForYou

YaBB Administrator

Offline

The obvious isn't obvious
until it is obvious

Posts: 1361
United States
Gender: male

Re: For Evolution to be true..............
Reply #13 - Nov 22^nd, 2009 at 1:09pm

Quote:

Oh, and I didn't bother dissecting your "Darwin wasn't original" bit, because it was so amusing. Best to leave it as it.

However, I will pick up on one point. You think most creatures that have lived have been vertebrates? Very interesting. Even a quick look at wikipedia shows this up for the nonsense that it is.

58,000 species of vertebrate have been described thus far (give or take).

Contrast this with the million or so insects that have been described, and the current thinking that approximately 90% of all life on earth is insect, and we note that, once again, 45 years of research that you have done has left you with an empty head.

==========================
GoodScience said" I was using that as an example to make you wake up from you belief in these delusional fools.
You are not much of a free thinker and I have a hard time with people who are so narrow minded. Sorry, I will spell it out better for you next time and include this idea that there are many creatures without a spine that have no similar genetics at all but these jerks will categorize them anyway to fit their unfounded on any scientific methodology other than an HEMG belief on this BS "tree of life".

Back to top

"Putting your faith in humanity has historically not been a good concept. Why do you think it is "different" now?"
"Find the truth for yourself and don't succumb to indoctrination."

IP Logged

Squawk

Ex Member

Re: For Evolution to be true..............
Reply #14 - Nov 22^nd, 2009 at 1:18pm

GoodScienceForYou wrote on Nov 22^nd, 2009 at 1:09pm:

Quote:

Oh, and I didn't bother dissecting your "Darwin wasn't original" bit, because it was so amusing. Best to leave it as it.

However, I will pick up on one point. You think most creatures that have lived have been vertebrates? Very interesting. Even a quick look at wikipedia shows this up for the nonsense that it is.

58,000 species of vertebrate have been described thus far (give or take).

Contrast this with the million or so insects that have been described, and the current thinking that approximately 90% of all life on earth is insect, and we note that, once again, 45 years of research that you have done has left you with an empty head.

==========================
GoodScience said" I was using that as an example to make you wake up from you belief in these delusional fools.

So let me get this straight. In order to convince me that you are correct, you post innaccurate information? Your method of teaching is to make stuff up? How can I hope to learn anything from someone who openly admits to making stuff up?

GoodScienceForYou wrote on Nov 22^nd, 2009 at 1:09pm:

You are not much of a free thinker and I have a hard time with people who are so narrow minded.

You mean those of us who like accuracy and who point out mistakes when we see them? That kind of free thinking?

GoodScienceForYou wrote on Nov 22^nd, 2009 at 1:09pm:

Sorry, I will spell it out better for you next time and include this idea that there are many creatures without a spine that have no similar genetics at all but these jerks will categorize them anyway to fit their unfounded on any scientific methodology other than an HEMG belief on this BS "tree of life".

Well you are going to have to address this when you try to answer my challenge to you on comparative anatomy. We note that the genetics of trees, to think of a particularly distant example, are around 50% similar to our own, and we note that as animals get more "human like" based on comparative anatomy, so their genetics get more human like.

But as I say, you will have to address that when you cover convergent phlogenies.

Back to top

IP Logged

	Welcome, Guest. Please Login
	YaBB is sponsored by XIMinc!