Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  > Evolution.      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 stargazer1000
Joined: 1/16/2008
Msg: 1451
Evolution. Page 59 of 63    (23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63)

Isnt there some mathematical flaw in the concept of evolution though?


Creationists have tried to argue that one but to no avail. It's a flawed argument based on faulty assumptions.

Nor does it adequately offer a viable "alternative" to evolution. Essentially, it's an argument from personal incredulity. Basically, "I don't understand how, therefore 'God'."


Theres also the 1000s of creatures we know havent evolved at all for millions of years too


Define "haven't evolved." Yes, we have bacteria but there's no "law" that says bacteria have to evolve to multicelluarism and sentience. Bacterial evolution has occurred and is observed. However, that's not to say there wasn't a strain of bacteria that developed to single cellular creature and that evolution continued onward.

The misinterpretation (and misrepresentation) of evolution is that it has a "goal" to evolve from single cells to multiple cells to us. Evolution is simply a process whereby advantageous traits carry future generations onto continued successful reproduction.


So I think that the evolutionary model has many holes in it as far as being a complete hypothesis


There are still things to learn about evolutionary biology. Any biologist will declare that readily and happily! But the best you're going to get from a creationist is going to be "Evolution doesn't explain..." and "Evolution isn't..."

Odd how they NEVER offer their own evidence FOR their "theory" of "godidit!"
 IgorFrankensteen
Joined: 6/29/2009
Msg: 1452
view profile
History
Evolution.
Posted: 10/17/2011 2:05:56 AM
Naked, I believe you are looking at the wrong people, relative to what we're talking about when we refer to Creationists. We aren't talking about the folks who believe in God, and who vaguely assume that God created the universe. The creationsists we are talking about are intent on REPLACING the science of evolution (among other things) with a version of the old Biblical stories, that THEY control.

It isn't about a general sense of place in the world, or of the comfort of faith. It's about their desire to run everyone else's lives. Those of us in opposition to this Creationist push for hegemony over all others are NOT painting ALL believers with the same brush (though as with all discussions, you CAN find individual people who jump in and try to do exactly that).

As for you worries that advances in genetic manipulation will lead to new dangers and concerns, I think that's a valid area to discuss, though I would think it should be in a different thread.
 MikeWM
Joined: 2/7/2011
Msg: 1453
view profile
History
Evolution.
Posted: 10/17/2011 12:11:39 PM
Which almost morphs the thread into a discussion about the pros and cons of faith schools when you think about it lol
 MikeWM
Joined: 2/7/2011
Msg: 1454
view profile
History
Evolution.
Posted: 10/19/2011 6:25:50 AM
I think in terms of human evolution the "next plateau" will be a jump in terms of rationalisation, So rather than racial seperation I think its being stunted by orthodoxy more than anything else

Increased consumerism and greed tends to nudge peoples ways of thinking and most aspects of our daily lives in a very specific and easily controllable direction as well as also directing avenues of research in science too

As much as it would probably be impossible now to alter that path I do think that its what would be needed for us to "evolve" in any true or meaningful fashion as I think current and recent orthodoxy by its very nature strives to limit our exploration and understandings of what we are ultimated capable of doing or being and that as with any other form of exploration once we could begin to ship away at that particular iceberg the limits of our capabilities would be found to be huge underestimations at each stage along that voyahe of discovery which in turn would cause "science" to become a very different beast indeed
 aremeself
Joined: 12/31/2008
Msg: 1455
view profile
History
Evolution.
Posted: 10/27/2011 8:30:59 PM
typical Gouldism:

quote;


Contrary to popular myths, Darwin and Lyell were not the heroes of true science.… Paleontologists have paid an exorbitant price for Darwin's argument. We fancy ourselves as the only true students of life's history, yet to preserve our favored account of evolution by natural selection we view our data as so bad that we never see the very process we profess to study.4 All paleontologists know that the fossil record contains precious little in the way of intermediate forms; transitions between major groups are characteristically abrupt

end quote.
 IgorFrankensteen
Joined: 6/29/2009
Msg: 1456
view profile
History
Evolution.
Posted: 10/28/2011 1:44:51 PM
Very good, cheshire.

By the way, just because we think of "evolutionary change" as being synonymous with "slow, creeping, gradual change," doesn't mean that it actually IS so. Evolution can and does move suddenly, in very violent overnight ways at times. Thus, the fact that you can't find "transitional" fossils to your liking has NEVER been proof, or even a tiny bit supportive of the notion that evolution doesn't happen. In fact, demanding that "transitional fossils" be found, indicates that you don't understand at all how evolution happens.
 60to70
Joined: 7/28/2008
Msg: 1457
Evolution.
Posted: 10/28/2011 10:12:27 PM
I am so glad that evolutionary strides happen overnight. I am wondering besides fossil debates if mankind has a stake in petty details such as food on the table, affordable housing and dental and medical care for all of the world's citizens? Otherwise, what is the point of evolution?
 IgorFrankensteen
Joined: 6/29/2009
Msg: 1458
view profile
History
Evolution.
Posted: 10/29/2011 2:39:28 AM
Exactly.

Evolution is a RESULT.

Solving problems such as those involve conscious choices, unless (as too many "haves" want to do these days) you choose to simply wait them out.
 aremeself
Joined: 12/31/2008
Msg: 1459
view profile
History
Evolution.
Posted: 11/4/2011 12:01:33 AM
typical Gouldism:

quote;


Contrary to popular myths, Darwin and Lyell were not the heroes of true science.… Paleontologists have paid an exorbitant price for Darwin's argument. We fancy ourselves as the only true students of life's history, yet to preserve our favored account of evolution by natural selection we view our data as so bad that we never see the very process we profess to study.4 All paleontologists know that the fossil record contains precious little in the way of intermediate forms; transitions between major groups are characteristically abrupt

end quote

so stephen gould gets overruled on this site.
or, he didn't mean what he said.

Ok.
 aremeself
Joined: 12/31/2008
Msg: 1460
view profile
History
Evolution.
Posted: 11/4/2011 12:56:44 AM
it's pretty clear what Gould is saying.
I get it, do you?
that's probably why he comes up with his 'sudden change theory'.

what am I trying to say??

evolution is not even close to being cut and dried.

especially in;
beneficial mutations being the mechanism for evolution.
and
the fossil record having an abundance of clear cut examples of missing links to take to the bank.
and
bacteria evolving, as in molecules to man evolution.
 lyingcheat
Joined: 9/13/2009
Msg: 1461
view profile
History
Evolution.
Posted: 11/4/2011 1:22:40 AM

so stephen gould gets overruled on this site.
or, he didn't mean what he said.

The 3rd possibility is that you misinterpret what he was saying.
A 4th possibility is that you misinterpret what he was saying because you don't understand evolution.

For instance, the evolution of 'horses' is quite well documented.
http://txtwriter.com/Backgrounders/Evolution/EVpage03.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/horses/horse_evol.html

Note that the fossil record (regarding the evolution of horses) doesn't contradict anything Gould says, and nor does it contradict anything Darwin said.
 IgorFrankensteen
Joined: 6/29/2009
Msg: 1462
view profile
History
Evolution.
Posted: 11/4/2011 4:10:29 AM
I vote for "clearly doesn't understand evolution," combined with "doesn't WANT to understand evolution, owing to allegiance to other ideas." These are the MOST common reasons I see for people who "don't get it."

Essentially, they don't WANT to get it, and so seek out any slick cover story, and use every careful wording by the folks who DO understand, to pretend that careful accuracy is synonymous with abject ignorance.

For one thing, it is VERY misleading, AGAIN, to say that "beneficial mutations [are] the mechanism for evolution." That is so incomplete as to be false, as stated. The MECHANISM for evolution, the IMPETUS for it, is what ever environmental or other actions occur, which the "beneficial mutations (which can only be at that time RECOGNIZED as beneficial, more often than not)" permit the "mutants" to survive and have progeny through.

As for demanding to SEE molecules evolve into man before your eyes, or to be shown a complete fossil record of same, that is ridiculous. Calling for it is an ingenuous act. One might as well call for detailed proof that the one asking has, in fact, grown from a zygote into who and what they are. The fact that ALL the details are not available to view at one time, does not mean that the growth and change did not occur.

I'll bet that at MOST, all they can show us is their drivers license, a few remaining family photos...and MAYBE a video of the conception. We'll have to INFER, LOGICALLY AND SCIENTIFICALLY, that all the other changes required for them to appear before us, misunderstanding what we are saying, and asking ignorance based questions, DID in fact occur.
 MikeWM
Joined: 2/7/2011
Msg: 1463
view profile
History
Evolution.
Posted: 11/4/2011 5:45:33 AM
I think the mutant idea would explain the lack of "links" pretty well really

gradual evolution for many species is flawed as the remains arent there to show them

But as we have only excavated a tiny miniscule fraction of the earth even that isnt exactly surprising. Many land masses that would once have been teeming with life are now under tons of ice or hundreds of feet of water anyway, so who knows what lies hundreds of feet below the soil in those areas

But if evolution for some species at least happened by random incidences where those offspring for one reason or another were seen as either more attractive to mates or just had a trait that made them more resilient in the current conditions then they would become predominant in quite a short space of time and no slow stage by stage transition would occur or be findable anyway

Even where we can see a fairly clear pattern of evolution it tends to show "species" rather than an endless parade of animals each differing a fraction of a percent from the other over thousands of generations

So even then a tiny number, even just one could have been born as an anomally, which through key advantages or even just the luck of the draw ended up being the predominant or even the only family line to survive

I dont think the steady fractional evolution idea holds water at all, and that one based on mutational anomalies is the most likely scenario otherwise we would still be in the process of evolving from fish

As for the act of dismissing evolution based on "incomplete" proof

Exactly how much actual tangible "proof" that can be scientifically verified is there for the creationist stand point?

Isnt there a saying about people who live in glass houses not throwing stones?
 stargazer1000
Joined: 1/16/2008
Msg: 1464
Evolution.
Posted: 11/4/2011 9:15:29 AM

typical Gouldism


Typically dishonest creationist quote-mine.

Gould was a proponent of his own theory of "punctuated equilibrium" to explain an apparent "lack" of "transitional" fossils in the fossil record. Essentially, species experience periods of prolonged stasis before sudden "bursts" of evolutionary diversity. The converse of this, of course, is "gradualism" in which species are constantly undergoing minor changes that - over time - amount to great change.

Likely, the truth is somewhere in between.

Nothing that Gould says supports the notion of a magic sky man waving his magic wand and poofing everything into existence at once. For that, you might try Mother Goose. Or the Bible.
 lyingcheat
Joined: 9/13/2009
Msg: 1465
view profile
History
Evolution.
Posted: 11/10/2011 5:50:37 AM

EVOLUTION (the cyclical nature of)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJtHi6IM5vk

At first, looking at this ^^^ I figured you must be joking...

According to Gariaev’s research, our DNA not only assembles our proteins but also stores and communicates data. His team found that the genetic code in potential DNA follows, for practical purposes, the same foundational rules as human languages. In order to prove this, the syntax, semantics and grammar of human language and DNA were compared.
It was discovered that potential DNA's alkaline sequences closely mirror linguistic communication rules. This strongly suggests that the many human languages did not appear randomly, as is commonly believed, but reflect our essentially similar genetic structure.
Supported by Gregg Braden's discovery that the ancient Hebrew name for God (YHVH) is actually code for DNA based on the latter's chemical composition of carbon, hydrogen, oxygen and nitrogen, Gariaev's findings offer scientific substantiation that in the beginning was the Word!

Gariaev and his colleagues also studied DNA's electromagnetic behavior. They concluded, "Living chromosomes function just like holographic computers using DNA's own laser radiation." The Gariaev team modulated certain linguistic frequencies onto a laser. With this technology of language-modulated radio and light waves, they were not only able to heal damaged chromosomes, they also successfully altered genetic expression.
Amazingly, they obtained results similar to those documented by Dr. Yu Dzang Kangeng, who was the first to employ torsion energy to transfer DNA between organisms. Using radio and light waves keyed to human language frequencies to reprogram DNA, as opposed to gene splicing, Gariaev's team literally transformed frog embryos into healthy salamander embryos in the laboratory!
http://www.scribd.com/doc/15092021/DNA-Monthly-Vol-1-No-4

But apparently you're not, because you've posted 'material' like this before.
So here's a link to a useful 'style manual' for your future posts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoscience
 Deerclan
Joined: 8/5/2009
Msg: 1466
Evolution.
Posted: 11/15/2011 12:39:14 AM
Yep, and random chance.
I intend to prove evolution one day. Every day I take all the pieces of an old fashioned alarm clock outside with me, and throw them all in the back of my pickup truck. One day, by random chance, the pieces will all fall together in exactly the right way, and bingo! There will be a complete clock sitting in the bed of my pickup truck, without any intelligent input into the process. Of course on the day it happens Fundamentalist Christians will say, "But who created the little pieces of the clock?" And I will of course answer, "If you weren't so ignorant, you wouldn't ask me such a dumb question!"
 scorpiomover
Joined: 4/19/2007
Msg: 1467
view profile
History
Evolution.
Posted: 11/15/2011 5:31:57 PM
RE Msg: 2963 by _alan:
This is true, but the very fact that both the philosophical and scientific communities want to claim this statement as one of their own, means both must consider its basic essence as truth, fact, i.e. LAW!!!!!!
What I find interesting about the statement "Insanity, is doing the same thing over and over, expecting different results", is how often people feel that it's applicable and relevant. It suggests to me, that the reason so many quote it so often, is because it's so often true that many people do keep doing the same thing over and over, because they expect different results this time. This in turn suggests to me, that people want to believe that THIS time it will work, because they believe they are smarter than people who did it before, and this time, they believe that THEY will make it work. So really, it shows that people keep being overly optimistic as to their ability to do things better than everyone else.

Lots of people thing that WE are the smart ones, and the only reason that other people failed, was because they weren't US.

I include myself as having made that mistake, several times in my life, and probably will make it again. What can I say? I'm human, and "to err is human".
 bestspfx
Joined: 8/31/2011
Msg: 1468
view profile
History
Evolution.
Posted: 11/15/2011 5:32:30 PM
I just wanted to post something! Lol. I didn't read all the posts cause the arguments are usually the same. I just don't understand why the ideas of creationism and evolution are mutually exclusive. I don't even see it really is an argument! Lol. I think the problems are the definition of terms. I think the real argument is 'is man a spritual being or is he an object' - bodies of any living being being matter of course - atoms of elements being organized into proteins then DNA etc.. So a body is physical universe based - made of matter. And the question, and 'argument' is then - is man? Is man a, or is any man his own, body? I say no and that evolution also DID happen! Lol. I don't think the argument is did evolution happen - I think it absolutely did. But I think the creationists REAL argument that man is not a or his own body is correct! I don't think the two REAL arguments are mutually exclusive! To clarify - I think evolution of bodies is just simply a RESULT of spiritual creation or a spiritual creation of other or additional living things! A supreme being, creator, or WE being spiritual beings simply created living beings, bodies, human and animal from a wish to do so at some point in the distant past! We started them and they continued into the form they are in now! Evolutionists love to forget about the starting point of bodies! The spark that started the original creation of the organization of 'organic molecules'! The organization itself was caused by a or many spiritual beings! Not an electrical accident like they like to pretend with 0% proof whatsoever! That argument is at least as proofless as there is a God of any kind or men are actually spiritual beings! Lol. The argument is not whether evolution exists or existed but HOW it does and was started! Lol. Why can't man be a spiritual being who POSESSES a body, a body among others that HE/SHE or a Creator created in the first place? How did evolution start? A spiritual being or many of them decided to create bodies! And then they obviously and logically continued - progressed - EVOLVED - from there! Life, life energy - i.e. spiritual beings - created them, although they aren't them, to have a game in this universe with various team members - many other players! Just because these spiritual beings created playthings, biological machines - but machines none-the-less, does not make him/her one anymore than having/posessing a car makes a man a car! Lol. Evolution does exist and did happen for human bodies and other living bodies once they were initially created by spirits, but a man is not his body - he is a spiritual being in posession of one-human in this case- because its more useful in this game than a deers, or a tic's or a frogs in this game in the physical universe! Thats my argument! Lol.
 DuncanRnB
Joined: 12/7/2011
Msg: 1469
Evolution.
Posted: 12/20/2011 9:23:11 PM
It's not a theory. It's a law. Everything in the universe evolves, isn't somebody becoming older a form of evolution? But even abstract things/ideas evolve (actually probably more than any physical being or creature).

As a Pandeist I think that BOTH atheism AND theism are off base vastly. Religion explains the why and science is the how.

If somebody wants creationism to be taught in school so badly, nothing is stopping those individuals from starting their own schools. But creationism needs to stay out of public schools which are a public (and secular) institution.
 stargazer1000
Joined: 1/16/2008
Msg: 1470
Evolution.
Posted: 12/22/2011 5:17:38 AM

since the schools are there to dumb down the students I am sure that is why they teach theory instead of facts.


since the churches are there to dumb down the congregation I am sure that is why they teach that a magic invisible sky wizard spoke everything into existence without offering any actual evidence of his existence.

See, two can play that game.


No. There is an agenda to lead you to such conclusions and you have been had. I am a scientist and did not come to my conclusions through religion. In fact I studied evolution among other things such as zoology, geology, genetics, archaeology, chemistry, medicine etc....on and on. I was agnostic because of my formal education. Once you study politics, history of finance and wars, eugenics etc, you see the philosophy of power elites and WHY our country and infact the world has been dumbded down, over whelmed with propaganda and false science...not to mention false religions...you say WHY ? eventually you will learn there are HUGE bodies of information that has been kept from you. Get curious, get angry. Many creationists were confirmed evolutionists that set out on a quest to shut the creationists up for good.....then, uncovering real evidence have hit their knees, wondering HOW they could have been so blind.


Ah, so you're a "scientist" so you're going to make the "argument from authority."

Problem is, even scientists can surrender their scientific credibility in favour of a dogma, like the geologist quoted by Richard Dawkins who stated that, regardless of whether all the evidence pointed to an old Earth, he would always be a young Earth creationist.

Having surrendered your scientific incredulity (assuming you ever had it) for religious credulity compromises your credibility. It doesn't enhance it.
 lyingcheat
Joined: 9/13/2009
Msg: 1471
view profile
History
Evolution.
Posted: 11/7/2013 6:51:46 AM
Going by some of the responses to various topics in this forum evolution is poorly understood, which is surprising given the educational resources easily available (obviously) to those who post here.

So... I've sourced a few helpful links for those who would like to inform themselves.



Evolution - 24 myths and misconceptions

It will soon be 200 years since the birth of Charles Darwin and 150 years since the publication of On the Origin of Species, arguably the most important book ever written. In it, Darwin outlined an idea that many still find shocking - that all life on Earth, including human life, evolved through natural selection.

Darwin presented compelling evidence for evolution in On the Origin and, since his time, the case has become overwhelming. Countless fossil discoveries allow us to trace the evolution of today's organisms from earlier forms. DNA sequencing has confirmed beyond any doubt that all living creatures share a common origin. Innumerable examples of evolution in action can be seen all around us, from the pollution-matching peppered moth to fast-changing viruses such as HIV and H5N1 bird flu. Evolution is as firmly established a scientific fact as the roundness of the Earth.

And yet despite an ever-growing mountain of evidence, most people around the world are not taught the truth about evolution, if they are taught about it at all. Even in the UK, the birthplace of Darwin with an educated and increasingly secular population, one recent poll suggests less than half the population accepts evolution.

For those who have never had the opportunity to find out about biology or science, claims made by those who believe in supernatural alternatives to evolutionary theory can appear convincing. Meanwhile, even among those who accept evolution, misconceptions abound.

Most of us are happy to admit that we do not understand, say, string theory in physics, yet we are all convinced we understand evolution. In fact, as biologists are discovering, its consequences can be stranger than we ever imagined. Evolution must be the best-known yet worst-understood of all scientific theories.

So here is New Scientist's guide to some of the most common myths and misconceptions about evolution.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13620-evolution-24-myths-and-misconceptions.html#.UnsEZkrciXz


Additionally, many useful links to other sources are embedded in this ^^^ offering from NewScientist.



A few more...


http://www.nature.com/nature/newspdf/evolutiongems.pdf
15 EVOLUTIONARY GEMS

Gems from the fossil record
1 Land-living ancestors of whales
2 From water to land
3 The origin of feathers
4 The evolutionary history of teeth
5 The origin of the vertebrate skeleton

Gems from habitats
6 Natural selection in speciation
7 Natural selection in lizards
8 A case of co-evolution
9 Differential dispersal in wild birds
10 Selective survival in wild guppies
11 Evolutionary history matters

Gems from molecular processes
12 Darwin’s Galapagos finches
13 Microevolution meets macroevolution
14 Toxin resistance in snakes and clams
15 Variation versus stability
http://www.nature.com/nature/newspdf/evolutiongems.pdf




How Do We Know That Evolution Has Occurred?

The evidence for evolution has primarily come from four sources:
1. the fossil record of change in earlier species
2. the chemical and anatomical similarities of related life forms
3. the geographic distribution of related species
4. the recorded genetic changes in living organisms over many generations
http://anthro.palomar.edu/evolve/evolve_3.htm




Five Proofs of Evolution

1. The universal genetic code.
2. The fossil record.
3. Genetic commonalities.
4. Common traits in embryos.
5. Bacterial resistance to antibiotics.

http://www.evolutionfaq.com/articles/five-proofs-evolution




29+ Evidences for Macroevolution
The Scientific Case for Common Descent
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/default.html




TimeTree is a public knowledge-base for information on the evolutionary timescale of life. A search utility allows exploration of the thousands of divergence times among organisms in the published literature.
http://www.timetree.org/




Misconceptions about evolution

Unfortunately, many students have persistent misconceptions about evolution. Some are simple misunderstandings — ideas that develop in the course of learning about evolution. Other misconceptions may stem from purposeful attempts to misrepresent evolution and undermine the public's understanding of this topic.

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/misconceptions_teacherfaq.php



These ^^^ are all reliable sources - there is no ideological agenda other than a commitment to truth. All of the information relayed by these sites is supported by reference to solid research going back decades. This research has been carried out by independent science bodies, educational organisations (universities), museums, independent research organisations, and governments, etc etc etc sometimes working in isolation, sometimes cooperatively, collecting evidence and reporting what they've found.
 drinkthesunwithmyface
Joined: 3/27/2012
Msg: 1472
view profile
History
Evolution.
Posted: 11/9/2013 9:08:58 AM
This should be a good introduction as well, for those truly curious and willing to spend at least a little time - http://www.youtube.com/user/mrsolarwind
 RussArtLover
Joined: 5/13/2010
Msg: 1473
view profile
History
Evolution.
Posted: 11/9/2013 4:04:35 PM
OP
I was going to be a politician. Popular "fear" is more the target of your original post. Not what politicians fear, we could care less. It's what you guys fear. We have to powder your bottoms so you won't do what we all want to do, revolution. Revolution is wasteful. Lots of the wrong people die.

Evolution is proved every day. Not by pop culture. When you sleep, you evolve. Period. Call it Gods plan or one of the mysteries or whatever, it can be scarey to know tomorrow when you wake up you won't be exactly who you were today. It's like staring at a dot on the wall until it fills your vision and all you see is uncertainty. Jeesh. We have pills for that now but the old remedies are still the best. Go for a walk. Talk to old people. Do anything you'd never do in your comfort zone.

LIVE a little.

...Evolve
 IgorFrankensteen
Joined: 6/29/2009
Msg: 1474
view profile
History
Evolution.
Posted: 11/25/2013 4:07:23 AM

Must have forgot about the frauds committed by neo-darwinists. Who have been responsible for the biggest frauds in Scientific history.

Just a few common ones, Piltdown Man, Nebraska Man, Haeckel’s fake embyro drawings, The German Anthropologist Protsch who resigned in disgrace in 2005 after 30 years of committing to the truth! It was found that he had been forging scientific facts for over 30 years.


You have mis-classified these things. You present them here, ingenuously, as though the frauds were, and are still, put forward by science itself. By your "reasoning," every thief, every scam artist, every liar, and every robber and murderer is proof that capitalism is entirely a false idea, set forth to fool everyone into helping the thieves get their way. That every Faith Healer or snake oil salesman is proof that all of medical science is a fraud. And by logocal extension, that every false priest and side-show religious scammer, proves that all of your own religious beliefs are a fraud.

In the contrary, what your list shows, is two things: one, that scalawags will ALWAYS pop up and try to use ANYTHING that is available, to trick people into filling their purses; and two, that serious scientists ALWAYS eventually catch up to the scammers, and kick them out again.


All Human fossils ever found are not much different to homo sapiens.


That statement only works if one decides to refuse to admit that the many fossils found which ARE very different to homosapiens, are also human. You are playing the usual, very tired, and very false games here.
 localRenoite12
Joined: 4/17/2013
Msg: 1475
Evolution.
Posted: 11/25/2013 1:55:37 PM
Evolution is real, even the Catholic Church admits it can no longer be dismissed... I don't understand how people are still denying it, then again I'm sure it took a while for the Flat World believers to die off.
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  > Evolution.