Evolution? The most GDed ridiculous Fing thing ever to have been imagined

Thanks for the interesting thread

originally posted by: Lysergic
So who is winning?

Has anyone changed anyones mind yet?

Does everyone still believe the same things before going into the thread?

Yeah.

you should have just posted “derp”

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: TzarChasm
a reply to: whereislogic

You don't have to believe in evolution. You don't have to do anything that contradicts your ethics, because it's your prerogative to choose a lifestyle and creed that guarantees your success. On the same principle, what do you gain by attempting to puncture and deflate evolutionary theory for those who derive their success from it?

If evolution is false then it has misled countless individuals into a nihilistic frame of mind. Evolution acts as an answer to the question of where we came from, and it strongly implies that we came from unintelligent random chance. For many people this strips their pursuit of truth, but in all fairness so does blind belief in anything.

originally posted by: TzarChasm

Build my cozy little acre of heaven on earth so there's no fear of the afterlife doing me dirty. A good death is it's own reward.

A wholesome life is a good preparation, whether you believe in the afterlife or not.

You're mistaken. Evolution doesn't address the ageless mystery of "where are we going" or "what's the point of it all" because that's philosophy. Science can't definitively answer that question nor should it. But cult dogma is hardly the most useful resource either, considering our species penchant for exploiting faith and industrializing the culture of pursuing ethereal prizes. Ultimately you can only decide for yourself what the rewards of the human experience should look like.

originally posted by: Lysergic
So who is winning?

Has anyone changed anyones mind yet?

Does everyone still believe the same things before going into the thread?

Yeah.

There are no winners on this forum regardless of the matter being debated or the most popularly voted comments. Have a cookie for your contribution 🍪

originally posted by: Randyvine2
a reply to: tanstaafl

Again if there were no evidence Christianity would be easily debunked.

So debunk it the resurrection that's all you have to do and good luck.

No clue wtf you are yammering about now...

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: tanstaafl

There's literally nobody who says that's what happened. There are however people saying brand new species suddenly appeared out of nowhere.
That's magical.

Yes, it would be if it happened that way... I'm not saying that though...

It's not one species transforming into another. It's developments with junctions where a foundation is laid and 'the branch of the tree' diverges.

So... what do you call a bacteria slowly, over billions of years, turning into a ... fish.

It simply cannot happen.

a reply to: tanstaafl

Well it looks like Nature didn't care what you think can or can't happen. It did.
Not saying that each bigger step didn't require some 'additional encouragement'.
But for a along time there obviously were a lot of niches available, lifeforms moved in and adapted.

originally posted by: TzarChasm
]

There are no winners on this forum regardless of the matter being debated

I call BS... Randyvine2 is clearly the winner, all things being equal and untestable then the South Park interpretation takes the cake.

Who needs a cookie when you can have the whole cake?

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: tanstaafl

Well it looks like Nature didn't care what you think can or can't happen. It did.

Prove it.

Oh, just like a Christian who believes that God created the world and every living thing in 6 days - you can't.

Right.

a reply to: tanstaafl

Prove! what?

So... what do you call a bacteria slowly, over billions of years, turning into a ... fish.

This?
That bacterias are all related to those of their kind who terraformed Earth into this beautiful marvel that made it possible for more and more cell-cummulations to form more complicated lifeforms also fish.

I don't know why you guys are so fixed on mutation? That's not really what anybody is saying.

a reply to: Peeple

Transmutation of Species preceeded Darwinism.

Just keep Piltdown man in mind, British are really good at trying to write-craft history.

Piltdiwn was a response to Germany (the center of science at the time) discovering Neanderthal and the Brits faked piltdown man proclaiming since they found the missing link then surely they were the masters of all things.

And where did they discover piltdown man? You guessed it, in England.

Yes folks you read that correctly... the British were proclaiming they were the Master Race well before we heard it come out of Hitlers mouth.

And they even provided faked scientific proof to back up this claim...

Competition was high back in them early scientific days.

PS; Science isn't political not at all, how could it be?

a reply to: Randyvine2

No matter what ridicule you face in this thread, just know......... You are 1000% correct. "Evolution" as we have been taught is utter nonsense.

The problem lies with common people not getting all the information. That results in a "general consensus" of the public and then, GL applying common sense against mob rule. Maybe human nature evolved that way..... Lol.

a reply to: Randyvine2

Every idea presented anywhere is someone's undoctrinated version of something. It is either proven, disproven, or evolves into something either accepted or denied. Having a unique perspective does not make it wrong. Masses have been just as wrong as individuals. In fact, its more likely in a crowd than for a single person. Group think allows people to act in a way they would normally avoid because they believe they are not responsible for their actions. "They' didn't do anything wrong, it was the group. No, give me one person who has spent some time and careful consideration on an idea rather than a crowd following the lead of people they can't even see through the masses.

a reply to: Helious

Can you believe our news media used to practice something I actually take great pride in, it's called investigative journalism (research)

The dates, time frames, the political and scientific landscape at the time along with Germany and England being political and scientific rivals all may need to be charted out on paper if one is unable to hash out the equation in their mind.

The missing link (the first modern humans) the Master Race was actually British for a time.

The first human fossil assemblage described as Neanderthal was discovered in 1856 in the Feldhofer Cave of the Neander Valley, near Düsseldorf, Germany

We didn't know then that Humans and Neanderthal were different species. And Darwins lie persisted for quite some time doing damage still even to this day.

a reply to: Randyvine2

"Intelligent design" and evolution don't necessarily have to be mutually exclusive. "Intelligent design" could have very well paved the way for the the process of evolution over thousands/millions of years.

Unless you literally believe the earth is only 6000ish years old, which is preposterous.

The laws of science are laws of God that have been meticulously weighted to allow life to proliferate. The language of scripture and mathematics compliment one another to comprehend the nature of what is.

originally posted by: iamthevirus

originally posted by: TzarChasm
]

There are no winners on this forum regardless of the matter being debated

I call BS... Randyvine2 is clearly the winner, all things being equal and untestable then the South Park interpretation takes the cake.

Who needs a cookie when you can have the whole cake?

If you don't know the cake is a lie, does it still taste like frosting and propaganda?

originally posted by: iamthevirus
Yes folks you read that correctly... the British were proclaiming they were the Master Race well before we heard it come out of Hitlers mouth.

And they even provided faked scientific proof to back up this claim... and guess who was involved? some guy named Charles Darwin.

Competition was high back in them early scientific days.

PS; Science isn't political not at all, how could it be?

Oh, so evolution is racist. This CRT spin off must be the South Park satire you mentioned earlier.

It's politics nothing more, you would have to listen to the speech given (rather read it) after the discovery of piltdown man.

I'll dig it up for you...

It just shows how scientific theories which are not facts (that's why we call them theories) can be used in the context of a political rivalry and advanced as an agenda.

Can't wait to move on to the big bang "theory" that one is a lot of fun lol.

PS; my phone spell corrected Dawson to Darwin obviously because I've typed "darwin" before so make note.

a reply to: TzarChasm

When someone brings up Evolution just say Piltdown man... it shuts em up.



a reply to: glend

I guess Darwin sailing off to some island paradise to study the diversity of life so he could hash out his theory of evolution coming as a revelation to him doesn't sound like some fairy tale story at all... I mean I have seen day time soap operas that were just as good, so heoric.

Heck might even be be right up there with some other supposed well know ahem fairy tale.



a reply to: TzarChasm