Proposal to change the name of "Evolution"

reply to post by Kailassa

We know what is good and what is evil

Seldom does line in a post just jump off the page like that one did for me. Because I remember a very infamous character saying that. This is the end result of the evolutionary mantra. It is also one of the major issues raised by the very first rebel in the universe and propagated to the very first woman. And God said lets see if your right, lets test your theory. Human history has given us the answer.

reply to post by chocise

Originally posted by chocise

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
reply to post by glen200376

 

I realize that there is a 'theory' of evolution, which explains the fact that evolution happens. Theories explain facts. Please, learn some science for the Doctor's sake.

This is where you're simply wrong and supremely dishonest [& hypocritical] with it.

Really? I'm wrong and dishonest for giving the honest definition of a theory?

If you were to objectively examine the evidence you'd soon reason it's far from complete and wholey inaccurate in places.

Citation needed. Which area is incomplete and where is it inaccurate?

Huge questions exist which are not readily answerable,

Such as?

yet the ToE remains simply because no other rational explanation is presently obvious to us.

Evolution isn't something which is just obvious, it's wholly supported by the evidence. Unless you wish to provide evidence which contradicts evolution, I'd suggest refraining from further comment.

Ignoring the holes,

Which you've declared exist without identifying a single one...

you have concluded 'it must be that way', so I put it to you that is a very unscientific approach.

I didn't say that it must be this way, I'm saying that it is this way. It could be otherwise, but it simply isn't.

In this light I suggest the term 'evolution', in the context used, should be re-termed, 'lie'... because that best describes it.

Look, it's idiocy! Please, explain why evolution, the foundational theory of modern biology, is a lie. Simply calling it a lie is idiotic.

reply to post by Blue_Jay33


Blue_Jay33's favorite strategy. Take an out of context single line and make a post on it whilst ignoring the main points of the post.

Please, keep the thread on topic.

reply to post by chocise

If you were to objectively examine the evidence you'd soon reason it's far from complete and wholey inaccurate in places.

Incomplete? Horrors! It's that pesky Devil of the Gaps again!

Care to explain how it's incomplete?

And does 'wholey' mean holy, holey or wholly?

Huge questions exist which are not readily answerable

And those questions would be..?

The ToE remains simply because no other rational explanation is presently obvious to us.

Would you prefer an irrational explanation?

Ignoring the holes, you have concluded 'it must be that way', so I put it to you that is a very unscientific approach.

Why do you call it unscientific? Evolution has a theory, but what is unscientific about a hypothesis?

In this light I suggest the term 'evolution', in the context used, should be re-termed, 'lie'... because that best describes it.

You just can't face being an ape, can you?