HK
A refreshing change from lots of things.
Ballkicks: (+116 / -8)
Posts: 678 (0.112)
Reg. Date: Jan 2004
Location: Milano, Italy!
Gender: Male |
Reply 22 of 102 (Originally posted on: 05-27-04 04:38:59 PM)
Edit Post
| Edit History
| Send PM
| Change Title
| Reply w/Quote
| Report Post
| Ignore
| Show All Posts
Yeeehaw, herein starts ignorance fest!
Quote:
Oh? Is that why it is still called the "Theory" of Evolution?
Yes. That's it. For the same reason we have a theory of gravity. It's a wonder your ass is still stuck to the chair, ain't it?
Quote:
No, no matter how much some people would like it to be, evolution has never fully been proven, nor has creationism, and neither will be able to be proven. Why? Evolution will never leave the Hypothesis state, because it cannot be measured, observed in a laboratory, felt, tasted, heard, smelled, seen with a microscope etc.
What are you, a biologists?
Let me enlighten you: evolution has been observed in laboratory. Speciation has been observed in laboratory. Mutations, changes in allele frequency, diversification rates have all been observed in laboratory.
Have we seen a whale turn into an elephant? Nope. Why? It takes hundreds of thousands of here. Have we observed the basic process through which this happens? Yes.
Quote:
Same with creationism. This is why I often find these debates to be very futile, because we will never fully know until we are dead. I really don't want to get into some massive debate that I'll lose energy for about 3 posts in.
Nope. No creationist experiment has ever been carried out in a lab, mainly because:
1) There's no creationist theory to begin with. Creationist can't even agree with themselves over anything. Young Earthers, Old Earthers, Flat Earthers, you pick 'em.
2) There's no scientifical empirical process behind creationism. That is. Zero. Nil.
Quote:
Even Darwin admitted that if missing links couldn't be found, his theory was defunct. So far, what missing links have we found? For the millions of species of organisms we have today, we should be seeing TRILLIONS of intermediary fossils lying around everywhere. What do we have? Maybe 2 arguable fossils which no one is too sure about. Where's the dog with flippers that was supposed to turn into a whale? Where is the rat that had wings while turning into a bat? Without these fossils, the evolutionary trees everyone has drawn up are just speculations and imaginations.
Darwin is not to evolution what Jesus is to Christianity. Science don't give a fuck what Darwin admitted or not. His theory has been examined, empirically tested and observed. It has been vastly improved. And it has been shown to be functional, and in full accordance with what we observe in nature.
The fossils:
1)What is an intermediary fossil? Every species is a complete species of is on. "Intermediary" is a fallacy. We have millions of fossils. Each of them is intermediary. We have reconstructed tens of evolution processes. The horse. Humans, up to a point. And many others.
2) Are you aware how rare it is for fossilization to occur? Fossilization occurs only in given circumstances, found in extremely rare situations. I'd rather be amazed at the quantity of fossils we have managed to found.
Quote:
The Big Bang is rather odd. Last time I checked, giant ass explosions don't create order, they create chaos. How the hell can some big random explosion that came from out of no where create this amazingly complex universe? If I blew up your car, and waited a couple million years, will I find a bunch of planets with civilizations whirling around everywhere? No, I don't think I would. Even if gravitational pulls had something to do with compacting the planets, ok, so you have big balls of dust everywhere, how is this shit from a giant random explosion going to eventually create us? I just don't see it. If I poor a bag of marbles on the floor, everything scatters into utter confusion and chaos, they don't create big beautiful designs and ornate patterns.
Oh my, here we go again. Allow me to repeat:
Bing Bang Theory has nothing to do with evolution.
Bing Bang Theory has nothing to do with evolution.
Bing Bang Theory has nothing to do with evolution.
Bing Bang Theory has nothing to do with evolution.
Got that through your head?
Now, you are utterly ignorant of everything concerning physics, astrophysics and probably biology as well. Before making more of a fool out of yourself I suggest you actually go and read a book about these things. I suggest starting from a basic one.
Quote:
I think the biggest argument that could be brought against evolution is the numerical chances. Thinking scientifically, this whole big bang turning into our great universe was a one time shot, right? I believe that if anything is 1 to the 10^50, it is considered absolutely impossible. Go check the mathematical calculations on the chance of evolution and tell me if that one shot chance would succeed.
What the heck are you debating? Big Bang or evolution?
Big Bang is an educated guess at the origin of the Universe, with some compelling evidence (like background cosmic radiation) to its side.
Evolution is a proven theory. You want to count the numbers for evolution? Okay. Trillions of mutations take place constantly in trillions of cells. The math has evolution not as a likely chance, but as an assured outcome.
See the wonders of Europe for 30 Euros a day!
El pueblo unido jamąs serą vencido!
|
