You don't realize, do you, that the more you attempt to distract away from finding or expressing proof of ETE, the more you are really expressing that there isn't any.
Evolution is a hoax.
Topic: Evolution is a hoax - page 14. (Read 108173 times)
^^^ No proof that evolution exists there in what you posted.
You don't realize, do you, that the more you attempt to distract away from finding or expressing proof of ETE, the more you are really expressing that there isn't any.
Evolution is a hoax.
You don't realize, do you, that the more you attempt to distract away from finding or expressing proof of ETE, the more you are really expressing that there isn't any.
Evolution is a hoax.
^^^ Computer matrix or simulation doesn't have anything to do with proving evolution. Your posting of these ideas is simply a method you are using to distract that there isn't any proof for evolution theory evolution at all.
Essentially, evolution is a complete hoax.
Essentially, evolution is a complete hoax.
Of course it does, it proves god is a complete hoax, since you cannot prove we are not in a simulation, your god is essentially a hoax.
PD: I'm using your silly arguments against you to prove a point, I doubt you understand it but it's fun haha.
^^^ Computer matrix or simulation doesn't have anything to do with proving evolution. Your posting of these ideas is simply a method you are using to distract that there isn't any proof for evolution theory evolution at all.
Essentially, evolution is a complete hoax.
Essentially, evolution is a complete hoax.
^^^ Thank you.
Still lizards of the same kind. Nobody knows that the change wasn't something that is programmed in the DNA as an on-the-shelf adaptation protection, ready since the Beginning, to be used when necessary. Or do they know it, and just haven't announced it?
The point isn't that there might or might not be evolution (ETE). The point is that nobody has proven it. Another point is that nobody has proven it after trying for 150 years or more regarding Darwin, and for thousands of years regarding those who came before him and tried.
These points are starting to prove that ETE doesn't exist, because nobody can find it. And since they are starting prove they can't find it, but keep on talking like it does exist, they are formally promoting a hoax.
Evolution is a hoax.
Still lizards of the same kind. Nobody knows that the change wasn't something that is programmed in the DNA as an on-the-shelf adaptation protection, ready since the Beginning, to be used when necessary. Or do they know it, and just haven't announced it?
The point isn't that there might or might not be evolution (ETE). The point is that nobody has proven it. Another point is that nobody has proven it after trying for 150 years or more regarding Darwin, and for thousands of years regarding those who came before him and tried.
These points are starting to prove that ETE doesn't exist, because nobody can find it. And since they are starting prove they can't find it, but keep on talking like it does exist, they are formally promoting a hoax.
Evolution is a hoax.
''Nobody knows that the change wasn't something that is programmed in the DNA as an on-the-shelf adaptation protection, ready since the Beginning'' True, nobody knows that we aren't living in a matrix/computer simulation or do they know it but haven't announced it? The point is that we might as well throw everything out the window because we could all be just a giant simulation.
^^^ Thank you.
Still lizards of the same kind. Nobody knows that the change wasn't something that is programmed in the DNA as an on-the-shelf adaptation protection, ready since the Beginning, to be used when necessary. Or do they know it, and just haven't announced it?
The point isn't that there might or might not be evolution (ETE). The point is that nobody has proven it. Another point is that nobody has proven it after trying for 150 years or more regarding Darwin, and for thousands of years regarding those who came before him and tried.
These points are starting to prove that ETE doesn't exist, because nobody can find it. And since they are starting prove they can't find it, but keep on talking like it does exist, they are formally promoting a hoax.
Evolution is a hoax.
Still lizards of the same kind. Nobody knows that the change wasn't something that is programmed in the DNA as an on-the-shelf adaptation protection, ready since the Beginning, to be used when necessary. Or do they know it, and just haven't announced it?
The point isn't that there might or might not be evolution (ETE). The point is that nobody has proven it. Another point is that nobody has proven it after trying for 150 years or more regarding Darwin, and for thousands of years regarding those who came before him and tried.
These points are starting to prove that ETE doesn't exist, because nobody can find it. And since they are starting prove they can't find it, but keep on talking like it does exist, they are formally promoting a hoax.
Evolution is a hoax.
Quote
If you claim we fell out of a monky's ass, then you need to back this extraordinary claim up with some credible evidence.
Evolution is a fact but i am not with the ape to human transformation theory, if that was the case we will not have any monkeys as every ape and money could have changed through evolution to humans. Evolution is a fact... some forms of it.
If you look in the dictionary - https://www.dictionary.com/browse/evolution - you can find all kinds of explanations of the word "evolution." Properly applied, evolution is fact.
The form of evolution made popular by Darwin, that says that animals change into other animals over thousands or hundreds of thousands of years, and that all life had its start with some microbe, the descendants of which gradually changed into other "animals," has never come close to having a proof start. All the evidence for such a thing having happened, easily fits other forms of "evolution" found in the dictionary or in encyclopedias.
When Astargath suggests that a link I used is really pro-evolution of the evolution-theory-evolution kind (ETE), he forgets that the evolutionist that speaks in that site, simply announces a fact where there is adaptation change, but still the same basic animal (lizard) - https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.51252920. In other words, there is no change into another kind of animal... no ETE.
If you have proof for ETE, other than simple stories about how ETE might exist in history, show the proof. As I have said many times, there is no way that we know to prove it except through painstaking DNA examination. And examining the DNA of millions of animals and plants from thousands and hundreds of thousands of years ago is literally impossible in any way we know.
In other words, we know that evolution can never be proven without tremendous advancements in science. We know this. And since we know this, yet state that evolution is factual, we are promoting a hoax among people who don't understand the ETE process, or who don't understand that we literally can't know if it is factual or not.
Evolution is a hoax.
Click the link and read the first paragraph would you?
''he title gets the principal objection of any creationist out of the way: yes, this population of Podarcis sicula is still made up of lizards, but they’re a different kind of lizard now. Evolution works.''
Yikes, is this how you do your research? No wonder you believe in so much bullshit, the guy that spoke on that site announced the fact that evolution works, it's literally in the first paragraph, stop embarrassing yourself, will you?
Quote
If you claim we fell out of a monky's ass, then you need to back this extraordinary claim up with some credible evidence.
Evolution is a fact but i am not with the ape to human transformation theory, if that was the case we will not have any monkeys as every ape and money could have changed through evolution to humans. Evolution is a fact... some forms of it.
If you look in the dictionary - https://www.dictionary.com/browse/evolution - you can find all kinds of explanations of the word "evolution." Properly applied, evolution is fact.
The form of evolution made popular by Darwin, that says that animals change into other animals over thousands or hundreds of thousands of years, and that all life had its start with some microbe, the descendants of which gradually changed into other "animals," has never come close to having a proof start. All the evidence for such a thing having happened, easily fits other forms of "evolution" found in the dictionary or in encyclopedias.
When Astargath suggests that a link I used is really pro-evolution of the evolution-theory-evolution kind (ETE), he forgets that the evolutionist that speaks in that site, simply announces a fact where there is adaptation change, but still the same basic animal (lizard) - https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.51252920. In other words, there is no change into another kind of animal... no ETE.
If you have proof for ETE, other than simple stories about how ETE might exist in history, show the proof. As I have said many times, there is no way that we know to prove it except through painstaking DNA examination. And examining the DNA of millions of animals and plants from thousands and hundreds of thousands of years ago is literally impossible in any way we know.
In other words, we know that evolution can never be proven without tremendous advancements in science. We know this. And since we know this, yet state that evolution is factual, we are promoting a hoax among people who don't understand the ETE process, or who don't understand that we literally can't know if it is factual or not.
Evolution is a hoax.
I can prove NASA astronauts are hanging from wires and that they landed a cardboard box on a the Moon but that's not the issue here. If you want to make the extraordinary claim that men "evolved" from monkeys then much like "outer space" you need to provide some evidence that isn't manufactured.
I am with you in the moon landing conspiracy, no one went to the moon after that and now they are exploring mars but never had a plan to explore moon again with all the latest technology and the reason they tell for not exploring moon right now is the extraordinary expense 
. Quote
If you claim we fell out of a monky's ass, then you need to back this extraordinary claim up with some credible evidence.
Evolution is a fact but i am not with the ape to human transformation theory, if that was the case we will not have any monkeys as every ape and money could have changed through evolution to humans. 
Modern science much like modern art is an embarrassment.
I thought you knew the word theory, I'm sorry my bad. from someone who claims to have completed a thesis on evolutionary biology
this is an embarrassment.
this is an embarrassment.
A huge step back? How long do you keep searching for Waldo before you realize he's not even in the picture and that you've been punked?
"A human skull retrofitted with an orangutan’s jaw and chimp’s teeth means Piltdown Man is a fucking hoax!" I know I've read about it
It was quite a scandal in the science community and a huge step back on human evolution theory. I still standby by my previous reply.
if you feel my previous comment doesn't apply to you, then ignore it.
It was quite a scandal in the science community and a huge step back on human evolution theory. I still standby by my previous reply.
if you feel my previous comment doesn't apply to you, then ignore it.
^^^ A human skull retrofitted with an orangutan’s jaw and chimp’s teeth means Piltdown Man is a fucking hoax! The evidence for evolution is manufactured i.e. fraudulent and you've got the fucking balls to ask me if I've ever completed a doctoral thesis on evolutionary biology?
^^^ So instead of providing evidence the Earth is billions of years old to support the theory of evolution you're just going to go along with the establishment consensus that it is [billions of years old] and attack me, got it.
I can prove NASA astronauts are hanging from wires and that they landed a cardboard box on a the Moon but that's not the issue here. If you want to make the extraordinary claim that men "evolved" from monkeys then much like "outer space" you need to provide some evidence that isn't manufactured.
I've provided one reference so far that shows that evidence for evolution is in fact being manufactured. In your response you supportedtwo three additional hoaxes, attacked me and, spammed links to a vast list of unproven radiometric dating techniques where results very widely. You need to cite actual evidence that the Earth is billions of years old.
If you claim we fell out of a monky's ass, then you need to back this extraordinary claim up with some credible evidence.
I can prove NASA astronauts are hanging from wires and that they landed a cardboard box on a the Moon but that's not the issue here. If you want to make the extraordinary claim that men "evolved" from monkeys then much like "outer space" you need to provide some evidence that isn't manufactured.
I've provided one reference so far that shows that evidence for evolution is in fact being manufactured. In your response you supported
If you claim we fell out of a monky's ass, then you need to back this extraordinary claim up with some credible evidence.
are you sure that the evidence you might or will provide isn't manufactured? it is easy to claim something you don't understand a hoax.
I won't claim anything from this type of topics since it is full of holes to counter every claim that has been made. my point is, it
is pointless to argue about it if neither of the party fully understand the subject they are arguing about. I'm not saying you don't
fully understand both subjects, but do you?
have a good day!
^^^ So instead of providing evidence the Earth is billions of years old to support the theory of evolution you're just going to go along with the establishment consensus that it is [billions of years old] and attack me, got it.
I can prove NASA astronauts are hanging from wires and that they landed a cardboard box on a the Moon but that's not the issue here. If you want to make the extraordinary claim that men "evolved" from monkeys then much like "outer space" you need to provide some evidence that isn't manufactured.
I've provided one reference so far that shows that evidence for evolution is in fact being manufactured. In your response you supportedtwo three additional hoaxes, attacked me and, spammed links to a vast list of unproven radiometric dating techniques where results very widely. You need to cite actual evidence that the Earth is billions of years old.
If you claim we fell out of a monky's ass, then you need to back this extraordinary claim up with some credible evidence.
I can prove NASA astronauts are hanging from wires and that they landed a cardboard box on a the Moon but that's not the issue here. If you want to make the extraordinary claim that men "evolved" from monkeys then much like "outer space" you need to provide some evidence that isn't manufactured.
I've provided one reference so far that shows that evidence for evolution is in fact being manufactured. In your response you supported
If you claim we fell out of a monky's ass, then you need to back this extraordinary claim up with some credible evidence.
I'm confident that I could turn organic plant and animal tissue into stone in a time-frame of weeks or days with a concrete-like process. That being said what proof does "science", and when I say "science" I don't mean the scientific method but instead, the authority-based crap the government and media forces on the public, what proof do they have that the Earth is older than 10,000 years?
I don't buy radio-carbon dating. Evolution as described by "science" requires billions of years, what proof is there of "billions of years ago"? I know the Earth is an engineered structure and for it to be any older than thousands of years is ridiculous.
"It turned out to be a human skull retrofitted with an orangutan’s jaw and chimp’s teeth" -- Piltdown Man: The Secret Life of Charles Dawson (2003)
I don't buy radio-carbon dating. Evolution as described by "science" requires billions of years, what proof is there of "billions of years ago"? I know the Earth is an engineered structure and for it to be any older than thousands of years is ridiculous.
"It turned out to be a human skull retrofitted with an orangutan’s jaw and chimp’s teeth" -- Piltdown Man: The Secret Life of Charles Dawson (2003)
Why don't you do a little research yourself? You can actually study these things and even test them for yourself. There are many methods used to calculate the age of the earth. Also ''I don't buy radio-carbon dating method'' is not an argument.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronological_dating#Absolute_dating
So you can't prove the Earth is the billions of years old that evolution requires then? I can poke hols in radiometric dating techniques all day, the evidence for an Earth billions of years old is very weak.
I'm sure you can mate, you are the dumbass who believes giants existed and space is a hoax. Go back to your troll thread, this one is too hard for you and you will only make a fool of yourself even more. Not worth debating with brain dead zombies like you, if you want to feel special by believing the earth is flat, go ahead.
I'm confident that I could turn organic plant and animal tissue into stone in a time-frame of weeks or days with a concrete-like process. That being said what proof does "science", and when I say "science" I don't mean the scientific method but instead, the authority-based crap the government and media forces on the public, what proof do they have that the Earth is older than 10,000 years?
I don't buy radio-carbon dating. Evolution as described by "science" requires billions of years, what proof is there of "billions of years ago"? I know the Earth is an engineered structure and for it to be any older than thousands of years is ridiculous.
"It turned out to be a human skull retrofitted with an orangutan’s jaw and chimp’s teeth" -- Piltdown Man: The Secret Life of Charles Dawson (2003)
I don't buy radio-carbon dating. Evolution as described by "science" requires billions of years, what proof is there of "billions of years ago"? I know the Earth is an engineered structure and for it to be any older than thousands of years is ridiculous.
"It turned out to be a human skull retrofitted with an orangutan’s jaw and chimp’s teeth" -- Piltdown Man: The Secret Life of Charles Dawson (2003)
Why don't you do a little research yourself? You can actually study these things and even test them for yourself. There are many methods used to calculate the age of the earth. Also ''I don't buy radio-carbon dating method'' is not an argument.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronological_dating#Absolute_dating
So you can't prove the Earth is the billions of years old that evolution requires then? I can poke hols in radiometric dating techniques all day, the evidence for an Earth billions of years old is very weak.
I'm confident that I could turn organic plant and animal tissue into stone in a time-frame of weeks or days with a concrete-like process. That being said what proof does "science", and when I say "science" I don't mean the scientific method but instead, the authority-based crap the government and media forces on the public, what proof do they have that the Earth is older than 10,000 years?
I don't buy radio-carbon dating. Evolution as described by "science" requires billions of years, what proof is there of "billions of years ago"? I know the Earth is an engineered structure and for it to be any older than thousands of years is ridiculous.
"It turned out to be a human skull retrofitted with an orangutan’s jaw and chimp’s teeth" -- Piltdown Man: The Secret Life of Charles Dawson (2003)
I don't buy radio-carbon dating. Evolution as described by "science" requires billions of years, what proof is there of "billions of years ago"? I know the Earth is an engineered structure and for it to be any older than thousands of years is ridiculous.
"It turned out to be a human skull retrofitted with an orangutan’s jaw and chimp’s teeth" -- Piltdown Man: The Secret Life of Charles Dawson (2003)
Why don't you do a little research yourself? You can actually study these things and even test them for yourself. There are many methods used to calculate the age of the earth. Also ''I don't buy radio-carbon dating method'' is not an argument.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronological_dating#Absolute_dating
I'm confident that I could turn organic plant and animal tissue into stone in a time-frame of weeks or days with a concrete-like process. That being said what proof does "science", and when I say "science" I don't mean the scientific method but instead, the authority-based crap the government and media forces on the public, what proof do they have that the Earth is older than 10,000 years?
I don't buy radio-carbon dating. Evolution as described by "science" requires billions of years, what proof is there of "billions of years ago"? I know the Earth is an engineered structure and for it to be any older than thousands of years is ridiculous.
"It turned out to be a human skull retrofitted with an orangutan’s jaw and chimp’s teeth" -- Piltdown Man: The Secret Life of Charles Dawson (2003)
I don't buy radio-carbon dating. Evolution as described by "science" requires billions of years, what proof is there of "billions of years ago"? I know the Earth is an engineered structure and for it to be any older than thousands of years is ridiculous.
"It turned out to be a human skull retrofitted with an orangutan’s jaw and chimp’s teeth" -- Piltdown Man: The Secret Life of Charles Dawson (2003)
^^^ Still just a lizard:
So, where is the ETE proof? Even if this is a strong form of adaptation evolution, it is only the tiniest of beginnings toward proving that evolution is the thing that changes one kind of animal into another, and that this is the way that all creatures developed on earth.
Evolutionists desire evolution to be true so much, that they are working as hard as they can in every direction they can think of. Part of this work is to proclaim evolution as truth, even though all they have found is some possible evidence, and no fact.
I'm not saying that all this search and research isn't providing some useful knowledge about how nature operates. But calling it ETE when it is not known to be ETE in any sense is a hoax.
Evolution is a hoax.
Evolution created something new, and it did it quickly (about 30 generations), and the appearance was documented. It’s still just a lizard, but we expected nothing else — and it’s now a lizard with novel adaptations for herbivory.
So, where is the ETE proof? Even if this is a strong form of adaptation evolution, it is only the tiniest of beginnings toward proving that evolution is the thing that changes one kind of animal into another, and that this is the way that all creatures developed on earth.
Evolutionists desire evolution to be true so much, that they are working as hard as they can in every direction they can think of. Part of this work is to proclaim evolution as truth, even though all they have found is some possible evidence, and no fact.
I'm not saying that all this search and research isn't providing some useful knowledge about how nature operates. But calling it ETE when it is not known to be ETE in any sense is a hoax.
Evolution is a hoax.
Hahaha this so funny. You actually didnt realize the article is mocking creationists, did you?? Hahahaha
"I predict some Creationist/ID proponent who believes evolution is consistent with Creation/ID will take this as supporting evidence that evolution need not take billions of years."
This is beyond funny.
Jump to: