So the question remains: How did humans acquire such vast intellectual capacities so comparatively recently and so rapidly?
If the Cambrian period of 530 million years ago poses serious challenges to Darwin’s insistence upon slow, incremental change in the amazingly rapid proliferation of animals over a mere 5 to 6 million-year timespan (see Darwin’s Doubt https://darwinsdoubt.com/), then how much more should the transformational changes in the human brain over the past 100 to 200,000 years cause as serious reevaluation of the nature of human beings and the means by which they came to be.
Topic: Evolution is a hoax - page 60. (Read 108173 times)
How can a theory be a hoax
As with the big bang
How can a theory be held as truth
Maybe change the heading to "Evolution is only a theory"
One known fact
about 6000 years ago their was a worldwide flood documented in every "Global" civilization at the time
What civilizations (not cavemen) lived before 6000 years ago
Before the Abrahamic laws (Jew, Christian, Muslim), Hindu's, Egyptians
Before Noah
?
From there we could see, learn, if any evolution came from what is theory
As with the big bang
How can a theory be held as truth
Maybe change the heading to "Evolution is only a theory"
One known fact
about 6000 years ago their was a worldwide flood documented in every "Global" civilization at the time
What civilizations (not cavemen) lived before 6000 years ago
Before the Abrahamic laws (Jew, Christian, Muslim), Hindu's, Egyptians
Before Noah
?
From there we could see, learn, if any evolution came from what is theory
Nope, they all have a ton of evidence behind them and are normal examples of evolution, you can find hundreds. All of them with evidence and proof. You can see it in humans, there are plenty of fossils of our ancestors.
https://hastyreader.com/anagenesis-cladogenesis/
All of these are documented facts, you are just delusional.
Dude, the amount of disinformation... I never thought that people could really believe these things...
I mean, it's all there, you just have to learn how to understand certain principles and use different tools such as statistics, mathematics, biology, physics (etc..), and you will be able to understand so many things. You will also realize how little you previously knew and wonder how much more knowledge there is that you do not possess..
But why would you do all that boring work and study these things for years to get the understanding you need when you can just google some attractive, mystical conspiracy subjects and theories for 2 hours and feel like you understand and know everything.
A single evolution mutation in a plant or animal would not be large enough to be noticeable without microscopic examination. The before and after animals would be essentially the same.
Any plant or animal in the fossil record that is considered to be a missing link, would have to have thousands or millions more missing links before it and after it, to become the missing link that it is considered to be. These missing links are not available or visible in the fossil record anywhere.
If you change evolution theory so that you don't need all these missing links, then you would find easily recognized evolution changes all over the place today outside the fossil record, in everyday life.
The fact that adaptation explains all the so-called evolution evidences better, along with a fossil record that has no missing links, shows that ...
Evolution is a hoax.
Evolution happens over a period of hundreds of thousands even millions of years. Every generation of a species mutates "a little" as you mentioned and there's no noticeable way to see it (without DNA analysis) but when you take, lets say, a thousand generations the first and the thousandth generation are so much different from each other (since every generation is a little bit different than the previous) you get 2 different species. Those species (distinct species, not just 2 generations that came 1 after the other keep that in mind) are considered links in a chain of evolution. Now, where is the line that separates 1 species from another, in which generation does 1 species become another I don't know. that question you need to ask someone who's more specialized in the field.
If you don't understand these simple things how can you claim evolution is a hoax lol..
It's as if I said "hey man the gods are angry" each time there's thunder just cose I can't understand or am not educated enough to understand whats really going on.
Knowlege is power, man, I wish more people realized that.
Thank you. Since you can't see evolution as you have said, and since everything that we CAN see, and that is CALLED evolution, can be explained by adaptation better, and since all the non-adaptation mutations that we see are destructive mutations, where is the evidence for evolution?
For example. If you had never seen a house built, and someone took you into a house and told you that there were 2x4 studs in the walls, you might believe him. But you might want some evidence, first. So, he might get out his stud finder and tell you that it is showing you where the studs are by finding the nails that hold the paneling on. You might respond with the idea that those are simply anomalies in the wall that the stud finder is finding.
How does anyone prove that there are studs in the wall? You tear the paneling off, and then you can SEE the studs, for a fact. Somebody, please come and tear the "paneling" off the "wall" of anthropology/geology/history/etc. so that we can SEE the actual evolution "studs" in the wall. Until you do this, all the evolution talk is, well, just talk.
Of course, since you can find many reasons why evolution is impossible - all you have to do is Google "impossible evolution" - that's why you can't find any evolution.
Evolution is a hoax. If you believe evolution exists, you are making it your religion.
your eyes are the first to lie to you. you can not rely on your senses to prove something. you can't see black holes but we know they are there. You can see the rainbow but it's actually not a physical thing, iz's an illusion. Do not base your beliefs on what you can see, that's very limiting. Just cose you see something doesn't mean it's true and just cose you don't see it doesn't mean it's not true... That's why we have computers and other tools and instruments that can measure data waaaay better than we can...
As i said before, if you knew a thing or 2 about statistics you would be able to "see" the evolution in the data. if you know math you can calculate the distance between the sun and the earth although you cannot take an actual tape mesure and mesure it yourself. I strongly recommend you to get into math and physics, studying it can be so boring but once you start understanding it you will see how awesome it is, you will be able to do so many thing and understand so much more.
Thank you. Since you can't see evolution as you have said, and since everything that we CAN see, and that is CALLED evolution, can be explained by adaptation better, and since all the non-adaptation mutations that we see are destructive mutations, where is the evidence for evolution?
That’s your idea that everything fits adoption better then evolution.
Adoption is a need, will or society driven skill you acquired, evolution is a pre dispositioning you are born with. You don’t adapt to being taller, you are taller, you don’t adapt to become world champion in 100m run, you are born a fast runner, - that might require training. You don’t adapt to become a social or technical genius, you already are. Some might never recognize it; some might never grab or be given the chance of exploring it. The rest of us can adapt or train all our life, and will never reach such a level.
And once you recognize that some people are born more suited for certain tasks/skills (e.g. they do not adapt to them) it becomes very hard to reconcile with one man started it all (Adam) and all his offspring’s turn out variously suited for certain task – and none of them evolved. How can that be?
From Dictionary.com:
Quote from: http://www.dictionary.com/browse/adoption?s=t
adoption
[uh-dop-shuh n]
1. the act of adopting: the adoption of a new amendment.
2. the state of being adopted.
[uh-dop-shuh n]
1. the act of adopting: the adoption of a new amendment.
2. the state of being adopted.
So, what does adoption have to do with evolution?
Kinda like, what does simple change evolution have to do with evolution theory evolution?
Thank you. Since you can't see evolution as you have said, and since everything that we CAN see, and that is CALLED evolution, can be explained by adaptation better, and since all the non-adaptation mutations that we see are destructive mutations, where is the evidence for evolution?
That’s your idea that everything fits adoption better then evolution.
Adoption is a need, will or society driven skill you acquired, evolution is a pre dispositioning you are born with. You don’t adapt to being taller, you are taller, you don’t adapt to become world champion in 100m run, you are born a fast runner, - that might require training. You don’t adapt to become a social or technical genius, you already are. Some might never recognize it; some might never grab or be given the chance of exploring it. The rest of us can adapt or train all our life, and will never reach such a level.
And once you recognize that some people are born more suited for certain tasks/skills (e.g. they do not adapt to them) it becomes very hard to reconcile with one man started it all (Adam) and all his offspring’s turn out variously suited for certain task – and none of them evolved. How can that be?
Thank you. Since you can't see evolution as you have said, and since everything that we CAN see, and that is CALLED evolution, can be explained by adaptation better, and since all the non-adaptation mutations that we see are destructive mutations, where is the evidence for evolution?
For example. If you had never seen a house built, and someone took you into a house and told you that there were 2x4 studs in the walls, you might believe him. But you might want some evidence, first. So, he might get out his stud finder and tell you that it is showing you where the studs are by finding the nails that hold the paneling on. You might respond with the idea that those are simply anomalies in the wall that the stud finder is finding.
How does anyone prove that there are studs in the wall? You tear the paneling off, and then you can SEE the studs, for a fact. Somebody, please come and tear the "paneling" off the "wall" of anthropology/geology/history/etc. so that we can SEE the actual evolution "studs" in the wall. Until you do this, all the evolution talk is, well, just talk.
Of course, since you can find many reasons why evolution is impossible - all you have to do is Google "impossible evolution" - that's why you can't find any evolution.
Evolution is a hoax. If you believe evolution exists, you are making it your religion.
Why you don't use your "studs" analogy to find the evidence of God? You only try to discredit scientific facts by your "show me the money" mantra, and in the process you just show that you don't understand evolution, one tiny bit.
Why don't you ask your god to come out of the "walls" and show himself, for crying out laud?
Why is your god so shy? He created the universe he can type, can't he? Ask him to post here and we all can move on.
You are kinda off topic, there, bud. But we'll let it slide this time, because through being off topic, you are admitting that you agree that...
Evolution is a hoax.
Hmm, ignoring your own argument I see... Classic badecker. His brain probably got scared for 1 second here but quickly his delusion took over and had to ignore your post, af_newbie.
Thank you. Since you can't see evolution as you have said, and since everything that we CAN see, and that is CALLED evolution, can be explained by adaptation better, and since all the non-adaptation mutations that we see are destructive mutations, where is the evidence for evolution?
For example. If you had never seen a house built, and someone took you into a house and told you that there were 2x4 studs in the walls, you might believe him. But you might want some evidence, first. So, he might get out his stud finder and tell you that it is showing you where the studs are by finding the nails that hold the paneling on. You might respond with the idea that those are simply anomalies in the wall that the stud finder is finding.
How does anyone prove that there are studs in the wall? You tear the paneling off, and then you can SEE the studs, for a fact. Somebody, please come and tear the "paneling" off the "wall" of anthropology/geology/history/etc. so that we can SEE the actual evolution "studs" in the wall. Until you do this, all the evolution talk is, well, just talk.
Of course, since you can find many reasons why evolution is impossible - all you have to do is Google "impossible evolution" - that's why you can't find any evolution.
Evolution is a hoax. If you believe evolution exists, you are making it your religion.
Why you don't use your "studs" analogy to find the evidence of God? You only try to discredit scientific facts by your "show me the money" mantra, and in the process you just show that you don't understand evolution, one tiny bit.
Why don't you ask your god to come out of the "walls" and show himself, for crying out laud?
Why is your god so shy? He created the universe he can type, can't he? Ask him to post here and we all can move on.
You are kinda off topic, there, bud. But we'll let it slide this time, because through being off topic, you are admitting that you agree that...
Evolution is a hoax.
Nope, they all have a ton of evidence behind them and are normal examples of evolution, you can find hundreds. All of them with evidence and proof. You can see it in humans, there are plenty of fossils of our ancestors.
https://hastyreader.com/anagenesis-cladogenesis/
All of these are documented facts, you are just delusional.
Dude, the amount of disinformation... I never thought that people could really believe these things...
I mean, it's all there, you just have to learn how to understand certain principles and use different tools such as statistics, mathematics, biology, physics (etc..), and you will be able to understand so many things. You will also realize how little you previously knew and wonder how much more knowledge there is that you do not possess..
But why would you do all that boring work and study these things for years to get the understanding you need when you can just google some attractive, mystical conspiracy subjects and theories for 2 hours and feel like you understand and know everything.
A single evolution mutation in a plant or animal would not be large enough to be noticeable without microscopic examination. The before and after animals would be essentially the same.
Any plant or animal in the fossil record that is considered to be a missing link, would have to have thousands or millions more missing links before it and after it, to become the missing link that it is considered to be. These missing links are not available or visible in the fossil record anywhere.
If you change evolution theory so that you don't need all these missing links, then you would find easily recognized evolution changes all over the place today outside the fossil record, in everyday life.
The fact that adaptation explains all the so-called evolution evidences better, along with a fossil record that has no missing links, shows that ...
Evolution is a hoax.
Evolution happens over a period of hundreds of thousands even millions of years. Every generation of a species mutates "a little" as you mentioned and there's no noticeable way to see it (without DNA analysis) but when you take, lets say, a thousand generations the first and the thousandth generation are so much different from each other (since every generation is a little bit different than the previous) you get 2 different species. Those species (distinct species, not just 2 generations that came 1 after the other keep that in mind) are considered links in a chain of evolution. Now, where is the line that separates 1 species from another, in which generation does 1 species become another I don't know. that question you need to ask someone who's more specialized in the field.
If you don't understand these simple things how can you claim evolution is a hoax lol..
It's as if I said "hey man the gods are angry" each time there's thunder just cose I can't understand or am not educated enough to understand whats really going on.
Knowlege is power, man, I wish more people realized that.
Thank you. Since you can't see evolution as you have said, and since everything that we CAN see, and that is CALLED evolution, can be explained by adaptation better, and since all the non-adaptation mutations that we see are destructive mutations, where is the evidence for evolution?
For example. If you had never seen a house built, and someone took you into a house and told you that there were 2x4 studs in the walls, you might believe him. But you might want some evidence, first. So, he might get out his stud finder and tell you that it is showing you where the studs are by finding the nails that hold the paneling on. You might respond with the idea that those are simply anomalies in the wall that the stud finder is finding.
How does anyone prove that there are studs in the wall? You tear the paneling off, and then you can SEE the studs, for a fact. Somebody, please come and tear the "paneling" off the "wall" of anthropology/geology/history/etc. so that we can SEE the actual evolution "studs" in the wall. Until you do this, all the evolution talk is, well, just talk.
Of course, since you can find many reasons why evolution is impossible - all you have to do is Google "impossible evolution" - that's why you can't find any evolution.
Evolution is a hoax. If you believe evolution exists, you are making it your religion.
Nope, they all have a ton of evidence behind them and are normal examples of evolution, you can find hundreds. All of them with evidence and proof. You can see it in humans, there are plenty of fossils of our ancestors.
https://hastyreader.com/anagenesis-cladogenesis/
All of these are documented facts, you are just delusional.
Dude, the amount of disinformation... I never thought that people could really believe these things...
I mean, it's all there, you just have to learn how to understand certain principles and use different tools such as statistics, mathematics, biology, physics (etc..), and you will be able to understand so many things. You will also realize how little you previously knew and wonder how much more knowledge there is that you do not possess..
But why would you do all that boring work and study these things for years to get the understanding you need when you can just google some attractive, mystical conspiracy subjects and theories for 2 hours and feel like you understand and know everything.
A single evolution mutation in a plant or animal would not be large enough to be noticeable without microscopic examination. The before and after animals would be essentially the same.
Any plant or animal in the fossil record that is considered to be a missing link, would have to have thousands or millions more missing links before it and after it, to become the missing link that it is considered to be. These missing links are not available or visible in the fossil record anywhere.
If you change evolution theory so that you don't need all these missing links, then you would find easily recognized evolution changes all over the place today outside the fossil record, in everyday life.
The fact that adaptation explains all the so-called evolution evidences better, along with a fossil record that has no missing links, shows that ...
Evolution is a hoax.
Evolution happens over a period of hundreds of thousands even millions of years. Every generation of a species mutates "a little" as you mentioned and there's no noticeable way to see it (without DNA analysis) but when you take, lets say, a thousand generations the first and the thousandth generation are so much different from each other (since every generation is a little bit different than the previous) you get 2 different species. Those species (distinct species, not just 2 generations that came 1 after the other keep that in mind) are considered links in a chain of evolution. Now, where is the line that separates 1 species from another, in which generation does 1 species become another I don't know. that question you need to ask someone who's more specialized in the field.
If you don't understand these simple things how can you claim evolution is a hoax lol..
It's as if I said "hey man the gods are angry" each time there's thunder just cose I can't understand or am not educated enough to understand whats really going on.
Knowlege is power, man, I wish more people realized that.
Badecker is delusional, he doesn't understand because he doesn't want to. He will keep repeating the same garbage without ever doing any real research on the matter. In fact he doesn't even realize that he is proving evolution with some of his arguments.
Nope, they all have a ton of evidence behind them and are normal examples of evolution, you can find hundreds. All of them with evidence and proof. You can see it in humans, there are plenty of fossils of our ancestors.
https://hastyreader.com/anagenesis-cladogenesis/
All of these are documented facts, you are just delusional.
Dude, the amount of disinformation... I never thought that people could really believe these things...
I mean, it's all there, you just have to learn how to understand certain principles and use different tools such as statistics, mathematics, biology, physics (etc..), and you will be able to understand so many things. You will also realize how little you previously knew and wonder how much more knowledge there is that you do not possess..
But why would you do all that boring work and study these things for years to get the understanding you need when you can just google some attractive, mystical conspiracy subjects and theories for 2 hours and feel like you understand and know everything.
A single evolution mutation in a plant or animal would not be large enough to be noticeable without microscopic examination. The before and after animals would be essentially the same.
Any plant or animal in the fossil record that is considered to be a missing link, would have to have thousands or millions more missing links before it and after it, to become the missing link that it is considered to be. These missing links are not available or visible in the fossil record anywhere.
If you change evolution theory so that you don't need all these missing links, then you would find easily recognized evolution changes all over the place today outside the fossil record, in everyday life.
The fact that adaptation explains all the so-called evolution evidences better, along with a fossil record that has no missing links, shows that ...
Evolution is a hoax.
Evolution happens over a period of hundreds of thousands even millions of years. Every generation of a species mutates "a little" as you mentioned and there's no noticeable way to see it (without DNA analysis) but when you take, lets say, a thousand generations the first and the thousandth generation are so much different from each other (since every generation is a little bit different than the previous) you get 2 different species. Those species (distinct species, not just 2 generations that came 1 after the other keep that in mind) are considered links in a chain of evolution. Now, where is the line that separates 1 species from another, in which generation does 1 species become another I don't know. that question you need to ask someone who's more specialized in the field.
If you don't understand these simple things how can you claim evolution is a hoax lol..
It's as if I said "hey man the gods are angry" each time there's thunder just cose I can't understand or am not educated enough to understand whats really going on.
Knowlege is power, man, I wish more people realized that.
Nope, they all have a ton of evidence behind them and are normal examples of evolution, you can find hundreds. All of them with evidence and proof. You can see it in humans, there are plenty of fossils of our ancestors.
https://hastyreader.com/anagenesis-cladogenesis/
All of these are documented facts, you are just delusional.
Dude, the amount of disinformation... I never thought that people could really believe these things...
I mean, it's all there, you just have to learn how to understand certain principles and use different tools such as statistics, mathematics, biology, physics (etc..), and you will be able to understand so many things. You will also realize how little you previously knew and wonder how much more knowledge there is that you do not possess..
But why would you do all that boring work and study these things for years to get the understanding you need when you can just google some attractive, mystical conspiracy subjects and theories for 2 hours and feel like you understand and know everything.
A single evolution mutation in a plant or animal would not be large enough to be noticeable without microscopic examination. The before and after animals would be essentially the same.
Any plant or animal in the fossil record that is considered to be a missing link, would have to have thousands or millions more missing links before it and after it, to become the missing link that it is considered to be. These missing links are not available or visible in the fossil record anywhere.
If you change evolution theory so that you don't need all these missing links, then you would find easily recognized evolution changes all over the place today outside the fossil record, in everyday life.
The fact that adaptation explains all the so-called evolution evidences better, along with a fossil record that has no missing links, shows that ...
Evolution is a hoax.
https://www.wired.com/2008/12/evolutionexampl/
https://listverse.com/2011/11/19/8-examples-of-evolution-in-action/
http://www.businessinsider.com/recent-human-evolution-traits-2016-8?IR=T
Plenty of examples.
Those are examples of suggested evolution by novices and scientists who wish that they were examples of evolution. They are inconclusive regarding evolution. But they are not inconclusive regarding being simple adaptation.
Nope, those are examples of evolution and you can't debunk them so you type simple sentences so your brain doesn't stop working. It happens all the time, your brain has a defense mechanism, it will not accept being wrong and it has to ignore these arguments.
They debunk themselves right in their own language. In what way? you might ask. In the way that the language is full of things that haven't been proven, and often don't make any sense, or are incomplete, or lack facts to support them. All you have to do is track down all the statements in every example to its base, and you will come up with circular references, or dead ends.
Evolution is a hoax.
Dude, the amount of disinformation... I never thought that people could really believe these things...
I mean, it's all there, you just have to learn how to understand certain principles and use different tools such as statistics, mathematics, biology, physics (etc..), and you will be able to understand so many things. You will also realize how little you previously knew and wonder how much more knowledge there is that you do not possess..
But why would you do all that boring work and study these things for years to get the understanding you need when you can just google some attractive, mystical conspiracy subjects and theories for 2 hours and feel like you understand and know everything.
https://www.wired.com/2008/12/evolutionexampl/
https://listverse.com/2011/11/19/8-examples-of-evolution-in-action/
http://www.businessinsider.com/recent-human-evolution-traits-2016-8?IR=T
Plenty of examples.
Those are examples of suggested evolution by novices and scientists who wish that they were examples of evolution. They are inconclusive regarding evolution. But they are not inconclusive regarding being simple adaptation.
Nope, those are examples of evolution and you can't debunk them so you type simple sentences so your brain doesn't stop working. It happens all the time, your brain has a defense mechanism, it will not accept being wrong and it has to ignore these arguments.
They debunk themselves right in their own language. In what way? you might ask. In the way that the language is full of things that haven't been proven, and often don't make any sense, or are incomplete, or lack facts to support them. All you have to do is track down all the statements in every example to its base, and you will come up with circular references, or dead ends.
Evolution is a hoax.
Nope, they all have a ton of evidence behind them and are normal examples of evolution, you can find hundreds. All of them with evidence and proof. You can see it in humans, there are plenty of fossils of our ancestors.
https://hastyreader.com/anagenesis-cladogenesis/
All of these are documented facts, you are just delusional.
https://www.wired.com/2008/12/evolutionexampl/
https://listverse.com/2011/11/19/8-examples-of-evolution-in-action/
http://www.businessinsider.com/recent-human-evolution-traits-2016-8?IR=T
Plenty of examples.
Those are examples of suggested evolution by novices and scientists who wish that they were examples of evolution. They are inconclusive regarding evolution. But they are not inconclusive regarding being simple adaptation.
Nope, those are examples of evolution and you can't debunk them so you type simple sentences so your brain doesn't stop working. It happens all the time, your brain has a defense mechanism, it will not accept being wrong and it has to ignore these arguments.
They debunk themselves right in their own language. In what way? you might ask. In the way that the language is full of things that haven't been proven, and often don't make any sense, or are incomplete, or lack facts to support them. All you have to do is track down all the statements in every example to its base, and you will come up with circular references, or dead ends.
Evolution is a hoax.
The Model T Ford was first produced in 1908. Nowadays Ford makes all kinds of other cars, as well. Is this evolution?
The point in this topic has been evolution theory evolution. Evolution theory evolution does not include every type of change. And the so-called evolution theory evolutionary changes fit plain old adaptation better than they fit evolution theory.
I think we have quite a different view of what evolution is. I get the feeling you think, you take one part chicken and another part chicken, put it in a pot and out comes a horse. Some kind of terraforming that should happened at one point or another. A magical change.
Evolution never worked this way and never will work this way.
I’m taller than my father, and his father and his father. I know this, because I knew them all. It’s the result of ever taller parents producing offspring’s. Apparently taller people in the last 100-500-1000? years have had a better chance of reproduction. I don’t know, just guessing.
Either way, I’m better than my father at grabbing apples of a tree, because I’m taller. I can get some he can’t. It is not something I adopted to, I’m by nature better at it. I was born more suited for it. Is it a skill I can use in our time, probably not. But at one point in time it maybe could have been. Is it programming, sure is, a specified mix of DNA gave this result. Any other mix would maybe have given me something similar, but not quite the same. I have evolved.
So to answer if a Ford T from 1908 has evolved to what Ford sells now – absolutely! This is evolution. You take what you have, mix it, improve on it, and you get something new, possible better – but it is society that judges if a given change is better for society as a whole, not the changes themselves. The only difference between cars and humans is that cars needs help to reproduce, humans does not. Might change in the future, but either way, its still evolution.
I use "evolution" in the Model T way on occasion. We are similar in this. Where we differ is evolution theory evolution (ETE), which is different than Model T evolution, and other forms of change listed above.
We have no proven example of evolution theory evolution... not even one. We have a lot of people who suggest or believe in ETE. Essentially all of the ETE evidence can be shown to be adaptation or something other than ETE, better and easier than it can be shown to be ETE.
Evolution theory evolution is a hoax, even if you want to use the word "evolution" for simple changes in things other than ETE... including adaptation and simple change.
The Model T Ford was first produced in 1908. Nowadays Ford makes all kinds of other cars, as well. Is this evolution?
The point in this topic has been evolution theory evolution. Evolution theory evolution does not include every type of change. And the so-called evolution theory evolutionary changes fit plain old adaptation better than they fit evolution theory.
I think we have quite a different view of what evolution is. I get the feeling you think, you take one part chicken and another part chicken, put it in a pot and out comes a horse. Some kind of terraforming that should happened at one point or another. A magical change.
Evolution never worked this way and never will work this way.
I’m taller than my father, and his father and his father. I know this, because I knew them all. It’s the result of ever taller parents producing offspring’s. Apparently taller people in the last 100-500-1000? years have had a better chance of reproduction. I don’t know, just guessing.
Either way, I’m better than my father at grabbing apples of a tree, because I’m taller. I can get some he can’t. It is not something I adopted to, I’m by nature better at it. I was born more suited for it. Is it a skill I can use in our time, probably not. But at one point in time it maybe could have been. Is it programming, sure is, a specified mix of DNA gave this result. Any other mix would maybe have given me something similar, but not quite the same. I have evolved.
So to answer if a Ford T from 1908 has evolved to what Ford sells now – absolutely! This is evolution. You take what you have, mix it, improve on it, and you get something new, possible better – but it is society that judges if a given change is better for society as a whole, not the changes themselves. The only difference between cars and humans is that cars needs help to reproduce, humans does not. Might change in the future, but either way, its still evolution.
What if God is not a being or anything like that. What if God is just an idea, a collective way of acting and thinking.. just like the economy is.. The more people using the currency make the value of it go up. What if God is a similar principle; the more people believe in it the more widespread those ideas become..
I'm not very religious but if your religion makes you do good to others than I'll support that idea and help spread it..
I'm not very religious but if your religion makes you do good to others than I'll support that idea and help spread it..
It's really difficult to think that something as detailed, complex, and drawn-out-in-time as evolution, might exist when you can't even find one factual example of it. If the evidences that are suggested to be for evolution, didn't fit adaptation or something else better, we might have a reason to suggest that we should go looking for something like evolution.
There isn't any evolution theory evolution. We have nothing that says that there is evolution except a bunch of scientific people who suggest something that is essentially impossible, while ignoring the things that are highly probable. That's it!
Evolution is a hoax!
There isn't any evolution theory evolution. We have nothing that says that there is evolution except a bunch of scientific people who suggest something that is essentially impossible, while ignoring the things that are highly probable. That's it!
Evolution is a hoax!
Why you say that? What do you mean you can't find any factual example? All offspring’s of all species on this planet is an example! There are 100 of trillions of examples for you to view right this instant.
There is nothing complex about evolution, its rather simple - it’s just change, any change.
The point in this topic has been evolution theory evolution. Evolution theory evolution does not include every type of change. And the so-called evolution theory evolutionary changes fit plain old adaptation better than they fit evolution theory.
Ok so I ask another way; if all species are created and never change, why do all individual specimens not look the same of each species? Why do all humans not look they very same, and I mean the very same? Why do they keep coming up with new forms, shapes and sizes? What would you call this every changing, renewing physical appearances?
It's called genetic programming, and operates according to the laws of physics which act through cause and effect. In other words, it is programming. And programming has a programmer.
This part of your questions is starting into the idea of Who or What the Programmer of the Universe is. But the point of this thread is that the available facts do not fit evolution theory evolution. Google "evolution impossible."
Why there are still monkeys around if they were part of our evolutionary beginnings ?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cz0gFarCfBE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cz0gFarCfBE
why wouldn't there be monkeys?? I think that you might be thinking that us humans evolved from monkies, that's not true at all. Humans and monkeys evolved from the same species that's not a monkey nor a human. that species is often referred to as a "common ancestor". as the time passed by that "common ancestor" evolved into 2 or more different species the same way pigs that humans domesticated evolved so differently from the pigs that were in the wild that they become 2 different species (pigs and wild boars).
It's really difficult to think that something as detailed, complex, and drawn-out-in-time as evolution, might exist when you can't even find one factual example of it. If the evidences that are suggested to be for evolution, didn't fit adaptation or something else better, we might have a reason to suggest that we should go looking for something like evolution.
There isn't any evolution theory evolution. We have nothing that says that there is evolution except a bunch of scientific people who suggest something that is essentially impossible, while ignoring the things that are highly probable. That's it!
Evolution is a hoax!
There isn't any evolution theory evolution. We have nothing that says that there is evolution except a bunch of scientific people who suggest something that is essentially impossible, while ignoring the things that are highly probable. That's it!
Evolution is a hoax!
Why you say that? What do you mean you can't find any factual example? All offspring’s of all species on this planet is an example! There are 100 of trillions of examples for you to view right this instant.
There is nothing complex about evolution, its rather simple - it’s just change, any change.
Ok so I ask another way; if all species are created and never change, why do all individual specimens not look the same of each species? Why do all humans not look they very same, and I mean the very same? Why do they keep coming up with new forms, shapes and sizes? What would you call this every changing, renewing physical appearances?
Jump to: