Topic: Evolution is a hoax - page 94. (Read 108046 times)

Maybe creationism is junk, but theory of evolution is a junk proven to be false.


Good luck in awaiting your Messiah of evolution.

Again you are talking a lot and saying too little. You indeed have no theory of creation, creation is regarded as junk science or pseudo science. The theory of evolution is the best we have until someone can come up with something better.

Do you know how long it takes for number 2 to occur?

There are two bariers that you do not acknowledge that science had not overcome.

1. No goo had ever seen to produce aminoacids needed for even the simplest of life form.
2. No hybridisation, adoption, mutation, natural selection had ever been observed to cross the barrier of making a new specie that can not breed with other speciment of the same specie but could give somehow new offsprings.

So.... Good luck with those... Right now God is proven right with his words and laws that - place the barrier on 1. point and 2. point. And it was proven to be true.

PM me if science will overcome those barriers. I would be shocked.

I'm religious, and don't see how evolution isn't real. It's proven essentially through decades of scientific studies.

eVOLUTION IS REAL

IS not a hoax at all . Life have been evolving since emerging frromm the first cells formed in the goo. To adapt to enviroment and spread increasing chances of urvival.

TO THE MOON TO MARS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I have no consistent and proven theory how life came to being just clues and hunches.  That doesnt mean that when the science would know more about the subject it knows little - we will eventualy make the theory of life creation. I hope we will.

Neither the evolutionist have when the hyphothesis about the abiogenesis of a spontanious creation of every aminoacids possible from a primordial soup was disproven and disregarded as a wrong hyphotesis. It was proven to not be the case, and yet - although proven otherwise some crazy evolutionists was claiming it was a proven hyphotesis.

If there would be a spontanious creation of all the bricks of life I might have considered evolution to be true. But it was PROVEN that more than a half of the bricks of life were missing.

I think the world was changed in the 6 days creation period. Maybe the laws of the universe was changing back then. Now we have different laws so it might be impossible to make life out of the dead in the current state of world. As a christian I believe that the world and its laws will cease to exist, and there would be new laws that would allow dead to come to life.

But yes. It is not science ofcourse but at least it is not a disproven hyphotesis that I keep on beieving like crazy.

I even suspect that the allegedly ancient human fossils that were once used were not really what the inventors found. It is an ancient primate fossil.

Since there is no proven fact for evolution... I don't know what you mean, evolution is a proven fact
and since all the evidence for evolution can fit creation easier... Basically no evidence for evolution fits creation in anything, I don't know why you keep saying this idiotic shit. The age of the earth or the universe doesn't fit creationism. If you consider humans to be stand-alone (dropped on earth as we are, not evolving from the created proto-human), there should be something astoundingly unique about us, and biologically, there really isn't. The search has been quite exhaustive. There is literally no evidence supporting creationism.

and since evolution talk is mostly contradictory... If you say so
and since even the knowledgeable evolutionists admit this... Sure thing buddy

There are many clues about the connection between the living organisms and batteries - and electricity. One day if we would know more about electricity we would know better about the creation of life.

Bones are acting like magnets, cells are like a tiny electricity factories, especially membranes, and the shape of all living creatures ressembles the Tesla observance of how the water flows, and how that matter how all energy flows, as all energy is transferable to electricity, and is a form of electricity.

Right now - the pure chemical answer is not giving any answers. It have to be therefor a physical, or more precise an electrical phenomen.

The question is - who makes the energy flow and give it a precise shapes? Who had made the law of Birkelands current? We just observed that and every energy flow makes the same pattern. Why? Why that law exist? It is not silly at all to assume a law giver.

That kind of shapes are repeatable to the high degree - it is not random by all means. If that would be random it would overflow. It does not overflow therefore there is a flow. Why? :







That is how nonliving materia behaves. For evolutionists to explain why that is - he would have to assume that evolution applies to a non-living materia as well - what is an absurd in itself.

By the way - if dead things have created life, one would have to assume how dead things behave, and evolutionists are not even interested in that, therefore they do not explain anything.

I believe in evolution. This version of the development of events I like most. Perhaps people will still find how life began. But this is definitely not God

Say it again. We like it

Since there is no proven fact for evolution...
and since all the evidence for evolution can fit creation easier...
and since evolution talk is mostly contradictory...
and since even the knowledgeable evolutionists admit this...

Say it again. We like it


You and evolution are a couple of hoaxes.

I will say it again, evolution is a fact. Evolution theory is the best scientific theory that explains that fact. There were and are actually different alternatives proposed to explain signs of evolution. The fact of evolutionary change was accepted but the mechanism proposed by Charles Darwin, natural selection, was denied, explanations of evolution such as Lamarckism, catastrophism, orthogenesis, vitalism, structuralism and mutationism (called saltationism before 1900) were entertained.

If you or anyone else has a better scientific theory then go ahead and propose one, however evolution itself is still a fact even if the theory of evolution is changed.

as a human being who will usually run every way to achieve his wishes, usually all sense will be used. then the deception effect will occur

The worst is having a question that makes absolutely no logical sense. Definition of lying means a purposefully and knowingly misinform the person you speak to.

You people need to know how to define the words you are using. Otherwise it is just a hot air.

It is not just this word. Every word has its boundaries. Like the word of so called "the theory of evolution" have a connotation with creating new specie in a classical sense. That is how the word originated. Sadly - people talking about "the theory of evolution" being real have also problems with defining words. They mix popular usage of words that are mostly wrongly used, with the proper - original sense of the word.

If you change the definition of words you can actually prove anything. Actually mathematicians prove 2+2=5 if they define the arithmetics differently.

Which is worse?   Knowing you are lying (trolling) or not knowing you are lying (religion).

You read my mind. "Paid troll would act the same". I am afraid he is not. That is the saddest part in all that. He thinks he is 100% honest... Sigh...

Well... one can use science to know the reality and others can use pseudoscience to create reality of scientism. You choose the latter. Im sorry... that is just too dumb for me.

If you think you learn something about the reality, when you ask people that are required to agree with something - what they think of what they required to do, and you expect them to be negative on it when they had not quit, and invest a whole lot of time and effort, you have to be out of your mind.

It's like asking a Foreign Legion Legionaire what they think about the Legion. Would you think they would say meh.... it sux I just wasted my whole life for that I passed this hellish test of prowress for nothing? Ofcourse all of them... almost would say that the Legion is awesome.

It is a kind of question like - do you like your job? And you know your job depends on it. Would you say you do not like your job? I would say noone would be crazy enough to do so. Or a question - what you think about your boss - and you would know your boss would read that answer?

It is just silly that anyone thinks that kind od surveys are telling anything about the reality. It is just dishonesty to the highest degree. It is sad that people think thats how science looks like.

Those kind of pseudo science is only creating a reality not explore it. I can't believe I have to explain that to anyone....

It is so funny that anyone take it seriously that I will give a joke about the lousy reality makers:

In the soviet union there was a poll with that question:

Who is your favourite leader? And why is it Stalin?

Thats what those polls are like. It is a grand scale farce.