kirkz2006@yahoo.com #fundie

kirkz2006@yahoo.com #fundie groups.yahoo.com

Earl: Scientists do not talk about moving from theory to "proven fact".

Theories have to be testable. The theory of gravity is testable.

Evolution failed the test of science when it comes to the fossil record. Miserably. Now all that is left is untestable, unprovable premises of why the missing links are missing by the millions.

There is NO chance soft tissue could be found in dinosaur bones if they were 65 million years old. Real science says soft tissue can only last about 10,000 years.

At every turn, real science is rejected by evolutionists to prop up the theory, which is nothing but secular ideology.

7 comments

old comment by The Reptilian Jew

Fuck my life, yet another Bible-thumping idiot who thinks that he can science. Spoiler alert: he can't.

Earl: Scientists do not talk about moving from theory to "proven fact".

The two are one and the fucking same. Learn to distinguish "theory" and "hypothesis" please.

Theories have to be testable. The theory of gravity is testable.

These are the only two truthful sentences in this goddamn tripe.

Evolution failed the test of science when it comes to the fossil record. Miserably.

You do realize that evolution is observable in real time, right? Just because it's not visible to the human eye it's still happening. Hundreds of experiments prove evolution through natural selection, mostly observed in bacteria but also in plants and animals. I can link some studies if you want.
I'm guessing that "testable" to you means "I can see it with my naked eye", which is why you consider gravity to be testable. You drop something, it falls, it's testable. Unfortunately for you, that is not how science works at all. It doesn't have to be visible to the naked eye to be testable. But that would mean that you actually have to study science instead of Dunning-Krugering something together, and that would be hard work, so you can't accept that.

Now all that is left is untestable, unprovable premises of why the missing links are missing by the millions.

Listen: every single specimen that isn't found is technically a "missing link" because evolution happens in every generation. Your kind would only consider evolution proven if we found every single creature of every single generation, or maybe not even then. You'll keep moving the goalposts so that evolution will remain "untestable".

There is NO chance soft tissue could be found in dinosaur bones if they were 65 million years old.

Depends. Soft tissue can survive for hundreds of millions of years in the right conditions, if, say, it's trapped in amber for example. Hundreds of thousands of Carboniferous insects have been discovered enclosed into amber, and those make dinosaurs look like younglings.
In fact, a dinosaur tail trapped in amber was found not long ago:

Has your point just been jossed? Oh boy, I believe it has been.

Real science says soft tissue can only last about 10,000 years.

I have a nagging suspicion that you define "real science" as "science that agrees with me".
I'm going to need some sources on that claim, as well as some names of the scientists who conducted research on this, since "science says" isn't a very good proof at all.

At every turn, real science is rejected by evolutionists to prop up the theory, which is nothing but secular ideology.

And once again, a creationist claims that evolution is a "religion" or "ideology". Oh the irony. Who's willing to bet that this dumbfuck considers the Bible to be a scientific source?
And he posted this logorrhea on an anti-abortion website to boot. That's exactly where I go if I want to read scientifically accurate things. /s
My work here is done.

kirkz2006@yahoo.com #fundie groups.yahoo.com

7 comments

Confused?