(the issue isn't about whether or not evolution exists. Sure, it exists.)
wrong evolution has been disproven
they found some many examples heres one
they found a fossalized dinosaur inside a fossalized mammel
but evolution says that mammels came millions of years later
46 comments
they found a fossalized dinosaur inside a fossalized mammel but evolution says that mammels came millions of years later
"Evolution" says nothing of the sort. He's confusing "evolution" with the fossil record. And he's wrong anyway. If he knew about the dinosaur-eating mammal, you'd think he would have noticed that it was 130 million years old, and dinosaurs were around until 65 million years ago.
they found some many examples heres one
Here's the thing fundies don't understand about evolution, the gelogical time line, paleontology, and just science in general. Is that in science, everything is supported by everything else. Evolution is proven by many things and simply changing or removing a single fact won't cause it to collapse. In the end religon, and espcially Christianty is a building whoes sole foundation is the Bible without anything to support it. If you take the Bible away it all falls apart.
Evolution says no such thing. All it says is, "Where organisms mutate, variations more successful at surviving to breed will eventually become dominant." You can't take someone else's extrapolation from that point and claim that any flaw in it automatically disproves the core principle.
"wrong evolution has been disproven"Please direct me to the scholarly, well-researched, peer-reviewed paper proving the ToE to be false. I'm waiting.
"they found some many examples"
Who are "they?"
"heres one
they found a fossalized dinosaur inside a fossalized mammel
but evolution says that mammels came millions of years later"
Before that assertion is even slightly interesting, you will have to show some supporting evidence.
Even so, there may be some mundane explanation, such as the fossils having be moved, either by natural events or human intervention.
Ok, here we go:
Wait a goldarned minute here, Baba-looey. This bozo wants us to accept that he understands evolution and other advanced scientific principles when little things like spelling, capitalization, punctuation, and sentence structure, totally elude him. I smell true fundie greatness here. Or maybe I stepped in something in the back yard.
I wish these guys would get something straight: evolution can't be disproved by finding that dinosaurs lived into the age of mammals, or even that dinosaurs are still alive (actually they are, if you count birds). The coelacanth, a fish thought to have gone extinct around the same time as dinosaurs, was found still alive in the 1930's (and still alive today). It didn't overturn evolution. Scientists would love to find a living dinosaur. It would improve our knowledge of evolution, not destroy it.
image And just who would "they" be? It's always "they did this" or "they found this out". There's never a definite name to go along with any of these claims. If anyone had disproven evolution, you wouldn't have to fall back on a vague "they", now would you?
Well, sometimes they give names: usually names like Ham, Hovind, Behe, the Discovery Institute, and so on.
I'm sorry NIB, you will be returning next year to repeat the second grade. This is disappointing to us as well, as we were trying really hard to pass you regardless of your past grades. However, this complete and utter lack of comprehension will do you no good in the real world, additionally, it might get us fired. Please clear your summer schedule as well as you will be attending three months of summer school. A funeral will be held for the small part inside all of us which died upon reading your post.
Yes! "Wrong evolution" -- that is, the definition of evolution held by fundy fuckwits -- has been disproven absolutely. The rest of this, however, is just a lie.
No, stupid, mammals were around during the dinosaur reign. They were kept small because any big ones got eaten by the dinos. It wasn't until the dinos bit it that mammals could come out and grow bigger and fill the nitches left behind by the dinos.
"they found a fossalized dinosaur inside a fossalized mammel
but evolution says that mammels came millions of years later "
What is a "mammel"
I have no idea what a "mammel" is, but that dinosaurs and mammals existed at the same time isn't exactly breaking news. The mammals may have been small, generally insignificant and a long way away from dominating the continents, but they nevertheless had already made an appearance.
And I bet that they could spell better than this idiot.
Early mammals DID exist at the time of the dinosaurs. They were small largely because they could not compete with the superior dinosaurs as large animals. Why?
Please say that English is not your first (or second) language, pleeeease!
Dinosaurs died out about 65 million years ago.
The theory of evolution describes, it doesn't dictate.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
