1 2 3
This shit again? I repeat, the thery of evolution is a biological theory of existing species changing over time. It does not take stances on astrology or abiogenesis.
Why am I saying this. You're obviously just parroting someone else.
7/1/2012 4:35:17 AM
If you read a book every once in a while, you might understand that evolution doesn't address the origin or formation of the universe, or the origin of life.
And minor variations and adaptations lead finally to speciation.
In short, you fail.
7/1/2012 4:37:19 AM
Actually, the only one for which we can observe no evidence is intelligence evolving from you.
7/1/2012 4:40:23 AM
Filin De Blanc
I'm not taking advice on what is or isn't science from a member of the freaking Flat Earth Nutters.
7/1/2012 4:40:45 AM
1) You can observe the expansion of the universe right now.
2) You can observe the creation of novel elements in reactors right now.
3) You can observe the condensation of gas clouds into stars right now.
4) You can observe inorganic matter producing organic molecules under the right circumstances right now.
5) What you call 'macroevolution' is simply the continuous process of what you call microevolution, which you can observe right now.
These are items of knowledge. Faith is not knowledge. Even if your faith were correct it would only be by coincidence.
7/1/2012 4:42:27 AM
These people think science is like their religion, which just pulls everything out of its ass and makes a bunch of bold magical claims with no evidence to support them whatsoever.
No, science is not like your religion. Science deals with actual evidence--
>The Flat Earth Society
Scratch that. Just.. never mind.
7/1/2012 4:42:59 AM
@Filin De Blanc
That goes double for this particular nut. If ignorance is bliss, Cassiterides probably is the happiest person on the planet.
7/1/2012 4:44:51 AM
The fallacy of this postulation is completely overshadowed by the words "Flat Earth Society".
So it exists.
I am somewhat shocked.
And Cassiterides is a member.
I am... slightly less shocked about that.
7/1/2012 4:46:41 AM
As it happens, this board is populated by more ordinary people than you'd expect from the name. Cassiterides is frequently mocked on there, and most of the posters seem to believe in ordinary scientific theory. Maybe they only go on there ironically?
7/1/2012 4:49:24 AM
Wow, it looks like most of the people on there are reasonable.
"Chemical evolution" cracks me up. You mean, chemicals being converted to other chemicals? You call that a kind of "evolution?"
"Stellar evolution" should be called "star formation."
7/1/2012 4:59:42 AM
Please explain, with examples, just what is the mechanism that prevents "microevolution" from becoming "Macroevolution"
Still waiting... *crickets*
7/1/2012 5:06:33 AM
I can do nothing except agree with what Filin De Blanc wrote.
7/1/2012 5:18:35 AM
On further research, it seems the site itself might be a Poe. Cass, on the other hand, is probably not.
7/1/2012 5:31:56 AM
Complex things come from simple things.
There are like a dozen easy to understand books by knowledgable people that explain a lot of things that have "never been proven". Yes, how complex molecules formed into a primitive organism isn't "proven" but that statement misses the point so much..
And I dunno why I wasted characters on this. Moral: read more and try again.
7/1/2012 5:43:43 AM
Verbatim kent Hovind parrot is verbatim.
7/1/2012 6:03:26 AM
But science doesn't only depend on what is immediately observed. If it did, we would know much much less than we know.
We can also make inferences from the observations about things which cannot possibly be observed.
An educated guess based on real evidence is better than the dogma and myth of a religion when we are trying to find out about the reality of the universe.
7/1/2012 6:18:15 AM
First 5 have never been observed, tested or repeated.
Creation, on the other hand...
7/1/2012 6:31:56 AM
It's always so much fun to observe the eructions that follow shortly after Cassiterides withdraws his head from his anal sphincter.
That said, without further proof of the observation, testing and repetition of the shagging his mother got to produce him, I'm afraid I'm going to have to doubt such a moron as Cassiterides actually exists. Yes, I'm almost convinced he is nothing more than a fictional character.
7/1/2012 7:00:45 AM
Eh, I expect this Hovind-parroting from the man who denies gravity.
7/1/2012 7:20:19 AM
Hint: Three of those five are not "evolution" as applied to biology, two of the others are essentially different shades of the same thing, and the other one of them is defined improperly.
Nice try though.
7/1/2012 7:21:47 AM
Haa haa, its old Tin Islands again. He's a total hoot.
7/1/2012 7:42:28 AM
The second one makes no fucking sense, and 1, 3, and 4 have NOTHING to do with evolution.
7/1/2012 7:49:36 AM
7/1/2012 7:52:52 AM
Science. You're not doing it right.
7/1/2012 8:14:06 AM
Frankly I'm amazed Cass accepts microevolution, given his/her many other stupidities. What's more worrying is something I haven't thought of before now, that the nym Cassiterides might indicate a Brit. Scary.
7/1/2012 8:22:49 AM
1 2 3