Evolution debunked

The biggest, and most ignored, fact about evolution is it ideas shouldn't apply to a singularity of special(species) relationships. That is to say, most of the effects of evolution work across species. This is a huge topic, so I will keep my claim small and concise.

Claim
If two species occupy the same terrain and feed on the same diet, they are in direct competition with each other. The factors that would evolve an ape into a man are infinitessimally small in comparison to the factors that should have made the majority of bovines extinct by now.

Open your eyes, evolution was only embraced when a social acceptance of moving away from christianity occured. It is simply a method used to justify denying a peoples faith in their God.

Why don't you actually learn about the subject matter before you begin shouting "OMFG EVILBBQHAX!"

What bogwarrior said.

What is your contention? I see you disagree, but why?

Filed under "doggerel and spooge". 

I think you are dismissing this idea too lightly. It is a factor in evolution that is intentionally overlooked since it provides thousands of examples of an unevolving earth.

What is your contention? I see you disagree, but why?

Because your dissertation didn't explain shit - rather than delving into the topic of why it's wrong, you simply used generalizing terms (e.g., "the factors"), an oversimplification of a case example to back your claim, and, to top it all off, stated that evolution is the scientific community's attempt at toppling God/religion.

No.  It's a science.  Not a religion.  Go back to hugging your Bible.

[edit]
OMFG, you said "unevolving".

Charles Darwin was a christian you plank.

Or at least he was until he explained the idea of evolution.

Quote from: narcberry on April 05, 2007, 02:54:24 PM

What is your contention? I see you disagree, but why?

Because your dissertation didn't explain shit - rather than delving into the topic of why it's wrong, you simply used generalizing terms (e.g., "the factors"), an oversimplification of a case example to back your claim, and, to top it all off, stated that evolution is the scientific community's attempt at toppling God/religion.

No.  It's a science.  Not a religion.  Go back to hugging your Bible.

[edit]
OMFG, you said "unevolving".

You dont get angry until someone says Bible, do you? That is an interesting phenomena. Anyhow, I did present the "why", but I will try again in a more clear manner. And I'll leave my opinions out this time, so as to not offend.

Quote from: BOGWarrior89 on April 05, 2007, 02:59:18 PM

Quote from: narcberry on April 05, 2007, 02:54:24 PM

What is your contention? I see you disagree, but why?

Because your dissertation didn't explain shit - rather than delving into the topic of why it's wrong, you simply used generalizing terms (e.g., "the factors"), an oversimplification of a case example to back your claim, and, to top it all off, stated that evolution is the scientific community's attempt at toppling God/religion.

No.  It's a science.  Not a religion.  Go back to hugging your Bible.

[edit]
OMFG, you said "unevolving".

You dont get angry until someone says Bible, do you? That is an interesting phenomena. Anyhow, I did present the "why", but I will try again in a more clear manner. And I'll leave my opinions out this time, so as to not offend.

I don't get angry, just defensive against religious zealots.  I'm happy that you've found some certainty/stability in your life, but please, allow me to think for myself.

Very well - I'll soon be posting what evolution is and what it is not, so as to avoid any confusion and debunk popular myths.

Claim
If two species occupy the same terrain and feed on the same diet, they are in direct competition with each other. The factors that would evolve an ape into a man are infinitessimally small in comparison to the factors that should have made the majority of bovines extinct by now.

The majority of the creatures that once inhabited the Earth are extinct now.

Open your eyes, evolution was only embraced when a social acceptance of moving away from christianity occured. It is simply a method used to justify denying a peoples faith in their God.

Don't flatter yourself. Those of us who support evolution couldn't care less about your religion.

Please ignore this thread.

All thoughts are welcome here:
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=12254.0

I smell a plot thickening.

The biggest, and most ignored, fact about evolution is it ideas shouldn't apply to a singularity of special(species) relationships. That is to say, most of the effects of evolution work across species. This is a huge topic, so I will keep my claim small and concise.

Claim
If two species occupy the same terrain and feed on the same diet, they are in direct competition with each other. The factors that would evolve an ape into a man are infinitessimally small in comparison to the factors that should have made the majority of bovines extinct by now.

Open your eyes, evolution was only embraced when a social acceptance of moving away from christianity occured. It is simply a method used to justify denying a peoples faith in their God.

It usually helps your arguement if you back it up with science before coming to a conclusion based of zero evidence.

Please ignore this thread.

Please ignore this post.

Charles Darwin was a christian you plank.

Or at least he was until he explained the idea of evolution.

Actually from what I've heard, Charles Darwin later noticed that the idea of evolution was incorrect but it was too late at the time to tell everyone because they already accepted his idea of evolution. NOTE: I heard this from all those creepy church people my parents bring over to our house. So most likely they were just trying to brainwash me.

Yeah that statement about Charles Darwin opposing evolution at his death is actually a complete lie; it is not based on any amount of truth at all.  It demonstrates the moral character of many of the people who oppose evolution, that they think it is ok to consciously lie in order to convert people to their beliefs.

It's also important to point out that even if it were true, which it is not, it is hardly evidence that evolution does not exist.  The evidence that proves evolution is in the dna of every single life form, as well as the fossil records, and the physical world; not in the mind of Charles Darwin or any other person.

What you said doesn't even make sense dingleberry. The factors that evolved an ape into man... it's easy. The apes stood on their back legs to see over some grass. They started making tools because the realized the advantage of mechanics... ?

What you said doesn't even make sense dingleberry. The factors that evolved an ape into man... it's easy. The apes stood on their back legs to see over some grass. They started making tools because the realized the advantage of mechanics... ?

...rofl.

Evolution doesn't prove anything.

The eloquence and intelligence of your argument is a fantastic example of the way religion supports the quest for knowledge. 

Evolution doesn't prove anything; it explains the obvious.

Fixed.

Exactly.

Evolution isn't a proof, it's a theory.
The theory may have holes... that's why we get better ones.

It just takes us some time to find the missing parts, and then reformulate the theory around those parts.
Natural Selection is a proven, non-debated (I hope  ) fact.

Macroevolution had more holes.  Those holes are starting to be filled.  The final theory (if one is possible) for how organisms developed into different species will most likely be different from our current understanding.

[edit] OMFG, you said "unevolving".

Help! I'm unevolving! 

Or maybe it's just the FEers...

Says somebody with a Michael Jackson avatar...

Lol!

Exactly.

Evolution isn't a proof, it's a theory.
The theory may have holes... that's why we get better ones.

It just takes us some time to find the missing parts, and then reformulate the theory around those parts.
Natural Selection is a proven, non-debated (I hope  ) fact.

Macroevolution had more holes.  Those holes are starting to be filled.  The final theory (if one is possible) for how organisms developed into different species will most likely be different from our current understanding.

rofl, evolution has never been debated. Only idiots claim to have debated it. Evolution has been tested and tried relentlessly, and it's always proven true. There are no holes in macro-evolution.

Do you ever post your own ideas outside of your poetry?

Quote from: Astantia on April 07, 2007, 02:41:14 AM

Exactly.

Evolution isn't a proof, it's a theory.
The theory may have holes... that's why we get better ones.

It just takes us some time to find the missing parts, and then reformulate the theory around those parts.
Natural Selection is a proven, non-debated (I hope  ) fact.

Macroevolution had more holes.  Those holes are starting to be filled.  The final theory (if one is possible) for how organisms developed into different species will most likely be different from our current understanding.

rofl, evolution has never been debated. Only idiots claim to have debated it. Evolution has been tested and tried relentlessly, and it's always proven true. There are no holes in macro-evolution.

Sure they are, but over details. The gist of the theory has never been in doubt since Darwin first published.