"law" of evolution?
- Started
- Last post
- 90 Responses
- Khurram0
*sigh*, hindsights a bitch....
- context is the bitch. I was speaking of the Darwinian evolution. And no, it could not have happened. This remains my stance.teleos
- position.teleos
- what did i say about linguistic chicanery?Khurram
- you said: [Science] does not observe species to species evolution from a common ancestor.Khurram
- That is pretty unequivocal dude, no matter how you phrase it.Khurram
- Now you're saying science DOES show evolution, but this is due to pre-programmed DNA or whatever.Khurram
- speciation you are calling it.Khurram
- Mal0
- TheBlueOne0
What is the statistical probability that Intelligent Design has a paradigmatic and empirical confirmation of the explanatory claims of intimately recognizable experimentability so as to ascertain its ability to confirm design intelligibilityness and retrodictive historicality?
- Truthidization can only be derived from incidental factudedness.harlequino
- strategery.teleos
- Khurram0
Don't worry. You are not alone. I too wish QBN would destroy some of my older posts.
- Khurram0
You're getting tense teleos. Seriously, chillax-et-vous. We are all friends here
*mwah mwah*
- teleos0
ukit... here's the point you're missing... NS+RM has never, i repeat NEVER been experimentally shown to be the mechanism responsible for such change/adaptation. Conversely, we can hypothesize that pre-existing information was triggered in such speciation events. Why? Look inside the cell (which Darwin couldn't see into). Scientists are finding ancient see urchins with all of the information for digits (fingers) present, just un-expressed. The information was there, just not expressed. Hence the front-loading hypothesis.
- is there a google version you use that filters out reputable scientific journals and only brings up answersingenesis or other nonsense sites?spifflink
- nonsense site?spifflink
- http://www.answersin… :DDrBombay
- that makes sense!spifflink
- teleos0
We have to define terms...
Evolution - meaning change over time, is demonstrated by science.
Evolution - meaning the Darwinian synthesis of natural selection acting upon random variation/mutation is not supported by scientific evidence.
- ukit0
So the nearly exact identical anatomy between Archaeopteryx and dinosaurs is just a coincidence, huh? God works in mysterious ways!
- Khurram0
Yes yes! We must define terms! So the cognitive dissonance caused by what teleos said before and what he says now and his obstinance with his views can be recognised without causing some sort of identity crisis!
From here on, teleos has defined these terms for us*
*Subject to a five-yearly review of each definition depending on the opinions teleos holds at that time. Whut.
- teleos0
Miko - "Natural selection is the process that SORTS the naturally occuring genetic mutations.."
1. Never been observed.
2. Observed: mutations which KILL the organism
3. Warranted inference from the evidence: NS kills organisms/ensures extinction via deleterious mutations.- I've never observed my sisters kids growing either, but they are bigger every time I visit.ribit
- DrBombay0
Teleos, you are against evolution and against man contributed to global warming, correct?
- ETM0
- teleos0
of course horses zebra speciation occurred. But who said it was a Darwinian process?
- Khurram0
When i said i fucked your mother, in the ass! this does not necessarily mean i penetrated her with my penis.
We really need to get our definitions right, otherwise there'll be no end of confusion. God!
- ceiling_cat0
they say this fossil can rewrite the books of science.........
how stable is science, will it change in 20 years too with another discovery?
man is a fool, they use to believe the earth is flat
the truth be here
http://www.lolcatbible.com/index…- Science isn't supposed to be stable. All it is is a method of disproving things. It's unstable by it's very definition.TheBlueOne
- teleos0
I am FOR evolution, if you mean change over a long period of time.
I am AGAINST evolution, if you mean blind stochastic mechanisms making the change, like Darwinism.
I am FOR belief in climate change.
I am AGAINST belief in anthropogenic climate change.