Paleocon
Legend
We spent 50 Years fighting the USSR just to become a gay, retarded version of It.
Posts: 7,336
|
Post by Paleocon on Jul 12, 2022 20:39:47 GMT
Yep, you're one stupid frog. Do you ever check before opening that nasty French piehole of yours?
Darwin called The Origin of Species “one long argument” for his theory, but Jerry Coyne has given us one long bluff. Why Evolution Is True tries to defend Darwinian evolution by rearranging the fossil record; by misrepresenting the development of vertebrate embryos; by ignoring evidence for the functionality of allegedly vestigial organs and non-coding DNA, then propping up Darwinism with theological arguments about “bad design;” by attributing some biogeographical patterns to convergence due to the supposedly “well-known” processes of natural selection and speciation; and then exaggerating the evidence for selection and speciation to make it seem as though they could accomplish what Darwinism requires of them.
The actual evidence shows that major features of the fossil record are an embarrassment to Darwinian evolution; that early development in vertebrate embryos is more consistent with separate origins than with common ancestry; that non-coding DNA is fully functional, contrary to neo-Darwinian predictions; and that natural selection can accomplish nothing more than artificial selection — which is to say, minor changes within existing species.
Faced with such evidence, any other scientific theory would probably have been abandoned long ago. Judged by the normal criteria of empirical science, Darwinism is false. Its persists in spite of the evidence, and the eagerness of Darwin and his followers to defend it with theological arguments about creation and design suggests that its persistence has nothing to do with science at all.
You're quoting the article of a proponent of intelligent design, asshole. Intelligent design has been completely discredited by the scientific community at large. So in order to prove that Darwin has been discredited you link to the article of someone ho's "field of study" is not even considered as science by the real scientists Nice move, bozo! Based on the drivel that you post, we question whether you have evolved beyond your animal stage.
Attacking the messenger as you have done is an egregious logical fallacy fit for a fool.
Eldredge and Gould proposed that the degree of gradualism commonly attributed to Charles Darwin is virtually nonexistent in the fossil record, and that stasis dominates the history of most fossil species.
The sudden appearance of most species in the geologic record and the lack of evidence of substantial gradual change in most species—from their initial appearance until their extinction—has long been noted, including by Charles Darwin
Looks like the proponent of intelligent design was absolutely right, according to these two very prominent paleontologists. It's fun to watch you get your nasty unwashed French ass get kicked by multiple experts.
Anything else, libtard?
|
|
Paleocon
Legend
We spent 50 Years fighting the USSR just to become a gay, retarded version of It.
Posts: 7,336
|
Post by Paleocon on Jul 12, 2022 20:49:57 GMT
You really are a flaming dumbass to a level that I've not seen before. I'm glad you're in France with the rest of the Frog morons. Show me where 30,000 years ago, this dog (and yes, it's prehistoric and it's a dog, thus kicking your stupid ass) was a product of selective breeding and not natural micro-evolution.
Seriously, how did you get this f*cking stupid? Deprived of oxygen on the way out?
It isn't micro-evolution, you stupid fuck, it's selective breeding, that is men selecting dogs that they'll breed to accentuate certain characteristics over others, thus creating new breeds of dogs. That's how over the millennia from the same animal (the wolf) , we got breeds as different in appearance as a Saint Bernard and a Chihuahua. That has nothing to do with natural selection. These dogs didn't develop because they were the best at survival, they did because their appearance, physical/behavioral characteristics pleased their breeder. It's still on-going today as new breeds are bred even now. Morality: You are a fucking moron. It would help our species if you abstained from breeding. Asswipe, you astound us with your imbecility. We're talking about the PREHISTORIC dog, not the later breeds. Selective breeding was unknown 30,000 years ago, so it was natural selection and micro evolution that yielded the earliest dog.
I try to help you be less stupid but you are a lost cause.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 12, 2022 21:03:57 GMT
It isn't micro-evolution, you stupid fuck, it's selective breeding, that is men selecting dogs that they'll breed to accentuate certain characteristics over others, thus creating new breeds of dogs. That's how over the millennia from the same animal (the wolf) , we got breeds as different in appearance as a Saint Bernard and a Chihuahua. That has nothing to do with natural selection. These dogs didn't develop because they were the best at survival, they did because their appearance, physical/behavioral characteristics pleased their breeder. It's still on-going today as new breeds are bred even now. Morality: You are a fucking moron. It would help our species if you abstained from breeding. Asswipe, you astound us with your imbecility. We're talking about the PREHISTORIC dog, not the later breeds. Selective breeding was unknown 30,000 years ago, so it was natural selection and micro evolution that yielded the earliest dog.
I try to help you be less stupid but you are a lost cause.
You moron. Dogs are the results of wolves interacting with men. As soon as men started using wolves for domestic purposes (mostly defense and hunting) they took over their breeding. The wolves would no longer breed randomly but the way their owners wanted them too. This started right away, idiot! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 12, 2022 21:14:49 GMT
You're quoting the article of a proponent of intelligent design, asshole. Intelligent design has been completely discredited by the scientific community at large. So in order to prove that Darwin has been discredited you link to the article of someone ho's "field of study" is not even considered as science by the real scientists Nice move, bozo! Based on the drivel that you post, we question whether you have evolved beyond your animal stage.
Attacking the messenger as you have done is an egregious logical fallacy fit for a fool.
Eldredge and Gould proposed that the degree of gradualism commonly attributed to Charles Darwin is virtually nonexistent in the fossil record, and that stasis dominates the history of most fossil species.
The sudden appearance of most species in the geologic record and the lack of evidence of substantial gradual change in most species—from their initial appearance until their extinction—has long been noted, including by Charles Darwin
Looks like the proponent of intelligent design was absolutely right, according to these two very prominent paleontologists. It's fun to watch you get your nasty unwashed French ass get kicked by multiple experts.
Anything else, libtard?
The opinion of a proponent of ID is of no value. It's at about the same level as that of a young earther or a flat earther or an astrologist or someone who thinks you can change lead to gold with magic or that people become werewolves when the moon if full. It's stupid and useless and it's definitely NOT science. |
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Jul 12, 2022 23:33:06 GMT
You're quoting the article of a proponent of intelligent design, asshole. Intelligent design has been completely discredited by the scientific community at large. So in order to prove that Darwin has been discredited you link to the article of someone ho's "field of study" is not even considered as science by the real scientists Nice move, bozo! Based on the drivel that you post, we question whether you have evolved beyond your animal stage.
Attacking the messenger as you have done is an egregious logical fallacy fit for a fool.
Eldredge and Gould proposed that the degree of gradualism commonly attributed to Charles Darwin is virtually nonexistent in the fossil record, and that stasis dominates the history of most fossil species.
The sudden appearance of most species in the geologic record and the lack of evidence of substantial gradual change in most species—from their initial appearance until their extinction—has long been noted, including by Charles Darwin
Looks like the proponent of intelligent design was absolutely right, according to these two very prominent paleontologists. It's fun to watch you get your nasty unwashed French ass get kicked by multiple experts.
Anything else, libtard?
How brief or sudden is the punctuation of that equilibrium? Did Darwin have to get everything right for evolution to be true? Would you hold the same criteria for Newtonian physics? |
|
Paleocon
Legend
We spent 50 Years fighting the USSR just to become a gay, retarded version of It.
Posts: 7,336
|
Post by Paleocon on Jul 13, 2022 17:51:58 GMT
Based on the drivel that you post, we question whether you have evolved beyond your animal stage.
Attacking the messenger as you have done is an egregious logical fallacy fit for a fool.
Eldredge and Gould proposed that the degree of gradualism commonly attributed to Charles Darwin is virtually nonexistent in the fossil record, and that stasis dominates the history of most fossil species.
The sudden appearance of most species in the geologic record and the lack of evidence of substantial gradual change in most species—from their initial appearance until their extinction—has long been noted, including by Charles Darwin
Looks like the proponent of intelligent design was absolutely right, according to these two very prominent paleontologists. It's fun to watch you get your nasty unwashed French ass get kicked by multiple experts.
Anything else, libtard?
The opinion of a proponent of ID is of no value. It's at about the same level as that of a young earther or a flat earther or an astrologist or someone who thinks you can change lead to gold with magic or that people become werewolves when the moon if full. It's stupid and useless and it's definitely NOT science. That's why you are too stupid to be here, asswipe. You're too f*cking stupid to understand that the article had facts that had nothing to do Intelligent Design, but were compelling refutations of the sacred cows of the evolution cult.
But you're too chickensh*t to address the substance of the article instead preferrring to fallaciously attack the very truthful, very accurate messenger.
And you're too chickensh*t to acknowledge your defeat after I posted the fact that well known paleontologists also have abandoned Darwin and his stupid theory.
|
|
Paleocon
Legend
We spent 50 Years fighting the USSR just to become a gay, retarded version of It.
Posts: 7,336
|
Post by Paleocon on Jul 13, 2022 17:55:55 GMT
Based on the drivel that you post, we question whether you have evolved beyond your animal stage.
Attacking the messenger as you have done is an egregious logical fallacy fit for a fool.
Eldredge and Gould proposed that the degree of gradualism commonly attributed to Charles Darwin is virtually nonexistent in the fossil record, and that stasis dominates the history of most fossil species.
The sudden appearance of most species in the geologic record and the lack of evidence of substantial gradual change in most species—from their initial appearance until their extinction—has long been noted, including by Charles Darwin
Looks like the proponent of intelligent design was absolutely right, according to these two very prominent paleontologists. It's fun to watch you get your nasty unwashed French ass get kicked by multiple experts.
Anything else, libtard?
How brief or sudden is the punctuation of that equilibrium? Did Darwin have to get everything right for evolution to be true? Would you hold the same criteria for Newtonian physics? Darwin got very little right, other than micro-evolution. Science is always self correcting and I support that in all scientific fields. None of the current or the older theories can explain where the species originated, meaning that intelligent design is as viable as any other explanation. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2022 19:20:46 GMT
The opinion of a proponent of ID is of no value. It's at about the same level as that of a young earther or a flat earther or an astrologist or someone who thinks you can change lead to gold with magic or that people become werewolves when the moon if full. It's stupid and useless and it's definitely NOT science. That's why you are too stupid to be here, asswipe. You're too f*cking stupid to understand that the article had facts that had nothing to do Intelligent Design, but were compelling refutations of the sacred cows of the evolution cult.
But you're too chickensh*t to address the substance of the article instead preferrring to fallaciously attack the very truthful, very accurate messenger.
And you're too chickensh*t to acknowledge your defeat after I posted the fact that well known paleontologists also have abandoned Darwin and his stupid theory.
Idiot, the only people who "abandoned" Darwin's theory are ID kooks who never adopted it to begin with, just as flat earthers were never ones to believe in a spherical Earth. We're not talking scientists here, we're talking crapots and weirdos who happen to indulge the fantasies of ignorant morons like you. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2022 19:31:04 GMT
How brief or sudden is the punctuation of that equilibrium? Did Darwin have to get everything right for evolution to be true? Would you hold the same criteria for Newtonian physics? Darwin got very little right, other than micro-evolution. Science is always self correcting and I support that in all scientific fields. None of the current or the older theories can explain where the species originated, meaning that intelligent design is as viable as any other explanation. Hey nincompoop, ID is not an explanation, it's a contorted way of saying "god did it", you might as well put on a priest disguise or whatever and dance around a cross or whatever you bozos do when normal people are not looking, singing "god did it, god did it." I don't care about the details I've never been a big fan of superstitious idiosyncrasies myself. |
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Jul 13, 2022 19:59:50 GMT
How brief or sudden is the punctuation of that equilibrium? Did Darwin have to get everything right for evolution to be true? Would you hold the same criteria for Newtonian physics? Darwin got very little right, other than micro-evolution. Science is always self correcting and I support that in all scientific fields. None of the current or the older theories can explain where the species originated, meaning that intelligent design is as viable as any other explanation. Actually, evolution does explain where the species originated—from other species. It does not explain the origin of life itself. That doesn't make the theory wrong. It merely exposes the theory's limits. |
|
Odysseus
Legend
Trump = Disaster
Posts: 41,098
|
Post by Odysseus on Jul 14, 2022 3:42:34 GMT
OMG.
I guess I should not be surprised that Poopycuck is an evolution denialist.
It will take me some time to get accustomed to it, though. It's not too often I run across somebody so wilfully ignorant as Poopycuck.
Praise the Lord.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2022 5:32:59 GMT
OMG. I guess I should not be surprised that Poopycuck is an evolution denialist. It will take me some time to get accustomed to it, though. It's not too often I run across somebody so wilfully ignorant as Poopycuck. Praise the Lord. These people are the viruses and science is their antibodies... In a sense they "serve" science, in a way a thief makes you get better alarm systems to protect your private property. Perhaps without these assholes we'd be less thorough in our theories. However their propensity to ignore facts and reasoning makes their counterargument a bit tiresome after a while it's like the black knight in Holy Grail: In fact pale con is exactly like the black knight in holy grail, watch: |
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Jul 14, 2022 5:50:50 GMT
OMG. I guess I should not be surprised that Poopycuck is an evolution denialist. It will take me some time to get accustomed to it, though. It's not too often I run across somebody so wilfully ignorant as Poopycuck. Praise the Lord. I don’t know, many accept evolution just on someone else’s word without any investigation. That’s not much better. |
|
Odysseus
Legend
Trump = Disaster
Posts: 41,098
|
Post by Odysseus on Jul 14, 2022 6:50:51 GMT
OMG. I guess I should not be surprised that Poopycuck is an evolution denialist. It will take me some time to get accustomed to it, though. It's not too often I run across somebody so wilfully ignorant as Poopycuck. Praise the Lord. I don’t know, many accept evolution just on someone else’s word without any investigation. That’s not much better.
Um, do you accept that the earth is round and not flat?
On what do you base that opinion?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2022 8:15:25 GMT
OMG. I guess I should not be surprised that Poopycuck is an evolution denialist. It will take me some time to get accustomed to it, though. It's not too often I run across somebody so wilfully ignorant as Poopycuck. Praise the Lord. I don’t know, many accept evolution just on someone else’s word without any investigation. That’s not much better. Yeah, on the word of scientists as opposed to a bunch of kooks. That's much better than the opposite. How many lifetimes would you spend investigating the workings of every little thing you take for granted based on the words of knowledgeable people? Well, more than one at any rate. As always you give an out to your mentally disturbed friends based on an argument that's absurd. Another variation on your "we're all zealots" previous argument. Perhaps your goal is one day to be canonized as the patron saint of the scientifically inept. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2022 8:25:47 GMT
OMG. I guess I should not be surprised that Poopycuck is an evolution denialist. It will take me some time to get accustomed to it, though. It's not too often I run across somebody so wilfully ignorant as Poopycuck. Praise the Lord. I don’t know, many accept evolution just on someone else’s word without any investigation. That’s not much better. People used to claim and some keep claiming that: -You can square the circle. -Perpetual motion is possible. -The Earth is flat. -The Earth is millennia old. -Nature abhors a vacuum. -A series of chemical operations can turn Lead into gold. Plus plenty of other things that are now deemed ridiculous. ID is just one of those things. In fact ID is just creationism in disguise. |
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Jul 14, 2022 12:21:46 GMT
I don’t know, many accept evolution just on someone else’s word without any investigation. That’s not much better.
Um, do you accept that the earth is round and not flat?
On what do you base that opinion?
Partly, but not solely, based on authority. You? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2022 16:40:28 GMT
Um, do you accept that the earth is round and not flat?
On what do you base that opinion?
Partly, but not solely, based on authority. You? But to confuse all authority as if it was all one and the same is not only simplistic but idiotic as well. Are you saying that you think that someone who commits suicide like what happened in Waco on the word of some guru, is similar to say a judge who decides to sentence some contractor for a sloppy work based on the word of experts? Can you see a difference between these two? If you do not then I rest my case, if you do then you're some kind of hypocrite saying that blind faith in ID is the same thing as the belief in the theory of evolution. Either way you won't come out of it unscathed. |
|
Paleocon
Legend
We spent 50 Years fighting the USSR just to become a gay, retarded version of It.
Posts: 7,336
|
Post by Paleocon on Jul 15, 2022 16:27:51 GMT
Darwin got very little right, other than micro-evolution. Science is always self correcting and I support that in all scientific fields. None of the current or the older theories can explain where the species originated, meaning that intelligent design is as viable as any other explanation. Actually, evolution does explain where the species originated—from other species. It does not explain the origin of life itself. That doesn't make the theory wrong. It merely exposes the theory's limits. No, the theory of evolution has failed to explain where each species came from, and certainly has failed to provide any evidence that one species morphed into another. The very ideas that Darwin put forth have failed utterly, resulting in other "guesses" like P.E.
|
|
Paleocon
Legend
We spent 50 Years fighting the USSR just to become a gay, retarded version of It.
Posts: 7,336
|
Post by Paleocon on Jul 15, 2022 16:30:39 GMT
I don’t know, many accept evolution just on someone else’s word without any investigation. That’s not much better.
Um, do you accept that the earth is round and not flat?
On what do you base that opinion?
Scientific evidence proves the earth is round, and it's scientific evidence that is lacking to support the macro-evolution theory. |
|
