Evolutionist admits evolution can not be observed

  • 43 Replies
  • 7392 Views
*

Wendy

  • 18492
  • I laugh cus you fake
Re: Evolutionist admits evolution can not be observed
« Reply #30 on: January 06, 2011, 03:45:18 AM »
Making your metaphorical enemy give up and go away is a form of defeating them. It doesn't have to mean he's right.
Here's an explanation for ya. Lurk moar. Every single point you brought up has been posted, reposted, debated and debunked. There is a search function on this forum, and it is very easy to use.

*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30590
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: Evolutionist admits evolution can not be observed
« Reply #31 on: January 08, 2011, 02:14:59 AM »
Can a mod move this thread on batman to the lounge? It has nothing to do with alternative science.

Also, could the first post be deleted or modified? It has little to do with batman.

?

Thevoiceofreason

  • 1792
  • Bendy Truth specialist
Re: Evolutionist admits evolution can not be observed
« Reply #32 on: January 09, 2011, 05:18:28 PM »
Sigh,

who said that science is always directly observable.
We don't directly observe atomic orbitals, but we have chemistry.
We don't directly observe that the earth existed well over a million years ago, yet we know because of dating

Evolution is one of those many scientific theories that don't rely on direct methods.

*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30590
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: Evolutionist admits evolution can not be observed
« Reply #33 on: January 09, 2011, 09:56:31 PM »
Sigh,

who said that science is always directly observable.
We don't directly observe atomic orbitals, but we have chemistry.
We don't directly observe that the earth existed well over a million years ago, yet we know because of dating

Evolution is one of those many scientific theories that don't rely on direct methods.

Sorry, evolution relies heavily on direct observation. Fortunately it is also heavily observed.

Please do not let the trolls convince you that evolution is only happening on a scale of millions of years, it is readily observable on even fairly small time scales. The fish in a mile long stretch of river will all share many many common ancestors, yet they will still show recent diversity on a large scale. Within just a few hundred generations (fish breed yearly) they will evolve many different proteins all doing the same job.

*

Pongo

  • Planar Moderator
  • 6753
Re: Evolutionist admits evolution can not be observed
« Reply #34 on: January 11, 2011, 12:10:39 AM »
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB901.html

...a link, take it for what you will.  I doubt it will sway anyone's opinion.  Tomorrow the sun will rise, the post will run, and creationists will still trade evolutionist lies amongst each other like baseball cards.

?

Thevoiceofreason

  • 1792
  • Bendy Truth specialist
Re: Evolutionist admits evolution can not be observed
« Reply #35 on: January 11, 2011, 02:11:35 AM »
Sigh,

who said that science is always directly observable.
We don't directly observe atomic orbitals, but we have chemistry.
We don't directly observe that the earth existed well over a million years ago, yet we know because of dating

Evolution is one of those many scientific theories that don't rely on direct methods.

Sorry, evolution relies heavily on direct observation. Fortunately it is also heavily observed.

Please do not let the trolls convince you that evolution is only happening on a scale of millions of years, it is readily observable on even fairly small time scales. The fish in a mile long stretch of river will all share many many common ancestors, yet they will still show recent diversity on a large scale. Within just a few hundred generations (fish breed yearly) they will evolve many different proteins all doing the same job.

I was going after is argument on macro-evolution.
Many people, trolls and creationists alike realize that micro-evolution is undeniable.
So they attack the theories of abiogenesis, speciation, and new biological systems.

And by "direct" I mean we don't see species macro-evolve, but that doesn't mean we don't have valid evidence

*

Beorn

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 6543
  • If I can't trust my eyes, what can I trust?
Re: Evolutionist admits evolution can not be observed
« Reply #36 on: January 11, 2011, 09:40:26 AM »
Sigh,

who said that science is always directly observable.
We don't directly observe atomic orbitals, but we have chemistry.
We don't directly observe that the earth existed well over a million years ago, yet we know because of dating

Evolution is one of those many scientific theories that don't rely on direct methods.

Sorry, evolution relies heavily on direct observation. Fortunately it is also heavily observed.

Please do not let the trolls convince you that evolution is only happening on a scale of millions of years, it is readily observable on even fairly small time scales. The fish in a mile long stretch of river will all share many many common ancestors, yet they will still show recent diversity on a large scale. Within just a few hundred generations (fish breed yearly) they will evolve many different proteins all doing the same job.


And by "direct" I mean we don't see species macro-evolve, but that doesn't mean we don't have valid evidence

COUGHFRUITFLYCOUGH
Quote
Only one thing can save our future. Give Thork a BanHammer for Th*rksakes!

*

Wendy

  • 18492
  • I laugh cus you fake
Re: Evolutionist admits evolution can not be observed
« Reply #37 on: January 11, 2011, 09:49:55 AM »
Fruit flies have nothing to do with Batman. Please keep your off-topic banter in RM.
Here's an explanation for ya. Lurk moar. Every single point you brought up has been posted, reposted, debated and debunked. There is a search function on this forum, and it is very easy to use.

*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30590
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: Evolutionist admits evolution can not be observed
« Reply #38 on: January 11, 2011, 11:29:53 AM »
Sigh,

who said that science is always directly observable.
We don't directly observe atomic orbitals, but we have chemistry.
We don't directly observe that the earth existed well over a million years ago, yet we know because of dating

Evolution is one of those many scientific theories that don't rely on direct methods.

Sorry, evolution relies heavily on direct observation. Fortunately it is also heavily observed.

Please do not let the trolls convince you that evolution is only happening on a scale of millions of years, it is readily observable on even fairly small time scales. The fish in a mile long stretch of river will all share many many common ancestors, yet they will still show recent diversity on a large scale. Within just a few hundred generations (fish breed yearly) they will evolve many different proteins all doing the same job.

I was going after is argument on macro-evolution.
Many people, trolls and creationists alike realize that micro-evolution is undeniable.
So they attack the theories of abiogenesis, speciation, and new biological systems.

And by "direct" I mean we don't see species macro-evolve, but that doesn't mean we don't have valid evidence

There is no real distinction between "macro" and "micro" evolution. No creationist will ever give a valid explanation of what is considered macro evolution.


?

Thevoiceofreason

  • 1792
  • Bendy Truth specialist
Re: Evolutionist admits evolution can not be observed
« Reply #39 on: January 11, 2011, 12:02:04 PM »

Do you see the trend? All my stalkers are mostly old boring people, hence they are atheist. They are bored with their lives & just troll the net insulting what other people believe.


but everyone here was 14-18 year old kids? you are very confusing

Quotes from Beorn:

Quote
God evolved all kinds of different creatures after His creation of the earth. About 180 years ago He made human evolve

Quote
The earth is 212 years and 2 months old.

Quote
The earth is only 130 years old

Quote
Tell me how YOU observed that the earth wasn't created 200 years ago?

So according to Beorn:

1. The earth went from 212 years old, to 200, to 189, to 130.
2. The Bible was written two hundred years ago.
3. God started evolution (despite Beorn at the same time maintain no God exists).

But of course Beorn is dead serious, and no troll right? ::)

I didn't say that the bible was written 200 years ago. Humans were only created 180 years ago. I'm not a bible expert, so I don't know if the bible was created in the same time as humans were, but I believe it was. It is possible though that it was created 200 years ago.

And that the earth is 130 years ago was either a joke or I didn't say it. Can't remember saying that really.

o rly?
So you think all of human history, is a lie?
and you are aware that the bible is not the oldest book right?
I can think of at least two written before it.

*

Beorn

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 6543
  • If I can't trust my eyes, what can I trust?
Re: Evolutionist admits evolution can not be observed
« Reply #40 on: January 11, 2011, 01:15:00 PM »

Do you see the trend? All my stalkers are mostly old boring people, hence they are atheist. They are bored with their lives & just troll the net insulting what other people believe.


but everyone here was 14-18 year old kids? you are very confusing

Quotes from Beorn:

Quote
God evolved all kinds of different creatures after His creation of the earth. About 180 years ago He made human evolve

Quote
The earth is 212 years and 2 months old.

Quote
The earth is only 130 years old

Quote
Tell me how YOU observed that the earth wasn't created 200 years ago?

So according to Beorn:

1. The earth went from 212 years old, to 200, to 189, to 130.
2. The Bible was written two hundred years ago.
3. God started evolution (despite Beorn at the same time maintain no God exists).

But of course Beorn is dead serious, and no troll right? ::)

I didn't say that the bible was written 200 years ago. Humans were only created 180 years ago. I'm not a bible expert, so I don't know if the bible was created in the same time as humans were, but I believe it was. It is possible though that it was created 200 years ago.

And that the earth is 130 years ago was either a joke or I didn't say it. Can't remember saying that really.

o rly?
So you think all of human history, is a lie?
and you are aware that the bible is not the oldest book right?
I can think of at least two written before it.

Yeah sure, were you there to see them being written? NO! Don't come in batman thread telling lies.
Quote
Only one thing can save our future. Give Thork a BanHammer for Th*rksakes!

*

Chris Spaghetti

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 12744
Re: Evolutionist admits evolution can not be observed
« Reply #41 on: January 11, 2011, 02:13:13 PM »

Do you see the trend? All my stalkers are mostly old boring people, hence they are atheist. They are bored with their lives & just troll the net insulting what other people believe.


but everyone here was 14-18 year old kids? you are very confusing

Quotes from Beorn:

Quote
God evolved all kinds of different creatures after His creation of the earth. About 180 years ago He made human evolve

Quote
The earth is 212 years and 2 months old.

Quote
The earth is only 130 years old

Quote
Tell me how YOU observed that the earth wasn't created 200 years ago?

So according to Beorn:

1. The earth went from 212 years old, to 200, to 189, to 130.
2. The Bible was written two hundred years ago.
3. God started evolution (despite Beorn at the same time maintain no God exists).

But of course Beorn is dead serious, and no troll right? ::)

I didn't say that the bible was written 200 years ago. Humans were only created 180 years ago. I'm not a bible expert, so I don't know if the bible was created in the same time as humans were, but I believe it was. It is possible though that it was created 200 years ago.

And that the earth is 130 years ago was either a joke or I didn't say it. Can't remember saying that really.

o rly?
So you think all of human history, is a lie?
and you are aware that the bible is not the oldest book right?
I can think of at least two written before it.

How was anything written before the world was created? Duh!

*

Wendy

  • 18492
  • I laugh cus you fake
Re: Evolutionist admits evolution can not be observed
« Reply #42 on: January 11, 2011, 03:00:10 PM »

Do you see the trend? All my stalkers are mostly old boring people, hence they are atheist. They are bored with their lives & just troll the net insulting what other people believe.


but everyone here was 14-18 year old kids? you are very confusing

Quotes from Beorn:

Quote
God evolved all kinds of different creatures after His creation of the earth. About 180 years ago He made human evolve

Quote
The earth is 212 years and 2 months old.

Quote
The earth is only 130 years old

Quote
Tell me how YOU observed that the earth wasn't created 200 years ago?

So according to Beorn:

1. The earth went from 212 years old, to 200, to 189, to 130.
2. The Bible was written two hundred years ago.
3. God started evolution (despite Beorn at the same time maintain no God exists).

But of course Beorn is dead serious, and no troll right? ::)

I didn't say that the bible was written 200 years ago. Humans were only created 180 years ago. I'm not a bible expert, so I don't know if the bible was created in the same time as humans were, but I believe it was. It is possible though that it was created 200 years ago.

And that the earth is 130 years ago was either a joke or I didn't say it. Can't remember saying that really.

o rly?
So you think all of human history, is a lie?
and you are aware that the bible is not the oldest book right?
I can think of at least two written before it.

If you are thinking about the ones I think you are, you are not necessarily correct.
Here's an explanation for ya. Lurk moar. Every single point you brought up has been posted, reposted, debated and debunked. There is a search function on this forum, and it is very easy to use.

?

vhu9644

  • 1011
  • Round earth supporter
Re: Evolutionist admits evolution can not be observed
« Reply #43 on: January 15, 2011, 02:54:23 AM »
people i respect: Ski, Oracle, PizzaPlanet, Wendy