Arguments Against Organic/Biological Evolution

[Revoltingest]

One: I am not Revoltingest

Braggart!

 

[McBell]

ALTER2EGO -to- SUNSTONE:

I presented the correct definition of "organic evolution." If you disagree with my definition, why don't you present the forum with what you think is the correct definition? Present your rebuttal definition rather than simply state your opinion that my definition is incorrect.

Several people have come on this thread complaining about what I wrote by stating their opinions. Not one single person has presented rebuttal evidence that my opening post is inaccurate.

I'm not interested in mere opinions because everybody has a different opinion based upon their personal experiences. In other words, opinions are not reliable because opinions change. The only thing that trumps an opinion is facts. Where are your facts to prove that my opening post is incorrect? You've presented none.

Yes, you are only interested in your opinions, regardless of how steeped in ignorance those opinions are.

 

[Alter2Ego]

Fer Chissakes, Revoltingest and I don't even like each other, yet I have to admit he's right in this instance. And he doesn't have to rebute your nonsense. Anyone who knows anything about evolution --- which you obviously don't --- knows you are posing as someone who knows more about it than you in fact do.

ALTER2EGO -to- SUNSTONE:

So now you're a mind reader and you know that I'm pretending to know more than I actually know about evolution. What else are you able to read from my mind?

I'm still waiting for scientific rebuttals from you or one of your pals who insist that I've got it wrong. I'm ready for the debate.

 

[Sunstone]

ALTER2EGO -to- SUNSTONE:

I presented the correct definition of "organic evolution." If you disagree with my definition, why don't you present the forum with what you think is the correct definition? Present your rebuttal definition rather than simply state your opinion that my definition is incorrect.

Several people have come on this thread complaining about what I wrote by stating their opinions. Not one single person has presented rebuttal evidence that my opening post is inaccurate.

I'm not interested in mere opinions because everybody has a different opinion based upon their personal experiences. In other words, opinions are not reliable because opinions change. The only thing that trumps an opinion is facts. Where are your facts to prove that my opening post is incorrect? You've presented none.

In your OPINION, the crap you're dumping on us is crap we've never seen before. Go read the one or two hundred threads on this subject that are already on this forum. You will find point-by-point rebuttles of everything you've dumped on us. Meanwhile, quit acting like you're crap is precious gold. We've seen it all before.

 

[Revoltingest]

Yes, you are only interested in your opinions, regardless of how steeped in ignorance those opinions are.

I should point out to Alter2Ego that I've nothing against ignorance.
I'm actually a renaissance man of ignorance.....name a topic, any topic, & I can show you how much I need to learn.
Let's not be hostile just we each think the other is loopy.

If we aren't quick to jump into a debate, remember that we've been thru this so many times before on this & other forums.
We are loathe to rehash the same old same old, so I've some useful suggestions (worth every penny you paid for them):
- Read thru a few Wikipedia articles on evolution & related science. (It won't take long.) This way we will be using the same definitions & concepts.
- Check out some of the better threads on evo vs creation. You'll see which things have been done to death, & perhaps find a fresh aspect to discuss.
- Try to like us, even though we're jerks. It's difficult at times, but more fun that way.

 

[Sunstone]

ALTER2EGO -to- SUNSTONE:

So now you're a mind reader and you know that I'm pretending to know more than I actually know about evolution. What else are you able to read from my mind?

I'm still waiting for scientific rebuttals from you or one of your pals who insist that I've got it wrong. I'm ready for the debate.

I'm still waiting for you to say something fresh and original. Go read the old threads on this. There are at least one or two hundred of them. You're views were rebutted before you were born, youngun.

 

[fishy]

ALTER2EGO -to- SUNSTONE:

So now you're a mind reader and you know that I'm pretending to know more than I actually know about evolution. What else are you able to read from my mind?

I'm still waiting for scientific rebuttals from you or one of your pals who insist that I've got it wrong. I'm ready for the debate.

Yeah sorry dude, but this is what you know about evolution.............really sad.

ORGANIC EVOLUTION is the theory that the first living organism developed from nonliving matter :thud:

 

[Sunstone]

Yeah sorry dude, but this is what you know about evolution.............really sad.

ORGANIC EVOLUTION is the theory that the first living organism developed from nonliving matter :thud:

I know. It's pathetic, isn't it?

 

[McBell]

I should point out to Alter2Ego that I've nothing against ignorance.
I'm actually a renaissance man of ignorance.....name a topic, any topic, & I can show you how much I need to learn.
Let's not be hostile just we each think the other is loopy.

I am not being hostile.
I am merely calling it how I see it.

Of course, I have two other websites worth of her posts for background material that most on RF know nothing about.

 

[Alter2Ego]

For you to ignore:

http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...109893-evolution-ask-your-questions-here.html

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/evolution-vs-creationism/101633-evolution-evidence-redux.html

http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...6685-theory-evolution-supported-evidence.html

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/evolution-vs-creationism/94295-evolution-theory-evidence.html
​

ALTER2EGO -to- MESTEMIA:

I don't do links. You need to quote something specifically from your sources and then explain for the benefit of everyone why you feel it proves whatever.

As you will notice, in my opening post I clearly stated--in my own words--why I reject the evolution theory. Then I quoted verbatim from my sources to back up what I said. I identified each of my reference sources, including the page number where I got the quotation from.

You expect me to read long lists of documents without knowing what I'm supposed to focus on? That's your job. You're the one trying to prove a point. So you're the one required to quote the specific portion or give a summarization of what your source is saying. Don't ask me to do your homework for you. It doesn't work that way.

 

[fishy]

alter2goe what is it you don't understand about not understanding evolution?

 

[McBell]

ALTER2EGO -to- MESTEMIA:

I don't do links. You need to quote something specifically from your sources and then explain for the benefit of everyone why you feel it proves whatever.

As you will notice, in my opening post I clearly stated--in my own words--why I reject the evolution theory. Then I quoted verbatim from my sources to back up what I said. I identified each of my reference sources, including the page number where I got the quotation from.

You expect me to read long lists of documents without knowing what I'm supposed to focus on? That's your job. You're the one trying to prove a point. So you're the one required to quote the specific portion or give a summarization of what your source is saying. Don't ask me to do your homework for you. It doesn't work that way.

You remind me of pigeons.

And I did flat out call it when I said you would ignore it.
One wonders why you even asked when you had no intention of actually looking at it...

At least you are consistent.

 

[Revoltingest]

I am not being hostile.
I am merely calling it how I see it.

I wasn't referring specifically to you. (Sorry about my lack of clarity.)
It was just a general plea......aimed a bit more in Alter2's direction.
I think we're making her cross.

 

[Alter2Ego]

I should point out to Alter2Ego that I've nothing against ignorance.
I'm actually a renaissance man of ignorance.....name a topic, any topic, & I can show you how much I need to learn.
Let's not be hostile just we each think the other is loopy.

If we aren't quick to jump into a debate, remember that we've been thru this so many times before on this & other forums.
We are loathe to rehash the same old same old, so I've some useful suggestions (worth every penny you paid for them):
- Read thru a few Wikipedia articles on evolution & related science. (It won't take long.) This way we will be using the same definitions & concepts.
- Check out some of the better threads on evo vs creation. You'll see which things have been done to death, & perhaps find a fresh aspect to discuss.
- Try to like us, even though we're jerks. It's difficult at times, but more fun that way.

If Wikipedia is your only source of reference, you're in bad shape. Anybody can get on Wikipedia and post what they want--whether they are credentialed or not. In other words, Wikipedia isn't the most reliable source. They've been known to post inaccuracies.

 

[fishy]

ALTER2EGO -to- MESTEMIA:

I don't do links. You need to quote something specifically from your sources and then explain for the benefit of everyone why you feel it proves whatever.

As you will notice, in my opening post I clearly stated--in my own words--why I reject the evolution theory. Then I quoted verbatim from my sources to back up what I said. I identified each of my reference sources, including the page number where I got the quotation from.

You expect me to read long lists of documents without knowing what I'm supposed to focus on? That's your job. You're the one trying to prove a point. So you're the one required to quote the specific portion or give a summarization of what your source is saying. Don't ask me to do your homework for you. It doesn't work that way.

Yes mate, and this was your opening gambit.

ORGANIC EVOLUTION is the theory that the first living organism developed from nonliving matter

:thud:

A completely nonsensical statement. Absolutely nothing to do with the TOE, I mean how silly can you get? http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/editpost.php?do=editpost&p=2814502

 

[Revoltingest]

If Wikipedia is your only source of reference, you're in bad shape. Anybody can get on Wikipedia and post what they want--whether they are credentialed or not. In other words, Wikipedia isn't the most reliable source. They've been known to post inaccuracies.

Sigh....Wikipedia is not a sole source of info.
But it's science articles are a good quick overview.
And for subjects where I've some expertise, I've found'm pretty good.
I have edited some though....internal combustion engine history needed a little hellp.
If you prefer some other source, I've no objection.

 

[Alter2Ego]

You remind me of pigeons.

And I did flat out call it when I said you would ignore it.
One wonders why you even asked when you had no intention of actually looking at it...

At least you are consistent.

ALTER2EGO -to- MESTEMIA:

You can whine to your heart's content. The rule of evidence says that the person presenting evidence is required to select the specific portions that are to be brought to the attention of another person. Select it by quoting verbatim or by summarizing, and then give the page number where the info came from in case the opposing side wants to go and read the original. That's how it works.

If you were to appear in a court of law and handed a judge a stack of papers and tell the judge: "Read all of it and you will eventually find the evidence." Guess what would happen? The judge would throw your evidence out. Nobody has time to waste searching though pages to find YOUR evidence for you. That's your job. You're the one trying to convince me that I'm wrong.

 

[fishy]

ORGANIC EVOLUTION is the theory that the first living organism developed from nonliving matter

Would you like to address this fallacy, I've been asking.

 

[Sunstone]

Creationists want to tell you what to think about evolution without they themselves learning much of anything about evolution.

For evidense in support of my statement, see Alter2Ego and the last 200 creationists before her to pass by this board.

 

[Alter2Ego]

In your OPINION, the crap you're dumping on us is crap we've never seen before. Go read the one or two hundred threads on this subject that are already on this forum. You will find point-by-point rebuttles of everything you've dumped on us. Meanwhile, quit acting like you're crap is precious gold. We've seen it all before.

ALTER2EGO -to- SUNSTONE:

I'll pass. You're the one trying to prove me wrong; remember? You go do the research and get your old rebuttals from wherever they happen to be.

Not that they will do you any good because I've debunk several evolutionists with scientific evidence. One of them at another website couldn't take it, and so he started inventing fake arguments as he went along--accused me of quote hacking, insisted on giving his definition of what the paleontologists meant, and more or less hopped, skipped, and jumped all over the place.

But he still could not overcome the fact that all the paleontologists admitted there is no evidence in the fossils showing one type of animal evolved into an entirely different animal. And some of the paleontologists who made these admissions were pro-evolution.
.