Irony of the evolutionary belief

[IndigoChild5559]

Didn't they still stay moths?

Take the principle that you learned, and extend it over a long period of time. Changes, such as the color, would accumulate over time. Eventually you would have to acknowledge, heck, this has become a new species.

 

[YoursTrue]

Take the principle that you learned, and extend it over a long period of time. Changes, such as the color, would accumulate over time. Eventually you would have to acknowledge, heck, this has become a new species.

Sorry, there is no REAL evidence dinosaurs became birds such as sparrows or hummingbirds. Not saying different bird species did not change but there is no real evidence to show or demonstrate. People imagine but that's about it.

 

[YoursTrue]

She's evolved to the point where manual labour is not required. She got me to buy her a bell.

Ok cute

 

[Subduction Zone]

Sorry, there is no REAL evidence dinosaurs became birds such as sparrows or hummingbirds. Not saying different bird species did not change but there is no real evidence to show or demonstrate. People imagine but that's about it.

What are you talking about? Of course there is.

Can you tell us what you think qualifies as "real evidence"?

 

[YoursTrue]

Take the principle that you learned, and extend it over a long period of time. Changes, such as the color, would accumulate over time. Eventually you would have to acknowledge, heck, this has become a new species.

A long period of time...different origins, like snakes and moths evolving from one ancestor or separate ones from a few droplets maybe from outer space or thermal vents that blossomed into something else? You can believe that but it's like a fantasy now as I see it. Based on suppositions.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

there is no REAL evidence dinosaurs became birds

There is tons of evidence. It's pretty firmly established.

I can tell you what science has shown us. I can't make you appreciate science.

 

[Aupmanyav]

A long period of time...different origins, like snakes and moths evolving from one ancestor or separate ones ...

All life evolved from one type of ancestors, and the first ancestors of all life (Vegetation or animal) was like this.

Archaea - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[John53]

Sorry, there is no REAL evidence dinosaurs became birds such as sparrows or hummingbirds. Not saying different bird species did not change but there is no real evidence to show or demonstrate. People imagine but that's about it.

There is lots of REAL evidence. How else do you think people discovered it?

Here's some questions I know you won't answer or will come back with something completely off point but I'll give it one more try.

Why do you think people come up with all the evidence for evolution? Do you think they're deliberately trying to deceive others? Is it some kind of evil plan?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

My primary interest is relevant discourse and I've always valued learning above all else.

And yet you handwave away any and all pointing out of your mistakes and misunderstandings, only to double down on them in subsequent postings.

Excuse me while I don't take your statement serious any longer.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

The irony is believers in science simply can't see other ways of ordering reality, thinking, or assumptions.

"believers in science".


Your choice of words says it all.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

There are several assumptions here.

I won't point them out because this observation simply supports my theory that all change in life is sudden. No part of this observation is anomalous to my theory.

Another great example of you just handwaving away the very evidence you are asking for and of which you claim that it doesn't exist.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Essentially I'm saying that consciousness (and mutation) are the largest drive of change in species.

Nonsense that has been addressed time and again, and handwaved by you.

When I say all observed change in species is "sudden" I mean it is essentially complete in three generations.

This also has been addressed time and again, not to mention that you can't name a single example of this. 3 generations would be within a human lifetime, so you should have plenty of examples.

Punctuated equilibrium is much closer to reality than "survival of the fittest".

Great example that you indeed don't have a clue what "survival of the fittest" is about, eventhough a couple posts back you claimed that "everybody" (including you) knows what it means.

As if PE is some kind of "alternative" to it, or "something else" in any way.
It's laughable at best.

Ironically most people who believe in Darwin simply don't see the anomalies and interpret evidence in terms of the ToE.

I don't "believe in darwin".

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

There is no convincing evidence that life emerged without intelligence causing it to come about. None whatsoever.

There is also no evidence that life emerged "without" extra dimensional goblin engineers creating it.



Do you see the flaw?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Didn't they still stay moths?

How many more times do you need this strawman explained to you?
Why do you insist on being wrong?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Sorry, there is no REAL evidence dinosaurs became birds such as sparrows or hummingbirds.

You mean aside from the fact that it is impossible to come up with a definition of "dinsosaur" that includes ALL dinosaurs yet excludes birds?

Birds are dinosaurs just like humans are mammals.

 

[YoursTrue]

There is lots of REAL evidence. How else do you think people discovered it?

Here's some questions I know you won't answer or will come back with something completely off point but I'll give it one more try.

Why do you think people come up with all the evidence for evolution? Do you think they're deliberately trying to deceive others? Is it some kind of evil plan?

I think they are taking a theory and going with that as if it's the truth. I certainly don't think scientists are deliberately lying in all cases but rather are using the theory of "natural selection" to substantiate the idea. One of my relatives was a physicist at a university. I know he loved reading scientific publications when he was younger, went on to become a professor. Do I think he was lying? No. But I do think theoretical scientists play mental games. And many cannot coincide religious ideas with the theory. God is the judge. And without any real evidence including that of supposing about things like intelligence as I see it on these boards, supposing fossils (fitting them in the theory as if a jigsaw puzzle, sometimes changing their thoughts about it). Sorry, but it's just too incredible for me to go along with all the presumptions.
Furthermore, it is generally concluded that mankind is harming itself. Some of that which seems apparent to me stems from religious conflict, and ideas which I won't go into now, but the more I think about it, the various tribes which eventually became strong in some instances forming nations, has a role in this. I believe this is partially evidence of the use of religious forces, something unique among mankind--not gorillas or butterflies, for instance, with their own fascinating fabulous qualities.

 

[YoursTrue]

There is tons of evidence. It's pretty firmly established.

I can tell you what science has shown us. I can't make you appreciate science.

I appreciate certain things about science.

 

[Mock Turtle]

I appreciate certain things about science.

The age of the Turin Shroud, for example?

 

[Little Dragon]

yes, they are found in nature, but transgender isn’t natural occurrence, but a personal choice of each individual.

intersex is natural, as there are no choice when it does happens, as it is part of biology.

transgender is people being with sexual gender they were born with, but chooses to become the opposite sex for whatever motivate them. It is not really biological if you choose to surgically change his or her sex.

Clearly transition from one gender to another is a choice and not a natural process. Since it requires medical intervention.
The point I was making is that there has never just been two genders or two gender identities. Naturally like intersex and hermaphrodite organisms, or with intervention, as with transexuals.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I appreciate certain things about science.

And no doubt, those "certain" things are limited by those things you feel are compatible with your a priori fundamentalist religious beliefs.

Everything else is discarded. Not based on any evidence or actual proper arguments / reasoning off course...
It is JUST based on those things being incompatible with your a priori fundamentalist religious beliefs.

I can only tell you what I tell all others in such cases:

When the evidence of reality doesn't agree with your a priori beliefs, it's not reality that is incorrect...