Questions that evolutionists and billions of years proponents cannot answer but disprove their theories.

[F1fan]

Tip: always a good idea to read a post before typing an 'answer'.

Hey man, don't underestimate the value of selective breading. Taste matters.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

There are just adaptations within created kinds, aka micro evolution.

I already explained this to you. You are correct. It's the law of monofyly. Species never outgrow their ancestry.
This is exactly what evolution predicts.
Cats don't produce dogs.
Cats produce more cats and subspecies of cats, which remain cats.
Mammals produce more mammals and subspecies of mammals (like cats and dogs), which remain mammals.

No one has ever observed one created kind turning into another created kind.

Indeed. If we would observe one kind turning into another kind (like cats producing dogs), evolution would be disproven.
So this supports evolution theory.

Hilarious, right, that you think this somehow is evidence against evolution instead....

See this is why you should learn about the theory before trying to argue against it. It would help to prevent to say stupid ignorant things like that.

To assume that more changes will do that is projection outside of the measured or observe range.

Nobody assumes that except those who insist on arguing strawmen, like you

It is very bad science to do so.

Indeed it would be. So it's a good thing it doesn't happen then....

For example, the force needed to pull a spring is proportional to its distance.
F = kx
until breaks.
End proof.

Owkay. lol.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

People have bred dogs for many years and some a very large.
But what limits them from making even larger dogs?

Eventually? Physics.

Because eventually that dog line will become less fit and prone to many problems. That is the spring breaks.

Sure, sure. Point?

Projection outside of measured of observed ranges is pseudo science.
So macro evolution is falsified .

Yeah, the strawman you put up is indeed falsified.
Meanwhile, actual evolution theory remains solid as ever.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

so, if selective breading does no work, what will make a very large dog?

Why are you so obsessed with giant dogs?

There are no super giant dogs

There are no crockoducks either. Point?

This is observed in all species.
I have just falsified forever macroevolution.

No, you just argued a strawman.

I have already falsified abiogenesis,
I have already falsified the Big Bang.

How did the moon come into being?

Are you capable of sticking to a topic?

 

[F1fan]

However the Bible is quite clear and so there is just one faith.

How do you account for the Jewish faith then? After all, it's their Tanakh, not the Christians'.

How do you account for the distinction between Eastern Orthodoxy in its various forms, and Western Christianity?

Within Western Christianity how do you account for the schism between Catholic and Protestant?

Within Protestant Christianity, how do account for the difference between science-accepting and anti-science insisting (like yourself)?

I notced you didn't answer Blu's questions. If there is a problem and you lack answers then let us know.

 

[F1fan]

However the Bible is quite clear and so there is just one faith.

How do you account for the Jewish faith then? After all, it's their Tanakh, not the Christians'.

How do you account for the distinction between Eastern Orthodoxy in its various forms, and Western Christianity?

Within Western Christianity how do you account for the schism between Catholic and Protestant?

Within Protestant Christianity, how do account for the difference between science-accepting and anti-science insisting (like yourself)?

I notced you didn't answer Blu's questions. If there is a problem and you lack answers then let us know.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I notced you didn't answer Blu's questions. If there is a problem and you lack answers then let us know.

Behold the mighty prophecy of TagliatelliMonster's words of wisdom.
Verily, I say unto you that @SavedByTheLord shall not directly respond to questions.
Verily, I say unto you that @SavedByTheLord shall completely ignore any and all direct arguments and evidence.
Verily, I say unto you that @SavedByTheLord shall instead repeat his mantra of off topic broken record questions and attempt to change the topic and move the goalposts.
O ye believers, you shall see I bring you true words of wisdom and you shall know that I am THE LORD when all these things shall come to pass.
O ye believers, do not follow in the footsteps the unbelievers for they have been deceived by the Father of Lies, by the Great Deceiver, by my arch enemy known as Bubble Of Makebelief. Fall not for the evil of BUM.

O ye believers, I raise my pint in honor of your intellectual integrity and shall pour some of my blessed mead on the ground as a symbol for the neural networks lost to the BUM.
If however, a disbeliever has a change of hearts and breaks free from the Great Deceiver, then we shall feast in his/her honor with Tagliatelli and Meatbals and swim in rivers of beer.

Ramen

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Behold the mighty prophecy of TagliatelliMonster's words of wisdom.
Verily, I say unto you that @SavedByTheLord shall not directly respond to questions.
Verily, I say unto you that @SavedByTheLord shall completely ignore any and all direct arguments and evidence.
Verily, I say unto you that @SavedByTheLord shall instead repeat his mantra of off topic broken record questions and attempt to change the topic and move the goalposts.
O ye believers, you shall see I bring you true words of wisdom and you shall know that I am THE LORD when all these things shall come to pass.
O ye believers, do not follow in the footsteps the unbelievers for they have been deceived by the Father of Lies, by the Great Deceiver, by my arch enemy known as Bubble Of Makebelief. Fall not for the evil of BUM.

O ye believers, I raise my pint in honor of your intellectual integrity and shall pour some of my blessed mead on the ground as a symbol for the neural networks lost to the BUM.
If however, a disbeliever has a change of hearts and breaks free from the Great Deceiver, then we shall feast in his/her honor with Tagliatelli and Meatbals and swim in rivers of beer.

Ramen

• Everything we know about the Big Bang could be wrong | Salon.com
• 
  
• Big Bang theory wrong? Star older than Universe discovered - threat of ‘scientific crisis’ | Science | News | Express.co.uk
• 
  
• Top Ten Scientific Flaws In The Big Bang Theory | TechReader
• 
  
• The Big Bang Never Happened: A Conclusive Argument

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

• Everything we know about the Big Bang could be wrong | Salon.com
• 
  
• Big Bang theory wrong? Star older than Universe discovered - threat of ‘scientific crisis’ | Science | News | Express.co.uk
• 
  
• Top Ten Scientific Flaws In The Big Bang Theory | TechReader
• 
  
• The Big Bang Never Happened: A Conclusive Argument

O ye believers, you shall see I bring you true words of wisdom and you shall know that I am THE LORD when all these things shall come to pass.


Ramen

 

[SavedByTheLord]

O ye believers, you shall see I bring you true words of wisdom and you shall know that I am THE LORD when all these things shall come to pass.


Ramen

Is that the noodles talking?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Is that the noodles talking?

That's you demonstrating my impeccable prophetic abilities.

Ramen.

 

[SkepticThinker]

As always evolutionists cannot admit they have nothing.
It is a fallacy to believe that any form of projection, especially linear projection, outside of the measured or observed range is valid.
There are just adaptations within created kinds, aka micro evolution.
No one has ever observed one created kind turning into another created kind. To assume that more changes will do that is projection outside of the measured or observe range.
It is very bad science to do so.
For example, the force needed to pull a spring is proportional to its distance.
F = kx
until breaks.
End proof.

Oopsy, you just repeated the exact same thing again, instead of responding to the points put before you.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Oopsy, you just repeated the exact same thing again, instead of responding to the points put before you.

I did.
The spring analogy is a good analogy, but it is not needed to refute macro evolution (one kind evolving into another kind).

 

[SkepticThinker]

Sure there is an analogy to a spring breaking.
People have bred dogs for many years and some a very large.
But what limits them from making even larger dogs?
Because eventually that dog line will become less fit and prone to many problems. That is the spring breaks.
Projection outside of measured of observed ranges is pseudo science.
So macro evolution is falsified .
End proof.

You think this is a proof? Yikes.

 

[SkepticThinker]

If selective breading won’t work, what will?
There are no super giant dogs because any changes beyond a certain point break the spring.
This is observed in all species.

Artificial selection works. It wouldn't work if evolution and natural selection weren't a fact of life.

 

[SkepticThinker]

If selective breading won’t work, what will?
There are no super giant dogs because any changes beyond a certain point break the spring.
This is observed in all species.

There are lots of huge dogs. You should get out more. There are a lot of tiny dogs too.

 

[SkepticThinker]

I did.

I now you repeated yourself. It's like, your M.O.

The spring analogy is a good analogy,

It's not, as you've demonstrated.

but it is not needed to refute macro evolution (one kind evolving into another kind).

"Kind" is a vague and ambiguous religious word that has no actual meaning in science.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

You think this is a proof? Yikes.

The observation is that no one has ever seen one kind change into another kind.
An analysis of the genetics proves that too.

But what limits them from making even larger dogs?
Because eventually that dog line will become less fit and prone to many problems. That is the spring breaks.
Projection outside of measured of observed ranges is pseudo science.
So macro evolution is falsified .

 

[SkepticThinker]

The observation is that no one has ever seen one kind change into another kind.

As every other poster on this thread has pointed out to you, nobody who understands evolution expects to see one "kind" turn into another "kind."

First of all, "kind" isn't a scientific term. Maybe you mean "species" but who really knows.
Secondly, if it were observed that "one kind changed into another kind," that would falsify evolution.

An analysis of the genetics proves that too.

An analysis of genetics shows a nested hierarchy of varying degrees of relatedness between all creatures on earth.

But what limits them from making even larger dogs?

Where are people going to keep these super giant dogs you're so obsessed with?

Because eventually that dog line will become less fit and prone to many problems. That is the spring breaks.

That's because traits are being artificially selected for by humans seeking out traits that are desirable to them, rather than nature selecting traits that help the dog survive in the wild (which they can't do).

You know, artificial selection wouldn't work at all if natural selection was bogus, right?

Projection outside of measured of observed ranges is pseudo science.
So macro evolution is falsified .

All you've demonstrated here is that you have no idea what macroevolution is in the first place.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

(one kind evolving into another kind).

I already informed you that if such a thing would happen, evolution would be disproven.

Why do you double down on this mistake?
Do you like being wrong?