The first creature could not have come into being by random chance. It is impossible.

[exchemist]

For some, I'm starting to think that may be true, but of others, I think the knowledge they possess are the straw man versions they are fed.

I feel sure what we see in these stupid threads is an exercise of self-reinforcement of the beliefs of the group. None of this nonsense is really aimed at persuading others who don’t already share the same beliefs. But circulating this pseudoscientific stuff among like-minded believers, none of whom knows any science, serves to give them a warm feeling that the science remains uncertain or controversial and that they may still be right.

We see this kind of cherry-picking and reliance on bad data to support a preconceived belief in plenty of other aspects of society as well. For instance, I read that 25% of US citizens have chosen to convince themselves the last presidential election was stolen. It makes no sense, objectively, to think that, but it serves a purpose for the group.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I feel sure what we see in these stupid threads is an exercise of self-reinforcement of the beliefs of the group. None of this nonsense is really aimed at persuading others who don’t already share the same beliefs. But circulating this pseudoscientific stuff among like-minded believers, none of whom knows any science, serves to give them a warm feeling that the science remains uncertain or controversial and that they may still be right.

We see this kind of cherry-picking and reliance on bad data to support a preconceived belief in plenty of other aspects of society as well. For instance, I read that 25% of US citizens have chosen to convince themselves the last presidential election was stolen. It makes no sense, objectively, to think that, but it serves a purpose for the group.

There isn't much use in responding other than to correct. After that I think it is best to move on, given the repetition and apparent perpetuation of willful ignorance and piling on of pseudoscience that is extruded as support.

I've always knowns this, but find it to be the most difficult part of the process when dealing with empty claims outright denial of science repeated as if it is fact. It has always been easier to know that than to do that.

 

[exchemist]

There isn't much use in responding other than to correct. After that I think it is best to move on, given the repetition and apparent perpetuation of willful ignorance and piling on of pseudoscience that is extruded as support.

I've always knowns this, but find it to be the most difficult part of the process when dealing with empty claims outright denial of science repeated as if it is fact. It has always been easier to know that than to do that.

Yes I agree. My policy these days is only to react when something is being misrepresented, in a way that other readers might not immediately recognise as false. One could waste one’s whole life correcting all the falsehoods - that’s the idea behind the Gish Gallop, which @SavedByTheLord uses- so one has to be selective.

But I think most readers have got the idea by now.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Not at all. NOTHING you have done is evidence against the theory of evolution and does nothing to explain the phenomenon of evolution.

NOTHING you have done has cast doubt on the age of the Earth or the universe as determined by study and the application of the scientific method.

It is just you repeating things and ignoring others. I don't know of any skill or special knowledge required to do that. As I pointed out, parrots, recorders, and echoes can repeat without understanding or being correct. If this is the means you believe you have been called to perform, I can only conclude that you have been left without any guidance or tools to get the job done beyond repeating and repeating and repeating and repeating...

What I see is a person that wants things to be the way they believe and are willing to repeat that desire incessantly while seeming to do it with metaphorical fingers in the ears, ignoring rational discourse and evidence to the contrary.

I have to ask myself, is that really good witness for the belief or is it just stubborn personal pride, ignorance and worship of a particular interpretation?

I believe I know the answer and don't see any particular need to respond further to what I see as feeding meaningless repetition in a vacuum.

Of course I have proved evolution and billions of years false many times.
Can you give any fact that proves it at all?
No one has but give it a try.

 

[Mock Turtle]

Of course I have proved evolution and billions of years false many times.
Can you give any fact that proves it at all?
No one has but give it a try.

Only in the bubble that is your world - not in the real world fortunately.

 

[exchemist]

Of course I have proved evolution and billions of years false many times.
Can you give any fact that proves it at all?
No one has but give it a try.

I have proof of evolution: it killed my wife. One consequence of that is I do not take particularly kindly to trolls peddling lies about the subject, long after their errors have been explained to them. Evolution is also obviously all around us in the changes to the Covid virus, the development of bacterial resistance to antibiotics and the resistance of populations of animals and plants to various diseases. Only a fool, or a liar-for-Jesus, I suppose, would attempt to deny it.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Of course I have proved evolution and billions of years false many times.
Can you give any fact that proves it at all?
No one has but give it a try.

You just defeated yourself.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

You just defeated yourself.

Where?
I have proved evolution and billions of years false many times.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Unlikely is a word also. And, I might say, not only is there no proof, but really no evidence scientific or otherwise that the beginning of life and then evolution by unlikely chance actually happened.

Especially not if you ignore the mountains of evidence.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

The evidence is life and the beauty around us.

How is that evidence for a god?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

They are all different evidences that disprove evolution and billions of years

Every single one of them was a PRATT so common that they are all listed on the index to creationist claims website.
In fact, several of them were even so bad that creationist organizations themselves list them on their websites as "arguments you shouldn't use" because they are so idiotic and easy to refute.

 

[Secret Chief]

25% of US citizens have chosen to convince themselves the last presidential election was stolen

"A large majority of caucus-goers in Iowa told CBS they believed Mr Trump was the actual winner of the 2020 presidential election - a number that increased to 90% among Trump supporters."

- Iowa caucuses: What Trump's dominant win means for his rivals

 

[exchemist]

"A large majority of caucus-goers in Iowa told CBS they believed Mr Trump was the actual winner of the 2020 presidential election - a number that increased to 90% among Trump supporters."

- Iowa caucuses: What Trump's dominant win means for his rivals

Well, once 30% or so lose faith in fair elections, the fairness of the justice system and the broad accuracy of the main media, your democracy has pretty well gone. What will these people place their faith in instead? A Leader. That’s the plan, by the look of things.