Again if you screwed up fools show me your evidence. The only thing you manage to do is further discredit yourselfs by providing claims, not proff. Plus les ya fag you never hit a nerve spot, again it was the fault of the editing syste (or lack thereof). Other wise one post would have been awaiting you pussy. Plus

Blah blah blah. You’re just wasting your breath here.

As is all your previous posts for THEY PROVE NOTHING! The only thing they do is apeal to the already biased minds of the others on this forum.

Their response to such irrefutable evidence everytime is to stick their fingers in their ears and shout goddidit, goddidit, goddidit godiditLALALALALALalalala.

YOU HIPPOCRITS! YOU DO THE SAME! show me this palientoligical evidence why dont you. SHOW ME SOMETHING YOU PATHETIC PRICKS THAT ISN’T JUST ON THE SAME LEVEL OF ARGUMENTATION AS A BUNCH OF SCHOOL CHILDREN YELLING NAMES AT EACH OTHER PRETENDING TO BE ALL KNOWING AND ALL PERCIEVING.
How do you explain fossilised human bones which belonged to 18 foot tall humans? or mega fuana? Wheres your meterite that hit the earth, lost it? And if where evolving then how do you explain the degredation of species? How do you explain superior lifeforms in the fossil records?
“LALALABALBLABALKALABLABALALALAL, DARWINS RIGHT, YOUR WRONG, MAJORITY ROLES SO THAT WHO WE’LL APEAL TO WHEN WE ARGUE! BLALBLABLABALBALBLA!” pathetic

If there’s any doubt in anyone’s mind that this sad excuse for a commenter needs to be ignored I can’t imagine why.

Please don’t reduce yourself to his level by engaging him. There’s nothing you can say that will make sense to him. Absolutly nothing! Eventually he’ll wander off. Just let him go, please!

And here we have Dude; yet another classic example of how Jesus’ message of love changed someone from an obnoxious asshole into a peace filled and tolerant individual. It’s a miracle!

Shoot, I asked you to present some scientific evidence not insults. GIVE ME SOME. You should talk Les my I’d come in for second place if it were a competition between you and me about being arrogant. Plus I never cliamed to be Jesus, just someone who values the truth and doesn’t eat everything the media feeds me. As for you brock your suggestion is just ignorance, sticking your fingers in your ears and yelling? Its a sad sight to see people believe everything there told by ruling authority, such an attitude will be the downfall of all of us.

Typical trolling behavior; throw insults and then accuse others of being insulting.  Let’s take a look at Dude’s last several posts, leaving in only the insults:

You people are full of it
Damn you evolutionists are pathetic,
a F&^$#@% retard
You fools, the illuminati is controled by the pope. Stuff Dan Brown he knows NOTHING!!!!!!
your precious fake little world.
You were probably stonned
You sad little bogan, again,
panzy agures
Damn your a retard.
You couldn’t prove shit!
Your the idiot, a complete hipocrit,
baised minds of your retard brain washed little freinds
ignorant hipocrite,
an IQ of around 38.
you bunch of arragant, ignorant, biased, opinionated fools
Damn you people are the nut bags,
Again pissy little hipocrit.
you screwed up fools show me your evidence.
les ya fag
pussy.
the already biased minds of the others on this forum.
YOU HIPPOCRITS!
YOU PATHETIC PRICKS
pathetic

I probably missed a few; there were so many.  I don’t know what some of them mean, though if the spelling were better perhaps my recognition would improve.

Dude (and this is the only response I will ever direct to you) forget reading about evolution.  Try Dale Carnegie’s How to Win Friends and Influence People instead.

Dud has yet to make a single specific claim.

Dud, the claims that underly the theory of evolution are well documented.  Why do you want us to repeat them here?  Is your Google function broken?

If you really want to understand the theory of evolution, then you have a LOT of reading to do.  A good place to start would be any introductory Biology textbook or, if you want on-line sources, Talk Origins.

For you to ask us to ‘prove’ evolution is essentially like saying “reproduce, right here and now, the last 130 years worth of research on paleontology, geology, and genetics.”

If you have a specific bone to pick with a specific claim, then spell it out.

So far, your argument consists of ‘Nuh Uh.  No You’re the Doody-head!”

By the way, referring to the source of the Big Bang as a ‘molecule’ is, well, ridiculous.  Do you know what a molecule is?  Do you know what a singularity is?  Do you know why referring to a singularity as a ‘molecule’ is, well, . . .  nevermind. 

Do you know that evolution and cosmology are two separate disciplines?
Do you know that evolution and the study of the origins of life are two different disciplines?

What other types of radiologic dating are there, besides Carbon 14 dating?  Why would we use other types of dating? 

Why is the vitamin C pseudogene in humans and multiple other species of apes ‘broken’ in the same location?  Why does the ‘broken’ section of the pseudogene look like a ‘mirror-image’ of the section of the gene that is right next to it?

What are the different types of mutations?  ie: what’s the difference between a ‘point mutation’ and a transcription error?  (Hint.  This has a bearing on your ability to understand the Vitamin C pseudogene question).  Which type of mutation is most likely to result in genetic changes that create distinct morphological changes?

What is cellular differentiation, and at what point does it occur?

What causes point mutations?  What causes transcription errors?  How common/likely is mutation of the human genetic code within one generation (of one family)?

How many different types of speciation are there?  (Not how many species are there, how many different ways are there for speciation to occur.)

What do we mean by ‘reproductive isolation?’

What is ‘junk dna?’

What is selection pressure?

Why is it an error to refer to the results of selection pressures as the ‘goal’ or the ‘intent’ of the evolutionary process?

Is evolution ‘random?’

These are basic questions that you should be able to answer Dud, if you really want to debate the validity of evolution as a theory.

When you know the answers to these questions, you might be worth talking to.

As it is, you referred to the initial singularity of the Big Bang as a ‘molecule.’ Like Baugh, you hardly inspire confidence in your competence to discuss actual science.

Dr Baugh’s show is entertaining and the range of responses proves it.  However off the wall it may seem, advocating murder, exile or hatred for Dr Baughs’s point of view (and TBN viewers), is a bit irrational if not evil.  If anything, I welcome the opposite view, it’s challenging to respond in a scientific, rational way and any such response is refreshing.  Irrational responses shows that that person is angry and resentful for living a insiginificant, purposeless life.  Perhaps this is why anyone would so readily accept decendence from apes and fail to test the theory thoroughly.

Irrational responses shows that that person is angry and resentful for living a insiginificant, purposeless life.  Perhaps this is why anyone would so readily accept decendence from apes and fail to test the theory thoroughly.

Thanks, WD- I was wondering why my life is insignificant and purposeless, and now I know.

Darwin has stolen my soul
I’m cowering down in my hole
ain’t got no Lord
evo-devo’s my sword
but that won’t convert me no troll

Irrational responses shows that that person is angry and resentful for living a insiginificant, purposeless life.

I’d like to point out that creationism is an irrational response to modern science. Can I therefore conclude that creationists are angry and live an otherwise insignificant and purposeless life?

Oh man, nowiser, I could only answer about half of those questions.

How am I doing then?

I’d like to point out that creationism is an irrational response to modern science.

I would say, rather, that it’s an uneducated response, elwed.  If you don’t understand evolution, and you’re too lazy to try, it could be construed as being “rational” to embrace creationism and the handy-dandy one-easy-to-remember-answer-for-every-hard-question: Goddidit.  Why bother learning anything about biology, when the likes of Carl Baugh, Ken Ham, and Jack Chick are fending off the evilutionists for you?

I would say, rather, that it’s an uneducated response

Nah, for the most part it’s willful ignorance - close enough to being irrational.

If you’re lazy, then being willfully ignorant is rational, because it successfully saves you from unwanted exertion.  At least until the buttrocket goes off…

Zilch, don’t forget about the frame of reference. A juicy rationalization of Biblical proportions (purportions?) is entirely compatible with irrationality as seen from an outside vantage point.

Having said that, now that you’ve thrown buttrockets into the fray, I have to purge some visual images I’d rather not have

Holy Cow Shite!!!!!

Here I was thinking I was the only one that found that Dr Carl Baugh show on the Jesus channel hilarious. It’s just laugh out ridiculous.

I was watching it the other day and he had this quack saying because of the orbits of the gas giants in our solar system proves God created us, the universe and everything else. The quack lost me when he pronounced uranus as “your anus,” instead “ your a nes.”

has everyone finished with their moans, accuses and answerless so-called “proof-that-doesn’t-need-to-be-proved”? well then....

enlighten me! [sarcasm]Tell us, O great Evolutionists of the theory-that’s-not-a-theory[/sarcasm], since you seem to know it all....

where DID life come from, and how DID the Universe appear? I don’t have all day you know.

Well, you’re going to need all day, and then some, Gaz.  If you’re accustomed to accepting “Goddidit” as an answer, you’ll find biology (because it is a reflection of the complexity of the real world rather than a compilation of some sheepherder’s imagination) isn’t bite-sized.

Just to help you narrow your search a bit (as if I thought you were really searching), evolution has nothing to do with how life began, or how the universe began.  It is an explanation of species diversity.  Those other two topics are abiogenesis and cosmology, respectively.

I can’t think of any reason to wear my fingers to the bone typing answers to you when it’s already been done.  Just make some coffee, get comfortable, clear your calendar, and click on the link above.  Take your time and work through the bibliography while you’re at it.

evolution has nothing to do with how life began

1st of all, where the heck did THAT come from? I never even mentioned Evolution - apart from using the term loosely to describe what you ‘believe’ in.

ok then, let’s talk specifics. Time is very short for me at the moment, so I’ll leave you with a few things to ponder…

instead of pretending we were there at the beginning of the Universe, let’s begin with some very simple questions…

-how does a caterpillar turn into a butterfly?

-how is it, that every single human has completely unique thumb[print], hand["], eye, tongue["], DNA, voiceprint, heart beat, and we even all have a unique SMELL? [not including all the animals]

-if ‘Evolution’ - however you want to define it - is so solid and easily provable, then how come every time scientists think they have come up with evidence, they find that they have to re-think the entire thing over and over again [thinking they found life on Mars for example… that all went quiet after they found out they were wrong. that was the only thing that came up in my head for the mo; there’s just TOO MANY examples of failed proof to think about]

DOF, you’re a better person than I am. I’ve given up on responding to anyone who isn’t willing to engage me in open, honest, and reasoned debate. I just got sick of people asking the same damn questions all the time.

I think we should make an SEB list of all the dumb things people have said/asked/demanded of us, starting with the brilliant “If mankind came from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?”

Gaz: enlighten me! [sarcasm]Tell us, O great Evolutionists of the theory-that’s-not-a-theory[/sarcasm]

Who is claiming that evolution isn’t a theory? Certainly not evolutionists, who recognize that it is every bit as much a theory as gravity is(would you like to be enlightened on that one as well, Gaz?). I’ll tell you what’s not a proper theory--Intelligent Design.

As for your query concerning how life began, I don’t know, and honestly I don’t really care. It doesn’t concern me in the least. I do know that we humans, along with other primates, evolved from a common ancestor. As for the Universe’s origin, the
Big Bang theory is currently one of the most accepted cosmological explanations.

Maybe it was when you said,

enlighten me! [sarcasm]Tell us, O great Evolutionists of the theory-that’s-not-a-theory[/sarcasm], since you seem to know it all....

where DID life come from, and how DID the Universe appear?

.

I could be wrong. I don’t know; I’m not a doctor.

You can read about catterpiller/butterfly metamorphosis, here, and here.

The thumb/voice/eye thing is there because that’s something evolution would predict. This of course ignores the fact that the whorls on hands and feet help us grip things, that the veins in the body follow a somewhat loose pattern, that the voice can be altered by any number of internal and external pressures, and that a lifetime of wear will alter the tongue in a unique way (much like a shoe imprints on the specific posture of the wearer).

Now, if you’ll excuse me, I’ve got band practice.

Looks like Gaz responded while I was constructing my reply to her/him.

if ‘Evolution’ - however you want to define it - is so solid and easily provable, then how come every time scientists think they have come up with evidence, they find that they have to re-think the entire thing over and over again [thinking they found life on Mars for example… that all went quiet after they found out they were wrong. that was the only thing that came up in my head for the mo; there’s just TOO MANY examples of failed proof to think about]

Precisely because the evidence for evolution is so overwhelming. You’re right that scientists do re-work their theories again and again, and in the case of evolution, the support for its veracity manifests itself nearly every time.

Bachalon: I think we should make an SEB list of all the dumb things people have said/asked/demanded of us, starting with the brilliant “If mankind came from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?�?

That’s pretty much what the Talk Origins FAQ is, but Gaz isn’t going to read it.  You’re right I shouldn’t even bother.  I’m good at walking into sucker-punches that way.

Pompous Gaz: Time is very short for me at the moment, so I’ll leave you with a few things to ponder…

Here’s one for you, Gaz… did your great-great-great-grandparents ever have sex?  How do you know?  Were you there, or is it just a reasonable conjecture from the evidence?

Gaz,

When has anyone had to completely rethink evolutionary theory.  The only substantial debate over the fundamentals of evolutionary theory is between people who support natural selection as the primary mechanism behind evolution and those who suggest that drift is more likely to be the result of the majority of traits.  Furthermore, both sides agree that natural selection and drift both occur the question is just which has more influence.

Furthermore, what does metamorphisis or variation have to do with questions about the veracity of evolutionary theory?

On BBC1 on Sunday mornings is a programme called ‘The Heaven and Earth show’ which is a ‘belief magazine’ programme, not just Christianity, but anything, including crystals and stuff.

Last week, following the Church of England’s announcement that Genesis isn’t a historical document, they had one of those ‘balanced discussions’ these programmes do. It had a C of E rep, Dr Steve Jones, and an Answers in Genesis front man.  Poor old Dr J- you could see in his body language “I have to reply to ‘prove God didn’t do it’- how do I pack 130 years of research into a 30 second answer?�?  Yes, unfortunately a virulent meme- AiG- has reached these shores.  Luckily, at the moment any time there is a sniff that a school tries to teach creationism they tend to get hung out to dry by the main TV news.

Main point is- GAZ- there is no way we can present all the reasoning behind Evolution.  Let me try and explain this way.

I assume that you are fairly happy with gravity.  This is only a theory, as we have not yet managed to test every piece of matter in the universe.  Until we do we can not be 100% sure that it fits every circumstance.  However, as it is only a theory, please explain the reason why we do not fly off the planet under centrifugal force.  Please trace development through Newton’s Principia, via Einstein’s General and Special theories, finishing with why although late 20th century physicists have shown flaws in these, they still predict the motion of bodies accurately.  You should also reconcile quantum mechanics with general relativity.

If you are unable to do this I must conclude that we all stay on the surface due to the will of his Noodleness.

Ramen.