Republicans Belief in Evolution plummets

#301
#301
Vol8188 said:
I don't disagree in anyway with macro evolution. I can simply see how it is harder for some to believe.
Click to expand...

You defined your use of "evolution" in your second post-- as macro-evolution. There seems to be a change of stance when the equivocation is noted and disallowed.
 
#303
#303
Vol8188 said:
I apologize for being reasonable. I won't let it happen again, sir.
Click to expand...

How is it reasonable to make a point by equivocating, press the equivocation, deny that you meant what you defined in your equivocation, then follow that up with a strawman argument?

That is reasonable to you?
 
#305
#305
Orange_Crush said:
How is it reasonable to make a point by equivocating, press the equivocation, deny that you meant what you defined in your equivocation, then follow that up with a strawman argument?

That is reasonable to you?
Click to expand...

To deny micro evolution is insane. I believe that small change over time leads to much larger change. I think horses and donkeys are a great example of that. Over a long enough time frame they will probably be incapable of reproduction all together.

Yet I am reasonable enough to see how others could disagree with macro evolution.
 
#309
#309
Vol8188 said:
To deny micro evolution is insane. I believe that small change over time leads to much larger change. I think horses and donkeys are a great example of that. Over a long enough time frame they will probably be incapable of reproduction all together.

Yet I am reasonable enough to see how others could disagree with macro evolution.
Click to expand...

Shewww. Finally.

Agreed. Denying testable, repeatable, observational science would be insane.

Becoming incapable (losing the ability) of reproduction is a change, but it doesn't account for the existance of the information in the first place. That is devolution. It's like atrophy or vestigial organs. The loss of funcition doesn't account for function in the first place. That is just practical truth. If you lost your hearing, it is a change, but it is certainly not an increase. It might even be beneficial if you lived in an environment with unbearable noise.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#314
#314
Orange_Crush said:
That's a very interesting point. Why is incest 'bad'?
Click to expand...

That's going to derail the thread. If you'd like to debate this in greater detail, I'm sure you'll find incest brought up in every thread about homosexuality along with bestiality.

However, I don't deem anything morally wrong with incest, despite finding the act itself repulsive. I support anyone's right to engage in it because it doesn't affect me and mine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#315
#315
Septic said:
Wow, it must have taken you a while to dig up that nugget. (hogfarmer.com) Are you a hog farmer?

Like evolution - germ theory, heliocentric solar system theory & atomic theory are all just theory's - 'the general theory's are confirmed by all available evidence so that it consistent with and can predict new and unobserved phenomena.

Theory's aren't worth much if they can correctly predict all known evidence.'

Unless you have contradictory peer reviewed evidence, the theory of evolution should be regarded as fact. If you (or anyone) can provide evidence to the contrary, I'll gladly change my position. We may disagree on the origin of life but the mountains of evidence supporting evolution is irrefutable.
Click to expand...

This is just utter nonsense. Irrefutable? I hope you are joking. If the evidence for evolution being fact was irrefutable, then why are there scientists who totally disagree with the theory? Also there are mountains of evidence that refutes evolution. Of course for that evidence to be taken seriously requires someone examine it with an open mind.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#316
#316
BigOrangeTrain said:
This is just utter nonsense. Irrefutable? I hope you are joking. If the evidence for evolution being fact was irrefutable, then why are there scientists who totally disagree with the theory? Also there are mountains of evidence that refutes evolution. Of course for that evidence to be taken seriously requires someone examine it with an open mind.
Click to expand...

I provided a link to contradictory peer reviewed research. Im sure it's been given the most sincere and careful consideration........not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#317
#317
BigOrangeTrain said:
This is just utter nonsense. Irrefutable? I hope you are joking. If the evidence for evolution being fact was irrefutable, then why are there scientists who totally disagree with the theory? Also there are mountains of evidence that refutes evolution. Of course for that evidence to be taken seriously requires someone examine it with an open mind.
Click to expand...

I find the appendix..or coccyx to be pretty much irrefutable evidence of human evolution.
 
Last edited:
#318
#318
FLVOL_79 said:
I find the appendix..or coccyx to be pretty much refutable evidence of human evolution.
Click to expand...

Really?
How does the loss of function account for function in the first place?
This is actually the opposite of what is NECESSARY for Darwinism. But I'm sure you've given it serious critical thought and not just taken on faith what you read somewhere.

Also, life without the coccyx would be pretty messy. Its where muscles attack that deal with bowel movements. Life without it would it would be sh*-*y
 
#319
#319
Roustabout said:
Really?
How does the loss of function account for function in the first place?
This is actually the opposite of what is NECESSARY for Darwinism. But I'm sure you've given it serious critical thought and not just taken on faith what you read somewhere.

Also, life without the coccyx would be pretty messy. Its where muscles attack that deal with bowel movements. Life without it would it would be sh*-*y
Click to expand...

Its the remnants of a vestigial tale when we were fish-monkey-frog squirrels.

And I am pretty sure the appendix has been hypothesized to aid in digestion of food when we were non homosapians. The functional loss of a part of the body through disuse would be called evolution..

Skin pigmentation is another example of humans evolving and adapting to their surroundings.

I'm no biology major, took a few courses in College to satisfy some electives.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#320
#320
FLVOL_79 said:
Its the remnants of a vestigial tale when we were fish-monkey-frog squirrels.

And I am pretty sure the appendix has been hypothesized to aid in digestion of food when we were non homosapians. The functional loss of a part of the body through disuse would be called evolution..

Skin pigmentation is another example of humans evolving and adapting to their surroundings.

I'm no biology major, took a few courses in College to satisfy some electives.
Click to expand...

You will clearly learn a lot more just going to church. College just drives the liberal agenda, don't you know?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#321
#321
FLVOL_79 said:
Its the remnants of a vestigial tale when we were fish-monkey-frog squirrels.

And I am pretty sure the appendix has been hypothesized to aid in digestion of food when we were non homosapians. The functional loss of a part of the body through disuse would be called evolution..

Skin pigmentation is another example of humans evolving and adapting to their surroundings.

I'm no biology major, took a few courses in College to satisfy some electives.
Click to expand...
You sir are question begging and equivocating. Did you learn to build your worldview on fallacious reasoning in college??
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#322
#322
FLVOL_79 said:
I find the appendix..or coccyx to be pretty much refutable evidence of human evolution.
Click to expand...

I see what you did there, do you?

Roustabout said:
Really?
How does the loss of function account for function in the first place?
This is actually the opposite of what is NECESSARY for Darwinism. But I'm sure you've given it serious critical thought and not just taken on faith what you read somewhere.

Also, life without the coccyx would be pretty messy. Its where muscles attack that deal with bowel movements. Life without it would it would be sh*-*y
Click to expand...

Attacking my bowel movements would be a pretty sh***y proposition also.
 
#324
#324
I'd much rather just be a smartass than try to post anything on here with any real merit. It's much more fun and everyone eventually screws up their grammar.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#325
#325
Roustabout said:
You sir are question begging and equivocating. Did you learn to build your worldview on fallacious reasoning in college??
Click to expand...

Nah I gave up on zombie Jesus in high school and moved towards a more logical belief. I do not however belittle others belief in creationism. For all I know Old Man in the Sky snapped his fingers and the first monkey-fish-squirrel was created and this was all his plan. The science is there though to prove evolution does take place in nature, and Humans are not immune to it.

The only thing that I can think of that does not evolve is a McDonalds hamburger..

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfdg4ymCiT8[/youtube]
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top