Request to intelligent freepers that beleive in evolution - post the name of the species

self ^ | 2004/02/13 | self

[Truth666]

On a previous thread I explained how basically the evolution lie is implanted in the braines the masses : cheap trick behind the most devasting lie in the history of mankind

I'm addressing in this thread freepers with solid knowledge about the flora and fauna that has been documented since photography / film exist. So botanists, zoologists or simply nature interested people that believe in evolution, I have a request to you :

- please post the name of the species and if you have the time a short explanation of why that species would be the best example to illustrate evolution.

[Dimensio]

No, I haven't. God did, in His Bible.

No, you believe that an entity known as "God" said this in "His Bible". Your assertions do not amount to fact.

If you God/Bible haters could only see how foolish and pathetic you look to anyone whose eyes are not scaled over with the pus of sin, you would be ashamed for publicly behaving as you do.

This is not a reasoned argument. This is a pathetic attempt to tar anyone who does not believe as you do so that you can dismiss their arguments without actually addressing them. This is a sign of your intellectual weakness.

That you cannot see this, or feel any shame for the public ignorance of your stated positions, is itself both telling and quite sad.

Not nearly as telling or sad as the fact that your only response to valid arguments is insults. Rather than explain what is wrong with evolution theory, you call names anyone who dares defend it.

[Gargantua]

"Your moving of the goalposts is typical of creationist arguments."

Yes, of course. There, there now.

Creationists witness their faith in the Book of Genesis, a writing which has not changed for thousands of years... you blithering imbecile.

it is the Darwinists who have gad to keep changing the rules every time a new "scientific" discovery craps on their preous belief-structure.

Keep up the Evil One's work, blockheads. You'll be real well paid in the end

[Gargantua]

Why post here at all if you just wish to mislabel the posters and twist the facts?

[Shryke]

you imbecile

Keep up the Evil One's work, blockheads.

Great, another Creationist flaunting his Christian temperment. You should be ashamed of yourself.

[Dimensio]

Creationists witness their faith in the Book of Genesis, a writing which has not changed for thousands of years.

This doesn't change the fact that you've moved goalposts.

you blithering imbecile

You must feel like your arguments are really weak and without merit if you feel the need to sling insults so casually. What makes you so angry?

it is the Darwinists who have gad to keep changing the rules every time a new "scientific" discovery craps on their preous belief-structure.

Of course, it's a weakness of science (ALL science, not just evolution) to adjust when new facts are discovered. It would be much better if scientists just ignored facts that didn't perfectly fit with their worldview, as you have done.

Keep up the Evil One's work, blockheads. You'll be real well paid in the end

More insults, more signs that you've not a single bit of intellectual honesty within you.

[Shryke]

And who have I labeled at all? You as a creationist? Sorry, if I am wrong, correct me. And what facts have I presented? None, just evidence or Evolution. Next? Care to answer my questions posted to you?

[Modernman]

Creationists witness their faith in the Book of Genesis, a writing which has not changed for thousands of years... you blithering imbecile.

So what? There is no mechanism in place for changing any part of the Bible, AFAIK. There is no peer review process nor a committee of theologians tasked with making changes as new evidence comes to light. So, it's disengenious of you to claim that the fact the Bible has not changed is evidence of anything other than the fact that THERE IS NO WAY TO CHANGE IT.

And calling me an imbecile? Very instructive as to your rhetorical capabilties.

it is the Darwinists who have gad to keep changing the rules every time a new "scientific" discovery craps on their preous belief-structure.

If a scientist claims that ANY theory is written in stone and is not subject to change as our understanding improves, that scientist is either a fool or a liar. A theory is meant to explain something based on the available evidence. As the available evidence changes, so must the theory. Why do you consider this to be a problem? Real scientists are not so arrogant as to claim that we know everything there is to know about ANYTHING. Every theory, from gravity to relativety, has undergone changes as we learn more about how the universe works.

Keep up the Evil One's work, blockheads. You'll be real well paid in the end

God lord, man, you're going off the rails here. Anyone who accepts the theory of evolution is working for Satan? Is your faith so weak that it can be compromised by the existence of one little scientific theory?

[Truth666]

"So how do you characterize leg bones that are not used as part of a leg, as in the snake example?"
Thanks for dropping "vestigial" but you still use "legs" ...
Sure they are used. You just don't know how.
The list of "vestigial" organs has been shrinking with every year ....

[Truth666]

These are bones that evolution "scientists" call pelvic and femur to implant in the brains of students that they are remnants of legs.

[Truth666]

Galapagos finches: survival of variations and development into divergent groups was not caused by isolation but allowed by lack of competition.
Ok, let's extend item 1 in the list with that "cause".

[Dimensio]

These are bones that evolution "scientists" call pelvic and femur to implant in the brains of students that they are remnants of legs.

This is not a refutation. This is not even an argument.

Do you actually have a refutation to the presented evidence for vestigal bone structures?

[Truth666]

Humans gaining height: seems to be strictly a function of attaining optimal growth under better environmental circumstances. At this point I have to reveal what I planned :
- 1: collect the list of items suggested by intelligent freepers, as I requested
- 2: debunk each item in the list (currently 4 items).
Thanks for having done already point 2.2.

[Shryke]

These are bones that evolution "scientists" call pelvic and femur to implant in the brains of students that they are remnants of legs.

Impressive. This is the exact evidence you asked for, and when presented it, deny it for no reason other than you want to. You should have entitled this RIDICULOUS exercise:

"I Deny Self-Evident Facts", or "The Sky is Green".

When you plainly ignore any evidence, even self-evident evidence, you shouldn't bother asking for it in the first place - it's dishonest. Or perhaps I am wrong? Tell me, is there any type of evidence, outside of G-d himself bonking you on the head and saying "I am behind evolution", that would convince you evolution may occur? Please answer me that one question.

[knarf]

- 1: collect the list of items suggested by intelligent freepers, as I requested
- 2: debunk each item in the list (currently 4 items).

Start a new thread and request a vote ...
Creation = C
Evolution = E

Vote for one, no commentary and add 'em up.

Really ... isn't that the main point anyway?

[Truth666]

"Dogs (and all other domesticated animals): there may be speciation in the future but generally, since the breeding is artificial, it would not be considered natural evolution."
Even if it's artificial, if WOLVES were the ancestors of CHIHUAHUAS I would have to agree with the Natural History Museum in London, who says that breeding of dogs shows evolution.
So it will be kept in the list for later debunking.

[jennyp]

Evidence is not proof, it is just evidence. Any "evidence" which contradicts the Bible is proof only of the satanic origin of that evidence.

Remember that.

Evidence is not proof, it is just evidence. Any "evidence" which contradicts the holy Qur'an is proof only of the satanic origin of that evidence.

Remember that.

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

I think what the author is asking for is an example of something that is clearly in the process of evolutionary change.

How is this possible when the process can take millions of years and our frame of reference is a 70 year lifetime that conditions us to be unable to comprehend such geologic timescales?

Natural selection/evolution will be proven when a serious experiment is undertaken and completed in another couple million years. Then we'll have the proof. Until then...

[Truth666]

As I already mentioned twice in this thread, that point is not what I mean with my request

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1077309/posts?q=1&&page=1#41

[Truth666]

The thread was moved to chat so the link now is :
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1077309/posts#41

[Ditter]

Has he answered everyone except me? If he has then I am the winner. LOL