Replies

<< It's not that I am calling you a liar. >>

Of course not. You just said I was dishonest. BIIIIG difference -- sure there is. LOL! Like I said -- I am used to treatment like this from creationists who themselves are afraid to look at the evidence. No biggie. You call me dishonest -- and I call you ignorant of the facts. One of us actually has some evidence for his statement.

<< You are simply deceived by knowledge. >>

Deceived by knowledge. And you, I take it, are enlightened by ignorance?

<< The transitional fossils if they existed should clearly show formation of one type of animal into another. For instance, fins turning into legs, long ape arms turning into shorter human arms, etc... >>

Repeating a claim is not evidence for the claim. Once again -- you need to learn that this is one of the stupidest claims you could choose to make against evolution. It's nothing but a straw man of creationist "design" -- heh-heh. So am I to take it that you didn't bother to read any of those articles I linked to? Too bad. If you had -- you might not believe them, but at least you would have a chance of understanding what it is you are refusing to believe.

<< If evolution were true it would be so clear there would be no debate. >>

There is no REAL debate among scientists concerning whether or not evolution is a solid, well-supported explanation of the evidence. There is no alternative explanation that even comes close. I ask you again -- and I will keep asking you -- to read up on the actual scientific literature and see the evidence, instead of just continuing to repeat the creationist mantra. Repeating your denials does not make them any more persuasive. Only evidence and logic are persuasive -- and you have given neither. I have handed you enough to get you started on educating yourself about what evolution really does say -- instead of that ridiculous straw man you have chosen to continue repeating.

<< And your number of 99% of scientists believeing in TOE is just taken out of your hat. You don't know that at all. >>

I said 99% of BIOLOGISTS. Among other scientists the percentage is at least in the 90s. There is no debate. There is no controversy. Besides -- I also said that they could be wrong. But to show them they are wrong, you will need more than this stupid "transitional" straw man argument and accusations against their honesty and attitude toward religion. You will need actual evidence.

There is no logical alternative at this point. There is nothing else out there that can explain all the evidence the way evolution does. If you can come up with a better explanation, then your theory will win the day, and you will be world famous. But your alternative will have to deal with the real evidence -- and not be based on straw men and logical fallacies.

<< What about the thousands or at least hundreds of scientists that can explain the falsity of evolution alot better than I? >>

A few hundred out of hundreds of thousands -- and most of those few hundred are NOT biologists. You do the math and then tell me my numbers are wrong! Hahahaha!

Look -- there are people who are better arguers than both of us are -- on both sides. So what? It's not how well you can argue your point -- it's how well your argument actually fits the evidence that counts. The anti-evolution arguments are built entirely of distortions, mischaracterizations, and outright lies. They are based on religious objections, and often, those objections are deceitfully hidden. I challenge you, again, to do some reading in real science for a while -- even if it is just to balance out your research.

As long as you keep repeating your straw men and your false accusations that have nothing to do with the issue -- I will keep repeating this simple logic: You are not ready to refute an idea until and unless you understand that idea well enough to avoid misstating what it really says. So far -- you have failed utterly in your attempts to show any problems with evolution.

There are some unanswered questions, you know. There are some problems that have eluded science, so far. But you haven't even bothered to understand the theory, so that you know what those problems really are. You are content to just keep repeating your straw man -- in defiance of the evidence. And you have refused, so far, to educate yourself so that you can learn to stop making such a blunder. There's nothing more I can do than to point you to some evidence -- but I can't make you read it and understand it.

<< I really believe something has happened to you to make you angry towards religion or God that makes you cling to bad knowledge in your head. >>

There you go, again, with the stupid personal accusations, instead of evidence and logic. The fact is that you know nothing about me or my religious ideas, or what I think of "God." Nothing. But personal accusations serve to change the subject from your lack of understanding of the subject, and you seem too willing to avoid that subject, apart from repeating your straw man arguments.

I have no anger against religion -- or against any god or gods. Well -- I'm not particularly fond of Allah -- but beyond that -- I'm cool with most of the rest of them. There are some religions that I don't like at all -- such as Islam -- and some I could just as well do without -- such as Scientology and Christian Science -- but overall, I think religion, particularly Christianity -- well, most of it -- is a good thing.

But the truth is that this has nothing at all to do with what we are talking about. Evolution is not about religion or God. Even if it WERE true that I have "anger" toward "religion" and "God" -- that does not change the evidence. It doesn't diminish the scientific support for evolution one bit. It doesn't help you learn to stop using straw man argument and pitiful attempts at psychological diagnosis from a distance. Even if I hated all gods and all religion with a white-hot passion -- that STILL would have nothing to do with the evidence for evolution.

The evidence, Fabian -- the evidence. The REAL evidence. Why won't you just take some time to read a small bit of the real evidence? Read why evolutionary biologists accept the evidence we have; read how they interpret it; read about how much evidence there really is. Read about the experiments, the discoveries, the mistakes. And PLEASE -- read some good material on transitional fossils, for Pete's sake!

<< I have anger too,not to be a hypocrite, it's just that I have looked at both sides and clearly evolution falls for lack of evidence. >>

I don't believe you. Oh, I believe you when you say you have anger. But I don't care. Your anger is not evidence for or against anything. But I do not believe your claim that you have looked at both sides. You may believe you have -- but it's clear from your arguments that you have not looked at evolution. Instead, you have been gazing intently at the creationist straw man of evolution -- but when you beat up that straw man, you are not even touching the real thing.

Repeating a stupid straw man gives evidence that you really have not looked at evolution. If you really had -- you would not be using that straw man. Until you decide to bite the bullet and study the real thing -- not only are you not ready to make an informed decision concerning its validity -- you are not ready to make any argument against it -- and you are not able to avoid foolish arguments that are clearly false.

<< Have you ever thought of the fact that if we were evolving to better humans why the mass murder and suffering caused by one and other continues? >>

Have you ever thought of the fact that "evolving to better humans" has nothing to do with the theory of evolution? This is just another example of your lack of understanding of the theory you propose to argue against. It is just more evidence that you have NOT really looked at "both sides" as you claim. The fact that you consider this nonsense statement an actual argument against evolution is just more evidence of your complete ignorance of the subject you presume to refute.

PLEASE -- do some reading in the scientific literature. It is sure to help. It certainly can't hurt. PLEASE. Then maybe you will be able to avoid these embarrassing statements. Maybe. Consider me dishonest. Consider me angry. Hey -- consider me perverted and ugly. I don't care. Just do SOMETHING to clear up this ignorance you have concerning the subject matter at hand, before you embarrass yourself further with yet more straw men, non sequiturs, and other fallacies.

And last -- how about answering my questions? What IS evolution? What evidence do biologists point to in support of it? What predictions does it make? How can it be falsified? When you can answer those questions knowledgeably -- THEN and ONLY THEN will you be ready to try to refute it.