This is the thread for everyone who does not undertand/rejects evolution

[Sornaensis]

http://Evolution.berkeley.edu <--- read the ENTIRE thing, before making silly claims and arguments please, i dislike people arguing over something they hardly understand.

[wasup]

While I don't necessarily condone shooting tons of links to people to support your claim (as opposed to summarzing the info and asking for a rebuttal) I definitly do think that it is the responsibility of a debator to understand the other side. You can't say something is wrong without knowing about it. One very, very common thing I've found is that the supposed inherent "flaws" that religious zealots find in the theory of evolution is not a flaw in the theory (because, they would have a world-famous discovery if they did indeed find a flaw in the theory of evolution), yet, it is just a flaw in their UNDERSTANDING of evolution. I KNOW this is biased, but I still think it is correct (the following). I think an atheist does not have to read the bible, but a theist should definitly read about the theory of evolution before criticizing it. Perhaps this has to do with the simplicity of either 'theories.' God made the world in X days? I don't think there is much more to understand about that. You can pretty easily debate that without knowing more about it. But saying evolution calls for much, much more in-depth study (I really don't know much, to be honest, about it) to debate against it. Mostly because people who propose the theory of evolution as truth will not want to type out 100's of pages to elaborate, clearly, they want to trunctate it. For example, an atheist might say (here I am assuming that all atheists believe in evolution, which is a pretty good assumption) "We evolved from monkeys." The "logical" rebuttal is "Then why are there still monkeys?" That is basically the inherent problem with debating evolution. To be entirely honest, from the basic statement "We evolved from monkeys," saying that to someone who knows nothing of evolution, a perfectly logical response is "why are there still monkeys." However, at this point, it is not the job of the atheist to feed a theist information. The disbeliever in evolution should really read up about it before claiming there are "flaws." I don't really know why I posted this, I just felt like ranting.

[Sornaensis]

Uhm... Do you know how long it would take to explain all of that, and my OP, and whatnot, not to mention the redundantcy of it, when i could give them the knowledge base to use. Argue with THAT, is all i'm asking. Because i find, as you say, the creationist has little knowledge, and has warped facts, so insted of it all going through me, i'd let them read what the experts have done.

[Elwood]

I see a whole lot of BS. Why would you have such a big ta-do about something that cant be proven? Theres so many flaws in evolution its a joke. Im only using science. Theres no transition species to be found. Besides what happens when a mutated animal is born? The parents kill it. Not it continues in the circle of life. Here read this instead http://www.fishdontwalk.com/

[Sornaensis]

... There are mutant people being born every day. Did you even read that? Why would people devote their LIVES to a lie? Hmm? There are many transitional fossils, infact... EVERY fossil is a transitional fossil, duh! Think about it... Ever ife form is constantly changing, so therefore every fossil is a transitional one.

[Elwood]

Um no fish make fish. Birds make birds. These "mutant children" die at young ages and dont reproduce. That web site i gave you has more facts than your Berkley BS. Wait where do you get the fact every fossil is transitional? So, do you believe in Unintelligent Design?

[skysaw]

Theres no transition species to be found. Who told you that? Here are the transitional fossils you claim do not exist: Hominin species known to science in 2002 for which cranial capacity can be estimated, plotted as boxes indicating their range of cranial capacities and range of appearance in the fossil record (as of 2005). ... and a complete discussion of these fossils here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transitional_fossil ...Next!

[Sornaensis]

^ AMEN xD.

[wasup]

I see a whole lot of BS. Why would you have such a big ta-do about something that cant be proven? Theres so many flaws in evolution its a joke. Im only using science. Theres no transition species to be found. Besides what happens when a mutated animal is born? The parents kill it. Not it continues in the circle of life. Here read this instead http://www.fishdontwalk.com/ Errr, refer to my post. Flaws found in evolution by theists are simply flaws in their understanding of evolution. Before making such claims about flaws in evolution, please learn about it first.

[skysaw]

Theres no transition species to be found. Sorry, but I have to quote this one more time. Why not admit this statement was wrong instead of flailing about with random responses. I presented proof that your statement was false, and you ignored it. You said there were no species to be found, yet there are thousands of records of them. The are on display in hundreds of museums across the world. There are photos of them, studies of them, countless archeologists who spent hour upon hour meticulously uncovering them, cleaning them, classifying them. They have been seen by tens of thousands of people and cataloged in countless journals. Unless you can speak to this point, nothing else you say rings of any truth whatsoever.

[Elwood]

Sorry, but I have to quote this one more time. Why not admit this statement was wrong instead of flailing about with random responses. I presented proof that your statement was false, and you ignored it. You said there were no species to be found, yet there are thousands of records of them. The are on display in hundreds of museums across the world. There are photos of them, studies of them, countless archeologists who spent hour upon hour meticulously uncovering them, cleaning them, classifying them. They have been seen by tens of thousands of people and cataloged in countless journals. Unless you can speak to this point, nothing else you say rings of any truth whatsoever. Im sorry what i put was incorrect, i should have wrote. "Not many (enough to matter, millions or more considering the earth is "billions of years old") transitional species have been found."

[blahaha]

I see a whole lot of BS. Why would you have such a big ta-do about something that cant be proven? Theres so many flaws in evolution its a joke. Im only using science. Theres no transition species to be found. Besides what happens when a mutated animal is born? The parents kill it. Not it continues in the circle of life. Here read this instead http://www.fishdontwalk.com/ I'm not even going to bother with reading this whole thing. They die because the change is too drastic, evolution happens over millions of years.

[Keeper]

if you dont read the whole thing, how can you be sure there isn't truth in it?

[SilverZero]

http://Evolution.berkeley.edu <--- read the ENTIRE thing, before making silly claims and arguments please, i dislike people arguing over something they hardly understand. Hmmm. . . . http://etext.virginia.edu/kjv.browse.html <--- Read the ENTIRE thing before making silly claims and arguments, please. I dislike people arguing over something they hardly understand.

[Sornaensis]

Hmmm. . . . http://etext.virginia.edu/kjv.browse.html <--- Read the ENTIRE thing before making silly claims and arguments, please. I dislike people arguing over something they hardly understand. Do you pay any attention to my posts, or are you just ignorant? I read the bible daily. LOL. Seriously, wake up. look at my location.

[SilverZero]

Do you pay any attention to my posts, or are you just ignorant? I read the bible daily. LOL. Seriously, wake up. look at my location. Yikes, I thought personal attacks were out-of-bounds. That was a link for everybody to read before participating in the argument, just like your opening post was; it wasn't an attack on you. I was simply seconding your opinion that we all familiarize ourselves with the information before debating it.

[joey11223]

Seis u read it daily, yikes, hint of belief in there:p. I haven't read it all, but we read a lot of it in RS

[Sornaensis]

Seis u read it daily, yikes, hint of belief in there:p. I haven't read it all, but we read a lot of it in RS Yes, I can't believe people honestly follow that crap!!! I just use it to make funnies about the religion .

[thegnome54]

Yikes, I thought ad hominem arguments were out-of-bounds. A personal insult is not necessarily an ad hominem. It's only ad hominem if the insult is pretending to be a rebuttal - i.e. "You're stupid, that's wrong because [argument]" is not an ad hominem. "That's wrong because you're stupid and you don't know what you're talking about" is. I'm not really sure how his comment was meant, but I just wanted to clear that up because I see that misused a lot.

[Half/Dreaming]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=t7I73DNgu...elated&search=

[SilverZero]

A personal insult is not necessarily an ad hominem. It's only ad hominem if the insult is pretending to be a rebuttal - i.e. "You're stupid, that's wrong because [argument]" is not an ad hominem. "That's wrong because you're stupid and you don't know what you're talking about" is. I'm not really sure how his comment was meant, but I just wanted to clear that up because I see that misused a lot. You're right, I read too fast and typed on my way out the door. I fixed it, for the ages. My point was, there are more appropriate ways of saying things like "or are you just ignorant?" such that you make your point without resorting to insults.

[wendylove]

Believe it or not, not only black people live in africa, now YOUR being racist. Hey, wait a minaute you said the incorrect word, you should have said African african, so it not confused with African American. Now who's the racist Seismosaur. See when you say black people you should really say African African. However I don't know what you call a white person from america who was born and live in africa.

[Sornaensis]

Hey, wait a minaute you said the incorrect word, you should have said African african, so it not confused with African American. Now who's the racist Seismosaur. See when you say you should really say African African. However I don't know what you call a white person from america who was born and live in africa. ...I wasn't refering to nationality.. Color... Er.. !!!!