toldailytopic "Evolutionary theory isn't about the origin of life"

[Arthur Brain]

Why did you close your case of Kleenex though you're still crying so pitifully?

In your link, you say that



If something is not about origins at all, then it is not about the origins of species. So, you're admitting that evolution is not about the origins of species.



You geniuses have no shame in flat out contradicting, out of one side of your mouth, what you just got done saying out of the other. "Evolution is about the origin of species; evolution is not about origins at all."

Even your own post quotes how evolution works "following the origin of life".

“Evolution, in fact, is not the study of origins at all.…Evolution studies the pathways and mechanisms of organic change following the origin of life.”

:doh:

Seriously, is your ego that fragile that you can't still acknowledge your basic mistake?

 

[mtwilcox]

Why do you believe in Evolution Arthur?

I mean, there is plenty of evidence against it in the fossil record and in Nature.

=M=

 

[Arthur Brain]

What you have agreed upon through popular vote is to call the cloud of pompous nonsense you call "the theory of evolution", "the theory of evolution". And, you call that vote, "science".

:freak:

You should stick to playing console games as you are obviously ignorant as to how science operates.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Why do you believe in Evolution Arthur?

I mean, there is plenty of evidence against it in the fossil record and in Nature.

=M=

Such as?

 

[7djengo7]

Even your own post quotes how evolution works "following the origin of life".

“Evolution, in fact, is not the study of origins at all.…Evolution studies the pathways and mechanisms of organic change following the origin of life.”

:doh:

Seriously, is your ego that fragile that you can't still acknowledge your basic mistake?

Arthur Brain contradicts Arthur Brain by telling us that evolution is not about origins at all, and that evolution is about origins.

 

[mtwilcox]

Such as, animals that have remained anatomically unchanged for millions of years; they have not gained any new functional anatomy: they may have changed size and color, but have never changed into a new species.

=M=

Dragon flies, coelacanth, starfish, jellyfish; every species we know modernly has a counterpart dating back millions of years in the fossil record... why do you think man changed into a new species in just 3.5 million years?

 

[Arthur Brain]

Arthur Brain contradicts Arthur Brain by telling us that evolution is not about origins at all, and that evolution is about origins.

So, your ego is that fragile then. Hopefully you'll grow up in time and learn to accept when you've dropped the ball.

Oh, well. Meantime, evolution is not about the origination of life.

 

[Cntrysner]

Scientific theories come into being because of evidence. It's really not that difficult to understand. They don't come about through some personal whim but through stringent and continual testing that supports the data. If the evidence didn't support the theory of evolution then it wouldn't have become such. The theory of gravity exists by that same token.

Scientist have a brain for sure but how did their brain become existent to develop their theoretical evidence ? What is their basis of their evidence and how did their evidence come to exist?

How does gravity exist? What token? Gravity exist by scientific evidence? You are ignorant.

What I find odd is that there's still people who are so set in their doctrinal belief systems whereby science is considered a threat to faith or belief. To rational people there's no actual dissonance between the two. Attempting to mock science from a YEC perspective is pretty ironic.

No mock of provability, just evident you still hide under a rock and have nothing to stand on.

 

[JudgeRightly]

So, your ego is that fragile then. Hopefully you'll grow up in time and learn to accept when you've dropped the ball.

Oh, well. Meantime, evolution is not about the origination of life.

:troll:

He quoted you (and UN) saying two contradictory things, and you respond by claiming his ego is fragile?

 

[Arthur Brain]

Such as, animals that have remained anatomically unchanged for millions of years; they have not gained any new functional anatomy: they may have changed size and color, but have never changed into a new species.

=M=

Dragon flies, coelacanth, starfish, jellyfish; every species we know modernly has a counterpart dating back millions of years in the fossil record... why do you think man changed into a new species in just 3.5 million years?

Why would everything need to change into a new species? I suggest you read Alate One's thread about evolution as she's better versed in explaining biological matters than I could be, as you'll no doubt see if you read it.

 

[7djengo7]

:freak:

You should stick to playing console games as you are obviously ignorant as to how science operates.

Now you're trying to outsource--to NPCs--the work of trying to answer questions you are incompetent to answer.

 

[Arthur Brain]

:troll:

He quoted you (and UN) saying two contradictory things, and you respond by claiming his ego is fragile?

What contradictory things? How species come into being is a completely separate issue as to the origination of life itself, the very premise of this thread. It's been explained over and over and over again. The theory of evolution has absolutely nothing to do with how life itself came about, period.

So there's no trolling going on here and pointing out that Djengo needs to accept this and stop digging a deeper hole is actually trying to do the guy a favour.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Scientist have a brain for sure but how did their brain become existent to develop their theoretical evidence ? What is their basis of their evidence and how did their evidence come to exist?

How does gravity exist? What token? Gravity exist by scientific evidence? You are ignorant.

No mock of provability, just evident you still hide under a rock and have nothing to stand on.

Um, yes, the theory of gravity came about because of the evidence, just like the theory of evolution. To maintain otherwise would actually be ignorant.

 

[Cntrysner]

So, your ego is that fragile then. Hopefully you'll grow up in time and learn to accept when you've dropped the ball.

Oh, well. Meantime, evolution is not about the origination of life.

You continue to make a fool of yourself until you explain your perceived origin of life.

 

[JudgeRightly]

What contradictory things? How species come into being is a completely separate issue as to the origination of life itself, the very premise of this thread. It's been explained over and over and over again. The theory of evolution has absolutely nothing to do with how life itself came about, period.

So there's no trolling going on here and pointing out that Djengo needs to accept this and stop digging a deeper hole is actually trying to do the guy a favour.

I suggest you actually pay attention to what he says in his posts, instead of just hitting reply woth quote and typing something up without reading.

Specifically, this post.

Why did you close your case of Kleenex though you're still crying so pitifully?

In your link, you say that



If something is not about origins at all, then it is not about the origins of species. So, you're admitting that evolution is not about the origins of species.



You geniuses feel no shame in flat out contradicting, out of one side of your mouth, what you just got done saying out of the other. "Evolution is about the origin of species; evolution is not about origins at all."

 

[7djengo7]

So, your ego is that fragile then. Hopefully you'll grow up in time and learn to accept when you've dropped the ball.

Oh, well. Meantime, evolution is not about the origination of life.

Whatever is not about the origination of life is not about the origination of species. So, here, you've told me, yet again, that evolution is not about the origination of species.

 

[mtwilcox]

Why would everything need to change into a new species? I suggest you read Alate One's thread about evolution as she's better versed in explaining biological matters than I could be, as you'll no doubt see if you read it.

The question I have for you is:
Does Evolution happens Fast, Slow, or Not at all?

I’m going with not at all.

Exactly; why would animals need to change?

Or, better; have animals ever changed into a new species?

As I said befor there is no evidence for the theory of evolution, but there is evidence against it.

=M=

=========================

 

[Cntrysner]

Um, yes, the theory of gravity came about because of the evidence, just like the theory of evolution. To maintain otherwise would actually be ignorant.

So you admit it's just a theory of gravity.

 

[Arthur Brain]

I suggest you actually pay attention to what he says in his posts, instead of just hitting reply woth quote and typing something up without reading.

Specifically, this post.

Then, in turn, I suggest you read the responses he's already had on the point. How life evolves and expands, including species is a completely separate issue as to how life itself came about to begin with. That is the very premise of this thread, something that Djengo was ignorantly attempting to mock. How can it be any more clear?

 

[Arthur Brain]

The question I have for you is:
Does Evolution happens Fast, Slow, or Not at all?

I’m going with not at all.

Exactly; why would animals need to change?

Or, better; have animals ever changed into a new species?

As I said befor there is no evidence for the theory of evolution, but there is evidence against it.

=M=

=========================

If there was no evidence for it, it wouldn't have become a theory. You do realize how theories come about in science?

So you admit it's just a theory of gravity.

I suggest you acquaint yourself with what a theory actually is where it comes to science.