Page 1 of 36 12345678910111213141516171819202122232425 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 706

Thread: If you don't believe in evolution, you also can't believe in...

  1. #1
    Unnecessary Surgeon Dr Lou Natic's Avatar
    Posts
    5,571

    If you don't believe in evolution, you also can't believe in...

    If you don't believe in evolution, than you are hearby forbidden from using the word "hereditary".
    Now I understand that most people who don't believe in evolution couldn't pronounce that word anyway, so I will make it more specific, you are not allowed to acknowledge the science behind black people having black children, in doing so you are acknowledging evolution, you must assume it is a coincidence that black people have black children, in fact you can't acknowledge that people birth children at all.

    You don't believe in the sperm joining wih the egg, god is the creator, you were created by god, sex is what evil people do, it does not produce babies, god creates babies in a factory in the sky.
    Perhaps black people have black children because god makes black children for them, ok for you the word hereditary refers to the way god customizes children to what will suit parents, remember you can't accept the passing on of genes as something that happens. This is evolution, what I'm basically saying is you can only have on or the other, if you don't believe in evolution, you can't believe in all the things associated with evolution.
    Thats like saying you believe in 2, but you don't belive in 2 + 2 = 4. If you believe that 2 exists you have to believe 2 plus 2 equals 4, right?
    I mean I can prove it right now if you don't, two dots; .. another 2; .. we're agreed so far right? place them together= .... Thats 4 dots, end of story, case closed.

    If you believe that sex creates babies, and you believe that the traits of the parents are passed onto the babies, if you believe in individuals, that people are different from one another and that different people produce different babies, you believe in evolution, bottom line. You can't go that far and back out, I am here by declaring such an act as illegal, or at least immoral or something(obviously its irritatingly ignorant but thats not enough anymore).

    If you believe god created all, you can't believe in anything appearing by way of evolution (ie being birthed out of a female organism). You believe in creation, that means you believe things are created, not concieved, concieved is evolution, giving birth is evolution, sex creating babies is evolution.

    You don't believe in these things, pregnant women are just lazy and fat, if a baby falls out of their vagina they must have put it in their themselves to try to trick theists into going over to the dark side.
    The baby was not a product of evolution, you don't believe in evolution, obviously it was created by god and handed down to its parents.

    Consistency is all I ask, you believe in creationism, you stick with it and try to live day by day believing in that. If you don't see hands coming out of the clouds delivering babies to newlyweds but you do see spiders laying eggs, recognise that you are indeed witnessing evolution.
    If you do see giant god hands coming out of the sky with new creations, maybe planting a tree here and there and delivering puppies to your female dog at home, then by all means believe in creationism, untill then though I don't see why you would or how you could.

  2. #2
    Registered Senior Member
    Posts
    219
    A fat man frmo a fat family losing weight and producing skinny children? is that evolution?

  3. #3
    "Nothing of consequence." Ellimist's Avatar
    Posts
    267
    pregnant women are just lazy and fat, if a baby falls out of their vagina they must have put it in their themselves to try to trick theists into going over to the dark side.
    I love you.

  4. #4
    Registered Senior Member
    Posts
    2,669
    I don't think your attacking theist in general, but a select group of Christians.

    If you believe god created all, you can't believe in anything appearing by way of evolution (ie being birthed out of a female organism). You believe in creation, that means you believe things are created, not concieved, concieved is evolution, giving birth is evolution, sex creating babies is evolution.
    Why? Suppose God created evolution. Doesn't that mean that God created us through evolution? Without further information, God could have created us any number of ways, all equally likely. Whose to say that God couldn't create us through evolution? Any apparant answer that we could give is based upon preconceived ideas of God.

  5. #5
    Unnecessary Surgeon Dr Lou Natic's Avatar
    Posts
    5,571
    Yes I'm addressing those who don't believe in evolution more than the rational(yet stubborn) theists who can't deny the blindingly apparent and numerous evidences for evolution.

  6. #6
    Is evolution all about just passing of genes.? Cockroaches don't show any sign of evolving for quite some millions of years. Still they are producing cockroaches with passing genes from one generation to another. Your ban is not acceptable.

  7. #7
    Unnecessary Surgeon Dr Lou Natic's Avatar
    Posts
    5,571
    I'm saying that creationists are constantly being disproven by everyday things, ie someone being born rather than created. I've never seen a creationist try to deny individual people come into existence in the way science describes, but right there to me they are acknowledging evolution in action, and so I question their faith if they don't question such things as, people being born. I don't think they are taking creationism seriously enough.
    I don't know what you are saying with cockroaches. Cockroaches haven't needed to change for a long time, thats all, they fell onto a winning design.
    But surely creationists realise they aren't exactly the same as their brother, do they not then(and this is where my 2 + 2 analogy comes in) that if there brother died and only they had children, their type was favoured by evolution, if they keep putting the 2's together you can see that a species would change to be more like the survivors over time.
    To be a creationist, you have to deny such things as different people produce different children.
    There is evidence for evolution, pregnancy and birth, that is how evolution works and how new members of a species pop up, evolution has this covered, people who don't believe in evolution essentially can't believe in birth, they can only believe in things being created by a designer. The way birth happens is known to be by evolutionary method, 2 individuals passing on their genes to offspring, this isn't ALL evolution is, never said it was, this is the 2 and if you have a brain in your head you put the 2 with the other 2 to get the 4.
    Some say god created the evolutionary system, and though its a cop out I can't really attack them with the logic I am using here, i can however attack the hardcore creationists that don't believe in evolution, I have an incredibly good case actually.
    I'd like to know exactly how god creates living organisms, I'd like to know where they are, perhaps there are too many products of evolution in my field of vision for me to see these remarkable people.
    (its a shame I think all the hardcore creationists have predictably been exhiled from this place, an old thread someone pulled up inspired me to make this point, unfortunately I don't think any of the eyes I wanted to reach are reading)

  8. #8
    It is not evolution, it is ILLUSION get the spelling right !



    The Real Ideological Root of Terrorism: Darwinism and Materialism

    The Darwinist Lie: 'Life is conflict':

    http://www.harunyahya.com

    The Muslim formidable site that crushed the evolution nonesense once and for all and which became a reference to even christian and jewish believers.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr Lou Natic
    I don't know what you are saying with cockroaches. Cockroaches haven't needed to change for a long time, thats all, they fell onto a winning design.
    I have seen quite a number of cockroaches falling on their back and struggling to get on their legs again. That is a vulnerablity considering the number of its predators roaming around in the vicinity. The reason why such fall-back cockroaches were not eliminated in evolution process is (1) they already would have passed on their genes before falling on back and die or (2) accidentally falling on back is a common design flaw rather than a suicidal trait of certain cockroaches. Whatever it is , they pass on the genes and able to survive as a species without any further improvement in design.

    btw, my point was, evolution is not apparent in the geneology of cockroaches.

    The way birth happens is known to be by evolutionary method, 2 individuals passing on their genes to offspring, this isn't ALL evolution is, never said it was, this is the 2 and if you have a brain in your head you put the 2 with the other 2 to get the 4.
    Since people who don't have brain in their head should have been eliminated long back, so everyone here, including me, must be having some brain and can arrive at 4 by adding 2 with another 2. But all i could see is some arithmatic.

    If i understand correctly, creationists don't believe in day-to-day creation. They believe that certain species were created as such and from there on evolution takes over and branched out other species and so on... So, in effect, none can avoid evolution in current state of affairs.

    EDIT : I have seen PM has posted while i was typing my post. Dr Lou, you have your valuable client. Have a nice time.
    Last edited by everneo; 02-16-04 at 05:27 AM.

  10. #10
    Let us not launch the boat ... Tiassa's Avatar
    Posts
    30,519
    A fat man frmo a fat family losing weight and producing skinny children? is that evolution?
    It could be heroin.

    But aside from that, how's his wife? Would you do her?

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by everneo
    I have seen quite a number of cockroaches falling on their back and struggling to get on their legs again. That is a vulnerablity considering the number of its predators roaming around in the vicinity. The reason why such fall-back cockroaches were not eliminated in evolution process is (1) they already would have passed on their genes before falling on back and die or (2) accidentally falling on back is a common design flaw rather than a suicidal trait of certain cockroaches. Whatever it is , they pass on the genes and able to survive as a species without any further improvement in design.

    .
    I think you've got that arse about face. When cockroaches lie on their backs, they are actually pretending to be dead... go near them and try to disturb them and they're off like a shot, at least that's what Cypriot cockroaches do.

    I think they reached evolutionary near-perfection millions of years ago... they are wily and clever, can run and fly, are virtually indestructible and can never go short of the type of food they like to consume.

  12. #12
    you can't argue about what you don't have proof of
    how can you know for sure?
    "science" points towards evolution
    but it's not exact science. it's a bunch of self-apointed experts who came to certain conclusions.

    evolution is more logical tho... so i go with that
    but as far as "proving" anything thru "science", nothing has been proven

  13. #13
    Valued Senior Member
    Posts
    4,916
    PM, as usual, your link is utter tripe. Harun Yahya "refutes atheism" basically by stating that "god exists because I say so".

  14. #14
    "Nothing of consequence." Ellimist's Avatar
    Posts
    267
    It is amazing to me that even though science has all of these checks and balances, and peer reviews and double-checks, and repeated verifications to make sure ideas are consistent with observations, that these little dumbass, uneducated children and adults alike think they know better than hundreds of thousands of scientists around the world. If evolutionary theory is wrong, they change it to fit the evidence. Not the other way around. You change the idea, not the observation. Do you think the theory of evolution is the same now as it was when Darwin formulated it? No! There have been recantations and additions made for the past hundred years... If there really is a problem with it, like so many theists, and others, say, why haven't they published their ideas and changed evolution, or even got rid of it entirely. Stop putting your ideas on fucking websites. If you really think you are right, publish it. That is the beauty of peer review. If you are right, they will verify it and you will change science... otherwise... you are blowing smoke.

    And so far, that is exactly what so many people are doing, saying carbon dating is wrong and all of these other bullshit claims that they can never substantiate, and evolution still stands. Pretty damn strong, it appears. Damn, even to show the broad support of the theory of evolution, there was a poll to see how many scientists named "Steve" supported the theory of evolution...("Steve" because Stephen Jay Gould had just died in May 2002) Just in America, they got over 500 signatures of males and females with Steve as a root name... Stephen, Steven, Steve, Stephanie, Steph... things like that.

    Anyway, you all should take a look at an article I will be posting in the religion forum... about intelligent design. Have fun.

  15. #15
    Registered Senior Member Barkhorn1x's Avatar
    Posts
    158
    From PM's glorious site;

    "Did you know that; A smaller star instead of the sun would cause the earth to grow extremely cold, and a bigger star would scorch the earth?"
    I suppose that to a certain segment of ignoramuses this is taken as proof that God or Allah (or some deity or other) made the sun "just so".

    It must be (sadly) beyond the the imagination of these cretins to posit a universe with billions of stars, millions of eathlike planets and a handful with stars that are "just so".

    Idiots.

    Barkhorn.

  16. #16
    harwn yaHye is actually Arabic for "Stupid Atheists".
    (not really.)

    Tiassa... I wouldn't do her, because I'm homosexual. Would you do her?

    My suspicion, if their kids are thin, is that a fat guy married Barbie...meaning that his kids had tiny feet and the girls' breasts were gigantic?

    Or perhaps they aren't *really* his kids, maybe she lied to him? Or maybe he's delusional and doesn't really have kids, but thinks he does?

    Also... Tiassa... some guys (for some reason) are attracted to obese chicks. hmm. (chicks, as in human females, not baby chickens.)

    Last edited by GB-GIL Trans-global; 02-16-04 at 02:37 PM. Reason: MARIJUANA!!!

  17. #17
    http://www.harunyahya.com/
    This site is as funny as they get. Unfortunately everything it says is based from a position of ignorance.

    "Dolphins can 'talk' to each other over 220km, it must be god!"

    More than that I have to also use a quote used above from that site:

    "Did you know that; A smaller star instead of the sun would cause the earth to grow extremely cold, and a bigger star would scorch the earth?"
    Yes, that's quite apparent. Also, distance is a factor. If it was further away, our planet would look like Mars, if it was closer our planet would look like Mercury. In any case, we wouldn't be here to debate anything. As the sun is in the right place and of the right size, life has had the chance to evolve. Who knows, maybe god planned originally to have humans live on Saturn, but then realised it was too far away from the sun.

    Other such hysterical quotes as "The speed of rain drops, regardless of their size, does not exceed 8 meters in a second." and "If seismic activity were greater, too many life-forms would be destroyed." makes me laugh my little socks off. The simple stupidity of the whole thing is unbelievable.

    These guys should really take some science lessons..

    I have seen quite a number of cockroaches falling on their back and struggling to get on their legs again. That is a vulnerablity considering the number of its predators roaming around in the vicinity.
    Nothing is perfect, but the majority of insects, (which are seemingly some of the worlds oldest creatures), do share this slight problem. Give them time however, and they can correct their balance. As for number of predators... a cockroach only has 2 natural predators. One of those is man, and there is a certain bird that hunts them as food. But look on the bright side... cockroaches can sustain themselves by eating absolutely anything, they are known to live in nuclear reactor cores and have 600-1000 kids 3 times a year. They are also very environment adaptable - more so than any other animal.

    If i understand correctly, creationists don't believe in day-to-day creation. They believe that certain species were created as such and from there on evolution takes over and branched out other species and so on... So, in effect, none can avoid evolution in current state of affairs.
    If that were the case it wouldn't be so bad, but there are many serious creationists who deny any chance of evolution outright. The majority I have spoken to however, do not understand the concept at its most basic, and as such naturally see the problems they see. One such person said to me "So, why don't cows just grow wings then?" That shows just how severe the lack of understanding can often be.

  18. #18
    PM:

    The Muslim formidable site that crushed the evolution nonesense once and for all and which became a reference to even christian and jewish believers
    That site is a joke.

    It may come as a surprise to you, but most Muslims believe in evolution. By denying it, you're actually joining the ranks of the fundamentalist Christians. And all this time, they thought you didn't care for them!

  19. #19
    Registered Senior Member
    Posts
    291
    It may come as a surprise to you, but most Muslims believe in evolution.
    Just wondering where empirical data for that conclusion came from?

    By denying it, you're actually joining the ranks of the fundamentalist Christians.
    By denying it he's just one more individual that is skeptical of a "molecules-to-man" theory. Too many people equate one definition of "evolution" for another. Hereditary changes are another matter. Don't get me wrong here, I disagree with almost everything that poster stands for. But you don't have to be a fundie-anything to doubt the veracity of a theory.

  20. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by tablariddim
    I think you've got that arse about face. When cockroaches lie on their backs, they are actually pretending to be dead... go near them and try to disturb them and they're off like a shot, at least that's what Cypriot cockroaches do.
    Cypriot cockroaches may be cooling their arse while on their back. Most of the predators like birds and lizards won't give a damn whether their prey is dead or alive & there is no advantage in pretending to be dead. The simple reason for their inactivity is they give up after sometime.

Similar Threads

  1. By kmguru in forum Intelligence & Machines
    Last Post: 06-27-04, 02:28 PM
    Replies: 156
  2. By Decimator in forum Biology & Genetics
    Last Post: 01-21-04, 12:40 AM
    Replies: 19
  3. By ~The_Chosen~ in forum Religion Archives
    Last Post: 10-07-02, 09:26 PM
    Replies: 60
  4. By jjhlk in forum Religion Archives
    Last Post: 05-20-02, 07:47 PM
    Replies: 10
  5. By KalvinB in forum Religion Archives
    Last Post: 12-15-01, 05:06 PM
    Replies: 28

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •