Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
John - Evolution,Anthropology or what?

Gaps in knowledge do not disprove. I agree. Gaps in knowledge seem bad though when a theory explaining such grand ideas as the creation of mankind by natural processes is missing what I think should be an obvious set of proofs,i.e. about 1 billion tweeners of all sorts of species.

I understand and accept that my great,great grandfather's generation may have been smaller than mine. I accept that type "evolution". Girls have bigger tits now than in 1960,I accept that "evolution" and like it,too.

The species change idea? Show me the tweeners. Specifically,that is the part of "evolution" I find lacking logic.

Concerning natural selection EX species changes,I asked do we have proof that genetics are getting better? I don't know,I do know we still have lots of live births with deformation,autism,retardation,etc.

I'm opposed to having my religious beliefs questioned,why should Darwin's views be w/o critical questions? Like,"where's the tweeners". That's not so disrespectful.

Like I said,I accept evolutionary change,but,not different species due to this missing link info. I'm not afraid to have my religious views challenged including the validity of Scripture,textual criticism,etc.

Darwinism it seems to me makes much the same claims Genesis does and I see as little proof Darwin had this right as most you guys do Moses had it right. Yet,Darwin's view should be demonstrable to the eye if valid and should have been a million years before Charles lived,too.
quadrat Wrote:
Armadillo Wrote:
JohnWho Wrote:Gaps in our knowledge do not mean that Evolution is invalidated.
That is true. It also means the theory can not be validated. Proclaiming it such is bad science.
If the theory does not predict what we find in nature, and yet is held to be true, that is also bad science.
Why don't you go to the next museum that exhibits some natural stuff and have a look at the skeletons of prehistoric creatures. Have you never seen them? Or did the great flood wipe them out for Noah's incompetence to summon them all?
One of the great lies of museums relative to skeletons was to place horse skeletons in order of ascending size, the inference being that the horse evolved to be bigger. Unfortunately, the skeletons were not in chronological order. The famed photos of the moths in England who seemed to adapt their coloration to sooty atmosphere were shown to be fake.

The theory of evolution is full of holes and there are plenty of counterexamples to its theses. Yet it does provide a soothing plausible scheme. It is not an experimental science, only an observational one, so it cannot really be tested. But, hey, it provides lots of fun conversations.
Jefferson: I place economy among the first and important virtues, and public debt as the greatest of dangers. To preserve our independence, we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our choice between economy and liberty, or profusion and servitude. If we can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of caring for them, they will be happy.
My big brother is a pHD in propulsion engineering. He is educated. He is also an atheist. Not an anthrologist at all,but,took some courses and knows a little.

He told me years ago of a famous(infamous?) case of a hip bone found alleged to have been that of "fill in the blank man" from a trillion years ago or whatever. Eventually found to be a hog's hip joint. He doesn't buy this stuff at all. He shares JT's view,too many holes. No religious reason,he just has no desire to accept as fact ideas with gaping holes in the theories.

All these things like that "footprint" of a man in northern Italy dated to be like 100K years old Anon posted,excuse me,the photo was no more of a footprint than it was my head.

No one questions it. It's secular gospel. People like me,just ignorant dumbasses that the wise pity,the wise say it's a 100K old man's footprint even though it looked like a fricking irregular hole in the ground like 10 million other ones.

Honestly,this same certitude is expressed with AGW. They're right,anyone who questions them is an ignorant son of a This is exactly the certitude of the evolution crowd. Where in hell are those missing links? No answer. If there are 7 billion humans,most of us all ought to be somewhere between 0-100% human,that's self evident.

Yet,here on the ground we have 7 billion 100% human humans. If the theory made any sense,that wouldn't be the case. That's all.
John L Wrote:In that case everything is 'bad science' then. After all, we are constantly modifying our perception of things.
No, there is a very important difference.
With other unproven/unprovable theorys they are reguarded as such, as an idea of what we think happened. Einstein's Theory of Relativity has been tested and can be considered fact. If it is tested and fails to predict nature, then we may come up with something better.

Evolution drives "scientists" to a pseudo-religious zeal, much as AGW does. They insist it is fact and insist it be taught as fact.
Evolution is not a fact. It's a neat idea, but unproven at least for macroevolution.
History shows again and again how nature points out the folly of man.
Different eyes see different things. Different hearts beat on different strings.
But there are times for you and me when all such things agree.
-Geddy Lee, Rush.
Armadillo Wrote:History shows again and again how nature points out the folly of man.

Blue Oyster Cult...

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)