• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged Icebear's Evolution Thread

dafydd said:
Linking to a crank website will not help your case. How few brain cells does one need in order to believe in Creationism?
Click to expand...

Now now. Be nice. Lots of creationists have plenty of brain cells. They are just not permitted to actually use them.
 
Let's see. On one side Darwin and an abundance of evidence. On the other a god waving a magic wand. Which one would a person with brains and talent choose?
 
icebear said:
The other kind of time problem which evolutionists have and don't like to talk about has to do with soft tissue turning up to an increasing extent in dinosaur remains.

http://kgov.com/dinosaur-soft-tissue

https://www.google.com/search?client=opera&q=hadrosaur+soft+tissue&sourceid=opera&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8


There is zero possibility of the kinds of tissue these articles describe lasting for even one million years, much less for tens or hundreds of millions as we've been indoctrinated to believe.
Click to expand...

Maybe you should read the actual research about this instead of the offal you did. This is NOT soft tissue. Its extremely dessicated and part mineralised remains of tissue that needed soaking in acid if I remember correctly. Its extremely degraded even then. Its not soft tissue more a proto- fossil (if that's a word) or part fossilized tissue.
 
icebear said:
Simple ignorance is one thing, but I really hate seeing people totally in BONDAGE to ignorance, and jref seems to have a problem which is a bit worse than usual...
Click to expand...
I'd suggest you not look in a mirror if ingnorance upsets you so much. You have not provided a counterargument and you calling us ignorant is like the pot calling the kettle black.

If you feel that creation science is superior to mainstream science then please continue with your arguments. Please try not to become uppset when we provide counter arguments, evidence and solid science as rebuttle because thats exactly what you'll get from us.
 
dafydd said:
There is something about this site that attracts the woos.
Click to expand...
I think we should thank these geniuses for sharing their wisdom with the utterly unworthy. Just think of it: everyone (that includes most of us I presume) who supports evolution is, according to icebear, devoid of creativity and brains. And yet this kind and generous soul, obviously one of the chosen few, favors even us with his insight.

I would bow down to him sooner, except I'm still trying with my feeble excuse for a brain to make sense of the theory of life, the universe and everything I saw on one of the other forums from a genius who figured it all out using only fifth-grade arithmetic and wikipedia. Of course I'm probably a hopeless case. I can't even make sense of the Timecube.
 
bruto said:
I think we should thank these geniuses for sharing their wisdom with the utterly unworthy. Just think of it: everyone (that includes most of us I presume) who supports evolution is, according to icebear, devoid of creativity and brains. And yet this kind and generous soul, obviously one of the chosen few, favors even us with his insight.

I would bow down to him sooner, except I'm still trying with my feeble excuse for a brain to make sense of the theory of life, the universe and everything I saw on one of the other forums from a genius who figured it all out using only fifth-grade arithmetic and wikipedia. Of course I'm probably a hopeless case. I can't even make sense of the Timecube.
Click to expand...

I disagree. If you were that uneducated then you would be a creationist.
 
icebear said:
The fruit fly experiments in the early decades of the 1900s should have been the end of it. Fruit flies breed new generations every other day so that running any sort of a decades-long experiment with fruit flies will involve more generations of them than there have ever been of anything even remotely resembling humans on our planet. Those flies were subjected to everything in the world known to cause mutations and the mutants were recombined every possible way; all they ever got were sterile freaks, and fruit flies. The results were unambiguous. Several prominent scientists publicly denounced evolution at that point in time including the famous case of Richard Goldschmidt.

The failure was due to the fact that our entire living world is driven by information and the only information there ever was in the picture was that for a fruit fly. When the DNA/RNA information scheme was discovered, even if the fruit fly thing had never happened, evolution should have been discarded on the spot. But GIVEN the fact of the fruit fly experiments, somebody HAD to have thought to himself "Hey, THAT'S THE REASON THE FRUIT FLY EXPERIMENTS FAILED!!!!!!"

In other words, there is no way in the world anybody should be believing in evolution 40 years after the discovery of DNA.

Evolution is an ideological doctrine masquerading as a science theory.
Click to expand...
If you put these fruit flys in different environments they would evolve different survival mechanisms. There was once a moth that turned dark after being white in a polluted environment and white again when the polution went away. Birds were able to see the moths when they were white on a dark surface and when the pollution went away they went white again to match their environments.

If fruit fly populations were placed in various different environments then they would mutate or go extinct. If a fruit fly was light in a dark environment it would have to develope dark charistics and vice versa to avoid being eaten.. They would have to develope a stratedgy to avoid being eaten these areas.

The experiments were more of a genetic experiment overall rather than an experiment to test the theory of evolution. Fruit flys are tough and very hardy organisms and they have a great survivability mechanism.

The only fruit fly experiements I ever knew about were experiments to see why they changed color during certain periods of their developement. The one I saw at Cal Tech had nothing to do with evolution.
 
Last edited:
I accept the theory of evolution. I am an evolutionist.
I accept the germ theory of disease. I am a germist.
I accept number theory. I am a numberist.
I accept the theory of gravity. I am a gravityist

……………………………..
What I like most about being an evolutionist.

My favorite thing about being an evolutionist is not giving myself permission to rape, murder and eat people. It is not making fun of people who believe that the Earth is less than 10,000 years old. It is not stealing consecrated communion wafers in order to perform Satanic rituals. My favorite thing is being part of an international conspiracy to suppress the truth. Just knowing that I am part of a cabal to control the world's universities and colleges makes me feel as if I am part of something bigger than myself. I am linked to the Nobel Prize Assembly who will never award a prize to anyone who does not publicly acknowledge the superiority of evolutionists. I am linked to the Obamacare death panels who believe that survival of the fittest means we must kill those we consider unfit.

I
am
an
evolutionist.​
 
Last edited:
Pretty sure the OP never heard of the Lenski affair:

http://www.badscience.net/2008/06/all-time-classic-creationist-pwnage/

From Lenski's second reply to the jokers at Convervipedia:

First, it seems that reading might not be your strongest suit given your initial letter, which showed that you had not read our paper, and given subsequent conversations with your followers, in which you wrote that you still had not bothered to read our paper. You wrote: “I did skim Lenski’s paper …” If you have not even read the original paper, how do you have any basis of understanding from which to question, much less criticize, the data that are presented therein?
Click to expand...
 
Cainkane1 said:
The only fruit fly experiements I ever knew about were experiments to see why they changed color during certain periods of their developement. The one I saw at Cal Tech had nothing to do with evolution.
Click to expand...

In regards to the OP, if you only have a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
 
icebear said:
The Haldane dilemma describes one kind of time problem which evolutionists enjoy ignoring....
Click to expand...

Haldane's argument applies only to beneficial mutations that reach fixation in the population (and even then, it applies only given many other caveats).

How do you know how many of those 500,000 point mutations that distinguish humans from neanderthals are beneficial? It's quite plausible that the vast majority are neutral.
 
Last edited:
icebear said:
Simple ignorance is one thing, but I really hate seeing people totally in BONDAGE to ignorance, and jref seems to have a problem which is a bit worse than usual...
Click to expand...

Well, ...

If you are wanting to see people in bondage and/or needing some bondage education, then JREF is the wrong web site for you.

;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom