Five questions that evolutionists can't answer

[Patrick Degan]

4) Considering how quickly new generations of bacteria are formed, why haven't scientists seen any evidence of evolution in the laboratory?

Bacteria which are increasingly antibiotic-resistant with each new generation. What the fuck do you think they're observing, moron?

What evolution is doing is taking an idea that is non-testable and non-repeatable and declaring it fact by definition and imagination.

Gee... somebody better tell the breeding industry about that. Also the horticulturists. Oh, and the heike crab while we're at it as well.

There are thousands of different genetic enhancements required by the Theory of Evolution, with a great many of them dependent on many others to provide an advantage. There are many of these statistical impossibilities required to bring about the evolution of the human species. How can you, the evolutionist, be sure that you have it right, when the odds are that you are actually wrong?

Except each enhancement opens the way to the next one, and the particular environment in which the species exists forces the selection of the most suitable enhancements to facilitate survival over time. Each enhancement reduces the odds you find so insurmountable.

[Einhander Sn0m4n]

Looking at this guys other posts, he is a troll.

He's also a highly unsatisfying target or chewtoy as well, due to his sporadic hit-and-fade copypasta attacks with no real intention of sticking around to slug it out, rather in a less extreme but recognizably identical form as one JOEBIALEK (What a waste of the Beverly Hills zip code). I suggest the remedy for this be recognizably identical, too.

[Darth Wong]

What does it say about creationism that even the most laughably false claim can live in perpetuity on creationist websites? Not to harp on the "second law of thermodynamics" lie, but seriously, any scientist could have debunked their misrepresentation of the concept of entropy even when FDR was in diapers.

Yet even today, this argument persists. It is copied by creationists all around the world. It is found in creationist websites, books, pamphlets. It is one of the most common arguments used by creationist debaters. It seems like an immortal argument, totally immune to correction.

[SirNitram]

Old parallel world concept. The lies perpetuate because it's a closed loop; they don't interact with the filthy heathens even a microsecond more than they have to, or to raise shit with their brain tightly shut. They seek to create a self-contained reality where only their dogma exists; just look at Bibleman to see how much they'll copy and clone into their dystopic side-world.

[Lusankya]

Well, they do have a point about the 2nd law of thermodynamics. I mean, if evolution were to work the way evolutionists claim, then there'd have to be some kind of external energy source supplying the earth with energy every day, and I'm certain that if something like that existed, then scientists would have noticed it by now.

[CJvR]

the lack of "transitional forms"

Every living thing is transitional, the only completed species are the extinct ones.

[Civil War Man]

Old parallel world concept. The lies perpetuate because it's a closed loop; they don't interact with the filthy heathens even a microsecond more than they have to, or to raise shit with their brain tightly shut. They seek to create a self-contained reality where only their dogma exists; just look at Bibleman to see how much they'll copy and clone into their dystopic side-world.

And, interestingly enough, by creating this closed system, the dogmatic differences within it tend to smooth out over time until it is completely uniform.

Of course, creationists still have trouble explaining away one piece of evidence for evolution: male nipples. Of course, to them, nipples are filthy and not to be talked about.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Well, they do have a point about the 2nd law of thermodynamics. I mean, if evolution were to work the way evolutionists claim, then there'd have to be some kind of external energy source supplying the earth with energy every day, and I'm certain that if something like that existed, then scientists would have noticed it by now.

Fuck! You're right. Oh well evolution is dead. Who wants to hit the beach, and get some sun?

[Setesh]

Yeah, but isn't wheat also 3 species' genomes crammed into one?

Which, if anything, only increases the weirdness, but, still.

Ah, man, plant genetics is some whacky shit. Also helps evolution arguments considerably, what with the ability of plants to achieve speciation in a single generation.

Pretty much yeah. A lot of plants lack the gene that prevents multiple genes with the same functions from accumulating. Wheat lost the gene in cross breeding. They ran tests on some Ice Age wheat they found on a frozen mammoth and found 200000 genes. Todays wheats run from 1-3 million genes depending on type climate and engineering. That's the real joke on those 'only natural' vegans who protest against lab crossbred wheat. There are no living samples of un-crossbred wheat. Farmers started crossbreeding wheat 5000 years ago. There are Egyptian records of plant crossbreeding, not as efficient or fast as a modern lab, but they were willing to take the time back then.

[AdmiralKanos]

Since this troll prick obviously has no intention of engaging in proper debate here and is clearly a "hit and run" copy-paste troll whose contempt is becoming clearer each time he posts, let it be known that his E-mail address is wishful@windstream.net

[Superman]

Couldn't we apply the second law of thermodynamics to god himself? If he's been around for eternity, Shouldn't god be winding down about now? Is god some type of perpetual motion machine deity?

[Darth Servo]

Couldn't we apply the second law of thermodynamics to god himself? If he's been around for eternity, Shouldn't god be winding down about now? Is god some type of perpetual motion machine deity?

Of course not. Haven't you realized that God is immune to argument? Any flaw that creationists find in evolution could just as easily (if not more so) be applied to creationism but "God" doesn't have to obey logic or rules, because...because...well...he's perfect so he can do what ever he wants (including commit genocide), and it can defy our limited understanding but makes perfect sense to him.

[CaptJodan]

Of course not. Haven't you realized that God is immune to argument? Any flaw that creationists find in evolution could just as easily (if not more so) be applied to creationism but "God" doesn't have to obey logic or rules, because...because...well...he's perfect so he can do what ever he wants (including commit genocide), and it can defy our limited understanding but makes perfect sense to him.

I encounter this far, far, far too often. It's really quite maddening. A creationist wants to debate, so they start the debate, get trumped, then pull out the "But God can do anything. He can make it so the animals on the ark don't eat each other, don't produce waste etc. Not enough water on all of the Earth to flood it? No problem, God can import from the natural springs on the planet Zepher." And thus it goes. Not only is God immune to argument, but so are the people who believe in such "miricles".

Certainly the 2nd Law would not apply to God. The 2nd law was created by man, and thus flawed. God can work around it or just flat get rid of it at his will if he wants to.

I can't believe I'm going to be surrounded by this crap on Friday when I visit my grandparents.

[General Trelane (Retired)]

There are others here far more qualified to address your points than I, but I will answer one. Your fourth question, the one on bacterial mutation, demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of what evolution actually is. The argument you quote freely acknowledges the manifestation and propagation of antibiotic-resistant organisms; this is essentially evolution on a smaller scale, or microevolution, if you prefer. If this process of reproductive selection continues until enough biological changes are present in the target population so that they cannot reproduce with individuals from the "unmutated" population; when this happens, a new species has formed. If this does not occur in a population of bacteria, it is likely because only a single environmental factor, antibiotic presence, has changed, meaning that the organisms present must not adapt enough to reproductively alter their offspring. The organisms need not change in any other way; evolution does not mean that one creature instantly metamorphoses into a completely different one.

Alternatively, if this does not occur in a population of bacteria, it is likely because bacteria do not reproduce sexually!

[Surlethe]

I encounter this far, far, far too often. It's really quite maddening. A creationist wants to debate, so they start the debate, get trumped, then pull out the "But God can do anything. He can make it so the animals on the ark don't eat each other, don't produce waste etc. Not enough water on all of the Earth to flood it? No problem, God can import from the natural springs on the planet Zepher." And thus it goes. Not only is God immune to argument, but so are the people who believe in such "miricles".

Certainly the 2nd Law would not apply to God. The 2nd law was created by man, and thus flawed. God can work around it or just flat get rid of it at his will if he wants to.

I can't believe I'm going to be surrounded by this crap on Friday when I visit my grandparents.

The trump card here is the following: then believe creationism on faith all you want, but don't say it's science!* Then you can point out that they're believing in a liar God, a hypocritical creator who causes his creation to bear false witness to him and then turns around and orders humans not to do the same thing in the Ten Commandments.

*To elaborate: point out that science requires falsifiability; and is there any way to prove that God didn't create everything? The omnipotence argument essentially removes God from scientific inquiry completely: if God could work around it at his will, there's no way to disprove his working. No way to disprove, no way to build confidence in a hypothesis.

[Darth Wong]

I also find that it's common to run into people who proudly say that they refuse to restrict their theories to those which are logically sound, but they get angry when you characterize those theories as "nonsense". Even though illogical theories are quite literally nonsense by definition, since they don't make sense.

[Gil Hamilton]

What does it say about creationism that even the most laughably false claim can live in perpetuity on creationist websites? Not to harp on the "second law of thermodynamics" lie, but seriously, any scientist could have debunked their misrepresentation of the concept of entropy even when FDR was in diapers.

Yet even today, this argument persists. It is copied by creationists all around the world. It is found in creationist websites, books, pamphlets. It is one of the most common arguments used by creationist debaters. It seems like an immortal argument, totally immune to correction.

I know someone who tried to pull this in my Physics class when we were talking about entropy. The professor, who isn't the most aware person outside of physics, to say the least, sort of stared blankly at her because he had no clue what the hell she was talking about bringing up evolution in a discussion of thermodynamics or what she was getting at at all. Never crossed his mind to even think about it before, so he had no idea how to respond.

I had to explain to him what she was talking about after class, simply because he actually knows a ton about entropy in a heavily mathematic and physical way that the hideous strawman about entropy being about "order" or "disorder" or "better" or "worse" bandied about by creationists isn't something that he ever was aware of. For the life of him he couldn't wrap his head around what dispersed energy or probability had to do with evolution at all.

*He teaches a course that is basically thermodynamics as applied to engineering using a textbook that will actually cause a non-science major to incinerate on contact like they opened the Ark of the Covenant. You can tell he knows alot about it because his analogies on the subject he made were really terrible.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

This argument has completely proved to me that evolution is false!

Let it henceforth be known that the world was created out of Yggdrasil, the great World-Tree! Death to the Christians, Jews, Muslims, Atheists, Buddhists, Confucians, and numerous others who believe differently!

[Gil Hamilton]

Hail the All-Father! I propose we immediately hang wishful in dedication to the God of the Gallows in thanks for showing us the light!

[Ritterin Sophia]

You'll all be sorry when the Black Templars come on a recruitment drive!

[DrMckay]

I just gotta say; It's by reading posts like these, using logic, facts, and humor that I enjoy the site so.

Uhm, ego stroking and compliments aside, how's about a fossil record for evidence of links to sapiens??

My dad told me about a debate he had with a creationist at uni approx 300 yrs ago or so, where the fundie insisted that the fossils were placed there by the "Almighty" to "test our faith" Dad still laughs about that to this day.

[Surlethe]

Uhm, ego stroking and compliments aside, how's about a fossil record for evidence of links to sapiens??

Are you asking for evidence? I provided a link to a convenient website in my first post in this thread.

Edit: here.

[wishful]

Do you see the error in logic here?

'The entropy of an isolated system not in equilibrium will tend to increase over time, approaching a maximum value at equilibrium'.

Now, what could possibly make you think that the Earth is a closed system (protip: look at the big yellow thing in the sky) or is in equilibrium (hint: radioactive isotope decay and the cooling of the Earth's core).

Compare the bold, italic, and underlined portions. In the quote, it says "not" in equilibrium. And what did you say? Come on, I can't debate you people

[DPDarkPrimus]

[quote="wishful"Come on, I can't debate you people[/quote]

Then why did you bother posting this shit in the first place?

[wishful]

disregurd my last post.... I'm got lost between two differnt forums i'm posting in......


My noobie dumb ass fucked up.