Everyone can scroll back and follow me starting from page 68. There may be no logical fallacy in a belief and a speculation and an ideology which are the belief in evolution. There may be no arguments against a belief, and if one follows one will see that believers in evolution cannot even follow a simple conversation, and they act like pre-programmed zombies. Let's everyone answer the question as one wills: Do you BELIEVE in evolution? Or you are a heretic?
No, I think we should all ignore your question and all of your posts, until you describe a fallacy in the theory of evolution. As advertised in the thread title. Free advice: don't copy paste on from post #1, as those have all been debunked already.
Everyone can scroll back to page 68 where I started and see that believers in evolution have been ignoring all my questions and all posts I made. Never got an intelligible answer or any reaction which would show any sign of consciousness. It is another example, anything a believer in evolution is sensing by guts (remember, believers in evolution have no brain, it is all brainwashed clean) as something doubting or questioning his belief is translated by the believer as: -gibber -it was already debunked - I and other believers already posted links and facts - you don't understand science -it is all ramble -it makes no sense A half dozen of primitive statements considered a highly intellectual arguments. All they need for life. If somebody needs more proof that believers in evolution are not different from pre-programmed zombies one can scroll back to page 68 where I started the demonstration, or read in into any page after that. The funniest thing is that the zombies think of themselves as of intellectuals. Observe the believers below below:
More gibberish. “Everyone can scroll back to page 68 where I started and see that believers in evolution have been ignoring all my questions and all posts I made. ” Exactly.
There may be no logical fallacy in a belief and a speculation and an ideology = the belief in evolution. Understand? Belief in evolution is a belief, what logic and what logical fallacy can be applied to a belief, speculation, ideology? Understand? There may be no arguments against a belief, and if one follows one will see that believers in evolution cannot even follow a simple conversation, and they act like pre-programmed zombies. Understand? Let's everyone answer the question as one wills: Do you BELIEVE in evolution? Or you are a heretic?
Do you believe in magic in a young girl's heart How the music can free her whenever it starts? And it's magic if the music is groovy It makes you feel happy like an old-time movie I'll tell you about the magic, and it'll free your soul But it's like trying to tell a stranger 'bout-a rock and roll If you believe in magic, don't bother to choose If it's jug band music or rhythm and blues Just go and listen, and it'll start with a smile That won't wipe off your face no matter how hard you try Your feet start tapping, and you can't seem to find How you got there, so just blow your mind If you believe in magic, come along with me We'll dance until morning till there's just you and me And maybe, if the music is right I'll meet you tomorrow, sort of late at night And we'll go dancing, baby, then you'll see How the magic's in the music and the music's in me Yeah Do you believe in magic? Yeah Believe in the magic of the young girl's soul Believe in the magic of-a rock and roll Believe in the magic that can set you free Ohh, talking 'bout the magic (Do you believe like I believe?) Do you believe in magic? (Do you believe like I believe?) Do you believe, believer? (Do you believe like I believe?) Do you believe in magic? (Do you believe like I believe?) Do you believe in magic?
All over suddenly, woman, you are talking like a human being. What did cause the rupture in the raw of the believers? I like your talk Let me guess... You have been taught to BELIEVE in evolution in your mind, but you are want to be a heretic in your soul. We, heretics, are really cool. Am I any close?
So? That's irrelevant. Genes mutate. Species adapt or die. 60 Million years ago, the Earth was a lush tropical paradise. Canada and Alaska were covered with tropical rain forests, just like Europe and Asia. A massive volcanic eruption on the scale of the Deccan Traps created a land bridge between northern Europe and Canada. Primate species that evolved in Africa migrated out to Europe and Asia, and many crossed the land bridge into Canada and Alaska, and then populated all of North, Central and South America. Then the climate changed, and the tropical rain forests all died out, except for a few areas in Central and South American, Africa and Southeast Asia. Of the two dozen primate species in the Americas, they all died save for eight species, because they couldn't adapt to the new environment. It's all recorded in the fossil record of Alaska, Canada and the lower US. Adaptation is a very real thing. New organs are more than just "new traits." Why wouldn't they remain? A mutation doesn't automatically result in the death of the parent. A mutation in offspring has no bearing on the parent. Too bad you can't even grasp the basics. And you do? I never stated, implied or suggest there was. In fact, I have never mentioned E Coli. Now you're just making things up, because you're butt-hurt. That is an incredibly stupid comment. Once offspring have a mutated gene, they cannot simply get rid of it. And quite poorly, I might add. There's no comparison, but thanks for the Straw Man just the same. Actually, there has been, but your research skills are so poor, you'd never know. The Scientific Method is based on evidence. If I hypothesize that mixing an Acid and a Base yields water and a salt, I can construct an experiment to mix an Acid with a Base. The water and the salt produced are the evidence. You can make any scientific theory you want, you just have to dream it up. Once you've dreamed it up, you'll need to design an experiment to prove or disprove your theory. After you've done that, others will need to be able to use your experiment to replicate your results. There is no god nor are their miracles. One time, I dismounted my vehicle with my radio operator and the fire support team so we could get a better look as the battle unfolded and properly direct artillery and close air support. We were running behind some dismounted cavalry troops, and a mortar landed blowing the leg off of one of the cavalry troops. The leg flew through the air and struck my radio operator in the chest, knocking him down just as some 20 mm rounds whizzed by and struck my Bradley. Had my radio operator been standing, he would have been killed, but he was saved by the flying leg. Some people might consider that grotesque, and it probably is, but it wasn't a miracle from god, it was just the Laws of Physics at work.
Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods. ~Albert Einstein
"It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it." - Albert Einstein in Albert Einstein: The Human Side
Expressing opinion is not a judgement and pointing out a lack of evidence does not imply anything other than that.
Could you pass this on to usfan? He seems to think he can judge the truth of the most well supported scientific theory in history, despite knowing less than nothing about it and despite having no education or experience in any relevant, scientific field. Thanks in advance.
above he is using "gods" figuratively/metaphorically, Not as a reality. Einstein Letter to Gutkind. Auctioned a few years ago. "..The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weakness, the Bible a collection of honorable, but still purely primitive, legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation, no matter how subtle, can change this for me. For me the Jewish religion like all other religions is an incarnation of the most childish superstition.".." `
This just went right over your head. Science does not set itself up as judge of truth and knowledge. EVERY theory from science is STATED to be subject to further analysis, including falsification. So, since Einstein wasn't talking about scientific method, who WAS he talking about?
'Whoever', is not 'science'. That would be a human (presumably). Science is a process, and does not presume to be a judge of anything. Humans, otoh, often presume. I see too often a personalization of 'science!', as if it were some omnipotent entity to worship.. But thanks for the little insult! I was beginning to feel neglected!
Methinks, Will, that you need to read more.. My quote fit the arrogant presumption of the poster exactly. How could you miss that, assuming you are a relatively intelligent person? Am i overestimating you? Or are you still lobbying to be ignored?
Like you ignore the entire scientific community and all the evidence? Sounds like it is quite an honor to be ignored by you.
I, and everyone who defeats him in debate have received such an honor. You are likely to be honored soon.
Einstein's quote was a denunciation of the arrogance of those who set themselves up as the judge of truth and knowledge. Science doesn't do that. Science is based on no more than the ability to observe and does not purport to know "truth and knowledge" in the religious sense. All results of science are presented as the best that evidence supports and fully susceptible to further evidence. Religion is based on the truth of the existence of a totally undetectable super natural being - a truth that is held immutable and supreme over all that is observed now and forever. You just totally missed what Einstein said.
