100 Reasons Why Evolution Is Stupid

[dystopian]

You don't think that I can relate to that from my own theistic position?

The difference being that evolution is an observable fact upon which much of modern medicine is founded. If evolution didn't happen, then much of modern medicine simply wouldn't work. Theistic claims on the other hand are not observable facts; and nothing in our world would change if theism is false.

I've recently discovered this guy, an unbeliever, who I really like.

Berlinski is not an unbeliever. His claims to be a secular jew are a fairly obvious smokescreen. Nobody who argues for objective religious based morality or presents a defacto argument for intelligent design can be an unbeliever. It's like claiming to not believe in music while presenting an argument for why classical music is better than rock. His positions can not be reconciled with the state of being an unbeliever.

I'm not surprised you like him.

 

[atrib]

Neutron stars:



You should feel free to follow up on the references cited, but then again, you likely would not understand any of the material presented.

It's only speculation. May be responsible, as opposed to . . . But I got it.

Oh, and, you all can knock of the looking down on me because I don't necessarily know that you are full of shit because you remind me of the Christians when I was an atheist. It kind of makes you look like dicks.

That is how science works. We develop hypotheses based on our observations and test and refine those hypotheses as more observations become available to us. The tools available to us today are far superior to those available to prior generations of scientists, and will likely be inferior to the tools available to future generations of scientists. In the case of biological evolution, Darwin recognized that evolution happens, but he did not understand the underlying mechanisms driving the process. Today we have a much better understanding of the mechanisms because we are able to map the genomes of living things and study this information, which enables us to draw meaningful inferences on how evolution works. In a similar manner, Newton was able to quantify the behavior of certain types of material objects in certain types of gravitational fields by studying the motions of the planets. This was about 400 years ago. About a hundred years ago Einstein was able to actually explain what gravity is (the curvature of spacetime caused by the presence of massive bodies) and how gravity effects, and is effected by said massive bodies. It doesn't mean Newton was wrong, just that Newton's knowledge was incomplete, while Einstein's model is somewhat more complete, but still not perfect or 100% complete. Science is an incremental process that builds on existing knowledge

 

[Sarpedon]

You think that posting a link is not having a proper discussion, while dismissing a well established scientific principle as 'Nonsense,' is?

We can tell what elements are in stars by their spectra. We can chart how they change in differently aged stars. We can reproduce the fusion and its products in the laboratory and in supercolliders. It is not 'Nonsense.'

 

[atrib]

You think that posting a link is not having a proper discussion, while dismissing a well established scientific principle as 'Nonsense,' is?

We can tell what elements are in stars by their spectra. We can chart how they change in differently aged stars. We can reproduce the fusion and its products in the laboratory and in supercolliders. It is not 'Nonsense.'

However, if your only intent is to make all the relevant information go away simply by waving your hands, "Nonsense" might just be the perfect answer. That way you don't have to educate yourself or to defend your position.

 

[DLH]

It is stupid because it ignores the knowledge available to us today. It might also be dishonest if this ignorance is deliberate.

Well, he's supposed to have been a science teacher.
It'd be one thing if he claimed to have a better scientific interpretation of the evidence that IS available for the Big Bang, rather than claim there's NO evidence.

Scientific theory doesn't need evidence, there have been plenty of them without it.

 

[DLH]

You think that posting a link is not having a proper discussion, while dismissing a well established scientific principle as 'Nonsense,' is?

We can tell what elements are in stars by their spectra. We can chart how they change in differently aged stars. We can reproduce the fusion and its products in the laboratory and in supercolliders. It is not 'Nonsense.'

However, if your only intent is to make all the relevant information go away simply by waving your hands, "Nonsense" might just be the perfect answer. That way you don't have to educate yourself or to defend your position.

Oh, no, I gave the link too. It explains everything. I guess. I wouldn't read the shit, but it came up in a search . . . so . . . good luck with that. It's a long unbearable one when I glanced at it. I could find a trillion that agree with it and a trillion that disagree with it, so if this is you fuckers Idea of a discussion it will be a long one.

 

[atrib]

Well, he's supposed to have been a science teacher.
It'd be one thing if he claimed to have a better scientific interpretation of the evidence that IS available for the Big Bang, rather than claim there's NO evidence.

Scientific theory doesn't need evidence, there have been plenty of them without it.

Again, if you do not know what you are talking about, keep your mouth shut so you do not expose your ignorance to others.

- - - Updated - - -

However, if your only intent is to make all the relevant information go away simply by waving your hands, "Nonsense" might just be the perfect answer. That way you don't have to educate yourself or to defend your position.

Oh, no, I gave the link too. It explains everything. I guess. I wouldn't read the shit, but it came up in a search . . . so . . . good luck with that. It's a long unbearable one when I glanced at it. I could find a trillion that agree with it and a trillion that disagree with it, so if this is you fuckers Idea of a discussion it will be a long one.

Idiots.

You lack the knowledge to form educated opinions on the subject.

Ignorance can be cured, but you have to be willing to learn. However, If your only intent is to preserve your faith at the cost of everything else, then ignorance might be the way to go. Which is what I said.

 

[Ford]

Oh, no, I gave the link too. It explains everything. I guess. I wouldn't read the shit, but it came up in a search . . . so . . . good luck with that. It's a long unbearable one when I glanced at it. I could find a trillion that agree with it and a trillion that disagree with it, so if this is you fuckers Idea of a discussion it will be a long one.

Idiots.

Can someone remind me why anyone is still taking this person seriously?

\\

 

[RavenSky]

Oh, no, I gave the link too. It explains everything. I guess. I wouldn't read the shit, but it came up in a search . . . so . . . good luck with that. It's a long unbearable one when I glanced at it. I could find a trillion that agree with it and a trillion that disagree with it, so if this is you fuckers Idea of a discussion it will be a long one.

Idiots.

Can someone remind me why anyone is still taking this person seriously?

\\

Can someone let me know who ever did take this person seriously?

 

[DLH]

That is how science works.

I stopped reading there. I don't care how science works.

 

[atrib]

Oh, no, I gave the link too. It explains everything. I guess. I wouldn't read the shit, but it came up in a search . . . so . . . good luck with that. It's a long unbearable one when I glanced at it. I could find a trillion that agree with it and a trillion that disagree with it, so if this is you fuckers Idea of a discussion it will be a long one.

Idiots.

Can someone remind me why anyone is still taking this person seriously?

\\

While DLH's posting habits resemble those of common trolls, there may be others reading the forums who benefit from our patient explanations.

- - - Updated - - -

That is how science works.

I stopped reading there. I don't care how science works.

Yet you keep posting opinions on scientific matters. What does that tell us about you?

 

[Sarpedon]

I stopped reading there. I don't care how science works.

That's it. I'm done.

 

[DLH]

Scientific theory doesn't need evidence, there have been plenty of them without it.

Again, if you do not know what you are talking about, keep your mouth shut so you do not expose your ignorance to others.

- - - Updated - - -

I just heard Dr. David Berlinski say in the video I provided that scientific theory doesn't need evidence and that plenty of them have existed without evidence. This makes sense to me. It is theory. And who am I going to believe, him or you? Why don't you shut your mouth.

However, if your only intent is to make all the relevant information go away simply by waving your hands, "Nonsense" might just be the perfect answer. That way you don't have to educate yourself or to defend your position.

Oh, no, I gave the link too. It explains everything. I guess. I wouldn't read the shit, but it came up in a search . . . so . . . good luck with that. It's a long unbearable one when I glanced at it. I could find a trillion that agree with it and a trillion that disagree with it, so if this is you fuckers Idea of a discussion it will be a long one.

Idiots.

You lack the knowledge to form educated opinions on the subject.

Ignorance can be cured, but you have to be willing to learn. However, If your only intent is to preserve your faith at the cost of everything else, then ignorance might be the way to go. Which is what I said.

I am forming an opinion on the subject. I'm presenting a video for discussion by a teacher with tenure in public school criticizing the theory of evolution to a group of over confident science minded atheist. I'm learning a great deal. If by shut up you mean don't question then fuck yourself.

 

[DLH]

While DLH's posting habits resemble those of common trolls, there may be others reading the forums who benefit from our patient explanations.

Oh, God, that was funny.

Yet you keep posting opinions on scientific matters. What does that tell us about you?

how science works isn't the topic. The remark is like if I explained to you theology works like this. It is only true, and just and accurate and is believed by most of the people blah, blah, blah . . .

- - - Updated - - -

I stopped reading there. I don't care how science works.

That's it. I'm done.

NEXT!

 

[DLH]

The difference being that evolution is an observable fact upon which much of modern medicine is founded. If evolution didn't happen, then much of modern medicine simply wouldn't work. Theistic claims on the other hand are not observable facts; and nothing in our world would change if theism is false.

Modern medicine doesn't work. I used to work for one of the biggest Pharmaceutical companies in the world, Eli Lilly, and modern medicine is about as effective as the Placebo. The medical profession as we know it was founded by the tycoons of the 19th century who influenced the North American politicians to get rid of the competition so they could profit from patented synthetic medicine. Modern medicine is stunted, no, retarded compared to what it could be due to money. Like science is. Research dental amalgams, mercury, and the formation of the FDA.

Berlinski is not an unbeliever. His claims to be a secular jew are a fairly obvious smokescreen. Nobody who argues for objective religious based morality or presents a defacto argument for intelligent design can be an unbeliever. It's like claiming to not believe in music while presenting an argument for why classical music is better than rock. His positions can not be reconciled with the state of being an unbeliever.

I'm not surprised you like him.

Bedrlinkski doesn't, as far as I know (I have only recently discovered him) propose or endorse any intelligent design, at least not of a Biblical nature. He is a fellow of Discovery, but I've not heard anything about a Creator from him except as a possible alternative. There are more possibilities than the two, you know. One of which would be "I don't know."

 

[Ford]

Modern medicine doesn't work.

Tell me about it! The other day I had a throbbing headache, but instead of taking a couple Advil I just prayed to Jesus really hard.

Well to be honest I did take a couple of no-brand ibuprofin tablets and didn't pray at all, but the headache went away, so praise Jesus, right?''

 

[DLH]

Modern medicine doesn't work.

Tell me about it! The other day I had a throbbing headache, but instead of taking a couple Advil I just prayed to Jesus really hard.

Well to be honest I did take a couple of no-brand ibuprofin tablets and didn't pray at all, but the headache went away, so praise Jesus, right?''

So you think that's the way it works? You have a headache and pray to Jesus and he will heal you from the headache? People here keep telling me to shut up about science until I educate myself, why doesn't that apply to theology?

 

[DLH]

Why is it that all of my threads here are hijacked by overemotional but vague propaganda unsupported by atheists. I posted a couple times on the original forum and the people there were boring as hell but they had an argument. They weren't completely incompetent.

 

[Ford]

Tell me about it! The other day I had a throbbing headache, but instead of taking a couple Advil I just prayed to Jesus really hard.

Well to be honest I did take a couple of no-brand ibuprofin tablets and didn't pray at all, but the headache went away, so praise Jesus, right?''

So you think that's the way it works? You have a headache and pray to Jesus and he will heal you from the headache? People here keep telling me to shut up about science until I educate myself, why doesn't that apply to theology?

Who the hell are you to try and tell me how things work?

 

[fromderinside]

- 30 -