Evolution is plain silly, proven wrong countless times, a theory with infinite holes.

Asked by: RHEMA.97
  • Macro evolution is *counter intuitive*

    Not plain silly, and having infinite holes though. I recognize that we observe the changes in phenotypes of organisms, but the genotypes remain quite steady. To my knowledge, we have not seen an organism gain any notable traits. (The loss of tusks on elephants would be a loss of a gene, and the finches are all very similar) We have not observed (quantifiablely seen and measured) the addition of traits in an organism.
    Irreducible complexity does bring in other issues, but I got other stuff to do.

  • A Very Silly Theory

    I find it prepostorous that otherwise smart people will say irreducible complexity is a bogus principle. Or think that pointing at 'simpler' precursors falsifies IC: a basic principle which informs any engineering feat because any system must have a core set of parts without which it can't perform a given function eg an iTouch without its iOS. I find it nonsensical that in the 21st century_despite the hard work of researchers_a foolhardy evolutionary orthodoxy will not yet admit the fact of directed mutations turned on specifically under certain environments, and mediated by certain enzymes and subsystems in an organism eg GRN's. I find the idea foolish that man evolved from an ape ancestor aface of widely-known facts of species begetting their like, the fact of living fossils (fossils of organisms not much unlike those alive today eg sharks, coelecanth, ferns, mosquitoes, dragonfly etc), and the fact that a much more focused selective breeding shows limits to how much viable breeds can be made. It is a rape on reason to assert that the very random mutation an organism's cell fights against (using redundancy in the genetic code and DNA repair mechanisms) is the source of novel traits; it is then double folly to think mutations which converge on the same solution (eg echolocation in bats and whales) multiple times are random_I would expect far more chimera to be seen; and cap it off by implying that natural selection must keep the good ones, it can't especially if its of no immediate 'survival AND reproductive benefit. I could go on with more evolutionary just-so stories and wonder how the heck people fell for Darwin's nonsense. In any case, there's a small speck of hope. Some the staunchest evolutionists admit that human intelligence opens up more possibilities (esp for humans) to evolve. We see a massive playing out of this in the IT world and how it affects other spheres of living like entertainment and medicine. That tells me one thing a couple of dumb folks won't admit. Evolution requires intelligent input.

  • Of course it is!

    There is a lot of sites full of proofs of that... Just google some! For example in my coutry there is the television series "Evidencias" who youpeople of my own coutry (Brazil) can see on youtube. There is also all those lies like the pig tooth and the nom existing specimens... Its just a confusion of macro and micro evolution of people who are against Religion...

  • Of course it is!

    There is a lot of sites full of proofs of that... Just google some! For example in my coutry there is the television series "Evidencias" who youpeople of my own coutry (Brazil) can see on youtube. There is also all those lies like the pig tooth and the nom existing specimens... Its just a confusion of macro and micro evolution of people who are against Religion...

  • Science disproves evolution

    Evolution cannot occour in nature for many reasons. It leaves many questions unanswered and its totally illogical, a fairytale for adults but claimed to be"science".

    Why would one base his belief on evolution. In the first place a single celled organism is to complex to be formed by chance. Even in the most advanced Laboratories they couldn't produce the protein cells needed for life.

  • Evolution isn't a theory

    Theory: a supposition or a system of ideas intended to explain something, esp. One based on general principles independent of the thing to be explained.

    Fact: a thing that is indisputably the case.

    Evolution is happening before our eyes with many species. We have elephants that are evolving so they are born without tusks to avoid poachers, Hudson River Fish evolving to make themselves immune to toxic waste, mice becoming immune to rat poison, darwin's finches beaks changing because the food they eat. The only thing that is a theory is the theory of human evolution from the beginning of time. We know as a fact that humans been evolving for centuries; there's just a "missing link" that is yet to be discovered. Religion hasn't proved what science can't prove yet. How the universe started? What started what started the universe? If God created us, who created God? But then who created God's creator? So shut up and sit down.

  • Evolution has yet to been proven wrong.

    It is one of the most supported scientific theories out there. Even if abiogenesis has not been proven it is extremely probable, though abiogenesis and evolution are 2 separate things. If you wish to believe in creationism instead of evolution, fine, just don't teach it to any kids or try and push it in schools. We want intelligent people in our future, not idiots that believe in talking snakes and a rib woman.

    Posted by: SNP1
  • Ugh, really? No.

    Evolution is widely accepted by the scientific community. It doesn't disprove God, it just provides a logical answer for his creations. If you want an illogical answer for the world, that is fine, you can believe that. I don't believe God hocus pocused the world, science is a greater miracle.

  • Evolution is not plain silly, it's a scientific fact that's widely accepted amongst the scientific community.

    You want to know what is silly though? Not just simply believing in a magic man which you cannot physically prove exists, but going a step further and believing in a very specific magic man in a world with thousands of religions that shaped this convoluted and ridiculous plan to 'forgive people' by murdering his own son which was technically not his son but him. If we were to criticize this story as an actual story and not mindlessly say 'Yup, that happened. God exists.' It simply doesn't hold up to scrutiny. Gods motives are simply poorly written. His logic is inconsistent, his morality is inconsistent, and when his logic isn't inconsistent it simply doesn't make any sense. And this is regardless of what parts you take as metaphor or literal. The Christian god is not real, and he's a terrible character that's nothing but a power mad god that enslaves people to reaffirm his own greatness.

    But enough about criticizing the bible on a literate level. Lets get to your obnoxious picture.

    'Atheism, the belief that nothing happe-'

    Hold up, hold up. We're not even a single sentence in and this picture has already proven that it doesn't have even the slightest understanding of what atheism even is. Atheism speaks nothing of someone's views of how everything came to be, it just means that the person in question doesn't believe that everything came to be through god. Just because we cannot provide a logical explanation for something,that doesn't make an absurd answer valid first of all, and second of all just because we cannot provide a logical explanation that doesn't mean that we believe that everything was caused by 'nothing'.

    'And then nothing magically exploded for no reason.'

    It's really cute when people like you try to be clever, because you just reveal how silly you are. Just because someone's an atheist, that doesn't mean that they subscribe to the big bang theory, first of all. Second of all, the big bang theory at least has some actual compelling evidence behind it.

    'A bunch of things magically re-arranged its self'

    If you believe in a god you really aren't in any place to criticize anything as being 'magical'. I mean, seriously, you're just being completely ridiculous. A magical being of all power created everything through magic. How is that honestly any more absurd than believing that everything magically rearranged its self alone? And this is going by your misrepresentation of how science actually functions. Meanwhile, in the real world, I have never ONCE heard a scientist assert that everything rearranged its self through 'MAGIC'. Would you like to hear why? It's simple, because that's not how science works. The idea is to explain things through compelling evidence and reason. You know, the absolute opposite of just asserting that X is true and that it just magically happened? Just because you cannot understand the science behind something that doesn't mean that it happened 'magically'.

  • I am religious but I have nothing against evolution.

    Evolution has been seen, the best example being the Galapagos Islands. Let me take you to some scripture. Genesis 2:7 "And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul." Evolution says it started way back with cells on pieces of clay combining to make the first Eukaryote. Then, over millions and millions of years, we came along. Personally, I do not think that monkeys evolved into us. The idea of evolution is wholly possible though.

  • Yes, evolution is so silly, its far more likely that a magic man in the sky created two people, who some how multiplied to millions.

    Even without facts and logic and everything those who believe in evolution rely on, evolution is still an actual theory. That means its a fair assumption given based on a set of facts which seem to lead to the conclusion. Religion however, is often inaccurately called a theory. It is an uneducated guess formed on a leap of logic. "The scales of these fish seem to change as time goes on to resist the cold in Antarctica, they must have evolved" Shows a theory based on a fact which leads to it. "The grass is so beautifully green this time of year, god must have made it that way" Is an incoherent leap of thought because one wishes it. A species having altered through the ages proves evolution, the color of the grass does not prove the existence of god. Therefore evolution would appear to be significantly less silly than the commonly proposed alternative, wouldn't you say?

  • It's not really all that silly...

    Not even sure why this is a poll. I'm religious and even I understand that evolution did happen. But God is who made it all happen and is still making it happen. I don't think evolution is silly at all and instead goes right along with creationism in my viewpoint.

  • There Is No Competing Theory To Evolution, It Is Considered as Fact:

    Evolution is the only Theory that provides a Rational Explanation for the Development Of All Life On Planet Earth. There is nothing that even comes close to providing the explanations in an Objective, Testable (Falsifiable) Form as does Evolution.
    Scientists have been trying to Disprove Evolution for 150 years without success. As science has no Pet Theories.
    Nothing has ever dented Evolution.
    No Competing Theory Exists that even comes close to Evolution.
    Simply: There Is Nothing Else As Good.

  • When will this die?

    And how many times do we have to tell creationists, if you really think you have a valid scientific alternative to evolution, then why don't you go to college, work your way to a Ph.D. In biochemistry or biology, write a dozen or so peer-reviewed journals proving why evolution is wrong, and turn the scientific community on its head? In the meantime, if you're going to stall scientific progress, then zip it and get out of the way.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
Sagey says2014-04-19T07:36:05.587
Instigator knows nothing about science, since if Evolution was ever proven wrong, Once, it would not be the Theory of Life that it is.
Science does not give Theories second chances, proven wrong once and it is out, if somebody disproved Evolution, it would be no more, scientists would have to devise another Theory to replace it. Same goes for Einstein, prove the theory of relativity wrong once, it no longer exists as a Theory.
Thus, Evolution has not been shown to be Wrong even Once. Which Destroys the Instigator's Opinion completely.
Proof: It still exists as a the Current Theory.
Sagey says2014-04-19T07:37:41.403
If Instigator could Disprove Evolution Once, He'd get the Nobel Prize. So if he thinks he is right, let him Prove it and get the Highest Scientific Award Available.
RHEMA.97 says2014-04-19T19:29:58.277
Are you even listening to yourself. That statement makes no sense in many ways. We have the right to debate on a subject no matter how true it sounds or how generally accepted that subject is. Or are you trying to take that right from me.

Subjects like evolution which is beleived by some to be true has been argued by many other scientists for centuries now ( i guess this is your first time of hearing that).

You dont need to be a genius to point out the obvious flaws in evolution. Do you expect everyone to blindly follow a stated suggestion or theory. Im very sure you dont even know the flaws in evolution.

At a time in history evolution was banned from teaching in educational institution till later it surfaced out.

The reason why it still survive today is because it acts as an alternative for godless people to be convinced on how life on earth came to be. While some who believe in a God believe that evolution was a means through which life came to be. To those people they are unaware of the many holes and unanswered questions in evolution if not they would have changed their minds ever since.

If you truly believe evolution is true then you wont be scared for me to reveal its imperfections and if you say its true prove to us that its true rather than trying to encourage us to also blindly believe in it.
Mike01506 says2014-04-19T22:24:14.387
I suggest, RHEMA.97, that you respond to my proof that you requested.
You don't seem to be keeping up the argument.
Sagey says2014-04-20T02:30:00.663
Wrong RHEMA.97: You can debate it all you want and post opinions all you want, but they are only your opinions and they are WRONG in more than many ways.
Firstly, Scientists are not arguing about Evolution, only Creatard ex-scientists do that.
The only arguments Scientists are having are about the finer points of which alleles or which genes are affected, but not about Evolution overall as Evolution is accepted by all scientists who know about and theorize within it as Fact.
You know so little that it is laughable.
Sagey says2014-04-20T02:51:41.527
For starters: Here is a brief history of Evolutionary Thought, btw, it doesn't mention it, but one of the founding fathers of Evolution was Leonardo da Vinci, who realized that the Noah Flood never happened, so remember this every time you see his painting of Jesus's Last Supper.


Maybe you should go back and learn Evolution 101 from scratch, or even better still go back and start from pre-school and learn logic as well as science all over again, because scientifically you are Inept.

You can debate me on Evolution any time you like, but beware: I know at least 1 million times more than you about both Evolution and the history of evolution.
I know for absolute Certain that there are no contentious issues with Evolution among Scientists.
Only Creatards don't want you to know this, so falsely publish rot that Scientists are Questioning Evolution.
Scientists did question and test it when Darwin first wrote his Theory, but no scientists in the world has been able to falsify it.
If even one scientist could prove Evolution wrong, we would not be having this online convo, there would be no Evolution to argue about and that Scientist who discovered the Flaw in Evolution would be Famous and regarded as the Greatest Biological Scientist to Ever Live, as no other scientist has been able to show a flaw in Evolution.
Michael Behe ( his concept of " Irreducible Complexity") failed to show any problems with Evolution and did get to be Famous, but only as a Crackpot, yet Creatards still try and foist his failure as a success, which only makes them look like unscientific loonies.
Even his employer had to distance their university from his concepts and make a public statement that t;hey do not support "Irreducible Complexity", and that the University is squarely behind Evolution only.
RHEMA.97 says2014-04-20T03:38:22.213
@ Sagey it seems you dont know the definition a scientist .If you did you would know that some scientist didnt agree with the evolution THEORY I could name many. I dont know what world you live in but in this world evolution has been falsified countless times problem is that you are yet to find that out and I pray you do.

It has been falsified by various people so therefore one man cant claim that he falsified it. Ive already told you why this theory of evolution still exists Im not saying it again.

You may not want to agree in the idea of creationism that's fine. And you claim to know so much about evolution and its history but yet you've only been stating your opinions on this subject such as :

If Instigator could Disprove Evolution Once, He'd get the Nobel Prize.

( ( many people have already disprooved evolution I wont even desrve it. ) )

Evolution is accepted by all scientists who know about and theorize within it as Fact.

( ( you are wrong I suggest you over generalize things ) )

Scientist who discovered the Flaw in Evolution would be Famous and regarded as the Greatest Biological Scientist to Ever Live, as no other scientist has been able to show a flaw in Evolution.

( ( The problem is they are either unaware of the flaws or they ignore the flaws of evolution and come up with guesses and assumptions to fill in these flaws.) )

stating your opinions and suggestions proves nothing. I did state some opinions and came up with scientific evidence to defend my case, if you know so much about evolution and you believe it is true. Then support yourself with solid evidence that evolution is true .I'm tired of hearing only opinions.

Opinions prove nothing.
Sagey says2014-04-20T09:53:36.160
@ RHEMA.97: You are Extremely Wrong: Evolution has never been falsified:
If you think in your world it has, then you do not live on Planet Earth.
Scientists have tried to falsify it when Darwin first penned it and failed.
When the Science of Genetics was discovered, scientists at last thought they had a weapon to defeat Evolution, they were wrong ad Genetics strengthened Evolution beyond science's ability to destroy it.
Genetics made Evolution a Fact.

You know so little of Science that your comments are Laughable.
My now 12 year old niece knows science better than yourself.
Sagey says2014-04-20T09:55:52.127
Sagey says2014-04-20T09:57:29.527
From the second Source I cited earlier: "Not a single living organism that has ever been discovered shows any sign, whatsoever, of having evolved by non-Darwinian means. If there were, the scientific method is precisely designed to discover it. There are no known species of any living organism anywhere on Earth that can not be fully described by evolution theory. The only people who assert otherwise are religious fundamentalists who have repeatedly demonstrated they do not understand how Darwinian evolution by means of natural selection actually works. Hence it is illegal in almost every industrialised nation on Earth to teach creationism in the science classroom."
Sagey says2014-04-20T10:08:26.070
BTW: My comments are not Just my Opinions: They are the Opinions expressed in most western Universities and Science Establishments around the world.
Your opinions are only backed up by Creatard Anti-Scientists.
The number of highly regarded Scientists out of the Thousands of Such Scientists, in the entire world that back up your nonsense can be counted on your fingers.
I have 98% of scientific knowledge behind my Sources and comments.
You have less than 2%.
That's the fact.
You can debate me on the subject of Evolution any time, I'd shoot you down like a tin duck at an air rifle gallery, which is something else I excelled at.
You have no evidence backing your nonsense, while I have most of scientific research in the last 150 years to use as my sources.
Mike01506 says2014-04-20T14:28:22.400
I agree with Sagey.
Rami says2015-05-27T23:19:23.813
Please prove me wrong.

The Venus fly trap has a couple of parts to it. In the middle there is a brightly colored flower to draw flies. All over the flower there is different trigger hairs that of they are touched, they will snap shut. Then, when the plant trapped its meal, its mouth is filled with enzymes to dissolve its catch. This are only the traits I'm certain are needed.
If evolution goes by slowly, how does it survive? If one of those trait were missing, it would starve and die out. It couldn't have slowly evolved from another organism, unless it was basically the same type of plant.