Evolution is not a scientific theory - problem of falsifiability (Catch 22). Exposing pseudoscience

every scientific theory functions in a way it can be disproven if certain facts or theory come out.
Meanwhile, evolution (like Hegelian theories), while being the current paradigm, seems entirely unfalsifiable (Poppers prerequisite for scientific theory). like the test for real witch - If she dies she is probably a witch, if she survives she isnt.

Example 1: if it survives its more adapted (ergo superior), if it doesnt its less adapted (ergo inferior). That kind of logic should also apply to human races so if whitey dies, he actually wasnt the masterrace, if he survives he actually is. This is mythology and circular reasoning, not scientific reasoning.

Example 2: "useless human body parts". Appendix and wisdom teeth are considered an evolutionary relic…until few years ago when appendix was discovered to be very usefull for keeping gut bacteria. Wisdom teeth? Idk I still have them.


In the end theory of evolution doesnt predict anything like a good sci theory should, but explains things backwards.
Evolution is nothing more than antiwhite mythology to push nihilism and confusion.


Attached: science_TM5.jpg (468x318 492.11 KB, 42.31K)

Other urls found in this thread:


Explanatory value is still high.
However, I think that memetic organisms have selectively bred humans for a while now.

example of pseudoscientific thinking inspired by evolution.

I know that plenty of you think that evolution is prowhite since

but the trick is that EVERY evolutionary argumention can go both ways

like with all mythology…and like all mythology it has ZERO predictionary value which is what should count is science (unlike NUscience)

I can come up with scenarios that would contradict evolution. You even describe procedures by which a theory could be shown to be wrong yourself. I don't get why it's not falsifiable.

And why are theories about past events not scientific? Prediction does not mean it has to be data in the future. It can also be other data in the past. If you make a theory that all pharaohs wore sandals then you only need to find one that doesn't to disprove your theory.

Are you trolling or just not trying?

Imagine caring about something this pointless when your nation is over run with Jew's and shitskins

Another schizo thread

the trick is that you can argue from an evolutionary position pro and anti homosexuality:

1. anti - no procreation
2. pro - adaptation towards overpopulation

its totally unfalsifiable.

some are some arent. Schliemanns theory and discovery of Troy was obviously a falsifiable one.

go away moron. evolution is no1 nihilistic paradigm of today.

utter brainlet detected.

Attached: evolution1548188628081.png (872x1024 1.32 MB, 100.76K)

fuck off anti-European-rabbi.


Moth literally named "The predicted one".

You are a dumb nigger, OP. You were not blessed with any great revelation and your IQ is room temperature.

Attached: 1281248920355.jpg (291x291, 44.74K)

>literally a moth named the predicted one.

It's simple, you have random, Darwinian evolution (which is pseudo-scientific) and teleological (guided) evolution which is scientific. Kikes, globalists, various parasitic elites use the first to justify their acts despite not being able to survive for 10 minutes in a true "law of the jungle" scenario. Survival as a basis for superiority is objectively false. You have single-cell organisms that are here much longer than humans, in much higher numbers, and they would probably survive most disasters that would wipe us out completely. That does not make them superior in any meaningful sense.

It has some predictability, actually. Humans by large prefer symmetrical and healthy faces and bodies, hopeful mentalities, pro-social behavior, virtue and compassion.

I'll make the statement that humans can be divided into two groups. The more apelike and the more humanlike. The more humanlike is actively selecting for the best qualities, and even has some manner of 'image' that they select for. These images are hazy and mixed, but they are akin to angels, elves, kings, queens, princes and princesses and the sort. The apelike humans, however, prefer to go for simple things. Big tits, big ass, big lips, big dick, tall, muscular, popular… And of course, desperation. The ape has yet to conquer its fear of extinction to the extent that they can doom themselves to such a fate if their standards are not met. This means that the apelike humans tend to be uglier.
Of course, we all embody the ape within us. We do have the simple preferences - but not everybody acts on them.

Imagine ignoring your own life and struggles because of politics you can't directly affect. You're on the Internet, not killing invaders. Map your priorities, that is the hierarchy you believe in.

The theory of evolution existed before two very important theories, both of which were revolutionary, independent, and could have completely falsified evolution. Genetics, which could have easily falsified evolution but despite all the genetic testing done there are no anomolies inconsistent with evolution. No "crocoducks" as some christcucks argue. In Geology, the theory of Superpositioning… which basically states that older shit is under layers of newer shit, validated dating and the timeline of species well before anything like radiocarbon dating existed, and again… where it could have completely falsified it there has never been a single fossil found that is inexplicably out of place. All you would need to do is find ONE FOSSIL out of place so start digging faggot.

Don't be a fucking moron OP, evolution is a fact.

"Give us one free miracle, and we'll explain the rest"
T. McKenna

Also, OP's a fag.

The double space shill strikes again

"Evolution is not a scientific theory but a methaphistical research programme."

K. Popper

how does naming a moth tell something about epistemiology of evolution? you imbecile.

your mythological friends at leddit send you likes.

100% correct.
Only issue is that all of those FACTS, cant be explained both by evolution as with YEC.

this is all easily verifiable, genetics PREDATES evolution with Mendel and if you take ancient hereditary knowledge, hereditary mechanism knowledge predates Darwin by millenias.

And how on Earthly logic laws does denying evolution as Catch22 deny hereditary mechanisms?

faggot r/atheists, go watch a ted talk, go listen to Niel Degrasse you corny predictable faggot.

Attached: EVOLUTION723575.jpg (488x500 102.48 KB, 33.5K)

Here's some perspective for all.
Things can change. Have hope.

Ok, so you're not a serious person. Got it.

Reminder: Christians and Leftists (Yes) oppose Evolution because their faith demands that all human beings must be equal.

It is true that Evolution contains a form of mysticism, that just means rejecting it makes you an godless person.

how does ONE FOSSIL tell you about the dominant population of the time? A rabbit in precambrion would DISPROVE NOTHING.

Attached: scienceTM1.jpg (564x685 327.53 KB, 71.93K)


Attached: FUCKING JEWS.jpg (1080x1080, 204.06K)

In its most basic aspect "evolution", which is cognate with "unfolding", is the idea that organisms change over time and that the environment determines which changes allow the organism to survive. That's really it for the most. Its early modern interpretation by which a certain direction in terms of quality was assigned to it i.e things getting "better", seems in itself to be linked to Darwin and not so much to the modern theory, which, as with any aspect of society, recoils at the idea of some things being better than others(Darwin's theory in a way essentially implies that monkeys were something lower, while humans are something higher; moderns essentially reject this interpretation and simply say that both monkeys and humans are equally high or low and just adapted to their own ways).

The word "evolution" carries a lot of weight in its modern, sort of "progressive" interpretation which isn't implied in its etymology.

Fruit flies.

Fuck off and saged.

Attached: fuckem.jpg (255x255, 9.42K)

"Fitness" refers to the ability to reproduce successfully. If you can have 10 kids but die at 24 because you have a genetic disease you are more "fit" than a guy who lives to 95 and has one kid. It doesnt mean the guy with 10 kids is healthier, he just passed on his genes in greater volume. Evolution is really only concerned with reproduction and natural selection. Evolution isn't constant improvement. Understand that natural selection drives evolution, and some factors that would lead a healthy individual to an early death are completely up to luck and chance.
Example 2: "useless human body parts". Appendix and wisdom teeth are considered an evolutionary relic…until few years ago when appendix was discovered to be very usefull for keeping gut bacteria. Wisdom teeth? Idk I still have them.
The appendix was used for digesting coarse vegetable matter, kind of like a gullet on a bird. The fact that it also houses gut bacteria is a secondary function. Wisdom teeth serve the same purpose as your other molars, but the problem is the human jaw has shrunk because we don't need to chew coarse plant material for hours a day.

I believe in micro evolution , like wolves to dogs.
I do not believe one species can become another, like fish to people.

Why does op always have to be an op?

Attached: 0989d0af44550998cfffa7d3b2c5d6416544429aa86596a5899766d69c574dce.jpg (762x785, 396.35K)

"we are EVOLVING into a multicultural civilisation"

this whole thinking is a product of evolutionary mythology.

who is Mendel.

as do hereditary mechanism prove. Question is to what degree. Esch coli exp was a total flop.

you are totally incapable of analytic thinking.

"microevolution" is nothing more than simple hereditary mechanism which are a proven fact. the "macroevolution" is a nihilistic pseudoscientific myth.

I'm Christian and don't oppose evolution. In fact, I support it as an escape route for good things.
The equality before God is not identicality before God. To be frank, we have been commanded to judge tree by their fruit. I have a hard time not seeing Christianity as a human breeding program with (mostly) divine inspiration. The two world wars have crushed the European spirit, and all attempts at holding value and traditions seem worthless at the moment. Christian understanding of equality does not discredit hierarchies. Humanism, however, does.

Attached: Example of homologous structures.jpg (960x720, 56.51K)

That is nice, 2 billion christians disagree with you, meanwhile those humanists you attack are the only ones in the West with any kind of openness towards racism

Marx > Hegel > Darwin

its all progressivism/humanism/globalism/jewish-anglo nihilism and pantheistic in religion.

so black race is superior then?

its still used for storing good bacteria. not that (((scientific doctors))) will tell you that

you dont have it because many kids in western world are malnourished or have messed up hormones.

true, but evolution is still circular.


Attached: science1522523619100.jpg (1024x535 148.6 KB, 69.04K)

It is not circular reasoning you retard.

Having a bunch of vestigial organs would be selected against evolutionarily. Saying "God made man perfectly" leads to circular reasoning.

Honestly, atleast Marx was a bit of a racist and communist countries atleast stay racially distinct and quickly turn nationalist. This rying marx/hegel/darwin together only makes sense if you are some civcuck or liberal or something.

Is this the latest D&C strat? Was christian vs pagan not working anymore?

You have to remember that the biological sciences are by their very nature extremely imprecise.
You're dealing with meat and meat is never consistent or reliable.
In medicine you can do everything right and still have the patient keel over and die for seemingly no reason.
In adaptative evolution you can have weird shit that shouldn't be helpful stick around because meat is inconsistently frugal and is more than happy to keep vestigial things it doesn't need so long as everything works out overall. On top of that our understanding of meat and how it all works isn't great either.

We do however have real world evidence of evolution in action.
Elephant populations in Africa are more widely exhibiting what would normally be considered a genetic defect that prevents them from growing tusks. Meaning they're not a target for poachers.
Bacterial adaptation to antibiotic overuse. Along with bacterial adaptation to excessive bacteriophage exposure.

Attached: 1523901175.jpg (470x647, 98.28K)

Question for evolutionists, can you define "deformities"? What is a "deformity" and what is the next evolutionary step?

Answer: depends what you want it to be, Catch22 can go both ways.

they do. hegelians are faggots as well. where does that put you?

retroactive thinking VS proactive. I bet you REALLY FCK LOOOOVE science dont you faggot?

name one vestigial organ on humans right one.

not true, acheology can be mathematically precise if you use right theories and methodology. Schliemann discovered Troy using just basic empiricism.

Attached: tailbone_child.jpg (640x360, 69.78K)

Hegel a conservative philosopher, equally Darwin.

no wonder you dumb bastards were fed to lions


Attached: 1531309099.gif (420x420, 9.37K)

all of this is correct, but this is just natural selection which fits into YEC as well and is also verifiable. Its a proof of evolution as much as its a proof for YEC theory.

Think about this - did Scandinavians evolved into high lactose tolerance or were they selected for it? All human races have lactose tolerance btw, the difference is in the degree of it.

Hegel was a Soros of his time.

Attached: lactose1548970182244.gif (602x526, 95.95K)


Attached: EE6A9BE1-D654-4704-BAC1-E142EE42B718.jpeg (576x1024, 164.77K)


They drank fermented milk.
It's like the Irish being able to tolerate lactose because of the potato famine.
Everyone can tolerate it, but can you handle the side effects?

So you are suggesting that the earth was created very recently with all life being formed mostly as they are now and then set loose?


I think you are conflating evolution and natural selection. Its easier to understand if you separate them out.

Evoluition describes how the offspring of an organism is comprised of half of the genetic material of each of the two parent organisms, with a tiny change in DNA due to the cosmic background radiation.
Evolution predicts that two white people with blue eyes will produce a white child with blue eyes nearly always. But on the rare occasion there will be a mutation, which introduces a small random element.
I think in the modern world that isnt too controversial I dont think.

Natural selection is the idea that these genetic mutations will change isolated groups over many generations towards being more suitable for the current environment.
So in humans, the ones that stayed back in Africa could easily forage for food all year round. In the African jungle your best strategy was to produce plenty of kids and hope some of them dont die of diseases and infections.
The humans who went north to Europe faced a very different, much more harsh climate. Those who were lighter skinned got more vitamin D from the sun. So that trait succeeded. But also a lot of new mental traits were needed to survive in the freezing tundra. Ingenuity, determination, innovation. You cant just mindlessly pump out kids in the snowy wastes you need to conserve and preserve what resources you have.

The Catholic church has accepted evolution. That's around one billion who agree.

USA has been the lapdog of the jews for a century. It's not looking good for them. The fruit of all that labor has been an attempt to manifest the end times, and we shall see if it's just hubris or a successful campaign.

Mind clarifying my errors.

Post a few.

Thats nice, when will the catholic church purge the blacks from their ranks?

can someone name VESTIGIAL organs on humans right now that serve no purpouse?

go watch a red talk by bill nye you absolute retard

you havent answered my question - did Scandis with their high lactose tolerance EVOLVED into high lactose tolerance or were they selected for it?

Im not, natural selection (="microevolution") is factual, unlike evolution ("macroevolution")

as did they accepted refuggees. They cuck all the time.

Attached: evolutionSCIENCE!!!.png (600x600 664.98 KB, 73.79K)

Evolved. Most stop drinking after they move onto solids.
Where as these communities utilized the resources available to them. Instead of stopping the usage of milk after birth, they continued to utilize it for their survival.
Even if you were lactose intolerant, you would still eat / drink the products if it kept you alive
The longer the usage the more tolerant the community becomes.
Unless you follow sweden and invite every samdnigger in, then the communities tolerance decreases.

There's no need. Blacks should be kicked out of Europe. However, most non-whites in Europe are not Christians.

You don't get to redefine the terms microevolution and macroevolution. Microevolution is change in allele frequency within a specie. Macroevolution is change in allele frequency at or above the threshold of species. Speciation is Macroevolution by definition, and has been directly observed thousands of times. The two operate by the exact same process (Change in allele frequency by means of descent with inherent modification) with the only difference being scale. Natural Selection is not the same thing as biological evolution, but its set of selective pressures do yield evolutionary change.

according to evolution, vestigial organs on humans should be plenty, so far, they named:

it was all a flop and it turns out that all of those organs serve a crucial purpouse. So why dont they search for vestigialist and speed up the evolution into the Brave New World by removing useless human body parts? Is is because its nothing more than an unfalsifiably myth?

so it was like sink or swim after all? so what part did "evolved"? If you had high lactose you survived if you didnt you "drowned".

BULLSHIT! Esch coli longterm evolution experiment didnt create speciation even after 60k generations, which is why they havent repeated it.
Best you can do is strawmen me with examples of domesticated foxes and dogs.

Attached: fingers mutation.jpg (634x613 76.28 KB, 69.99K)

No just this but DNA disproves evolution. DNA proves a Human will never be anything but a human

Equality of organisms is an anti-evolution, anti-science pipe dream.

by that logic you shouldnt even be opossed to nogs emigrating into sweden since being it sweden should make you more intelligent and more nordic looking…?
Its just circular hegelian thinking at its finest and left ADORES circular thinking.


Attached: SWEDEN YES 1425501667784.png (659x609, 443.98K)

Well, it is a weak science, i give you that.
Because predicting, for example, european-descent population in 100 years is almost impossible:
will there be a "happening" of sorts, which turns the table?
will there be a mass suicide?
will whites create an ethnostate and from there, maintain stable levels of population?

Same thing for even a stupid animal as a salamander; will outside forces like migration of other animals, affect it's current ecological trend? If so, maybe adding migrating animals to the model… then you have an stochastic model which could diverge to any point given very delicate initial conditions.

These kind of questions are almost impossible to predict. Yet evolutionists try to do it. At least in simple cases.

Now here's another issue. You associate "evolution" or evolutionary theory, with Darwinian natural selection.
The fact is, natural selection is only part of it. The other HUGE ( i mean, massively huge and with huge implications) force of nature is genetic drift.
The other two: mutations and migration.

So it's possible you attack this discipline by being ignorant of it.
Grab a book of evolutionary theory (for example: Evolution, by Mark Ridley) and learn it fully.

t. almost-degree in biology user

Attributes of Kali Yuga

In relation to rulers

In relation to people's relationships


In a way, yes. Sink or swim.
Now don't quote me on this, I'm not a biologist, just an interested party.
However, the part that evolved would be the gut bacteria.

The only reason I would suggest that; ask a lactose intolerant person what It does to their guts.

I can name a vestigial organ: the toenail. Basically, those were grown because our ancestors' feet were more shaped like hands, but all they do today is get ingrown and broken.

Schizophrenia is a serious issue. Please seek help.

my condolences, that field is filled with left leaning bugman

hard not imposible, but to make it easier, lets stay in present, not in future - why dont they make a list of vestigial organs on humans?

ok, so it was selected for it, it didnt evolved and nogs wont evolve into nordics no matter the surroundings.

gut bacteria…that as well doesnt evolve in humans, you inject it with helathy food, especially ages food like cheese, meat, slightly rotten/aged meat etc. that same bacteria is stored in appendix which is why so many people that removed appendix (often legitimate procedure but done too often) after appendicititis have gut problems.

I get your point, but what is the reference point? Because one can argue that 2 hands is too much and without a reference point you cant say 2 is optimal number of hands.

back to you hegelian faggot.

Attached: intelligence_victorian.png (892x861, 86.03K)

Arnt kikes known for psychoanalysing everyone?

The real problem here is that once a person discovers that much of what he has always believed is a lie, and often even part of a conspiracy against him, he may, for a time, see conspiracies and lies where they don't exist.
Enter flat earth, reptilian shape shifters, ancient ayyliums, self-serving interpretations of everything, the bullshit ITT, and all manner of other distraction and folly… none of which is particularly important and only serves to divide us up into helpless little sub-groups that don't trust each other.
Once you guys get over reveling in the zeal of the newly converted, come back to sanity and help the rest of us out with the important things.

Attached: 1263068483687.jpg (604x558, 63.56K)

I'd say it's more of a case of excessive trauma (circumcision) and projection.

What you just said actually affirms biological evolution as a process. You would know that if you understood how the Law of Monophyly and nested hierarchies work.

Pure projection. Speciation among bacteria is difficult to determine because bacteria are able to transfer their genetic material laterally. You just strawmanned an experiment involving bacteria as though it were indicative of Speciation among sexually reproducing organisms. Very dishonest.

A good example of observed Speciation would be the case of three species of wildflowers called goatsbeards which were introduced to the United States from Europe shortly after the turn of the century. Within a few decades their populations expanded and began to encounter one another in the American West. Whenever mixed populations occurred, the species interbred (Hybridizing) producing sterile hybrid offspring. Suddenly, in the late forties two new species of Goatsbeard appeared near Pullman, Washington. Although the new species were similar in appearance to the hybrids, they produced fertile offspring. The evolutionary process had created a separate species that could reproduce but not mate with the Goatsbeard plants from which they had evolved. That right there is undeniable Speciation. You lose.

Vestigial organs which could serve another purpose, are repurposed (shaped by natural selection powered by mutations given an environment) and so they now serve a purpose.
Vestigial organs which cannot (realistically, by mutations or chromosomal rearrangements) serve a purpose, have been eliminated or is in the process of being eliminated.
We are not "fully evolved", we are still adapting to our respective environments. Migration is in fact blurring all of these issues and i wonder if we are going to survive even 100 years from now given the huge kikery going on at current year

Attached: darwin_quote_.jpg (850x400, 120.78K)

This is all a silly anegdotal story, I presented legitimate secular arguments and examples against evolution and I was responded to only with anegdotes and leddit smuggies. Evolution is the paradigm of today and used as a nihilistic myth together with NuScience worship against white civilisation.

Please respond with arguments instead of logical fallacies.

what on Earth are you talking about?

to know that those traits evolved youll have to be first sure that they didnt have that trait in the first place (generation of infertile men does not mean that human race (((evolves))) into infertility ). Genotpe does not always transfer into phentype and you used phenotype as a proof of changed genotype. Are you dishonest or sloppy?

Attached: science499880.jpg (1658x1028 60.92 KB, 1.95M)

what organs right now are being eliminated?
what organ right now are being created new (and how do you differentiate new organs from body deformities)?

Make of that what you will but imo the fact we're talking about FE is due to something about as organic as my Doritos bag.

Evolution contradicts diversity and leftism.
You are just drooling idiocies.

Mendel started experiments in 1856, and experimented through 1863… none of his ideas were formulated fully or appreciated until much later. The paper he wrote in 1865 was mostly ignored. Darwin published Origin of Species in 1859, ergo Evolution predated genetics. Further pea plant experimentation and studying a few select traits is nowhere near actual DNA testing.

Just looking at publications… 1859 is sooner than 1865, and even then the actual explanation that would launch the discipline (discovery of DNA) wouldn't occur until the 1950's.

you're a stupid nigger

What are you referring to? Genetic analysis confirmed they are new, separate species. But we already know that because the new species were not interfertile with their parent species.

African descent hominids are a different species.
Why, you might ask?
They have a different evolutionary history.
In theory, they are "ancestral" to us, and ramified earlier. However, we non-niggers have cross-bred with other hominids and aquired novel genes which, no matter how many thousands of years nigs would be living in Europe, will never be accessible to them. So it is too late for them to aquire them; also Europe is not their natural habitat, but rather the forests and savannah of Africa. Why would you put an inferiorly adapted animal in another environment?
The only reason why they are exploding in numbers is because whitey is giving them free stuff for society-level suicidal trends. If this trend continues, as we all know, european-descent people will cease to exist.

In fact, there are very fancy models that explain why migration decreases variation in diversity within a species [1] so in fact all those braindead leftyfaggots are pushing for the elimination of diversity through homogeneization.

[1] : supposing we are even a species (morphological definition). Protip: there are like 20 different definitions for species. Being able to cross-breed is only one part of it. There existed and exists different species which can crossbreed between them.

Attached: slide_4.jpg (960x720, 123.97K)

I can show you flower species that changes phenotype colour of the flower based on height you plant it - did it evolved or it just had more colour potential from the start?

Evolution is a corner stone of progressivism, EVERY ultra evolutionists is a flaming leftist.

hereditary mechnisms were know FOR MILLENIAS.

You dont understand either evolution or nihilism.

Got a single fact to back that up?
Science contradicts leftist politics in every way but like every other aspect of society jews try to muddy the water and subvert it.

lol, how old do you think the Earth is?

No the underlying mechanisms were not known. Selective breeding is not "genetics" faggot.

In a famine situation, giving yourself diarrhoea just kills you faster.
Contradiction of your own logic. If milk kept even the intolerant alive then there would be no selection pressure in favour of tolerance.
It wouldn't "evolve."
Spoiler: for the trait to be selected for, it has to already exist in a significant number of people. So most Whites being lactose tolerant in no way implies we 'evolved' the trait due to being forced onto a milk diet. All you're doing is restricting the population to persons who only have that trait.
Example : if a population kills 90% of all dark haired children of each generation then eventually the entire population will have light hair.
No sane person would claim that the 'selective pressure' against brunettes caused blonde and red hair to 'evolve' - it just acted as a filter on preexisting members of the species.
The genome of the population has not evolved.
By the way, the lactose thing is bullshit anyway.
Anyone can drink milk, it just has to be FERMENTED'' first.
And given that fermenting milk allows it to be stored FOR WEEKS AT ROOM TEMPERATURE, and that lactobacterial SCOBY(Google it) cultures such as kefir and kombucha'' have been known for thousands of years, it is perfectly sound and logical to assume this is exactly what the peoples of old used to improve their milk.
Modern man keeps telling us how awful and precarious life was without "tech". Our forebears didn't have refrigerators and they did not need them.

Who are the truly ignorant, man living thousands of years ago whose milk lasted weeks in a clay pot at room temp, or modern bourgeois consumer weaklings, whose pasteurised milk is rotten in a week, even when he burns fuels to power a machine to keep it cold?
One example of the fallacy of 'progress', lost on moderns. The absurdity would be obvious to everyone if they were not being deliberately kept in ignorance and swimming in pride, the pride which manifests in every transhumanist type as a tendency to refer to those who actually develop theie beloved tech and science, as 'we' of vicarious achievement.
People are not becoming more intelligent.
The physical decline of each generation since WW2 obvious to anyone, is the reification of a higher moral and spiritual atrophy.
And even this will be explained away by the same ideological lies "physique doesn't matter, muh robots soon."
Fat acceptance was only a matter of time.

It's unlikely that organs will be eliminated, but they will just become smaller and more vestegial if there are no use for it, as what we have observed in other species, no organs that exist will truly disappear, they might disappear, but the chances are almost impossible.

If we are to be technical right here, there is no real way of differentiating new organs from body deformities. What constitute as deformity is based on the average human body, if there are deviations from the normal human's body and function, then it could be constituted as deformity. So if a person suddenly have a mutation that have two hearts instead of one, then it also counts as deformity.

You guys need to stop responding to kike threads, and you need to stop dismissing this shit as "schizo". He's not crazy, he's not stupid, he's a kike deliberately trying to sow doubt about science and truth because science shows the truth that niggers are literally subhuman.

better way of putting is "facts contradict leftist policies in every way". Scientific community is totally complicit in white genocide, the closer they are to hegelianism/evolution the more radical about it they are: Michio Kaku, Bill Nye, L Krauss…


Attached: sciencefa3b832c8b365f1194cb92d80f59668e9a8ce682c3b6b4781a09b1b07423a640.jpg (850x400, 85.33K)

because they are kike run you stupid faggot
science is fact

Yes it would, go find one.

The practice of Genetic engineering is described in the book of Enoch.

hear hear

kudos on points about selecting for an the milk conspiracy of today

my exact point, its about semantics and catch22s

science is utterly pozzed.

we conclude that americans were black, Egiptians as well. brilliant.

Attached: science1523146405443.png (1125x1151 915.76 KB, 157.43K)


No idiot, understanding how something works is the science. Selective breeding to create dog breeds was not "genetics" it was dog breeding/animal husbandry and selectively cultivating plants was not "genetics" it was fucking agriculture. Farmers and breeders 1000 years ago had no fucking concept of RNA/DNA. What you are doing is calling a sky diver a fucking physicist because he uses gravity to do what he does.

you're a stupid nigger

Shit that hasn't happened proves your point. Brilliant.

See sky diving reference here you pilpul kike.

kys chr*stcuck dumbass
appendix is as you described, plus it serves as a cushion for other organs. wisdom teeth are more teeth, they're not supposed to get impacted but we eat soft foods and have improper oral posture so they do. there is no extraneous or "evolutionary relic" part of the body

More like science doesn't care about politics because it ultimately is a way to create models and abstractions for humankind to understand the world around them.

This is why scientists are and should be hesitant in making absolute statements because the description of scientific facts are nuanced and not set in stone, but they are very much pragmatic and consistent.

I think people tend to ignore the randomness of selection as well, evolution isn't necessarily about deliberate refinement, that concept is only done through human's deliberate behavior, evolution can just mean that it's "good enough" to live in the environment. A genetic retard can be selected if it has the ability to find mates and reproduce to pass down its retard genes to their descendants, this is why there tends to be a regression to the means, but human is actively being selected evolutionary not just biologically, but culturally as well, a retard may not be respected by society, and that itself makes them evolutionary dead ends.

There many different organisms in this world that just fills a niche in the environment, and they live in some environments that is not necessarily what we would call quality living, because evolution processes literally does not give a shit, and it is ultimately up to humankind and human culture to continue to develop better ways of improving other organisms for our purposes and also to improve humanity positively, whether its IQ, physicality, etc…

If you do not have a culture that values specific traits that are pragmatic such as intelligence, then technically there would be very little selection pressure to breed intelligent individuals, and you will produce people of all spectrums of intelligence, evolution literally selects for the minimal amount for immediate survival, like breathing, or staying alive autonomously.

I think people are just confusing the terms together.

Genetics is the underlying theory behind selective breeding, farmers didn't know genetics, but people eventually found out about genes and theorized about it for centuries before recent advancements that helped verify the field of study.

Bet the mods protect this slide as well.

No, this christcuck nigger is intentionally trying to conflate utilizing a mechanism (Selective Breeding) with understanding how it fundamentally works (Genetics). He's too much of a fucking stupid nigger to realize he's basically saying "all people that drive cars are mechanics or mechanical engineers because they've been driving cars for like, ever."

this is why dumbfuck christcuck spiritual semites are hated on Zig Forums