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

Bentley Morales
Bentley Morales

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.

sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071008102334.htm

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.

discuss.

Attached: appendix.jpg (42.31 KB, 468x318)
Attached: dawkins.png (492.11 KB, 1000x618)
Attached: 1X486445639836.jpg (749.35 KB, 2500x1667)
Attached: science-TM5.jpg (164.11 KB, 1024x576)

Other urls found in this thread:

vanisource.org/wiki/SB_12.2:_The_Symptoms_of_Kali-yuga
evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/evo_15
khanacademy.org/science/biology/her/evolution-and-natural-selection/a/darwin-evolution-natural-selection
ncse.com/library-resource/defining-evolution-0)
thoughtco.com/what-is-evolution-1224603
yourgenome.org/facts/what-is-evolution
science.howstuffworks.com/life/evolution/evolution1.htm
evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/0_0_0/evoscales_02
evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/0_0_0/evo_39
www2.nau.edu/lrm22/lessons/evolution_notes/microevolution.html
evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/0_0_0/evo_48
talkorigins.org/faqs/macroevolution.html
evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/0_0_0/evo_42
britannica.com/science/speciation
khanacademy.org/science/biology/her/tree-of-life/a/species-speciation
talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html
talkorigins.org/faqs/speciation.html
evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/news/100201_speciation
pnas.org/content/114/23/6074
sciencemeetsreligion.org/evolution/speciation.php
whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2012/10/19/speciation-observed-again/
pged.org/what-is-genotype-what-is-phenotype/
nature.com/scitable/definition/genotype-234
genome.gov/glossary/index.cfm?id=93
britannica.com/science/phenotype
evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/0_0_0/genovspheno_01
answersingenesis.org/racism/
answersingenesis.org/answers/books/one-race-one-blood/
answersingenesis.org/media/video/bible/only-answer-to-racism/
answersingenesis.org/racism/teaching-kids-about-race/
youtube.com/watch?v=Tv5d6VcHD0c
hooktube.com/watch?v=Tv5d6VcHD0c
youtube.com/watch?v=jINhlfIQ-BU
hooktube.com/watch?v=jINhlfIQ-BU
youtube.com/watch?v=0Bh4CyDdByQ
hooktube.com/watch?v=0Bh4CyDdByQ
discovery.org/multimedia/audio/2019/03/john-west-and-michael-medved-talk-human-zoos-and-racism/
discovery.org/multimedia/tag/darwinian-racism/
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3921335/
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3185609/
pnas.org/content/113/10/2554
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_of_Ham
answering-christianity.com/earth_flat.htm
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firmament
flatearthscienceandbible.com/2016/02/09/60-bible-verses-describing-a-flat-earth-inside-a-dome-2/
twitter.com/g_rdn_/status/1116321944096399360
sacred-texts.com/hin/m03/m03189.htm
sefaria.org/Psalms.104?lang=bi
twitter.com/g_rdn_/status/1116533085485641729
twitter.com/DiscoveryCSC
bayfiles.com/55a3f9ean5/Darwin_Devolves_by_Michael_J._Behe_2019_Audiobook_mp3
archive.org/details/ddbmd
archive.org/details/DarwinsDoubtPart17/Darwin's Doubt-Part01.mp3
archive.org/details/ddbscm
bayfiles.com/scG3D4e5nf/Darwin_s_Doubt_by_Stephen_C._Meyer_2013_Audiobook_zip
talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB102.html
youtube.com/watch?v=HEMD5-5VjeY
youtube.com/watch?v=LCpz-7Jj2-k
youtube.com/watch?v=bAmlTkoERi8
youtube.com/watch?v=YRvlJKzKPsc

Hunter Cox
Hunter Cox

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

Nathan Bailey
Nathan Bailey

example of pseudoscientific thinking inspired by evolution.

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

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

Explanatory value is still high.

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

Henry Young
Henry Young

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?

Julian Reyes
Julian Reyes

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

Hudson Martinez
Hudson Martinez

Another schizo thread

Robert Richardson
Robert Richardson

Explanatory value

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

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

You even describe procedures by which a theory could be shown to be wrong yourself. I don't get why it's not falsifiable.

its totally unfalsifiable.

And why are theories about past events not scientific?

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

Imagine caring about something this pointless

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

Another schizo thread

utter brainlet detected.

Attached: evolution-catch-22.jpg (100.76 KB, 872x1024)
Attached: evolution1526747708611.jpg (1.32 MB, 2580x2336)
Attached: evolution1548188628081.png (194.73 KB, 868x760)

Ryder Scott
Ryder Scott

discuss.
fuck off anti-European-rabbi.

YOU HAVE TO GO BACK

Colton Rogers
Colton Rogers

zero predictability
Moth literally named "The predicted one".

Camden Hill
Camden Hill

not even knowing what pseudoscience actually is

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

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

Brody Ortiz
Brody Ortiz

zero predictability
literally a moth named the predicted one.
Sage.

Adam Stewart
Adam Stewart

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.

Lincoln Diaz
Lincoln Diaz

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.

Jeremiah Bailey
Jeremiah Bailey

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.

Andrew Rivera
Andrew Rivera

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

Also, OP's a fag.

Oliver Perry
Oliver Perry

The double space shill strikes again

Joshua Lewis
Joshua Lewis

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

K. Popper

literally a moth named the predicted one.

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

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

your mythological friends at leddit send you likes.

Humans by large prefer symmetrical and healthy faces and bodies, hopeful mentalities, pro-social behavior, virtue and compassion.

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

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.

UTTER NONSENSE.
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?

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

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

Attached: popper-karl2.jpg.jpg (33.5 KB, 488x500)
Attached: EVOLUTION723575.jpg (102.48 KB, 785x594)

Andrew Taylor
Andrew Taylor

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

Lincoln Phillips
Lincoln Phillips

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

Noah Foster
Noah Foster

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.

Connor Thompson
Connor Thompson

All you would need to do is find ONE FOSSIL out of place so start digging faggot.

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

Attached: science-pseudoscience.jpg (71.93 KB, 564x685)
Attached: science1523183862188.jpg (327.53 KB, 1484x1113)
Attached: scienceTM1.jpg (314.04 KB, 1024x768)

Jaxon Butler
Jaxon Butler

FUCKING HEBES

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

Owen Watson
Owen Watson

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.

Asher Martinez
Asher Martinez

Fruit flies.

Fuck off and saged.

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

Adrian Stewart
Adrian Stewart

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.
"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.

Justin Garcia
Justin Garcia

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

Bentley Campbell
Bentley Campbell

Why does op always have to be an op?

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

Kayden Kelly
Kayden Kelly

"we are EVOLVING into a multicultural civilisation"

this whole thinking is a product of evolutionary mythology.

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

who is Mendel.

Things can change.

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

Christians

you are totally incapable of analytic thinking.

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

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

Nolan Sullivan
Nolan Sullivan

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.

Benjamin Watson
Benjamin Watson

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

Mason Morales
Mason Morales

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

Hudson Miller
Hudson Miller

Marx > Hegel > Darwin

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

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.

so black race is superior then?

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.

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

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.

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

Christian understanding of equality does not discredit hierarchies. Humanism, however, does.

true, but evolution is still circular.

one upon an unfalsifiable time in an unfalsifiable time far far away we used to…

mythology.

Attached: BLACK-SCIENCE64924.jpg (69.04 KB, 1024x535)
Attached: black-science-universe.jpg (148.6 KB, 1920x1080)
Attached: black-science-1.jpg (97.31 KB, 800x600)
Attached: science1533059780284.jpg (114.69 KB, 640x853)
Attached: science1522523619100.jpg (102.4 KB, 940x627)

Carson Mitchell
Carson Mitchell

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.
It is not circular reasoning you retard.
unironically posting the "creation man" "evolution man" image
unironically confusing abiogenesis with evolution
Having a bunch of vestigial organs would be selected against evolutionarily. Saying "God made man perfectly" leads to circular reasoning.

Jeremiah Clark
Jeremiah Clark

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.

Samuel Harris
Samuel Harris

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

Joshua Taylor
Joshua Taylor

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 (98.28 KB, 470x647)

Austin Bailey
Austin Bailey

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.

faggots go to hell

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

It is not circular reasoning you retard.

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

Having a bunch of vestigial organs would be selected against evolutionarily.

name one vestigial organ on humans right one.

You have to remember that the biological sciences are by their very nature extremely imprecise.

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 (69.78 KB, 640x360)

Lincoln Green
Lincoln Green

Hegel a conservative philosopher, equally Darwin.

Chase Cruz
Chase Cruz

no wonder you dumb bastards were fed to lions

Jack Gomez
Jack Gomez

BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES you dimwit.

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

Mason Cook
Mason Cook

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.

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 a conservative philosopher, equally Darwin.

Hegel was a Soros of his time.

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

Logan Richardson
Logan Richardson

THIS IS A RAID BY /CHRISTIAN/ TRYING TO DE RADICALIZE US INTO A CHRISTCUCK ZIONIST BOSRD

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

James Rivera
James Rivera

(9) posts
41 replies
ufff

Evan Fisher
Evan Fisher

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?

Eli Jones
Eli Jones

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?

Robert Edwards
Robert Edwards

being this dumb

Brandon Collins
Brandon Collins

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.

Daniel Flores
Daniel Flores

That is nice, 2 billion christians disagree with you
The Catholic church has accepted evolution. That's around one billion who agree.

Henry Gutierrez
Henry Gutierrez

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.

Jayden Campbell
Jayden Campbell

Mind clarifying my errors.

Lincoln Ortiz
Lincoln Ortiz

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.
Post a few.

Anthony Myers
Anthony Myers

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

Asher Evans
Asher Evans

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?

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

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

The Catholic church has accepted evolution

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

Attached: billy-nye-faggot.jpg (73.79 KB, 600x600)
Attached: bill-nye5.JPG (664.98 KB, 834x912)
Attached: evolution-estimate.png (356.44 KB, 1600x1041)
Attached: evolutionSCIENCE!!!.png (255.69 KB, 754x396)

Zachary Hernandez
Zachary Hernandez

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.

Andrew Cook
Andrew Cook

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

Nicholas Martin
Nicholas Martin

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.

Owen Nelson
Owen Nelson

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

according to evolution, vestigial organs on humans should be plenty, so far, they named:
appendix
wisdom teeth
high testosterone that leads to racism (?)

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?

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.

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".

Speciation is Macroevolution by definition, and has been directly observed thousands of times.

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: tailbone-child-2.jpg (69.99 KB, 634x613)
Attached: fingers-mutation.jpg (76.28 KB, 600x840)

Carson Myers
Carson Myers

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

Landon Taylor
Landon Taylor

Also
posting neoliberal egalitarian garbage
Equality of organisms is an anti-evolution, anti-science pipe dream.

Asher Taylor
Asher Taylor

Even if you were lactose intolerant, you would still eat / drink the products if it kept you alive

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.

DNA proves a Human will never be anything but a human

this.

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

Oliver Hall
Oliver Hall

it has ZERO predictionary value which is what should count is science (unlike NUscience)
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

Nathaniel Thompson
Nathaniel Thompson

like with all mythology…and like all mythology it has ZERO predictionary value

Attributes of Kali Yuga
Various Puranas (like Bhagavata 12.2) give lists of Kali Yuga symptoms. Some of them are:

In relation to rulers
Rulers will become unreasonable: they will levy taxes unfairly. Rulers will no longer see it as their duty to promote spirituality, or to protect their subjects: they will become a danger to the world. People will start migrating, seeking countries where wheat and barley form the staple food source.

In relation to people's relationships
Avarice and wrath will be common, men will openly display animosity towards each other. Ignorance of Dharma will occur. Lust will be viewed as being socially acceptable. People will have thoughts of murder for no justification, and they will see nothing wrong with that mind-set.

People will be inclined to follow false sciences. Family murders will also occur. People will see those who are helpless as easy targets and remove everything from them.

Many other unwanted changes will occur. The right hand will deceive the left, and the left the right. Men with false reputation of learning will teach the Truth. The old will betray the innocence of the young, and the young will betray the dotage of the old. Cowards will have a reputation for bravery, and the brave will be enervated cowards. People will not trust anyone in the world, not even their immediate family. Husband and wife will find contempt in each other.

In Kali Yuga, even pre-teenage girls will get pregnant. The primary cause will be the social acceptance of sexual intercourse as being the central requirement of life.

It is believed that sin will increase exponentially, whilst virtue will fade and cease to flourish. People will take vows only to break them soon after.

Death and famine will be everywhere. Men will have lustful thoughts, and so will women. People will without reason destroy trees and gardens. Men will commit murder. There will be no respect for animals, and meat eating will start.

People will become addicted to intoxicating drinks. Men will find their jobs stressful and will go to retreats to escape their work.

Gurus will no longer be respected and their students will attempt to injure them. Their teachings will be insulted and followers of Kama will wrest control of the mind from all human beings.

As the sin increases exponentially, so will the incidence of divine justice and wrath

vanisource.org/wiki/SB_12.2:_The_Symptoms_of_Kali-yuga

Jack Scott
Jack Scott

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.

Elijah Jackson
Elijah Jackson

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.

Austin Jenkins
Austin Jenkins

Schizophrenia is a serious issue. Please seek help.

William Barnes
William Barnes

we are evolving and adapting into a bright future
turns out we are becoming dumber despite IQ being one of the most crucial adaptive traits
mouthbreeders: "Praise thee eternal evolutionary wisdom for making us dumber in yee infinite wisdom

t. almost-degree in biology user

my condolences, that field is filled with left leaning bugman

Because predicting, for example, european-descent population in 100 years is almost impossible:

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?

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.

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.

toenail

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 (86.03 KB, 892x861)

Josiah Evans
Josiah Evans

Arnt kikes known for psychoanalysing everyone?

Michael Morris
Michael Morris

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 (63.56 KB, 604x558)

Thomas Hill
Thomas Hill

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

John Hughes
John Hughes

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.

strawman
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.

Elijah Hernandez
Elijah Hernandez

according to evolution, vestigial organs on humans should be plenty
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 (120.78 KB, 850x400)

Christopher King
Christopher King

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.

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.

Pure projection.

what on Earth are you talking about?

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.
That right there is undeniable Speciation. You lose

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: science1554634900914.png (1.95 MB, 1658x1028)
Attached: science1522525963091.jpg (60.92 KB, 735x490)
Attached: science499880.jpg (69.69 KB, 597x669)

Jaxson Sullivan
Jaxson Sullivan

Vestigial organs which cannot (realistically, by mutations or chromosomal rearrangements) serve a purpose, have been eliminated or is in the process of being eliminated.

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)?

Thomas Brown
Thomas Brown

flat earth

flat earth is a universally ridiculed theory with all of a couple dozen believers
Spring, 2015
explosion of videos and websites
highly produced
intelligent, articulate spokesmen
superficially compelling argument
recommended on youtube to conspiracy buff
bot comes around
reuploads videos on 911, Sandy Hook, moon landing, etc., appending "Flat Earth" to the title

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.

Caleb Morris
Caleb Morris

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

Brayden Lee
Brayden Lee

who is Mendel.
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

Carter Cooper
Carter Cooper

traits
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.

Charles Russell
Charles Russell

ok, so it was selected for it, it didnt evolved and nogs wont evolve into nordics no matter the surroundings.
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 (123.97 KB, 960x720)

Eli Myers
Eli Myers

species of wildflowers called goatsbeards

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 contradicts diversity and leftism.

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

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.

hereditary mechnisms were know FOR MILLENIAS.

Jackson Peterson
Jackson Peterson

You dont understand either evolution or nihilism.

Ryan Myers
Ryan Myers

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

David Walker
David Walker

DNA disproves evolution
lol, how old do you think the Earth is?

Gavin Barnes
Gavin Barnes

hereditary mechnisms were know FOR MILLENIAS.
No the underlying mechanisms were not known. Selective breeding is not "genetics" faggot.

Luis Gray
Luis Gray

Even if you were lactose intolerant, you would still eat / drink the products if it kept you alive
In a famine situation, giving yourself diarrhoea just kills you faster.
The longer the usage the more tolerant the community becomes.
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.
"we" have landed on the moon
"we" have discovered that race does not exist
"we" are developing quantum computers
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.

Parker Lewis
Parker Lewis

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.

Kayden Lopez
Kayden Lopez

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.

Jeremiah Wood
Jeremiah Wood

Science contradicts leftist politics in every way

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…

Cooking food is not cooking food unless its proved by SCIENCE.

imbecile.

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

Ethan Allen
Ethan Allen

Scientific community is totally complicit in white genocide
because they are kike run you stupid faggot
science is fact

Josiah Wood
Josiah Wood

A rabbit in precambrion would DISPROVE NOTHING.
Yes it would, go find one.

Jack Green
Jack Green

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

Eli Russell
Eli Russell

People are not becoming more intelligent.

hear hear

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

If we are to be technical right here, there is no real way of differentiating new organs from body deformities.

my exact point, its about semantics and catch22s

He's not crazy, he's not stupid, he's a kike deliberately trying to sow doubt about science

fck looooooving science
2019

science is utterly pozzed.

Yes it would, go find one.

year 3000
we found a black human fossil on NA

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

Attached: science-women-idiot849754.jpg (157.43 KB, 1125x1151)
Attached: science1532859251826.jpg (915.76 KB, 1299x1931)
Attached: science1523798239023.png (585.12 KB, 889x613)
Attached: science1523146405443.png (409.7 KB, 710x573)

Angel Thompson
Angel Thompson

sage

Julian Ramirez
Julian Ramirez

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

Kayden Wright
Kayden Wright

year 3000
we found a black human fossil on NA
Shit that hasn't happened proves your point. Brilliant.

Dominic Perez
Dominic Perez

"The process of"
See sky diving reference here you pilpul kike.

Caleb Nelson
Caleb Nelson

kys chr*stcuck dumbass
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.
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

Landon Martin
Landon Martin

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.

Jacob Howard
Jacob Howard

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.

William Scott
William Scott

Bet the mods protect this slide as well.

Jeremiah James
Jeremiah James

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

Lucas Flores
Lucas Flores

You're not interested in debate.

Samuel Flores
Samuel Flores

The problem with this thread is that it was started on a faulty premise that misused and confused terms with other terms and then when people try to point out the shaky foundation, their points are ignored or seemingly deliberately misinterpreted. I'll come back in a little bit to give the actual definitions to the terms used here, but that's only if others fail to do this simple task. Truth does not fear investigation.

Nicholas Price
Nicholas Price

I dunno, its as if pol have different users with different opinions

Easton Taylor
Easton Taylor

Your premise is false because it based on the a perspective in which evolution is a straight line moving forward. Nope. Its called trial and error. "Negative" traits being selected for temporarily, proves absolutley nothing. It in no way discounts the bigger picture. Evolution is not theory. It is fact. Forget about primordial goop rising from the oceans. Look at the difference between the average soyboy and his great grandpa. We haven't evolved to adapt a new enviorment? You don't adapt your behavior over the course of your lifetime to the point where you become unrecognizable to yourself? Change is the only permanent THING.

You can claim that humans have been edited by aliens or some shit to become super smart… You can even argue that a invisible man in the sky created our fleshsuits in his physical image. But evolution is in plain sight and cannot be denied. In fact it is all you ever see. All that is ever happening. Why are you hear? To change the opinions of others? Therefore hoping to evolve the whole of humanity through a domino effect. U are anti-science scum saying evolution does not exist when it is literally what you are here to accomplish you fucking retard.

And there is no avoiding nihilism. Pure awareness is the only sure thing. Anything else is just a game of make believe you tell yourself to get out of bed in the morning.

Thomas Lewis
Thomas Lewis

This is the same bullshit (((Vox Day))) has been spewing lately.

Ryan White
Ryan White

More like science doesn't care about politics

oh you sweet summer child…

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

the only reason you are this angry is because you are obsessed by an evolutionary demon

You're not interested in debate.

what interests you?

actual definitions to the terms

you have it wrong, while evolution is totally unfalsifiable, they are the ones calling basic natural selection proof of evolution to create confusion and false proofs.

But evolution is in plain sight and cannot be denied.

it isnt in plain sight nor in facts, but I agree with the last part, it cant be falsified. If I acusse of evlutionary demon possession, can you disprove it?

Attached: popper7.jpg (222.46 KB, 1024x844)
Attached: evolution-wiki-semantic-manipulation.jpg (34.61 KB, 774x210)

Jordan Cook
Jordan Cook

they do. hegelians are faggots as well. where does that put you?
In a bunker somewhere in time?

name one vestigial organ on humans right one.
Ur dik?

Gavin Diaz
Gavin Diaz

It's as if the "Zig Forums is not a single person" meme is pushed really hard to defend retarded niggers posting retarded nigger bullshit.

Colton Campbell
Colton Campbell

It's more that the environment we live in has become so hospitable, so tolerant, and so efficient that we are able to keep weak people alive in this society without severe repercussions, evolution is not a selection for improvement, but just a selection for survivable, and the survival for the self. If being a soyboy will get you laid and have children, then soyboys will rule the world in the future, nature doesn't give a shit, this is why cultural factors and values are so important other than just pure biology.

People can tease out the facts from fiction, whether if people want to pursue it or not, that's on them.

Jeremiah Garcia
Jeremiah Garcia

Yeah there are a lot of retards in this world, but I'm pretty retarded as well, only through this discussion do I have the ability to get rid of that retardation.

Xavier Hernandez
Xavier Hernandez

Diversity is Zig Forumss strength.

David Wilson
David Wilson

evolution is not a selection for improvement, but just a selection for survivable, and the survival for the self

that means you can only know who survives after it survives so you are only allowed to think retroactivly instead of making usefull predictions.

since when is pol against discussing epistemiology and hegelianism?

Daniel Lee
Daniel Lee

the only reason you are this angry is because you are obsessed by an evolutionary demon
So you have no reply, just a boring "u mad" retort?
shows you that your timeline is bullshit
explains your logic is nigger tier
You're some kind of evangelical christkike shill trying to delegitimize Zig Forums… probably using this thread as "evidence" that Zig Forums has nigger tier thinkers like you.

Jackson Allen
Jackson Allen

evolution has very valid and provable principles. unfortunately its been coopted by marxist kikes that dont want anyone knowing the truth.

instead of using it to describe differences in peoples/cultures/subspecies/species/etc
we use it to say god isnt real, abiogenesis must have happened even though we have no valid evidence of this, and all human races are equal and came from monkeys so our differences are trivial by comparison.

interpretation of science today is through a kosher lens, thanks to the kosher academia that controls the narrative, which is why its important to always look at facts and do your own research.

Charles Nelson
Charles Nelson

that means you can only know who survives after it survives so you are only allowed to think retroactivly instead of making usefull predictions.

The future is uncertain, and of course there can always be environmental disruptions that makes humanity unsurvivable in this world, if the sun suddenly blows up, then humanity as of now is shit out of luck even if we have the potential intelligence to eventually develop space colonization. But there are consistent enough observations to make sure that the near future can be predicted.

Bentley Nguyen
Bentley Nguyen

trying to discuss anything of consequence on Zig Forums
Are you daft?

Brayden Gutierrez
Brayden Gutierrez

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

No its not. The prominent theory is evolution by natural selection. Evolution is the result. Natural selection is part of the process.

Jason Brooks
Jason Brooks

offers up shit-tier creationigger arguments

Oliver Taylor
Oliver Taylor

Nice dubs.
evolution has very valid and provable principles. unfortunately its been coopted by marxist kikes that dont want anyone knowing the truth.
This is true. Evolution is basically a proven fact that everyone accepts today because we can demonstrate that it happens. Everyone believes in evolution, the only thing people disagree on is common ancestry. I for one do think DNA and the first organisms were designed, because no convincing evidence that life could have emerged spontaneously against infinitesimal odds has ever been provided.

Of course, intelligent design doesn't change the fact that christcuck creationism is a retarded meme at this point, it has absolutely so scientific value, since we've known for centuries that the earth is incredibly old, and no one can ever use it as a framework for doing real science. You wouldn't be able to find oil in the ground if you worked from a 10000-year-old model of the earth.

we use it to say… all human races are equal and came from monkeys so our differences are trivial by comparison.
Which is odd, since this confirms race realism (scientific racism), not the other way around. It's cognitive dissonance on their part, there's no way the races could be equal if Darwinism is true (which it is).

interpretation of science today is through a kosher lens, thanks to the kosher academia that controls the narrative, which is why its important to always look at facts and do your own research.
This 100%, it's just like Jewish "scientists" in the media back in pre-NatSoc Germany saying the kosher slaughter was completely humane, making up all sorts of lies under the guise of science so people believed whatever they said. Marxist science has absolutely no value. Nowadays, "scientists" need to capitulate to Marxist dogma to get any support or funding whatsoever. They'll literally make up pointless theses or hypotheses to research just for the sake of getting funding even if the research has no value at all, and will manipulate the data and interpret it to conform to what they want.

Science has been compromised since the 50s, for the most part.

Xavier Ortiz
Xavier Ortiz

evolution is like the test for witches
No, it isn't
if it survives it's more adapted, if it doesn't it's less adapted therefore if whitey dies he was not actually the master race but if he survives he is. This is circular reasoning and not scientific reasoning.
Except this is untrue, one example is a species of fly where females select larger males even to the point where it's detrimental to females. They're still selecting larger and larger males but this excess largess is causing more female mortality during reproduction. In some cases sexual selection alone is enough to genocide a species completely. In the case of the dinosaurs, it's not at all adaptation to the environment that got them killed but literal extinction events. To boil it down to "oh well if adapted he survives if not too bad" is just reductionist bullshit that shows a lack of understanding of the topic. With regards to whites, whites are the race best and worst suited for the modern world. Whites created the modern world and without us it will collapse, nowhites cannot into discovery and maintenance. Jews cannot into non-parasitism. Whites however cannot into ingroups which is the only reason we're dying out but this is entirely due to the fact that jews are at war with us and attempting to kill us all. This says nothing about adaptation but says everything about predation. The fact that you cannot even get this point right is proof that you're retarded.
useless body parts like the appendix and wisdom teeth… until the appendix was found to be very useful for keeping gut bacteria
So people were mistaken about anatomy thus evolution is incorrect? Amazing scientific reasoning there OP.
link that proves the appendix is useful but says fuck all about evolution
amazing source that does nothing for your argument
in the end, the theory of evolution doesn't predict anything like a good sci theory should
Except it does, evolution can explain why you find life in the most extreme of environments where almost all other life forms would die such as caves high in sulfuric acid/gas or the underwater volcanic vents. It also predicts that there will be a constant stream of changes in organisms due to changes in the genome which we can observe in the flu every year or in cases where new species are made. One example is an african crocodile which became orange and has eyes adapted to the cave environment in which it lives. Besides this it retroactively tells us that species will have derived from other similar yet different species in the past which was a prediction at the time of inception but has been correct so many times that to say otherwise is ludicrous.
evolution is antiwhite mythology to push nihilism and confusion
Evolution is very much pro-white because it tells you whites are the only species on the planet which developed anything of worth due to their intelligence and cooperation. It tells you that you are the luckiest mother fucker in the entire universe because of all the things you could have been born as you were born to the tribe of upmost greatness. Evolution tells you that the point of life is to reproduce and have your kids reproduce, nihilism that is pushed onto it is just kike faggots saying it doesn't matter because life will go on.
muh vestigal organs
I'll do you one better: vestigial muscles. See Palmaris Longus and its tendon. It does absolutely nothing for humans and is shortly being removed from the genome as now ~15% of people have lost the muscle completely. Same thing with muscles for moving the ears.

Go back to /christian/index.html

Ian Richardson
Ian Richardson

This is why we say creationists don't understand evolution, because if they understood it, they would accept it. The only thing they have a problem with is common ancestry of all organisms anyway. Microevolution is variation within species, macroevolution is variation between species. That's the definition. Speciation is therefore macroevolution, and we know that it happens. Both micro ajd macro are part of the same theory, and natural selection is one of the processes by which evolution happens (genetic drift and mutations are some of the others).

Tyler Ramirez
Tyler Ramirez

Palmaris Longus

they said the same about appendix, until recent revisionism, can you guarantee we wont see the same story? if we do, will you admit that evolution is wrong?

Thomas Baker
Thomas Baker

Go back

Attached: Screenshot-20190414-134915-Firefox.jpg (245.62 KB, 1440x418)

Bentley Myers
Bentley Myers

Telling people they're 'not allowed to be here' has the opposite effect, as it creates desire to be here. Very, very basic psychology.

Lincoln Diaz
Lincoln Diaz

science is utterly pozzed.
It's because you need to go through public/private education that's state mandated to do science.

Aiden Morris
Aiden Morris

You stay right here motherfucker.

Christopher Morgan
Christopher Morgan

Micro evolution has been proven to exist so it isn't just about fossils or dna anymore that prove that evolution does in fact exist. In fact, evolution actually incourages us to actually maintain the bloodline as it took millions of years just to get to this point. Why would anyone want to destroy there genes to revert back to a primitive state? Take you and your (((christian))) dogma and GTFO.

Evan Russell
Evan Russell

they said the same thing about the appendix
Ok, and? Do you have an actual response to what he said?
if we do, will you admit that evolution is wrong?
If we found out that it actually still serves some purpose that wouldn't prove evolution wrong.

Doesn't change the fact that they're faggots that have to go back.

Grayson Young
Grayson Young

That is Bill's nigger pass and now he gets to do nigger jokes and not pay Ice Cube to say it's okay to say nigger.

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (794.22 KB, 1000x618)

Alexander Jones
Alexander Jones

they said the same about the appendix so how can you guarantee we wont see the same story?
Organ function is quite different from muscle function, we know exactly how muscle works, what causes it to work and what action it will perform. We in fact know this so well that we can predict the action of any individual muscle on any normal human essentially 100% of the time. We've done tests for grip strength and found it provides nothing more than those who do have it vs those who don't. There is no difference at all.
if we can prove a muscle isn't useless then will you admit evolution is wrong?
Of course not, because anatomy is not the same as evolution you absolute mongoloid. If I'm wrong in an anatomical statement in saying a specific muscle has no real use then that says absolutely nothing about the spread of genes from one generation to the next. You have no idea what the fuck you're talking about. If you want to disprove evolution, find a way to explain speciation without genetics and find a way to explain why the flu changes every year without genetics. You can't.
Don't ever consider suicide and live the longest life you can, genius :^)

Jack Watson
Jack Watson

<argue from an evolutionary position (…) towards overpopulation
-distribution allegedly proportional to population size … implying self regulatory emergence …

it is theorized for being a sub contious dysfunction triggered by various occurances e.g. enduring confinement (i.e. caged mammals, pets like guinea pigs rabbits and eventually humans, prisoners )
due to the absence of opposite social partners the subconcious will switch to emergency mode because the human being is a social being ( i.e. experiments on the withdrawal of social affection )
nevertheless this topic is taboo for the mainstream because of centuries of closetting and finally the inability of accepting the truth which would inevitably lead to self destruction. also observed in various cases of suicide after exceeding the individual levels of insight into their own dysfunctional lifes (in terms of darwinistic reproducion of lifeforms) ultimately failing the sole purpose of ones existance , passing on the own strain of genome to the offspring after generations of survivors.

its todays (western) conditions of living who are the cause of these regulatory freaks of nature.

same is being observable in comparrison groups of morbidly obese and nevertheless other comparable psychological illnesses.

medicine has by far not reached its zenith, just imagine 90 years ago humans mostly travelled still by horseback.

all these taboos and the political correctness (i.e. soft living conditions for everybody's safe-space-protection-bubble-for-hurt-feelings) are a cancer to the evolution of the original ethnic-"westeners". it even has taken hold of the internet which, not long ago, accellerated human evolution tremendously and is now beginning to stagnate, again because of hurt feelings some cucks feel inside of their derranged minds.

all part of the evolution

remember 1488

Cooper Ramirez
Cooper Ramirez

the literal christian definition has yet to be disproven, and christianity accepts that god designed the original organism or even that god guided abiogenesis to make humans. also, a "day" in the bible doesnt make sense since days started passing before the creation of the sun or earth
but consider the following and take it how you want:
we have seen evidence of modern man much older than we believed possible.
our dating methods are wildly inaccurate and can easily be off by billions of years. (we know this and still use them because it supports the narrative)

oil in the ground
research the origin of the term "fossil fuel" –its a marketing term to make oil seem more valuable/rare than it really is. i believe the rockefellers coined the term
they started calling it that long before we "knew" it came from organic matter. after they coined the term, we "discovered" that though.
there's no way the races could be equal if Darwinism is true
yet the people that are most vocal about being pro-evolution are typically anti-racists. funny how that works.
They'll literally make up pointless theses or hypotheses to research just for the sake of getting funding
you mean (((grants)))? dont you love how grants are based on the conclusion? "if you prove global warming, you get a grant" there are few unobjective grants. its dominated by "if you prove X you get a grant, but if you disprove it you get blacklisted"

yea… science is a lost cause at this point and needs to be reclaimed. it used to be that atleast the methods made sense and the findings were fucked but thats not even the case anymore, now the actual "research" is based off of some other scientists "research" accpting everything as fact.
the peer review system is basically no different than reddit upvotes.

Jaxson Brooks
Jaxson Brooks

remember 1488
A good way to describe modern "civilization" is as follows: "The 20th and 21st centuries are periods of time in which white societies absolutely refused to believe that human beings are influenced by evolution. They are deluded into thinking that despite being the products of evolution they are demigods now totally above such influences and as a result are committing a dysgenic program in their refusal to believe the truth."

Easton Phillips
Easton Phillips

every scientific theory functions in a way that it can be proven wrong.
evolution can't be proven wrong
This is a strawman.
You're literally inventing a definition that is close to, but not exactly what the scientific method is.
You're literally creating an argument where there is none. You're suggesting that your definition is correct, then attempt to claim that evolution is a false premise and begs the question, because it doesn't fit your definition.
Your entire statement is designed to subvert the conversation to be about how evolution is a logical fallacy since it can't be disproven, and yet this isn't even how the argument should begin, because again, you're starting with a strawman by redefining the scientific method.

Christopher Reyes
Christopher Reyes

OP…. i'm not even going to read your post.
Evolution is real, fucktard. That's the reason you need a new flu shot every year. Forget the "out of africa" theory for human evolution, forget everything about human evolution. It's too confusing for you and that's okay.

Wyatt Young
Wyatt Young

Carbon dating? Disproves the bible by billions of years.
Fossils? Disproves the bible.
Evolution? Disproves the bible.
Galatians 3:28 disproves that the bible is a "racial book".
Matthew 21:22 disproves that prayer works.

Juan Lee
Juan Lee

the only thing people disagree on is common ancestry.
So in which species did the mitochondria magically appear seperately?

Asher Howard
Asher Howard

Evolution is nothing more than antiwhite mythology to push nihilism and confusion.
Well put.

Easton Miller
Easton Miller

That's actually some pretty good bait.

Attached: Foreshadowing.webm (2.95 MB, 640x480)

Brody Gray
Brody Gray

You fear change. I murder with telepathic hideous strength. The Jew fears the Dragon. Name a battleground.

Evan Rivera
Evan Rivera

If you think the usefulness of vestigial organs disproves Biological Evolution, you don't know what evolution is.
Time to define the terms properly as they are continually used improperly.

Biological Evolution
This is actually two different things:
1. The Process of Evolution as defined as change in allele frequency by means of descent with inherent modification. >evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/evo_15 >khanacademy.org/science/biology/her/evolution-and-natural-selection/a/darwin-evolution-natural-selection >ncse.com/library-resource/defining-evolution-0) This is a scientific fact, as this demonstrable and objectively verifiable.

2. The Scientific Theory of Evolution (Properly referred to as Evolutionary Developmental Theory) which is the official scientific explanation of how extant forms developed from earlier, ancestral organisms and it uses a thorough body of data, facts, and observable phenomena to substantiate itself.
thoughtco.com/what-is-evolution-1224603 >yourgenome.org/facts/what-is-evolution >science.howstuffworks.com/life/evolution/evolution1.htm This includes the fact of Evolution as a Process.

As you can see, the Scientific Theory of Evolution is falsifiable despite what OP says. If UCD was debunked tomorrow, or the current explanation was proven to be wrong, the Theory of Evolution would be modified in varying degrees if the basic explanation was not undone, or completely tossed aside if the UCD was debunked and a new explanation that more accurately described reality would be sought - as that is good science. But the fact of Evolution as an observable Process would not go away and would remain a reality.
Now that the major subject is properly defined, let's look at the smaller terms that OP misused:

Microevolution
This is evolutionary change in allele frequency by means of descent with inherent modification within the species level.
evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/0_0_0/evoscales_02
evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/0_0_0/evo_39
www2.nau.edu/lrm22/lessons/evolution_notes/microevolution.html

Macroevolution
This is evolutionary change in allele frequency by means of descent with inherent modification at or above the level of species.
evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/0_0_0/evo_48
talkorigins.org/faqs/macroevolution.html

Speciation
A lineage-splitting event that produces two or more separate species.
evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/0_0_0/evo_42
britannica.com/science/speciation
khanacademy.org/science/biology/her/tree-of-life/a/species-speciation
This has been directly observed in both field and laboratory settings many thousands of times:
talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html
talkorigins.org/faqs/speciation.html
evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/news/100201_speciation
pnas.org/content/114/23/6074
sciencemeetsreligion.org/evolution/speciation.php
whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2012/10/19/speciation-observed-again/
Bear in mind, Speciation is Macroevolution by definition.

Genotype
This is your complete heritable genetic identity, your genome that would be identified by a personal genome sequencing.
pged.org/what-is-genotype-what-is-phenotype/
nature.com/scitable/definition/genotype-234
genome.gov/glossary/index.cfm?id=93

Phenotype
This is a description of your actual physical characteristics, and most are influenced by your Genotype
pged.org/what-is-genotype-what-is-phenotype/
britannica.com/science/phenotype
evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/0_0_0/genovspheno_01

These should all prove useful any time OP screeches "NUH UH WORDS ONLY MEAN WHAT I SAY THEY MEAN"

Gabriel Reed
Gabriel Reed

pro-Evolutionists are anti-Racist
The status quo in general is anti-Racist. This doesn't mean science itself permits their lunacy, or that evolution permits equality among organisms to even be possible. You know who else opposes the reality of Race? The main proponents of Creationist lies:
Answers In Genesis on Racism:
answersingenesis.org/racism/
from a Biblical perspective, there is one biological Race
answersingenesis.org/answers/books/one-race-one-blood/
Although racism did not begin with Darwinism, Darwin did more than any person to popularize it
answersingenesis.org/media/video/bible/only-answer-to-racism/
answersingenesis.org/racism/teaching-kids-about-race/
all humans are one Race, one family, all equal before God

Kent Hovind on Racism:
Evolution is the foundation to Racism
youtube.com/watch?v=Tv5d6VcHD0c
hooktube.com/watch?v=Tv5d6VcHD0c
Races don't exist
youtube.com/watch?v=jINhlfIQ-BU
hooktube.com/watch?v=jINhlfIQ-BU
Hitler, Racism, and Evolution
youtube.com/watch?v=0Bh4CyDdByQ
hooktube.com/watch?v=0Bh4CyDdByQ

The Discovery Institute on Racism:
John West and Michael Medved talk Human Zoos and Racism
discovery.org/multimedia/audio/2019/03/john-west-and-michael-medved-talk-human-zoos-and-racism/
Darwinian Racism
discovery.org/multimedia/tag/darwinian-racism/

Mason Nguyen
Mason Nguyen

I messed up the format of the links for the subject term. Too lazy to fix.

Christopher Lopez
Christopher Lopez

<STRAWMAN
-THAT.
for your consideration; wall of text :
this twisted narrative is an entire clusterfuck ffs… the appendix removal is a cause for a numerous variety of chronic (psycolocigcal) illnesses… same as important as any healthy part/organ of the organism being amputated causes problems, for example observable during the many "transitions" during identity crisis where on the one side mental illness is being promoted and dysfunctional social behavior sprads the psychological cancer around to susceptible minds for only to later then, manifest physically resulting in X-Number of individuals of certain precious(if not fucking mentally ill) ethnicity, not procreating, …
on the other side priming the individuals for self destruction due to the inability of overcoming the internal conflict with natures purpose of life (producing offspring and advancing the string of genome the patients ancestry managed to pass on up till this point), resulting in depression, extended mental illness, and or combined side effects from medicating these with the current mean cures.
i strongly suspect a close connection to the indiviual's craving of attention (as a social being). assuming the rise of widely availiable visual media (tv, web via smartphone, maybe even out-of-home advertising) with its constant propagandization of "sex" ("sex sells") directed towards the recipients/subjects of reflexive identification on the one hand, and on the other, the starvation and alienation of individuals by emerging into flow states while playing video games, chatting in chatrooms, general sensory overflow etcettera…, simultaneusly neglecting "natural" social interaction ([compare societal states, i.e. before the rise of the internet, before the rise of television , respectively radio broadcasting ]). thus depriving the social being of its feed at the same time confronting it to the shiny imagery promoting wealth, fame, success, happiness and whatnot has been programmed as peing the all-purpose-carrot on a stick for the individual recipients…
again proposedly this leads to an expanded identification (with the knowledge of being able to transform the outer appearance by means of medication and surgery), fed by the craving for attention, not even necessarily linked to the dysfunction responsible for homophilic behaviour but definitely not exclusionary; causing the individual to adapt to the opposing idealized version of success/happiness etc. from a point on where the self realizes eventually the own self induced "failure, or what is precieved as such individually" from a point on; adoiding self destruction and slipping into the projection of that opposite appearance , likely a form of schizophrenia compared with several "societal-mental-illnesses".
same as with homophilia imho the only way to "redpill" on this would be, breaking with taboos factualizing that the gender will definitely not change chromosomes, self mutilational aspects, irreversible intervention with the natural organism's (removal of) genital tract, and so on… being prepared and maybe proactively attacing counterarguments for disproportionate suicide rates like mobbing (which is social rejection/repulsion) causes high suicide and not the psychological disfunction of ultimatively realizing the failure/failing at/with the meaning of life (see above) and as a last resort of saving face, off'ing itself on the own terms instead of withering away while suffering the effects of the self mutilation ( for example watch some images of aged people after a life of surgery addiction ( plastic ) )…
another direct action would be to life a good and steadfast life , having a lot of happy and based children; simply start to pass the legit genome on to your children and outbreed (while not neglecting certain white quality standarts at the same time you cunt)

Nathaniel Reyes
Nathaniel Reyes

Evolution is random change, but in a limited context. It is constrained by the rules of the universe and dependent on genetic history. DNA operates in the same way across Earth's organisms and many share the same genes. Not every life is precious, much of it is born only to die and feed something else. Approaching it in the way modern medicine does is foolish. It only leads to a world extinction event. The point of diminishing returns with medical advancements has already been reached. Humans must adopt the use of genetic modification to eliminate unnecessary genetic diseases, mental diseases, and to fortify our bodies against the environment. We will need humanoids on each planet and in each solar system modified to best survive their environment so that they can live there and build new ecosystems. Every male should have a penis, every female a vagina in the advent they must procreate to survive, and to allow the possibility of hot alien sex.

Andrew Peterson
Andrew Peterson

wow op obviously a christcuck thread.
muh race is a social construct
muh no biological differences
muh black brothas in christ get to fuck my wife and i see nothing wrong because race is only skin deep

thread gay af tbh

Mason Gray
Mason Gray

Fossils do not show or demonstrate on a genetic level how a species developed NEW GENES-NEW CHROMOSOMES-NEW DNA STRAND that helped code for NEW LIMBS(claws,beaks,wings) and NEW ORGANS. Show where in lab today that is OBSERVED(FACT) where an already born animal evolved through mutations on a DNA which somehow resulted in a random arrangement of nucleotides and then somehow magically/randomly started coding for new stuff mentioned above(limbs,beaks,claws,wing).
As long as there is no such demonstration considering fossils as evidence FOR MACRO EVOLUTION(species turns into another species) is pointless.

Andrew Sanchez
Andrew Sanchez

Darwinism's Downfall

Ayden Roberts
Ayden Roberts

Evolution is a scientific hypothesis that requires a very long time to test. You're right, it's not a theory as a theory has been shown to make useful predictions as well as explain past observations.
That a hypothesis be tested predates Popper. Btw, Popper rejects science.

Ryan Clark
Ryan Clark

You will suffer a permanent misunderstanding until you try to learn the subject honestly. Lying to yourself and raising strawmen will not do anybody any good.

Ethan Ross
Ethan Ross

The Scientific Theory of Evolution has made several useful predictions in the past. A notable example of this would be when Charles Darwin himself, upon noticing that the bones in the wings of birds looked like digits that had fused, predicted in his book On the Origin of Species published in 1859 there to be an example of an avian predecessor form in the fossil record that possessed unfused digits. Two years later, Archaeopteryx was discovered, proving Darwin's prediction correct. He couldn't have successfully made this prediction unless evolution as a process was a real thing.

Carson Baker
Carson Baker

evolution is fake guys
evolution is fake because the timescale isn't fast enough
I want you creationist /christian/ faggots to leave. Get the fuck out. Literal nigger-tier low IQ faggotry.
Evolution is not "fake" or "antiwhite" because you're too stupid to comprehend it.

Julian Cruz
Julian Cruz

Evolution is not antiwhite, and it is not prowhite either, it is just is.

Parker Brown
Parker Brown

Strawman where ?

So i must learn ?
Evidence must be observable if you claim it to be fact.
The idea where small changes(mutations) accumulate over large amount of time and transform into big changes is understandable.
But how does a random arrangement of dna caused by mutations translate to coding and create those small changes in the first place.
It is easy to study indoctrination.

Connor Jackson
Connor Jackson

BUGMAN
NIHILISTIC
MYTHOLOGY

nothing matters, everything changes, we a just a random coincidence within billion years that will anyway be forgotten within another 100 billion years so dont worry its not really worth protecting. pseudoscientific nihilism.

Evolution is real, fucktard. That's the reason you need a new flu shot every year. Forget the "out of africa" theory for human evolution, forget everything about human evolution. It's too confusing for you and that's okay.

Hi faggot, according to science race doesnt exist and you should remove your penis, please do so,dont breed science approved. Have a good day.

Carbon dating?
AHAHAHAHAHAH
YOU DONT KNOW SHIT MY NIGGER

Carbon dating works barely up to 1000 years, have you knew that? Archeologists are very skeptical towards using carbon dating even on estiamtes 200yo finds. That didnt stopped them for using carbon dating on fossils estimates to be + 1000000 yo.

muh race is a social construct

muh no biological differences

muh black brothas in christ get to fuck my wife and i see nothing wrong because race is only skin deep

you are talking to yourself obviously.

You're right, it's not a theory as a theory has been shown to make useful predictions as well as explain past observations.

it doesnt make ANY legitimate predictions, just mindless TED talks and Buzzfeed articles. You defend that shit.

Two years later, Archaeopteryx was discovered, proving Darwin's prediction correct.

Cool! Darwin used natural selection to find and predict different birds, now show me the part about 5 billion or 6 or 10 billion years (you never know, they change all the time) and how you can create a mice out of eschericia coli evolving.

Christian Hernandez
Christian Hernandez

Imagine being so triggered and assblasted to this degree on a Mongolian cave painting board.

Jace Johnson
Jace Johnson

Underrated posts.
READ THIS, YOU BUNCH OF NIGGERS, AND STOP HIJACKING SCIENCE FOR YOUR OWN AGENDA.

Sebastian Hernandez
Sebastian Hernandez

None of your counterpoints are even real scientific theories, that's just your low IQ kikestian programming screeching about everything that goes against what some kikes wrote down in a book about their imaginary kike god.

Daniel Howard
Daniel Howard

Attached: Abiogenesis---Darwinism's-Downfall-documentary.webm (14.54 MB, 1000x562)

Dominic Jones
Dominic Jones

How does randomness(mutations) creates coding.
Without this magic macro evolution is dead.

Wyatt Ward
Wyatt Ward

examples of unfalsifiable claims:

Jesus will come back soon
"Im not a racist. Racist confrmed, only a racist would deny that he is racist"
"I dont hate women." "Mysoginists confirmed, only a hater indoctrinated by institutional mysog would so passionatly deny his hate for wammen."
Catch 22 - too crazy to fly therefore ideal for a pilot
evolution - we didnt demonstrate cross species but its the truth

Evolution is not "fake" or "antiwhite" because you're too stupid to comprehend it.

hey, anti intellectual imbecile, I noticed that you fck loooove science, but can you give me an example of a finding that would disprove evolution or is it totally empirically UNFALSIFIABLE like all mythology?

None of your counterpoints are even real scientific theories, that's just you

good that you listed one of them and rekt me isntead of claiming strawmans or whatever the word they use on r/atheism

Attached: science-sokal-1997.jpg (126.42 KB, 700x364)

Joseph Hill
Joseph Hill

Shit OP, but I agree evolution is not science. I think the main reason evolution is popular on Zig Forums is because it gives people a justification to hate niggers and see themselves as being different from them. Yet I don't think our ancestors thousands of years ago needed the theory of evolution to do that.

I recommend reading The Facts of Life by Richard Milton. Boring name, but a good book about the unscientificness of evolution.

Noah Allen
Noah Allen

Genetics.
Mythology is fiction. Scientific facts are studied facts. Being a low IQ nigger and acting like everyone that opposes your genuinely retarded points is some redditor is incomprehensibly unintelligent.

Hudson Thompson
Hudson Thompson

by these faggots logic, we are all single celled organisms

antibiotics are bigoted, you should welcome your streptococcus and legionella brothers, you anti-prokaryotic bastard

Carter Moore
Carter Moore

DNA codes for RNA.
Triplets of RNA code for proteins.
DNA gets mutated.
Triplets of RNA change.
Final protein changes.
3 options:
Protein is rendered useless by the change. Individual dies.
Protein is unaffected. Nothing happens.
Protein works better or does something else. Individual changes.
Beneficial changes spread via gene transfer.
That's the gist of it. Evolution is not some kind of intelligent design that allows species to become better, mutation is a something that happens and we can only check species that have developed useful traits, because those with useless traits end up being dead.

Isaac Clark
Isaac Clark

Evolution is unfalsifiable therefore it is not scientific.
Uh… alright. It seems like the most likely theory to me but if you have a better one that is falsifiable, let me know okay.

Mason Martin
Mason Martin

My nigger VARIATIONS within species is understandable(MICRO EVOLUTION).
If the genetic evidence FOR MACRO EVOLUTION is so well know why don't you just link us all to it?
If not stop acting like a smartass you are not a geneticist either.
If you think that fossils are enough then read this

Luis Edwards
Luis Edwards

first two minutes
anti-Hitler propaganda
Lol no thank you.

Colton Price
Colton Price

schizo capitalization
Fuck off morphaeus.

Carter Reyes
Carter Reyes

Speciation is Macroevolution by definition. But you don't know what either word means. Every post you make is a waste of time.

Leo Wright
Leo Wright

So no link for the observable evidence(fact)? You low iq nigger.
No they are not you moron.

Jayden Thomas
Jayden Thomas

The Facts of Life by Richard Milton.

thanks, Ill try looking it up if I find time, I also recommend looking up some Popper and Feyerabends "Against Method" for a similar look an Lyschenkoism of our day.

Scientific facts are studied facts

The only reason you think that evolution is empirically testable instead of falsifiable is because you have evolutionary demon obession.

Attached: evolution1539539529094.jpg (87.79 KB, 583x559)
Attached: science-ceb59d759d464782d8d.jpeg (56.56 KB, 757x323)
Attached: science1523146577027.png (39.25 KB, 936x318)
Attached: science3527.png (349.7 KB, 1846x856)
Attached: scienceTM-6.jpg (129.76 KB, 1024x768)

Evan Rodriguez
Evan Rodriguez

Are you a bot? How is that even related to what the user you are responding to said? Sounds like pilpul.

Elijah Thomas
Elijah Thomas

I'm not spoonfeeding gab schizos with thousands of articles he'll dismiss out of hand anyway when he won't prove his retard alternative himself.

We need kikey back in power more than ever before. This is pathetic. For all his faults, boomer schizos that believe people that don't follow the magical sky new and think biology is fake being summarily executed was not one of them.

Gavin Cook
Gavin Cook

We need kikey back in power more than ever before. This is pathetic. For all his faults, boomer schizos that believe people that don't follow the magical sky new and think biology is fake being summarily executed was not one of them.

This is EXACTLY what an antiwhite human obesessed by an evolutionary demon would say. You should seek exporcism or try to find a scientific cure for your state. All the best in finding a solution.

Aiden Sullivan
Aiden Sullivan

/bg/ brainlet general

Attached: 8E972C99-4C5C-4329-A80D-DB5671B938A6.png (589.3 KB, 966x662)

Christian Richardson
Christian Richardson

random change

Attached: Cells---Darwinism's-Downfall-documentary.webm (13.79 MB, 1000x562)

Adrian Morgan
Adrian Morgan

I FCK LOOOVE SCIENCE

The only reason you think that is because you have evolutionary demon obession that makes you support antiwhite ideologies.

Attached: science1525726489999.jpg (313.05 KB, 697x674)
Attached: science1522525560969.jpg (13.36 KB, 225x224)
Attached: science1522525493103.jpg (67.14 KB, 378x456)

Gavin Johnson
Gavin Johnson

This thread is another dumpster fire. At least people don't fall for (((Creationist))) lies as much as the liars want.

Nicholas Ramirez
Nicholas Ramirez

You are the one acting as if your theory is a fact and not religious so link us all to those
articles which show proof(fact) then.
And when did i mention God?

Triplets of RNA change.
Protein works better or does something else. Individual changes.
Beneficial changes spread via gene transfer.
Yes mutations happen.
Somehow protein works BETTER ?
Somehow again beneficial coding is created ?
Are you implying because RNA changed it will
somehow transfer the SOMEHOW NEW coding
which will make protein SOMEHOW better or
SOMEHOW it acquires NEW functions when the original coding is altered?
Where is logic in this? Are you implying that beneficial mutations exist?
How can random coding created because of mutations in some way organizes and makes some NEW functions?

Eli Martinez
Eli Martinez

If evolution is false, why do niggers exist?

Justin Lewis
Justin Lewis

About two seconds from a compilation, and in the end it doesn't take away from the general content.

Brody Perry
Brody Perry

Micro evolution(and it's not false)

Robert Russell
Robert Russell

Not at all, this thread shows that the board has no place for retards and shills and they will get exposed if they don't have the intelligence to talk about it.

Your fundamental mistake is to assume that proteins can work better or worse, better or worse is qualified by pragmatic mans, yes beneficial mutations exist, but only in the context of what benefits humans, such a mutation can be bad to other organisms, say a bacteria, or a virus.

Because they are created in the image of god according to creationists.

Liam Phillips
Liam Phillips

Completely ignores that the original mutation was in the DNA.
Also, ignores the fact that beneficial mutations do exist.
A fucking substitution of the valine for glutamic acid at the sixth position of the β globin chain gives protection for Malaria.
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3921335/
A mutation in the CCR5 gene gives immunity to AIDS.
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3185609/
Bajau people in Malaysia have a mutation in the PDE10A gene that allows them to perform better underwater.
https://www.cell.com/cell/pdf/S0092-8674(18)30386-6.pdf
Also, a PNAS article about genetic mutations.
pnas.org/content/113/10/2554
Also, horizontal gene transfer and symbiosis are real concepts. You don't need to develop new functions, you can just take them from other individuals.

Anthony Taylor
Anthony Taylor

Because they are created in the image of god according to creationists.
So God created niggers on purpose? That's reason enough not to believe in Christianity right there. In fact, that is reason enough for all Europeans to simply reject the mind-disease that is Christianity, regardless of whether or not evolution was true.
God created fossils to test your faith, and also niggers to test your patience. And God created Kikes to rule over us! Christianity is a mind-disease.

Jose Robinson
Jose Robinson

How can random coding created because of mutations in some way organizes and makes some NEW functions?
When I was a kid, I had a ZX Spectrum 48k pc.
I had a horizontal scroller, spaceship-shooter type game where the objective was the navigate through a very long cave while shooting enemies, but without hitting the wall or the roof (you died instantly.)
So, as you of course know, games were loaded off cassette back in the day, and my cassette player (mains operated through a kind of 'shaver' 2 pin connection) had a loose power socket.
If I jiggled the socket it would crackle and arc, and the Spectrum would be affected, sometimes lines would appear, sometimes words, sounds, or other diverse effects.
After a while I realized that I could use this effect on purpose to "mutate" loaded games in ram.
So back to my horizontal scroller. It was a super-difficult game and one day I got frustrated and jiggled the power cord as I was about to quit anyway.
A couple of blocks appeared on the screen but it was otherwise normal, so I decided to start the level again and check for any other changes in gameplay.
To my utter amazement my ship's "laser" now shot holes in the terrain.
I shot a tunnel from the start to the finish of the level and finally completed the game that was virtually impossible.
I realize this is an analogy but it shows that random mutations to computer code can produce effects that the user finds beneficial.
The odds of that effect happening again, even trying the same trick every day for the rest of my life, is virtually zero.
But imagine millions or billions of people trying it over millions of years. It would probably happen thousands and thousands of times.
If an instruction can be changed, whether it's in an organism or a computer, of course it can result in a subjectively beneficial change.
There is not "good" or "bad" mutation, it all depends on the environment.
Any subjectively "negative" mutation you can think of, could be beneficial in the right environment.

Luis Hall
Luis Hall

(((CREATIONISM))) man, that's a better theory because evolution has to BENEFIT people and the WHITE RACE is the RACE of GODS and they BENEFITTED MORE from GOD than ANY OTHER subspecies.

Austin Mitchell
Austin Mitchell

(with the provisio that the organism retains the ability to a) reach adulthood and b) reproduce) - of course.

Anthony Reyes
Anthony Reyes

Attached: Fossils---Darwinism's-Downfall-documentary.webm (12.96 MB, 1280x720)

Samuel Ramirez
Samuel Ramirez

It's non-definitiveness is why it is a theory and not a law.

Oliver Rogers
Oliver Rogers

Disproving evolution first requires to look at what the theory predicts and see where it can be shown to make incorrect predictions. It is easy to be side-tracked by specifics of the theory, such as individual evolutionary pathways of certain features, and confuse these with what would falsify the overall theory of evolution by natural selection. Indeed, many creationists do this whenever a new discovery is made in biology that causes scientists to rethink some pieces of evolution. To avoid this problem, it is best to be clear what evolution is. It is based on three main principles: variation, heritability and selection. Given these three principles, evolution must occur, and many features of evolution appear given only these three guiding principles.[3] If any of these were shown to be flawed then the theory would be untenable.
Consequently any of the following would destroy the theory:
If it could be shown that organisms with identical DNA have different genetic traits.
If it could be shown that mutations do not occur.
If it could be shown that when mutations do occur, they are not passed down through the generations.
If it could be shown that although mutations are passed down, no mutation could produce the sort of phenotypic changes that drive natural selection.
If it could be shown that selection or environmental pressures do not favor the reproductive success of better adapted individuals.
If it could be shown that even though selection or environmental pressures favor the reproductive success of better adapted individuals, "better adapted individuals" (at any one time) are not shown to change into other species.
Charles Darwin made the case a little differently when he said, "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down. But I can find out no such case."[4]

Daniel Diaz
Daniel Diaz

This is what people don't get about evolution.
A beneficial mutation is an extremely rare event, the odds of that happening are almost 0.
But with enough individuals, and on a extremely long period of time, the odds of benefical mutations rise, and eventually, enough changes lead to the apparition of different species.

Daniel Howard
Daniel Howard

I don't believe in the creation myth though, the success of Christianity in Europe stemmed from Rome's adoption of Christianity, so is it by sheer chance or by design, that I'm not sure.

If the white race is so susceptible to such a mind disease, then its current failures is inevitable.

Mason Long
Mason Long

natural selection=/=evolution

natural selection and mutation is a NECESSERY but not SUFFICIENT proof for evolution

e.g. "John is a bachelor", it is necessary that it be also true that he is
1) unmarried,
2 )male,
3) adult

if you have all 3 you have SUFFICIENT proof. but it doenst go the other way ie. if you know an unmmarried person, that doesnt mean he is a bachleor (he might be divorced or a kid)

e.g. II "Evolution exists" it is necessary that it be also true that
1) natural selection/microevolution -100% proof
2) old Earth - "proved" but a huge jump to conclussion since you cant prove that conditions of uranium emmissions were constant during 4.5. bill
3) CROSS SPECIES mutation/macroevolution - NEVER DEMONSTRATED

so just porving "microevolution" isnt SUFFICIENT proof.

Attached: theory.jpg (112.77 KB, 1372x1067)

Jacob Sanchez
Jacob Sanchez

What on Earth is falsifiability?
What makes science a science?

science=application of scientific method
scientific method=empirical hypothesis testing

notice the last part - testing. in order to test it, hypothesis has to be testable. So where does falsifiability come in play here? Notice that the conclussion comes from empirical observation, so we actually make a logical fallacy in ALL legit scientific conclussions because we jump from inductive to deductive reasoning.

So, possibility of falsification in a way proves that therory comes from empirical observation (remember that in science we jump from induction to deduction which we dont do in logic), its POTENTIAL faultiness is a proof for its validity.

theory of evolution DOES NOT HAVE THE POTENTIAL FOR FAULTINESS.

Attached: theory2.gif (3.32 KB, 400x188)

Andrew Jones
Andrew Jones

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_of_Ham
Next!

Angel Flores
Angel Flores

they had no knowledge of electromagnetic spectrum theory so how could they know the sky was blue?

Jonathan Martin
Jonathan Martin

The jig was up when they figured out you can correctly guess the order of fossils by their layers. The principle of bio-stratification was discovered by the English geologist William Smith through his work digging out the Somerset Coal Canal. Smith would go on to make the first geological map of England, and it's still pretty accurate to this day. There is a good book about him called The Map that Changed the World.
Modern Creationism, on the author hand, is the creation of a faithful follower of Seventh Day Adventist cult, George McCready Price. Created by the woman Ellen G. White, she wrote down how God time-traveled her back to the beginning of creation, and yes, according to her hysterical ravings, it all happened in literally seven days, which she herself was there to observe. Price, a young student more fascinated by geology than his family's cult, was eventually forced to attempt to reconcile the two. Modern Creationism is the product of virtually this man alone. All the other fleece-the-flock organizations (AiG, ICR, etc), all basically borrow heavily from Price.

Attached: Geological-map-Britain-William-Smith-1815.jpg (272.59 KB, 800x1148)
Attached: ukmap8.jpg (563.28 KB, 1036x1614)

Carter Jackson
Carter Jackson

ALSO note that the odds of all the carbon in your body being made of radio isotopes and those decaying during the course of conversation you have with evloutinists many orders of magniture higher than generating proteins let alone dna. its literally more probable that people who believe in evolution cease to exist and vaporize than their theory being corect.

Luis Foster
Luis Foster

theory of evolution DOES NOT HAVE THE POTENTIAL FOR FAULTINESS.

and since it DOES NOT HAVE THE POTENTIAL FOR FAULTINESS it tells us its nothing more than a myth.

Evolution is no different than historiosophy or mythology, its activity is always from present to past (=constant revisionism), not from present to future (=predicting) like a good scientific theory.
Its a dialectical, implicitly progressive/panteistic theory based on semantics (Hegel started it, passed it on >> Marx and then on to >>> Darwin). All 3 played the same semantic tricks.

Dont be surprised about the idiotization of scientific community, its more of a nihilistic cult these days.

Attached: science1552234360345.jpg (163.59 KB, 1242x1476)
Attached: science1522526370283.jpg (574.7 KB, 2048x1536)
Attached: science7940907.png (252.11 KB, 481x458)

Thomas Fisher
Thomas Fisher

I've gone down the rabbit hole with many evolutionists, and it always comes down to a faith in Science, rather than an adherence to scientific method. Yet they reject the gender identity pseudoscience, which is put forth by these same institutions. So it's like a salad bar where they pick and choose the dogmas they accept from their chosen authority, which is a self-contradiction layered on top of their own false authority fallacy.

Zachary Cook
Zachary Cook

Indeed, the concept of beneficial/harmful mutation is hard to convey too.
If malaria had never existed, then sickle cell anemia would be seen purely as a disease. But because it is known to confer protection against malaria, it is seen as useful, even life-saving.
If malaria had somehow been eradicated before sickle cell was understood, it would be seen purely as a disease caused by a "bad mutation", and furthermore, any historical or mythological texts from antiquity which described sickle cell as having the power to cure a deadly feared disease, would be called fantasy.
Makes me wonder how many other "genetic diseases" are actually adaptations which have lost their purpose some time along the way, or ceased to be beneficial as the environment changed.
Color blindness is one example.

Jace Foster
Jace Foster

It's funny how people have a simplistic view of "beneficial" and "bad" genes, the process takes way beyond human lifetimes with a stochastic system, and the only reason why humanity survives and continues to improve is because of the transmission of ideas and beneficial and pragmatic cultures that allowed for positive selection. The reason why white culture survives is because of strong pragmatic and rational traditions stemming back to Antiquity, and even beyond that time period.

Modern liberalism is a cultural disease, but I would also criticize the supremacists because they romanticize old cultures because they did not have the work ethic nor the natural capacity to succeed in this world, and they deem themselves superior to make themselves feel better, but the reality is that their pride stems from the achievements of those who are arguably superior than themselves, more than likely, they are also genetic dead ends just like (((them))).

Oliver Bennett
Oliver Bennett

I've gone down the rabbit hole with many evolutionists

have you noticed how shitty as persons they almost all are? So cynical and bugmanish? That shouldnt surprise you since their paradigm is pseudoscientific nihilism.

Jason Phillips
Jason Phillips

schizophrenic jew-worshipping christcucks are allowed to make slide threads here
why

Ethan Johnson
Ethan Johnson

schizophrenic jew-worshipping christcucks are allowed to make slide threads here

the only reason you are this defensice about exposing this antiwhite mythology is because you are obsessed by an evolutionary demon

Joseph Rivera
Joseph Rivera

All that video argues is that life does not spontaneously materialize. That is true to the extent that maggots do not materialize from rotten meat. Life is a classification. There are plenty of pre-life constructs that exist today. Viruses, protiens, and prions, which can be created in laboratory conditions.

Gavin Cook
Gavin Cook

Makes me wonder how many other "genetic diseases" are actually adaptations
I would say very few, if any at all. You can say that having Downs syndrome is an evolutionary adaptation against (((trickery))), but that doesn't mean that it's still retarded.

christcucks are retarded, but that's the price of open markets, it allows for both feels and reals.

Jack Mitchell
Jack Mitchell

Modern liberalism is a cultural disease
Jonathan Bowden said:
LIBERALISM IS MORAL SYPHILIS, AND I STEP OVER IT

Adam Hill
Adam Hill

Yeah I mean God could have created the universe 10,000 to make it look like it was billions of years old because he knew we would eventually find out how to date things, after which one of two things would happen.
1. If God had created the world as if it were only 10,000 from nothing (no evolution, no Big Bang), we would have proof of God and or supernatural faith would no longer be the foundation of all virtue.
2. If God had created the world according to reason after some mysterious Big Bang, then our supernatural faith would be tested, but God’s infinite mercy would be kind to those whose faith was shaken.
Evolution really makes perfect sense as a Christian.

Benjamin Jones
Benjamin Jones

Liberalism is a denial of the fact that culture plays an important part in developing civilization, while it may not have a lot of sense, and a lot of it are vestigial, they deny their foundation entirely to adapt and embrace cultures and things that are unproven nor pragmatic.

Jacob Sullivan
Jacob Sullivan

posts only editorialized sources about christianity
good job faggot. might as well use cnn headlines as a source for scientific findings.

overzealous evolutionists being overwhelmingly anti racist is notable because of the required cognitive dissonance.

James Parker
James Parker

You can say that having Downs syndrome is an evolutionary adaptation against (((trickery))), but that doesn't mean that it's still retarded.
I wouldn't exclude DS either. The thing to remember with human mutations/adaptations is that to be positively selected for, they only need to benefit the genome and not necessarily the individual. In historical terms, helping your community is also helping your own genes because they're all extended family members.
Even if, for example, many downies are sterile, the tendency for later births to be downies could still be inherited via that mother's earlier children.
The chance of a down's birth increases exponentially as a woman ages. It is absent at age 14, then slowly creeps in.

Jack Butler
Jack Butler

god made niggers on purpose
For any people wanting to understand the mind of the "Right" wing of the ZOG, they must ponder over the question a lot. The "Right" wing of the ZOG is composed of basically nothing but Christfags like this user, and everything they believe about modern society is filtered through the narratives of the mind-disease that is Christianity.
So God created niggers on purpose, the curse of Ham making them black, and the curse of Canaan (Ham's son) making them slaves. Whether any of this makes sense on any textual reading is beside the point, so I will not dwell on that.
So when the Christfag ZOG-ling looks around and sees niggers, what does he see? He sees servants. He imagines niggers in "America" are serving him, his family, his country, whatever. Why would this Christfag ever want to separate himself from niggers? Niggers are his slaves, or at least, his 'people's' slaves. He is like the Southern slave owner, when confronted with people with people who didn't want him to bring his niggers with him to the new lands acquired by "America," protests "You can't tell me where I can bring my slaves!"
This is why there can not be a revolutionary White Nationalist movement with these people. They see niggers as their personal property, and will defend their property to the death.

Dominic Rivera
Dominic Rivera

lol, youre a retard. let the grown ups talk please

Jace Perry
Jace Perry

By the way, I would suggest that the reason most herbivores don't put up much of a fight when a big predator catches them, is precisely because of this selfish gene effect.
Rabbits are a good example.
If rabbits put up a fight, or helped their friends, yes a prey object might escape and now you have an injured rabbit that will probably die anyway.
The predator is still hungry, so it goes on and attacks another. If this one escapes or is freed, now you have 2 dead rabbits walking.
Predator is still hungry so it goes for a third and devour it this time.
Now instead of losing 1 rabbit to feed the predator for 1 day, you're going to lose 3.
It's better for the community (and hence the genes) if the rabbit just stops fighting the moment it's caught.
And that's pretty much exactly what they do.
Radiometric dating presupposes that the rate of decay of given isotopes has been the same since the creation of the universe.

Aiden Garcia
Aiden Garcia

shouldnt he number of species grow over time if evolution happens? some how earth had the most right at the beginning an its only gone down since then.

Cooper Brown
Cooper Brown

I'm not disagreeing with that, I think it's probably more likely that older women producing more downies are also part of the evolutionary mechanism to discourage childrearing at less fertile age, that which translated to culture where people don't necessarily biology, but find it is a lot more practical to the society and civilization as a whole to have children earlier.

Michael Ortiz
Michael Ortiz

Synthetic prions can be produced in lab environments. They are misfolded protiens. That is change in pre-life molecular structures that could lead to constructs that could eventually create life.

Gabriel Hughes
Gabriel Hughes

to discourage childrearing at less fertile age
That had occurred to me too. The birth of the downie teaches the woman and the community a message. A miscarriage on the other hand, can happen to a mother of any age and would not teach that she's doing something wrong/stupid/wasteful to the tribe.

Joseph Mitchell
Joseph Mitchell

Molecular structures could be created that allows certain chemical changes that would not

Sebastian Hernandez
Sebastian Hernandez

That is an interesting take on evolution, while you can explain it away with rationalizations, the reality is that nature doesn't necessarily make these sort of decisions rationally, the fact of the matter that herbivores don't put up a fight is more of an occurrence of chance rather than rational and conscious decision making of rabbits or their genes.
We can claim that things/traits have merit evolutionarily, that does not necessarily mean that it is practical or pragmatic in present circumstances. One thing that makes human unique is our cognition to categorize the world and abstract complex ideas into something that can be passed down without the use of genetics consistently, and to ignore these tradition and systems of rationality is also regression of mankind back into animals and beasts.

Luke Roberts
Luke Roberts

…occur in normal conditions. That is the function of enzymes.

Zachary Russell
Zachary Russell

Synthetic prions can be produced in lab environments.
They use bacteria to create the proteins.
They aren't creating them from non-living source.

Attached: veronica-miscarriage.webm (14.49 MB, 512x288)

Chase James
Chase James

The bible says that the earth is flat. So, either g-d didn't even know the shape of the world he created or bible believers believe that the earth is flat.

Attached: lain-kek.jpeg (17.21 KB, 400x284)

Brayden Rivera
Brayden Rivera

Did the bible ever said the earth was flat at all? I remembered it as the book of Jewish fairy tales.

Logan Cox
Logan Cox

Attached: Cilium---Darwinism's-Downfall-documentary.webm (13.34 MB, 1280x720)

Robert Lewis
Robert Lewis

Evolution was invented by Kikes.

Isaac Howard
Isaac Howard

Right here:
answering-christianity.com/earth_flat.htm

Cooper Price
Cooper Price

have you noticed how shitty as persons they almost all are? So cynical and bugmanish?
Yes I have. It's part of the same slavish mentality of being an unquestioning acolyte.

Brody Brown
Brody Brown

flat earth is real to shit over the legacy of the NatSoc scientists that got us into space
evolution is fake because it doesn't work like Pokémon with everyone evolving towards pure energy gods
I want /christfags/ to leave.

Angel Reed
Angel Reed

create life
is this what "ifuckinglovescience" fags actually think? astounding.

Evan Nelson
Evan Nelson

strawman fallacies
I want brainlet sophists to leave.

Attached: 0af66c41d936df6e62b65198a6f71e38.jpg (20.36 KB, 447x306)

Elijah Bennett
Elijah Bennett

The funniest part is
create
Which implies a creator. Professional evolutionists are more careful with their words; it's too easy to accidentally borrow from the correct worldview.

Eli Collins
Eli Collins

Are you really using an Islamic apologist website to try and debunk the Bible?
Kek.
None of his bible quotes state that the earth is flat.
pro-tip: if you want to make a credible point, you need to go to the Hebrew or Greek and show what the word actually meant, not what a medieval monk translated it as.
us
You've been then?

Aiden Jackson
Aiden Jackson

Quite the (((rant))). Why do you write me off so quickly? I don’t want niggers in my society, either.

Cameron Howard
Cameron Howard

Nice underhanded ad hominems wrapped in strawmen

Jace Jones
Jace Jones

Whatever definition of life you want to use, user. It isn't like these processes care what we call them. They will occur naturally regardless.

Angel King
Angel King

The LORD reigns, he is robed in majesty; the LORD is robed in majesty and is armed with strength. The world is firmly established; it cannot be moved.
Psalm 93:1

12 And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth
Isaiah 11:12

He set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved.
Psalm 104:5

The sun rises and the sun sets, and hurries back to where it rises.
Ecclesiastes 1:5

He shakes the earth from its place and makes its pillars tremble.
Job 9:6

And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel,
and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth
Isaiah 11:12

LOL

So, not only did you not read the link, you also believe that anyone needs to debunk the bible when it has never been proven in the first place (literally shifting the burden of proof).

Attached: studious-loli.png (254.89 KB, 601x601)

Charles Taylor
Charles Taylor

;)

William Johnson
William Johnson

But Whites in Europe didn't have nigger slaves to "bring" with them.
They were brought from Africa by jewish traders and only a tiny fraction of the population had one.

Kayden Rivera
Kayden Rivera

if you want to make a credible point, you need to go to the Hebrew or Greek and show what the word actually meant

Jaxson Martin
Jaxson Martin

im sorry, do you think that made sense? you sound like a hippy teaching a lamaze class talking about the sacred "wombspace".
is your worldview as intellectually vapid?

Adam Morris
Adam Morris

Muh translations
Then tell me what its supposed to be translated to? The burden of proof is on you at this point and you haven't proved anything so far. The quotes are pretty crystal clear on what they meant and leaves no room for interpretations.

Attached: smug-laugh.png (558.65 KB, 668x698)

Daniel Myers
Daniel Myers

and in america they were mostly black and jewish owners. the first american slave owner that argued to congress that he had a right to own a man was a nigger.

Josiah Jackson
Josiah Jackson

Then tell me what its supposed to be translated to?
make my argument for me.
No.
Go and bring the original Hebrew or Greek and show us where it originally says the Earth is flat.

Joshua Wilson
Joshua Wilson

Please don't flood this thread with
' flat earth ' stuff

Tyler Garcia
Tyler Garcia

fucking trigger discipline, bitch!

Nathan Bell
Nathan Bell

That image
Bodies in the animal kingdom don't have reoccurring, useless features
You are the niggest.

Attached: laryngeal-nerve.jpg (35.43 KB, 400x524)
Attached: 300px-GiraffaRecurrEn.svg.png (35.74 KB, 300x203)

Elijah Adams
Elijah Adams

i'm the bottom bitch for the Sky Kike
They also have no qualms about lying. Trump's presidency is unique in that Trump was forced to appeal to the interests of the working class of the White Nation, and basically sidelined the religious nutjobs like this user. Historically, however, they have been able to control the working class of the White Nation, by pretending to identify with the white working class.
Trust me, this user will put triple quotes around (((anything))) (usually extremely stupidly, I've once seen them put it around the Turner Diaries), but come Sunday morning, and it's all the liberal religious feelgood shit.
Make no mistake, the "Right" wing of the ZOG does see niggers as modern-day slaves of "America." And the slave master always wants to protect his property. He thinks his property is what lets him live the life he does. There is never going to be any reconciliation with the "Right" wing of the ZOG. They have to be struggled against, because they have no qualms about lying.
It is also worth pondering over the flat earth shit. The reality is that flat earth isn't about anything people actually believe at all. The Christfag is doing a short of reality testing, just to see how people react. It's a trolling of sorts, but it serves the purpose of testing the waters, to see how people react to having narratives challenged, and to see how gullible people can be. Flat earthers aren't true believers, they're fishers of men. Just as AiG, ICR, etc, are billion dollar operations (Creationism is big money), the modern flat earther has learned how to manipulate gullible people.

Mason Price
Mason Price

A lot of history is like that.
You sometimes hear about the "White" exploitation of Blacks on West Indian rubber plantations.
The truth oozes out the moment you scratch the surface though.
By the way there were tens of thousands of White slaves brought to the new world too, many women and children snatched off the streets. It's well documented in British local history.
Who was responsible? Jews, magistrates, bankers, and their White traitor goyim.

Attached: Michael-Palin-knows.webm (1.8 MB, 720x480)
Attached: white-cargo.jpeg (54.81 KB, 705x1080)

Owen Wood
Owen Wood

Nothing that happened in the past is 'falsifiable' because it's impossible to go back in time and observe if anything happened or not. The only thing that really is falsifiable are hypotheses about future events.

Brayden Long
Brayden Long

im sorry, do you think that made sense?
I wouldn't it expect it to make sense to an idiot. Most people are running off their outdated biology coursework, which was already 30 years out-of-date when they learned it. I see students struggle with even simple things like the Krebs cycle.

Angel Turner
Angel Turner

Which is why evolution is a theory and not a law.
Science proves nothing. In fact scientism caused by IFUCKINGLOVESCIENCE type influences is now such a problem, that Berkeley university created a website specifically to dispel this myth in millennial undergraduates.

Attached: proof.jpg (54.67 KB, 522x169)

Ian Powell
Ian Powell

Like I said the proof is on you my dude. I am not going to go out of my way to try to prove you right. The king's james version of the bible is a direct translation from the Hebraic scriptures. Now you need to prove that those specific scriptures are not accurate.

Juan Hall
Juan Hall

Like I said the proof is on you my dude.
No it fucking isn't.
You're the one claiming that the bible states the earth is flat. (not even the translations posted state that.)
Now you're retreating and your smug anime girls are gone because you're too fucking lazy to do the work required to support your claim by referencing canonical Hebrew or Greek.
LOL.
Thinking is hard, amirite?

Levi Myers
Levi Myers

prediction
If evolution is true, you should see that a change in environment will change the dominant phenotype of a given species
experiment
Pollute Britain to the extent that the trees blacken
verify if
The frequency of black peppered moths increases and the frequency of white ones decreases
falsify if
The above doesn't happen.

I wonder I such a thing has been done before…

Leo Scott
Leo Scott

Theories don't graduate into laws. They describe different things. A common way of explaining the difference is a law is the "what" and a theory is the "how." We still call the heliocentric theory a theory.

Ethan White
Ethan White

That isn't evolution.
We still call the heliocentric theory a theory.
Are you implying that heliocentrism is some special example which could never be overturned with new evidence?

Aaron Watson
Aaron Watson

And that's just the tip of the iceberg…
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firmament
flatearthscienceandbible.com/2016/02/09/60-bible-verses-describing-a-flat-earth-inside-a-dome-2/
According to the original Hebrew the earth was as flat as a pancake and had a dome around it.
And this retard is using a definitional retreat. GTFO with this fallacious argument you tard. You have disproved nothing and you have shifted the burden of proof at every opportunity you can possibly do.

Levi Morgan
Levi Morgan

twitter.com/g_rdn_/status/1116321944096399360

This dude goes on a tweeting spree making fun of evolution and it's honestly the funniest shit I've ever seen

Caleb Bell
Caleb Bell

smug anime girl still gone.
so embarrassed by his failure that he's started speaking to everyone else instead of the poster he's replying to "t…this retard, muh logical fallacy, plz ignore the fact that I tried to cite translated versions made by monks in the dark ages as evidence."
And even your translated quotes still don't say the earth is flat.
And no, it's not "definitional retreat" you spastic.
You have disproved nothing
Where did I state that I was attempting to disprove anything?
I simply challenged you to prove your assertion, you failed because you are too lazy or perhaps not intelligent enough to translate the proper hebrew and greek sources in order to make your point.
You've been reduced to an angry wreck and the sting upon your ego will stay with you for weeks, maybe forever.
I…I simply wasn't smart enough.

Hunter Young
Hunter Young

What happened:
fuck yeah IFUCKINGLOVESCIENCE, fuck religion
Google: "how to prove hebrew bible says the earth is flat"
bible semiotics page
FUCK THIS, IT'S TOO HARD
goes back to Zig Forums to shriek and kvetch

Matthew Morris
Matthew Morris

user, you are literally so new that you don't even know what an ID is. Nuff said!!!

Joseph Taylor
Joseph Taylor

That isn't evolution
It's natural selection; the process by which evolution happens. Evolution itself isn't the theory, natural selection is. The law of horizontality pretty well verifies that evolution in some form occurred.
Are you implying that heliocentrism is some special example which could never be overturned with new evidence?
No, i was responding to the fact that you implied that evolution being a theory and not a law is because it describes the past. Even if we could observe one species becoming another, it would still be a theory.

Landon Campbell
Landon Campbell

No, but it's obvious that you're back on a new id.
Which is why he quit posting and won't post again.
You failed to argue effectively on your first ID because you're lazy and stupid.
You made it obvious that you'd IP hopped by making your first post a direct reply to my last reply to the previous ID, because you're too stupid to sockpuppet effectively.
No wonder you're so angry, low IQ is often associated with poor impulse control.
still no smug anime.

Isaiah Ortiz
Isaiah Ortiz

It's merely a filtering process between already extant phenotypes of the same species.
No new DNA is created.
The genes are already in existence.
It is not evolution.
To suggest that it will lead to evolution is not only speculation, but a circular argument.
evolution is proved because certain types of organism which already exist, have a better chance of surviving in a given environment, which is a proposed mechanism for evolution, therefore evolution is proved.
This was covered hours ago.

Luke Gutierrez
Luke Gutierrez

Evolution itself is proven by the law of horizontality, as I said. If you want to know how evolution can occur via natural selection, it's called mutation: which we directly observe.

Mason Allen
Mason Allen

Even if we could observe one species becoming another, it would still be a theory.
I never said that theories turn into laws, you're putting words in my mouth.
I said evolution has never been observed, which is why it is a theory and not a law.
If it had been observed it would be a law and a theory.
inb4 some shit about bacteria 'evolving' in a test tube.

Christian Harris
Christian Harris

Argue about theories and whatnot as much as you like, ultimately science is about the practicality and observable realities in the world. You can believe in whatever you want, but if it has no practical values nor does it have any consistencies, then it is inherently not a valuable idea.
Science proves nothing, but it's pretty damn good at being right. The fact that people have to resort to "scientism" argument without actually thinking critically about the paper is just as bad, if not worse than the "science nerd xd" people, trying to cling on to whatever their idealism is despite rational observations and critiques continually shows otherwise.

Samuel Wright
Samuel Wright

If it had been observed it would be a law and a theory
That is precisely the misconception I was addressing. Even observable phenomena is classified as a theory. We observe the earth going around the sun. Yet we still call heliocentrism a theory

Ethan Parker
Ethan Parker

A notable example of this would be when Charles Darwin himself, upon noticing that the bones in the wings of birds looked like digits that had fused, predicted in his book On the Origin of Species published in 1859 there to be an example of an avian predecessor form in the fossil record that possessed unfused digits. Two years later, Archaeopteryx was discovered, proving Darwin's prediction correct.
Not what science considers to be a prediction, user. There was no experiment with controlled conditions.

Gavin Moore
Gavin Moore

Evolution itself is proven by the law of horizontality
No it isn't. The law of horizontality describes the way in which certain types of rock are formed.
Lol.
If you want to know how evolution can occur via natural selection, it's called mutation: which we directly observe.
This is more circular reasoning.
If I make up a theory which involves coca cola, the fact that coca cola can be observed not prove my theory.
You are just asserting that mutation leads to evolution.
Even observable phenomena is classified as a theory
Bullshit.
A theory attempts to describe why a phenomena occurs. A law describes the behavior.

Dylan Anderson
Dylan Anderson

Hurdur your stupid
Y-you IP hopes cause ah said so!!!
Is this the best you've got you fucking nigger? First you tried to despute the definition of a word and retreated behind that and then you spill the spaghetti and use character assassinations against me. You haven't disproven anything yet. And tell me what DID they mean by that the earth is completely motionless??? It's pretty clear that the bible is wrong no matter how you look at it.

Attached: 9e4e09849144776e60d57d5b7a4f685d4a426ffa8f498fc630b284f80723f3a4.jpg (95.18 KB, 631x571)

Isaac Edwards
Isaac Edwards

It's merely a filtering process between already extant phenotypes of the same species.
No new DNA is created.
Assuming I understand you correctly, but new DNA is created all the time, mostly because our DNA replication machinery is faulty.
Classic example is gene duplication events. Normally we have 2 copies of a gene, but a region of DNA can get copied twice, sort of like a record skipping, resulting in an extra copy of a gene on one of your strands of DNA. This extra copy doesn’t do much, but it can mutate with minimal effect on fitness as there isn’t much selective pressure on that extra gene. The result though is the mutations can then accumulate and form different forms of the gene.

Best example are the various globin genes. We have a bunch, such as hemeglobin, and then specialized forms such as myoglobin and neuroglobin, that are somewhat redundant but have specialized roles.

Repeat this for billions of years, making incremental changes and you have a whole bucketload of course Aries genomes. And that isn’t even including genetic recombination events, or the breaking up of large genes into smaller ones, and various combinations of the above listed phenomena

Luke White
Luke White

You know, first you got BTFO making unsupported claims about the bible, then you got BTFO ip hopping.
But you're carrying right on, shit, it's really true, low IQ people become enraged easily and don't know when to stop.
First you tried to despute the definition of a word
Link the post where I did this.

Wyatt Gonzalez
Wyatt Gonzalez

It's clear that you have the low iq here so quit with your mental projection.

if you want to make a credible point, you need to go to the Hebrew or Greek and show what the word actually meant

Where did I do this

Image related is you right now you kike.

Attached: hitler-on-debating-with-kikes.png (217.02 KB, 872x472)

Alexander Sullivan
Alexander Sullivan

I always feel like I'm in some kind of booze delirium when these threads come up.
How do you see the shit status of communities, countries, society and civilization and decide that the issue is a well documented scientific theory about common ancestry?
There's many issues, many things that need to be removed user and your clinging to a Christianity that does not encourage that removal is counterproductive.

Dominic Howard
Dominic Howard

crystal clear
no room for interpretation
the bible

it should be a crime to be this fucking retarded.

Kayden Perez
Kayden Perez

Assuming I understand you correctly, but new DNA is created all the time, mostly because our DNA replication machinery is faulty.

You wrote all that then qualified it with
Repeat this for billions of years
And there's your problem.
The mechanism you described could lead to variation of the same kind of organism but assuming that it will lead to new species if you leave it for long enough is an act of faith.

Luis Clark
Luis Clark

You really are retarded.
go to the hebrew or greek (from which the translation was taken.
find the word which was translated
find out what the word which was translated means (in Hebrew or Greek.)
Just stop, you're only making your own embarrassment worse.

Christian Jenkins
Christian Jenkins

The law of horizontality describes the way in which certain types of rock are formed.
It describes the fact that, in undisturbed strata, lower layers are older. In lower layers, you see fossils from some animals that no longer exist. As you go up the layers, you start to find more familiar forms.
You are just asserting that mutation leads to evolution.
Mutation creates new genetic material. Natural selection weeds out bad mutations and preserves the good.
A theory attempts to describe why a phenomena occurs
Generally speaking, yes. But remember, heliocentrism is a theory.
Anyway, the real theory isn't simply "evolution." Its "evolution by natural selection."

David Sanders
David Sanders

Reminder that literal jews are allowed to spam here without being punished in any way.

Mason Mitchell
Mason Mitchell

How do you see the shit status of communities, countries, society and civilization and decide that the issue is a well documented scientific theory about common ancestry?
This.
Assuming this thread is nothing but sperging about us possibly have common ancestors with various undesirables, you guys need to chill the fuck out.
We share a common ancestor with bananas if you go far back enough. Christ it’s something like 70% genetic similarity or something like that. So even assuming the out of Africa theory is true (it is somewhat contested), we’ve evolved quite a bit since then. It’s quite clear we’re not niggers anymore.

Blake Brooks
Blake Brooks

Wait, I just realized.
You think that translation works on a 1-for-1 basis.
Lol.

Brandon Lewis
Brandon Lewis

2 kikes in a pod

Attached: science1552234360345.jpg (149.47 KB, 1242x1476)

Christopher Ward
Christopher Ward

The mechanism you described could lead to variation of the same kind of organism
What makes you believe that? Because in my mind it makes sense to me that given a long time and various environmental factors, such as population bottlenecks, migration of species followed by prolonged bouts of isolation, ect, could lead to eventual speciation.

faith
No faith user. I see words like “proved” being tossed around in here a lot as well, leading me to believe many of you guys aren’t actual scientists.
But no I don’t “believe” in evolution. I accept evolution as the best description we have to explain certain characteristics of life on this planet today. It’s not a matter of belief.
I utilize my senses, my own experience working with dna, making recombinant genes, starring at word documents filled with amino acid sequences, ect, and evolution simply makes the most sense to explain the patterns I see, to explain why things are they way they are in various organisms.

I’m totally willing to admit evolution is wrong, and I’m totally willing to accept that we don’t know everything about it. It’s just that at this time logically it makes the most sense. Infinitely more sense than some sky father making us from clay and somehow also his rib and magical breath, then revealing all this to some illiterate desert nomads 1000s of years later, yet for some reason can’t come down from his sky palace today to correct us dirty heathens pursuing evolutionary theory. Makes no sense bud.
But moral of the story is evolution is the best collective attempt by humanity to actually try to explain life in a logical way. Of course it has holes, and im actually in fact happy you are questioning it. That’s good. It’s not supposed to be dogma, even though the trendy #ifuckinglovescience crowd treats its as such

Isaac Roberts
Isaac Roberts

In lower layers, you see fossils from some animals that no longer exist. As you go up the layers, you start to find more familiar forms.
Extinction does not imply evolution.
Mutation creates new genetic material. Natural selection weeds out bad mutations and preserves the good.
Actually it damages existing genetic material. But I can concede your terms, it doesn't matter because you're just restating the theory.
I'm well aware of how the theory claims species arise.
Generally speaking, yes. But remember, heliocentrism is a theory.
Again, what's your point?
By the principles of science, heliocentrism will be overturned if or when evidence to the contrary makes a different theory seem more credible.
Heliocentrism isn't some kind of sacred cow. No matter how "obvious" it seems today.
The reason that Michelson Morley Interferometer et al caused such a stir in science, was precisely because the result presented the binary choice:
discard ether theory
admit that Earth is stationary.
Edwin Hubble:
Therefore we disregard this possibility… the unwelcome position of a favoured location must be avoided at all costs… such a favoured position is intolerable.
(((to whom?)))
Also certain results from the cosmic background radiation measurements go farther than that, suggesting that the Earth may be at the center of the universe, a result so disturbing that it was dubbed the "axis of evil" by scientists, and hilariously described in euphemistic terms on Wikipedia as:
The anomaly appears to give the plane of the Solar System and hence the location of Earth a greater significance than might be expected by chance
greater significance than might be expected by chance.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axis_of_evil_(cosmology)

Anyway I'm out.

Gabriel Anderson
Gabriel Anderson

Because in my mind it makes sense to me
It does make sense, but feeling that something makes sense is not proof.
Phlogiston also made sense.
I'm out.

Carson Collins
Carson Collins

Extinction does not imply evolution
You're absolutely right. What does imply evolution is their replacement by species that did not previously exist.

Brody Morris
Brody Morris

Peace man. But once again the word proof is never used in science for a reason, I made mention of that. You will never read a scientific paper with the word.
The only time people use the word prove is in bullshit philosophical documents and in mathematics

Brayden Moore
Brayden Moore

Is "Evolution isn't not real" the next "Earth is Flat"?

Ayden White
Ayden White

No i didn't ignore that DNA was the original mutation
as i wrote '' Are you implying because RNA changed it will
somehow transfer the SOMEHOW NEW coding '' (i implied it was transferred from the DNA by RNA)

HIV
CCR5 was damaged by mutation which helped prevent HIV but no new genetic coding was formed from mutations which contributed to this phenomena.

Hemoglobin-Malaria
Again, a gene was broken by mutation but no new genetic information was added
or no new coding from mutations was added or was responsible for this immunity.

Baju divers:
'' . However, it is unknown whether this
has a genetic basis. Using a comparative genomic
study, we show that natural selection on genetic variants
in the PDE10A gene have increased spleen size
in the Bajau, providing them with a larger reservoir of
oxygenated red blood cells. ''

There isn't really any new genetic material that was added but we can say adaptation provoked gigantism for the spleen ,genes for gagantism do exist(mutations don't create them)

Pnas
The gene has subtle effects on insulin, and, for a fortunate few, mutations that knock out its function seem to offset the forces that would, for the rest of us, likely lead to diabetes. Similarly protective mutations—that disable a gene but create a benefit rather than a problem—have been discovered somewhat accidentally in the past
Again the gene was broken and couldn't perform it's function , no new genetic material was added or formed to create the resistance to Diabetes.

There is no new genetic coding that was added because of this mutations which resulted in immunity or performance enhancement.
I am familiar with this type of mutations and no i did't ignore that they exist this is nothing new.
They are beneficial but not in the sense where there is new genetic coding which is being formed in order to benefit the creature to form new limbs etc.
Accumulation of such mutation will only result in degeneration of the DNA or even death of the creature and not macro evolution.

Joshua Green
Joshua Green

Sure beneficial mutations exist but how did they contribute to the formation of mathematical things like this:
The ratio of arrangement of the seeds on the sunflower,cone.
Proportions of tiger lines,moth wings and their symmetry.

Attached: sunflower.jpg (174.07 KB, 640x480)
Attached: i2.wp.jpg (729.63 KB, 1920x1200)
Attached: moth.jpg (29.25 KB, 497x255)
Attached: cone1.gif (96.48 KB, 375x312)

Mason Kelly
Mason Kelly

evolutionists being anti racist is notable because of the required cog-dis
Or because they saw that if you factually state African nations will never rise up because low IQ, the punishment for stating a true fact was the loss of a nobel prize and blacklisting across all universities and laboratories. With this in mind, no one who values having a career will speak the truth.

Bentley Gray
Bentley Gray

Just posting to find this post

Adrian Sanders
Adrian Sanders

sacred-texts.com/hin/m03/m03189.htm

Robert Ramirez
Robert Ramirez

so, what your saying is that we should have to go back and forth between the english version and the hebraic version on every word just to get a passage right??? this is what your faith is based on? how can you trust anything the jew says anyway? all in all though you are clearly doing this just for argument sake

here's a site that compares the written text in hebrew and an even more accurate english translation side by side.
sefaria.org/Psalms.104?lang=bi

He established the earth on its foundations, so that it shall never totter.

the earth effectively teeter-totters on it's axis when revolving around the sun. neither the kjv nor this translation makes you look good.

Charles Bailey
Charles Bailey

Evolution is scientifically false
We all descended from (((Adam))) and (((Eve)))
All humans have equal worth
I wonder who's behind this post! Show Khazarian milkers or gtfo!

Anthony James
Anthony James

theory of evolution doesnt predict anything
Tiktaalik.

Ryder Parker
Ryder Parker

The LORD is king, He is robed in grandeur; the LORD is robed, He is girded with strength. The world stands firm; it cannot be shaken.
OH NO NO NO NO NO

Benjamin Moore
Benjamin Moore

You get complex geometry/symmetry in life for similar reasons you get them in everything else. If the same basic process gets repeated multiple times, complexity naturally arises. The universe is all following a simple set of rules. You iterate a bunch of simple interactions and add in a bit of RNG and you inevitably get complex structure.

Colton Gonzalez
Colton Gonzalez

First and foremost, the english is an intangible, abstract language. Meaning that descriptive words we use are often ideas rather than things. For example if I say I am "scowling," you can't draw a "scowl" or pick one up. If you draw a face that is scowling, but it's a face, not a scowl that you are drawing. In Hebrew, I would say "my face is stone." Stone is used instead of Scowl. I can't touch a scowl, but I can touch a stone. As a concrete language, it means that EVERY descriptive phrase can be taken as both literal and metaphorical. So the phrase "His face became stone" in Hebrew should be translated as BOTH "He scowled" AND "His face became hardened." But there is only room in the storyline for one of those. Which one do you pick? So the basis of understanding is different from Hebrew to English. So with that in mind, the same concrete word might need a different English translation depending on the context. We see this in English sometimes, but rarely. For example," I stood at the end of the tree." Context will tell you if I'm literally next to a living plant, or if I'm we're taking a family photo as in "the family tree" and I'm at the end of it. So that English example is a kind of thing that is EVERYWHERE in the Hebrew text. After that, root words. Eretz is the word translated as "Earth" from Hebrew. but if you put an H in front of it, it's dirt. If you put a V in front of it, it's a land mass. And if you put a VH in front of it, it's everything you see.

So it stands to reason that readers of the bible put faith in rabbi jesus is completely at the mercy of the translation which derived from hebraic text. There is no such thing as an even close to perfect translation of the bible.

Benjamin Butler
Benjamin Butler

You don't know what Evolution is.
The Process of Evolution is the change in allele frequency by means of descent with inherent modification in a given population of living organisms. It does not require new genes, only change in allele frequency.

And new genes do develop due to mutation. Every mutation can be described as an addition of genetic material dynamics because every one changes how different genes interact and yield new functions that did not previously exist. If you assert that every mutation results in a loss in genetic material, you need to quantify how much is lost. Do you realize how common mutations actually are? You yourself possess on average more than 100.

Liam Myers
Liam Myers

Jesus Christ fuck. Okay. Fuck you OP and your Swinburne-tier bullshit for making me type this all out. Having to rehabilitate Popper of all people is fucking nauseating. I do this only because I love you, and believe that you actually seek the (real/universal) truth, even if it probably has to be spoon fed to your drooling 85IQ ass by your Latina live-in care assistant.

I. INTRO/DISCLOSURE
Who the fuck am I? A fucking nobody, that's who. All you need to know is that when I'm not drowning in the sea of degeneracy that is $majorcity or weeping with you faggots, I do graduate research in history and philosophy of science. Before grad school, I did an absolute fuckton of theology and phil of religion; specifically religious epistemology (relevant) and modernity (less relevant).

Should you care? No, not even a little. But in the interest of full disclosure, I'll tell you anyways that: (1) I am "atheist" (not by preference); (2) I have enormous respect/fascination for religion and the Christian tradition in particular (especially Catholic teachings); and (3) I have fucking read this shit, nigger. Augustine is prolly the classical philosopher I'm most comfortable with, but I consider myself more-or-less acquainted with the trajectory of theology in the West (its major developments etc.) from the ~400s onwards, through the Reformers and right up to Milbank/Niebuhr's neo-Orthodox reaction of $currentyear.

Good? Let's get on with it.

Attached: kuhn.jpg (134.8 KB, 1280x720)

Bentley Hernandez
Bentley Hernandez

II. POPPER & THE HISTORICAL TURN
So, that quote you pulled from Popper, where he compares evolutionary theory ("evo") to a "metaphysical research programme", is actually quite famous. You can probably guess why that is, but since we're not trying to pre-judge the question, we'll leave most of this aside. However, you should know that Popper actually wound up later recanting his comparison of evo to a "metaphysical research programme". In short, a bunch of distinguished (but assmad) biologists cornered him a room somewhere and he ended up acknowledging, after thorough explanation, that maybe his comparison was off-the-mark; and the research methods of biology didn't in fact amount to the same level of ad-hoc bullshit as (Marxian/Hegelian) metaphysics.

As I'm sure you know, for the early analytics (in whose footsteps Popper followed) being called a "metaphysician" was just about the worst insult that you could throw at someone. With little exaggeration, it was worse than being called a kike-nosed liar, a retarded schoolchild, or a faggy poet—for at least liars and poets, the thinking goes, can produce sentences that have literal meaning (significance).

Specifically it was Hegelian/Marxist dialectics that the analytics had in mind, and in fact sort of idolized as the "arch-nemesis" of metaphysical hogwash, that was ruining philosophy's good name (or rather, the good name it ought to have). This is basically the origin of the modern divide between "Continental" and "Analytic" schools of philosophy, though it bears mentioning that the border has softened somewhat and has lost a fair deal (but not all) of the original political associations.

Now the early analytics who we call the "logical positivists" or "logical empiricists" (the terms are virtually interchangeable), were interested in providing a 100% rigorous and airtight justification or grounding of human knowledge, in reality as perceived through sense-experience. To this end, they got hella mathy. Starting with the Vienna Circle, the positivists basically ended up inventing all of modern logic, in their never-ceasing quest to invent new schemes ofr logical notation, or "ideal languages" which could accurately symbolize empirical "sense-datum" in a way which was open to and fruitful for intellectual reasoning ("science").

Attached: carnap2a.png (96.94 KB, 200x303)

Levi Peterson
Levi Peterson

With me so far? I won't go into too much detail; I really can't do just even the bulk of these attempts (specifically Wittgenstein I've not read). But as a brief over-simplification of one approach to this project, take Carnap's "Confirmationism". Basically: (1) you accept that only sentences which pick out things in the real world can have actual meaning, i.e., truth/falsity values. (this is the broader method of "Verificationism"). Then (2), Carnap thinks, you take our collective scientific observations—the sum-total of recorded sense-datum—and turn them into probabilities. So a "theory" is really just a probabilistic assertion that "X" is likely to happen, based on observations "a, b, c, …." etc. What Carnap visualized scientists as doing was more or less drawing "lines of best fit" through different points on a graph. These probabilistic theories are based on the *number* of confirming/falsifying observations, and not their quality. Also, it does bump into the Humean problem of induction, where it's recognized that even if the sun rose for the last 999 million days, that's no guarantee it'll rise tomorrow. But moving on.

Enter Popper. Popper himself rejected the "positivist/empiricist" label, but this is basically BS (or really, just minutae) and most of us are comfortable assigning him to something resembling that label. At the very least he's the "bridging gap". Now Popper specifically objected to confirmationism, not on the grounds of Humean induction, but on the grounds that it wasn't a realistic picture of what scientists are actually trying to do. Scientists don't just want to redraw the line based on what best fits the data points: they want to understand the line's *how* and *why*, that underlying mechanism which is the actual object of study. And it isn't right that an observed violation of a theory should be treated the same as merely an instance of its confirmation: "All the apples falling downwards in the world wouldn't be enough to prove the theory of gravity with 100% certainty, but just one apple falling upwards would be enough to disprove it". Or so the Popperian intuition goes.

There's more to say here about what Popper thought made theories scientific/unscientific (it was them having "empirical content", ie being able to be proven wrong), and what he thought made certain theories better than others besides just observational support: specifically, theories which are *more likely to be wrong*, ie "riskier" theories (like Einstein's relativity) Popper thought we should think of as better than very broad theories (like Aristotle's "essences"), which are next to impossible to prove wrong. Popper was specifically thinking of analytic (historical) Marxism when he took aim at these "ad hoc" explanations: the Marxist constantly predicts revolution any day now, but when it doesn't occur it must be for X reason or Y reason. "Circumstances obviously weren't ready, cuz it hasn't happened yet" — Popper considered this bullshit and left his previous position disgusted with his Marxist colleagues.

(YOU ARE HERE)

Now it may surprise you to learn that Popper wasn't the last fucking philosopher of science. No, in the half-century since he was current, there's been a monumental shift in how we understand "science" and scientific reasoning; so that when you harp on about how ""muhhhh EVO isn't science cuz it doesn't meet Poppy's standards""" you sound like a blithering idiot with 0 knowledge of the subject field. Remember that Popper's original criticism of confirmationism was that it doesn't actually do a good job modelling how scientists actually operate. They don't just systematize evidence, they try to come up with actual theories that explain why things happen, and then they test those theories for falsifications. Well, it turns out even Popperian falsificationism doesn't actually work out to actually capture the practice of science. There were already cracks in the foundations of logical empiricism by the time Popper started writing (see: Quine's Two Dogmas), but it would be Kuhn and Feyerabend that really brought it home in what is sometimes called the "historical turn" in phil of science.

Attached: Popper1a.jpg (12.12 KB, 276x188)

Jason Ward
Jason Ward

So basically, for Popper's falsificationism to work, there needs to be an objective way by which we can compare two competing theories' "empirical contents", ie their actual (explanatory) predictions and what would make one or the other falsified. And for the most part, in ordinary science, there is. Competing theories generally operate within a single "paradigm", and often differ only by tiny details. Successive theories make very small changes to their predecessors, and this is how Popper thought we approximated something like truth ("verisimilitude").
Except sometimes, this isn't the case. Sometimes, there are enormous revolutions in scientific understanding which go beyond a Popperian framework of falsification. Kuhn called these periods of non-ordinary or revolutionary science "paradigm shifts", and yes, it's Kuhn you have to blame for every TEDx asshole who has since used or misused the phrase (tbh Kuhn himself is among these). We can think of lots: Aristotlean to Newtonian physics, for example; or Newtownian to Einsteinian. But let's see where thing actually break down.

The first fracture is the fact that theories from different paradigms may actually be non-comparable, or "incommensurable", when they employ entirely different taxonomies. Imagine I brought back a medieval Aristotlean and asked you to prove his worldview wrong—do you think it'd be easy, if at all possible? Some think we can create "shared taxonomies", ie shared spaces of overlap between paradigms where discussion and comparison is possible. But there's no reason this has to be the case, and even if it is, it's at least plausible that two paradigms could be entirely incommensurable in how they describe the world.

Second and more fundamentally, observations are always and unavoidably ""value-laden"". What makes you think you ""observed"" a passing planetary body is actually a bundle of theories, including the theory that you can rely on your own eyesight and the instruments you use to view the body (telescopes). Sometimes called the Quine-Duhem thesis, this is pretty much fatal to Popperian falsificationism.

The famous example is those observed anomalies in the procession/perehelion of Mercury, which were known, as early as 1915, to present a substantial ""falsification""" of Einsteinian relativity. Except… what happened? Did everybody go on and give up on Einsteinian physics, like good Popperians? No, you idiot, they accepted the observations as "anomalies"; things which couldn't be accounted for by the theory, and which presented avenues for further inquiry; until the 1970s when it was realized it was something to do with how we measured the things in the first place.

Let this suffice as a brief overview of why virtually nobody in this day and age subscribes to Popperian falsificationism. Lakatos, Popper's disciple, (and ironically a Marxist) would go on to refine the falsificationist framework by making it sensitive to different "research programmes", but he still had to end up, like Popper, assuming some universal set of scientific values by which we could judge the success of competing but (supposedly) "incommensurable" programmes (ie paradigms).

I should note, that while were few people today would say that any such set of universal values does exist, the Kuhnian "historical turn" should not be confused with scientific relativism, in the way in which it's understood in the popular imagination. That's closer to the attack on scientific rationality which came from sociology, (David Bloor specifically) in the 80s/90s, in a movement which is generally termed the "Sociology of Scientific Knowledge", or SSK. Both Kuhn and Feyarabend, believed in some (haphazard or wayward or miraculous) mechanism of scientific progress, and Kuhn at least was on better days "horrified" but the relaitivism he seemed to have unwittingly unleashed in phil of science. Yet we can't go back, (at least those of us who've actually been following), and if we want to criticize EVO as "unfalsifiable" it will have to be in light of these developments.

[INTERLUDE]
I'm going to type out something further on the actual "evolutionary theory is a tautology" argument, which believe it or not is accepted as a legitimate problem for philosophy of biology. Then I'm going to explain why this doesn't work to support your wack-ass inference to intelligent design, despite and in light of some (smart) contemporary defenders. Hopefully the thread's still up, gotta shit.

Attached: 85302.jpg (12.23 KB, 200x264)

Michael Morgan
Michael Morgan

Don't forget his OC:
twitter.com/g_rdn_/status/1116533085485641729

Landon Flores
Landon Flores

the absolute state pf your waste
you came close with the mercury stuff but then back into the soup lol

Michael Cox
Michael Cox

Attached: Evolution-scientifically-debunked.webm (15.83 MB, 550x310)

Sebastian Wood
Sebastian Wood

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
No. There is no superiority in a void. Its all contextual.

What is adaptive in an arctic environ is death in the desert, and vice versa, and if the environment changes, so does the context.

Evolution is just a theory after all, grounded in reason based upon observable phenomenon.

Ethan Powell
Ethan Powell

superior and inferior are objective terms

Parker Evans
Parker Evans

*subjective

Xavier White
Xavier White

Attached: Darwin's-Doubt-by-Stephen-C.-Meyer-(2013).jpg (1.11 MB, 1039x1650)

Joshua Jones
Joshua Jones

This thread only has so many reply because OP is either retarded or, more likely, a shitposter trying to trigger nerds

Cooper King
Cooper King

Science doesnt real
Here, read my Jewish fairy tales

You faggots are going to pay.

Wyatt Lee
Wyatt Lee

Then how did DNA strand naturally obtained it's ratios then?
Where was this even observed where proportions arise naturally while they are mathematical?
Do you believe that some mess millions of years ago made up of rocks and dirt became alive somehow gained consciousnesses and then gained ability to create mathematical proportions , ratios for free just because it wished so?
Where did it even gain knowledge of what math even is?
Give some links at least to what you are implying?
And how does a mutation which ONLY destroys the genetic material create that order at all.
Knowing that DNA itself contain a mathematical ratio then what exactly allowed it to posse it?
A protein needs already existing DNA with RATIO to be formed.
in order to exist.Then who came 1st?
Claiming a degenerated DNA from mutations creates such order makes no sense.

Aiden Russell
Aiden Russell

twitter.com/DiscoveryCSC

Intellectual home of the modern intelligent design movement and the scientists and scholars challenging Darwin's theory of evolution on the basis of science.

Asher Brooks
Asher Brooks

If you want a REAL education on the New Atheism and Evolution, watch these from E.MICHAEL JONES.
He destroys Darwinism and evolution with reason.

Connor Peterson
Connor Peterson

Sometimes I wonder if wisdom teeth didn't get their name from some forgotten purpose they serve cognitively.

There are lots of links to dental health and the brain.

Daniel Bailey
Daniel Bailey

Best posts in the thread, or at least what I skimmed.

Evolution is the change in animals by natural selection. It's nothing more complicated than taking the known fact that people can breed animals for certain characteristics over many generations and applying that insight to the natural world before humans were around. Today we have orange carrots, tiny lapdogs, and turkeys too fat to move because their legs break easily. All of this happened not just within recorded history, but only within the last couple hundred years. Their wild cousins look nothing like what we have bred.

The only alternative theory to animals changing over generations is that animals have always remained the same. God (or some other unknown process) magically pops them into existence, where they and their descendents live for a time, then die off. Thus, if elephants have always remained the same, they and all their relatives would have had to be created millions of years after the dinosaurs, then have all but 2 species killed off just before the present day. It's taking abiogenesis, which Christcucks love to ridicule, and making that the explanation for how every single species on the planet arrived, fully formed, at set times in our history. The only difference is that their abiogenesis is caused by God's voice rather than a one-off natural event.

Oliver Martinez
Oliver Martinez

I tend to agree, I have always thought as evolution (descent through modification/mutation) as proof of intelligent design itself, rather than seeing it as an attack against god.

there are many incredibly complex mechanism in nature, and each one that is discovered - a loud minority of theists start bitching and moaning that it is some kind of atheist plot.

why cant we just accept the fact that nature can be decoded seemingly without end, and each time we learn something new, we still can make the personal choice of having faith in an intelligence above us.

Now, that being said. For some reason, OPs analogy to witch trials, really made me ponder for a second about our ironclad trust in the scientific method. perhaps one day we will see a missing puzzle piece and think of the SM as a witch trial tier process, until then, it really is the best we have. And I think God intended for us to learn about our surroundings, and the rate at which we do, using tools. is part of his design.

Carter Martin
Carter Martin

Its ironic that you somewhat berate the ones who see the ID, while you "thank God" for "the tools" instead of acknowledging the source that is the race. And you even consider the supposed "evolution" as "intelligent design".

Logan Anderson
Logan Anderson

I merely used the word god because that is quite literally the best word to describe any intelligence higher than ourselves that we cannot comprehend.

As for your comment on race, I never mentioned anything about race. The thread topic mentions nothing about race.

Now, I will add. If you look at the spectrum of intelligence, or even the food chain. You see and endless progression equally in both directions. It would be foolish to assume you are the endpoint on that spectrum. More than foolish, dunning kruger-ish.

Attached: zerm.jpeg (405.69 KB, 1125x1920)

Dominic Young
Dominic Young

nice strawman retard. I’m gonna go out on a limb here and assume you’ve never done any reading on the subject beyond Zig Forums infographs and young earth creationist evangelical zionist nonsense

Liam Butler
Liam Butler

It doesn't. Amino acids are coded for by thre base pairs of dna. The third is usually degenerate, meaning diferent base pairs there will result in the same amino acid. The level of genetic separation by random mutation can be measured by sequencing the same protein in two different organism and measuring the number of different third pairs.
Stop listening to vox, he is an entitled rich faggot who would not have survived on his own without daddy's money and connections. He read three pop sci books and thinks he is entitled to being an expert, and is too uneducated on the subject to understand the refutations. Just like he wants to influence and be the leader without actually being the leader; in everything he does, he wants rights without responsibility. That is why he ran from the US and stole another country's woman, yet wants everyone else to do the opposite. He does it out of vainglory, which is why he is dividing us over bullshit like this. Genetics is destiny, we must protect the genetics of the white race, not the idea that culture is more important the the functioned nanotechnology that makes us who we are.

Christopher Murphy
Christopher Murphy

That fucking gamma always does this; divides the group over bullshit he doesn't understand because we won't let him be the leader. Why should I accept a fucking coward rich boy who abandoned the youth of his country and now preaches the opposite? He feels entitled to it because his billionaire father never told him no. He even larp as being the leader of elite hackers, he thinks this board is his personal army.
Do not let him subvert us, he is a fucking parasite that only cares about aggrandizing himself.

Brody Scott
Brody Scott

The muscles that allow you to move your ears, which are functional in bonobos.

Mason Morgan
Mason Morgan

If they serve no conceivable purpose then evolution would be false. I know this refutation will fly over your head.

Jonathan Cox
Jonathan Cox

And this is why vox is absolutely retarded.
I think different races exist.
I also think that variation between species is false and designed by a jewish sky nigger.
durr, culture is more important than shared genetics, but culture arises from genetics, except when culture isn't there genetics doesn't matter.
He's a closet civnat.

Daniel Scott
Daniel Scott

Evolution is an extension of the laws of thermodynamics.

Nicholas Thomas
Nicholas Thomas

i always strawman their position because I cannot understand it, and I am so addicted to convenience that anything that isn't given to me in less than ten minutes makes me socially lash out.
You cannot believe that races exist and not believe in genetics at the same time.
Don't resort to name calling like a leftist, and don't reframe and say it is 'rhetoric'. It is the normalization of banality.

Sebastian Ramirez
Sebastian Ramirez

Vox is a coward who abandoned his people with daddy's money. He is subverting us with this pointless division.

Michael Parker
Michael Parker

bayfiles.com/55a3f9ean5/Darwin_Devolves_by_Michael_J._Behe_2019_Audiobook_mp3

Attached: Darwin-Devolves-by-Michael-J.-Behe.jpg (142.01 KB, 507x825)

Aaron Stewart
Aaron Stewart

Did you guys know that darwin had a second theory that he made? Its called sexual selection, and its gist is that there are positive feedback loops that can make species uniquely weird. A female that chooses a certain trait in a male, over other traits, over generations this trait will grow larger, and her preference may stay the same.

Many species have this "one unique evolutionary runoff trait that kinda stands out", we humans have a larger brain, and a set of retarded behaviors, like art, humor, wit, originality and more that are its parts.

Josiah Flores
Josiah Flores

This trait choosing can contributes to the micro evolution.
But in no way it proves macro evolution.

Dylan Evans
Dylan Evans

Sexual selection is memetic; Social evolution is much more interesting then genetic, yet they become intertwined and codependent like a pretzel.

Ayden Walker
Ayden Walker

schizophrenic jew-worshipping christcucks are allowed to make slide threads here

the only reason you are this defensice about exposing this antiwhite mythology is because you are obsessed by an evolutionary demon

Nothing that happened in the past is 'falsifiable' because it's impossible to go back in time and observe if anything happened or not.

incorrect, you cant test the concequences of hypothethisized past events in present. e.g. Shliemann and discovery of Troy.

Its about methodology and evolution doesnt have it.

If evolution is true, you should see that a change in environment will change the dominant phenotype of a given species

that only proves natural selection, you nigs are highly confused

Feyerabend

Ok, I see you are a total sperg for doing a wall of text to virtue signall, but you have my respect for posting that big brain nigga. total God tier of philosophy.

Now tell me how is (((evolution))) falsifiable.

Here, read my Jewish fairy tales

Legit iron cross nazis like Feyerabend exposed the nihilistic cult of NuScience.

nice strawman retard.

that is exactly what a person with an evolutionary demon would say.

Attached: feyerabend-nazi.jpg (19.77 KB, 300x212)
Attached: feyerabend2.jpg (101.73 KB, 700x500)
Attached: science-ted-talk-eeeeeuphoria.jpg (79.98 KB, 1200x923)
Attached: science-dumb-cunts.png (492.1 KB, 590x441)
Attached: science1544899535127.jpg (127.24 KB, 634x698)

Ethan Sanders
Ethan Sanders

It's probably best to throw out every theory and 'law' and start over fresh.

Dominic Campbell
Dominic Campbell

"The separation of state and church must be complemented by the separation of state and science, that most recent, most aggressive, and most dogmatic religious institution. "

P. Feyerabend

NuScience is a nihilistic cult based on pseudoscience, why do pollacks (or should I say reddit immigrants) defend is so passionately?

thesises support (=/=factually proven) by (((scientific community)))
patriarchy is bad
family is opressive
immigration good
nothing wrong with sex change operations
race doesnt exists its just very very very small and very insignificant genetical difference (signed by members of (((scientific community))) )
our existence is meaningless we are just a coincidence so no need to fight goy
Sammys Ted talk might as well be non ironic

From humanities to most STEM, every acedemic is a flaming leftist faggot, every sane person worth something is ostracized in (((scientific community))).

Elijah Diaz
Elijah Diaz

FACTS:

scientists are close minded NIGGERS that create worhtless research
(((scientific community))) are liars and your enemies
most legit and relevant research will never get published
most important topics are never discussed
(((scientific community))) are human mices
(((scientific community))) are anti-intellectual queers
supporting (((scientific community))) like homos in this thread do is like taking it up the ass

PS-look up sokal affair

Attached: science1538837924231.jpg (46.12 KB, 641x586)
Attached: SCIENCE1522854987386.jpg (133.28 KB, 771x1200)
Attached: science1522525046310.jpg (34.51 KB, 512x375)

Nicholas Hernandez
Nicholas Hernandez

You're a retarded kike and you'll just arrive at the same conclusions as the previous experimentalists. Data is good. You can arrive at conclusions more accurately when you have more data. You can make greater correlations when you have more time / energy / processing power. As (((nice))) as the modern world has been and as tantalizing as the Yang Bang UBI Singularity virtual waifu utopia future is, it is an absolute fantasy. We inhabit a cruel, boring, rotting dystopia, where humanity and kindness are secondary to profit and power. I have snapped. There is no going back. I only want to see everyone bleed and die hideous deaths.

Sebastian Bell
Sebastian Bell

muh reddit spacing

Christopher Long
Christopher Long

It is a theory. Over large stretches of time, things mutate, if the mutation is desirable, the beings with the mutations reproduce more, and so on.

"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.
This doesn't really refute evolution.

Logan Morris
Logan Morris

But don't go dismissing all of science because the modern science institutions are pozzed, that's just throwing all of your euro ancestors scientific hardwork out of the window because of some jews.

Luis Jenkins
Luis Jenkins

your euro ancestors scientific hardwork

my euro ancestors scientific hardwork is being mocked by these subhumans that run academia today with their mythologies and motivational speeches.

Attached: science1513108116039.gif (15.63 KB, 630x445)
Attached: scienceTM416.jpg (94.41 KB, 940x960)

Jason Moore
Jason Moore

archive.org/details/ddbmd

Samuel Ross
Samuel Ross

I think the main reason evolution is popular on Zig Forums is because it gives people a justification to hate niggers and see themselves as being different from them.
The main reason evolution is popular on Zig Forums is because we're not all Americans.

Jaxson Fisher
Jaxson Fisher

his wisdom teeth didn't come in perfectly
he doesn't use his wisdom teeth to grind food every day

Attached: -103275127-kevinhart.jpg (64.81 KB, 706x326)

Wyatt Wright
Wyatt Wright

archive.org/details/DarwinsDoubtPart17/Darwin's Doubt-Part01.mp3

Nolan Miller
Nolan Miller

implying that you must wholesale disagree with white men's greatest accomplishments or agree with all of it.
These newfags… such brainlets, I can't take it anymore.
Back to the bunker, you fags get more agressive and I'll expose your 'glorious leader'.

Liam Wright
Liam Wright

seems entirely unfalsifiable (Poppers prerequisite for scientific theory)
Passes Occam's Razor, but not Falsifiability. This places it at the same level of rigor as archeology or social sciences. You get more prestige, of course, for practicing one of the 'hard' sciences, so it makes sense for an academic to try to elevate his discipline above its station.
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.
'Fitness' in biology does not mean superior, just well suited to environment. Superiority is the subject of selective breeding and eugenics, rather than evolution.
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.
Not sure if any of them are useless, but some are very oddly shaped in relation to their present function. The laryngeal nerve or the positioning of the retina for example.
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.
Darwin seems pretty honest to me, so I don't think it was intended for that. It is, however, very easily misused to push atheism and materialism on the gullible.

Aiden Jackson
Aiden Jackson

well i believe in evolution, i also believe in degeneration.

I don't understand OPs reasoning, this is perhaps kike thread to keep newcomers from reading board content by looking at flat earth/evolution isnt real shit.

Juan Evans
Juan Evans

my personal belief is that if you needed your wisdom teeth out, you didnt develop properly.
Masculine men with good head structure dont need them out.

Blake Barnes
Blake Barnes

First of all, "evolution" is just the change of a species, or it's divergence into multiple descendant species, over time. Evolution has been observed in the fossil record. If you're arguing that life on Earth is the same as it was billions of years ago, then you're just wrong.

Perhaps what you meant was that natural selection is circularly defined. For example:

Natural selection is the survival of the fittest
But how do you define the fittest? As those who survive

Genes that increase an organism's chances of survival and procreation are preserved.
<But how do you know if the gene contributes to survival and procreation? You know if those organisms that possess it are preserved.

And so on

Carson Smith
Carson Smith

You know, OP, it's threads like these that really make me believe most of the smart people on Zig Forums have long since left.

There is not a single good argument in this entire thread against evolution. You cannot talk about science as you would about political topics. Just because the "I fucking love science" crowd and edgy atheists claim to know about evolution or science in general doesn't make it any less true. They are just bandwaggoners who know as much about science as you do.

Read a book for once in your life, OP, if you can read.

Attached: 1499594537.jpg (228.73 KB, 550x595)

Adrian Smith
Adrian Smith

It's only the christard /christian/ infestation that is interested in denying science, the rest of us are in line with reality. Christcuckery is a cult, so they'll do anything to keep believing their bullshit Jewish lies.

Carson Ramirez
Carson Ramirez

Le 56% boomer thread. How cute.
Responding for the ratio.

Attached: 1341698807044.png (155.83 KB, 1200x900)

Jaxon Green
Jaxon Green

implying I ever had wisdom teeth
Unless you're using them to eat sinew, bone and raw meat what's the point of having that many?

Attached: 1459553894222.png (94.81 KB, 233x243)

Jace Lee
Jace Lee

13129671 (OP) (You)
You know, OP, it's threads like these that really make me believe most of the smart people on Zig Forums have long since left.
There is not a single good argument in this entire thread against evolution.
I don't understand OPs reasoning

Its basic of the basics of philosophy of science, you probably arent smart enough. Pure basics of gnoseology and you anti intellectual idiots arent able to hold your own…

Masculine men with good head structure dont need them out.

correct! Well developed jaw widht doesnt create problems with wisdom teeth, think about the mistake in conclusion they made about them being vestigial.

denying science

leftist cultists absolutly LOOOOVE science. "Science" is a buzzword today, not that a retard would realize that >>13137964

Attached: science-faggot.jpg (135.71 KB, 550x733)
Attached: science-cunts.jpg (2.71 MB, 4032x3024)
Attached: science1526050676158.jpg (92.26 KB, 1125x608)
Attached: science1525368596444.jpg (381.1 KB, 2048x1334)
Attached: science1522873745961.jpg (124.03 KB, 640x640)

Alexander Reyes
Alexander Reyes

Evolution is pushed in the fake "science vs religion" debate.

Science can't penetrate the hypothetical transcendent dimension any more than a videogame character can't fathom the architecture of the pc it is running on. It is bare metal? it is a VM?

Science models the universe, does not explain it. So evolution offers a model. Let's examine it. Life forms reproduce, random errors happen, errors yield mutations, nature selects the most apt. So far so good. The problem is when you try to spin it against creationism or religion. We don't need a creator god, all we need is a universe chugging along randomly.

First problem, the hypothetical creator god resides OUTSIDE TIME which god created. A funny property of being outside time, is that there is no cause or effect anymore. So, if you omnipotent being want a randomly evolving bunch of atom to look like man, you create it. If i want a function to cross the origin, i think f(t)=3*t. Do i need to evaluate it for t from minus infinity to plus infinity to calculate it at 0? no because I AM UNBOUND BY t.
All of this means that a creator god does not prove or disprove evolution. End of the religious debate.

Scientific problem. To say something is 'random', as evolution does, you must know how the universe is implemented. No, it's not enough to say it looks random. No, it's not enough to determine its probability distribution. Because I may have a probability distribution of going to eat a pizza for dinner but that probability will turn to almost 1 if there is a hottie I have an appointment with there. And that particular episode has basically zero statistical significance. So I am not randomly choosing to eat pizza according to a distribution, whatever the statistician concluded.

So the evolving organism in an impersonally moving universe IS a pretty good model, but it concludes nothing. Personally speaking, while I don't subscribe to some newageish 'consciousness make things happen' model, I think the universe "cheats", that is, there are some more mechanism influencing the outcome of things and those are linked to the will, ours or somebody's. But that's my humble opinion, make your own.

Juan Bell
Juan Bell

There is not a single good argument in this entire thread against evolution.
Something never comes out of nothing.

Ian Torres
Ian Torres

Archaeopteryx
Archaeopteryx has been debunked though.

Jacob Garcia
Jacob Garcia

archive.org/details/ddbscm

bayfiles.com/scG3D4e5nf/Darwin_s_Doubt_by_Stephen_C._Meyer_2013_Audiobook_zip

Jason Nguyen
Jason Nguyen

<leftist cultists absolutely LOOOOOVE science
No they don't, they hate science, that's why they deny it all the time. They're only interested in using it as a buzzword, but they don't know a thing about it. If they loved science they wouldn't need to corrupt it all the time.

Still doesn't change the fact that evolution is a fact that is part of the general Theory of Evolution (although you probably don't even know what a scientific theory is). The infiltration of science is a relatively recent thing that began this past century, and only in the past few decades has it become a serious issue. Even then, not everything has been totally corrupted, and many models we currently use are still viable.

The only way you'd be able to reject something the contemporary (((scientific community))) claims is if you have actual evidence or data to the contrary, which is how we distinguish real research from leftist bullshit (like how we know that race realism is true, faggots are degenerate, transgenders are mentally retarded, etc.). If you don't have any real arguments against evolution (which you don't), the theory still stands.

Evolution doesn't teach this, it's a theory of biodiversity (the ONLY theory of biodiversity). Not abiogenesis, not a cosmological theory, not anything other than that. Using retarded arguments like this only shows how much of an imbecile you are.

Thus the count remains at zero.

Jason Robinson
Jason Robinson

No they don't, they hate science, that's why they deny it all the time. They're only interested in using it as a buzzword, but they don't know a thing about it. If they loved science they wouldn't need to corrupt it all the time.

you are living in a fantasy world and are as delusional as a science LOOOOOVING leftist - ALL ACADEMIA is left leaning, from biology to phisics. Science today is barely above NGO level of intellectualism.

Still doesn't change the fact that evolution is a fact that is part of the general Theory of Evolution (although you probably don't even know what a scientific theory is).

this is a big statement from someone that just admitted to having his head 3 floors in the sand.

The only way you'd be able to reject something the contemporary (((scientific community))) claims is if you have actual evidence or data to the contrary, which is how we distinguish real research from leftist bullshit

and you barely have the data because in and outs are controlled by (((scientific community))) via big money which is the only way to do research which we already established YOU BLITHERING IDIOT

Evolution is pushed in the fake "science vs religion" debate.

its about deep conceptual problems evolution has, which you would know if you barely read the thread.

Evolution doesn't teach this, it's a theory of biodiversity (the ONLY theory of biodiversity).

here is a one biodeiversity theory: YEC.
here is another: being X that isnt christian God created living things differently.
and another: Lamarckism.

remove yourself from thread you moron you arent even able to think.

Attached: science1522525900322.jpg (73.87 KB, 735x490)
Attached: science1523169185216.jpg (195.45 KB, 635x927)

Chase Ward
Chase Ward

pollack: I FCK LOOOOOVE SCIENCE es bastepilled!!!
me: …

why? (((scientific community))) are anti intellectual nihilists, that is why they invest in evolution and other nihilistic unfalsifiable MYTHS - to demoralize you.

familiarize yourself with concepts of unfalsifiability, empirical testing of hypothesis and basics of philosophy of science, some of the responses here make me feel like Im on some of the worsts boards of reddit.

"The separation of state and church must be complemented by the separation of state and science, that most recent, most aggressive, and most dogmatic religious institution. "

P. Feyerabend

Attached: reddit1523714512277.gif (698.63 KB, 1221x768)
Attached: bugman1541118008885.jpg (107.33 KB, 576x768)
Attached: rickmorty1514989522049.jpg (137.51 KB, 576x768)

John Richardson
John Richardson

How do you "debunk" a fossil?

You're probably new here since you quoted my same post twice for some reason.

ALL ACADEMIA is left leaning
I know. Still doesn't disprove evolution, though. Not like contemporary academia created the theory, it was formulated in the 19th century. Everything since then has confirmed it, particularly genetics and DNA sequencing (the same stuff we use to confirm paternity and ancestry).
and you barely have the data
I'm not the one that needs it, we have plenty (genetics, taxonomy, etc.). I was saying YOU need to present evidence to falsify evolution, since you're the one claiming it's just leftist bullshit. If that were the case it shouldn't be so easy to debunk, look at things like climate change and anti-racists, we can just look at the predictions they have made and we know they're full of shit. The same ought to be true of Darwinian evolution if it were just leftist bullshit.

Pointing out that (((grants and funding))) are only given for "research" that seeks to "confirm" leftist dogma doesn't support your position, it's something most of us here are already aware of.

here's one biodiversity theory: YEC
Not a theory at all, let alone a theory of biodiversity, it's just dogmatic bullshit based on judaized stolen myths. I don't know of a creationist alive today that doesn't accept evolution, they just try to put imaginary boundaries on it to pretend humans aren't apes so they can keep telling everyone they're "sinners" that need (((Jesus))).

intelligent design
Once again not a theory of biodiversity, what you've proposed would only explain the origin of life, not how populations change over time.

Lamarckism
Has been disproven already.

Eli Edwards
Eli Edwards

if that were the case it shouldn't be so easy to debunk
Should read:
if that were the case it should be just as easy to debunk

Mason Lee
Mason Lee

I was saying YOU need to present evidence to falsify evolution

I cant falsify evolution since its unfalsifiable like all empirically unbased theories. There is not a singe empirical finding that can falsify evolution.

Can you falsify the fact that you are obsessed with an evolutionary demon?

Robert Morgan
Robert Morgan

literal off topic kikestian propaganda is STILL up

Nicholas Phillips
Nicholas Phillips

Not a theory at all, let alone a theory of biodiversity

Evolution is not a theory at all, let alone a theory of biodiversity.
based on what is it not a theory?

literal off topic kikestian propaganda is STILL up

only an antiintellectual brainlet would react such a way.

Julian Robinson
Julian Robinson

according to Bill Nye's calculations
Holy shit, that (((cocksucker))) needs to die already.

Blake Martinez
Blake Martinez

There could be, actually. The discovery of an actual Pegasus, for example, would deal a heavy blow to the theory, since it would poke holes in our taxonomic models and would violate monophyly.

Based on the definition and criteria of a scientific theory.

Lucas Barnes
Lucas Barnes

I'll add to that, actually: DNA sequencing could have also falsified evolution, but it did not do this.

Alexander Thompson
Alexander Thompson

The discovery of an actual Pegasus, for example, would deal a heavy blow to the theory, since it would poke holes in our taxonomic models and would violate monophyly.

mutation/species that met a dead end, next.

Based on the definition and criteria of a scientific theory.

falsifiability, testabiltiy (in present), predictability. evolution meets non.

Austin Lewis
Austin Lewis

mutation/species that met a dead end
It couldn't be explained that easily because the number of mutations that it would take to create fully formed functioning wings that could support a horse would be astronomically high, which is why that would be something that would pose a huge problem for evolution. The horse has no "bird" in its ancestry, it would cross taxonomic lines.

Cooper Cooper
Cooper Cooper

This is the future you chose by allowing jew-worshippers to shitpost unmolested

Chase Lopez
Chase Lopez

evolution is easily falsified if we show that dna is not the sole factor that determines phenotype (If we for example cloned an animal and it had different traits, evolution is done), or we could find a complex animal too early in the fossil record, or we could find out that either there are no mutations that change phenotype or those that do cannot be inherited.

How is evolution any less falsifiable than any of our "laws" of physics ? We were throwing epicycles into Ptolemy's geocentric model in the past and we have this dark matter and energy nonsense today. There will always be retards trying to keep the standard model together with tape and glue, but even so, I can't think of anything less falsifiable than "the bearded jew in the sky did it 2 thousand years ago."

Evan Roberts
Evan Roberts

falsely accuses me of strawman
immediately constructs his own strawman
Stopped reading and filtered for low IQ. Lot of stuff to read, can't waste time on you, sorry.

Samuel Evans
Samuel Evans

seems entirely unfalsifiable (Poppers prerequisite for scientific theory)
If it's unfalsifiable, then it's the best explanation we have for a phenomena. The fact we haven't proven it false, does not make it false.

Yet, another failure of Christtards to prove evolution false with retard-tier logic.

Attached: brenton-tarrant-1.jpg (40.73 KB, 499x444)

Levi Green
Levi Green

filename

Nicholas Rivera
Nicholas Rivera

evolution is easily falsified if we show
…you're a complete retard.

Evolution is simple. You are a combination of your parents DNA. With luck you'll get the best DNA form both parents. But I digress, you seem to be proof evolution is false since you got the garbage DNA from both.

Zachary James
Zachary James

To deny evolution you also have to deny natural selection, genetic mutation, genetic recombination, genetic drift, etc.

Asher Bell
Asher Bell

He wasn't saying we can disprove evolution, he's explaining how evolution could potentially be falsified, since OP claims it is unfalsifiable (a sign of a bad theory in science, since it wouldn't be testable or able to be proven false if it were wrong).

Charles Richardson
Charles Richardson

What amazes me is if you talk to any creationist long enough, they will all acknowledge evolution is undeniable. The only things they have a problem with are abiogenesis and the common descent of all living organisms, which is fair. But to throw the theory out the window because the book of Jewish fables says something else is just stupid.

Isaac Wilson
Isaac Wilson

Micro evolution is a fact which is diversity/variations within species.
But macro evolution where species turns into another species is NOT a fact.
Tell us where did you see a beneficial mutation which helped create new genetic material in real life and not just shut down the function of a gene?
If you didn't Macro evolution is dead.

David Torres
David Torres

Based OP.

Isaac Bell
Isaac Bell

Mutations always result in the loss of information. Information does not randomly accrue; it comes from a source.

Nicholas Roberts
Nicholas Roberts

"Over 1000 doctoral scientists from around the world have signed a statement publicly expressing their skepticism about the contemporary theory of Darwinian evolution."

Angel Young
Angel Young

talkorigins.org/faqs/speciation.html
talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB102.html

Gavin Gutierrez
Gavin Gutierrez

It couldn't be explained that easily because the number of mutations that it would take to create fully formed functioning wings that could support a horse would be astronomically high

no it wouldnt we are talking about 5 BILLION YEARS (expanding every year). You can explain EVERYTHING.

Yet, another failure of Christtards to prove evolution false with retard-tier logic.
This is the future you chose by allowing jew-worshippers to shitpost unmolested

Only a science fck looooving bugman would respond so anti-intellectually.

evolution is easily falsified if we show that dna is not the sole factor that determines phenotype (If we for example cloned an animal and it had different traits, evolution is done),

that would falsify natural sellection and indirectly evolution (and YEC), read here>>13131353

or we could find a complex animal too early in the fossil record

that is the thing, a fossil "out of place" wouldnt falsify it, fossils "out of place" are perfectly in line with evolution mutation/species that met a dead end, next.

Yet, another failure of Christtards to prove evolution false with retard-tier logic.

To deny evolution you also have to deny natural selection, genetic mutation, genetic recombination, genetic drift, etc.

total bollocky, even withing YEC paradigm you would have genetic science, in fact you had genetics BEFORE Darwin

What amazes me is if you talk to any creationist long enough, they will all acknowledge evolution is undeniable.

that is whole point of my thread, you simply cant refute evolution, its unfalsifiable like all leftists/hegelian argumentations.

Carson Edwards
Carson Edwards

13129706

literally a moth named the predicted one.

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

Yeah… Wth

Michael Young
Michael Young

With every post, christcucks continue to demonstrate their willful ignorance and stupidity further and further.
no it wouldnt we are talking about 5 BILLION YEARS (expanding every year). You can explain EVERYTHING.
Wrong again, as always. It's been estimated at approximately 4.5 billion years for a while. Wouldn't matter anyway because neither horses nor birds have been around anywhere near that long. The fact that you think that a Pegasus could be explained away so easily by just "mutations" shows how little you understand about this. Do you think just one gene or allele would need to change and then suddenly a horse could be born with fully functional, fully developed wings in a single generation? As I said, a horse has no "bird" in its ancestry, so neither a single nor a million mutations would give a horse those features because that's not how evolution works (which is why creationists who use the argument "a cow would never give birth to a frog, therefore Darwin was wrong" are retarded, because that's perfectly in line with what evolution describes). Ergo the discovery of a Pegasus would indeed present a massive problem for the theory, since the creature would contain traits from two completely separate clades that don't have an ancestry close enough to share such traits.

By the way, that's a good video, I agree with a lot of what Feyeraband says, but it still doesn't change anything, you're still wrong.

But I do find it a bit odd you'd post the first part and not the second one, where in the first 2 minutes he brings up creationism as an example of pseudoscience that distracts from actual science:
youtube.com/watch?v=HEMD5-5VjeY

I also find it odd you'd post a video from this channel thinking it confirms your position when he uploaded a mirror video of this faggot:
youtube.com/watch?v=LCpz-7Jj2-k

And also uploaded this garbage:
youtube.com/watch?v=bAmlTkoERi8

And this shit (what the fuck even is "feminist epistemology"?):
youtube.com/watch?v=YRvlJKzKPsc

Nice try though.

Cameron Bennett
Cameron Bennett

You are honestly going to tell me that the chances of beneficial mutations happening on a consistent basis and always being beneficial without any deformities. Not to mention the improbability of those actually passing on their genes considering they could possibly turn out deformed. Then also consider the probability of this happening every single time. This theory was and always will be bullshit.

Gabriel Reyes
Gabriel Reyes

Wouldn't matter anyway because neither horses nor birds have been around anywhere near that long.

LETS JUST ADD BILLION YEARS EVERY FEW DECADES TEE HEE

The fact that you think that a Pegasus could be explained away so easily by just "mutations" shows how little you understand about this

I dont "think" it would be, it can be perfectly explained, as can rabbit in precambrion or however the bugman saying goes.

Do you think just one gene or allele would need to change and then suddenly a horse could be born with fully functional, fully developed wings in a single generation?

A lot can happen in a billion years…but apparently uranium emmission are perfectly constant (this thesis has been approved by Science and has (((scientific community))) seal of approval so edgy infinity pollacks can suck (((scientific communities))) cock passionatly).

But I do find it a bit odd you'd post the first part and not the second one, where in the first 2 minutes he brings up creationism as an example of pseudoscience that distracts from actual science

offcourse a member of (((scientific community))) is going to cuck intellectually even on his own implications so take the good, spit out the bad, now that you mentioned it can you bring up analytically precise arguments that member of (((scientific community))) brings against creationism as pseudoscience!!!???

Christian Taylor
Christian Taylor

The whole "survival of the fittest" paradigm is flawed because it leads people to think that only useful mutations persist so things like a bat's wings are confusing. There's a great deal of luck involved in survival and even if you survive you've got to attract a mate, so it's really survival of the lucky chads/rapists.

Attached: doomer.jpg (18.25 KB, 240x240)

Christian Ward
Christian Ward

part 2 on philosophy of science, notice that when touching on critique of evolution guy makes a almost a ciggarette health warning (similar to what you hear in WW2 docs or when Wagner is to be played). Modern science is an anti-intellectual nihilistic cult.

take the good spit out the bad.

The fact that you think that a Pegasus could be explained away so easily by just "mutations" shows how little you understand about this.

in other words, is perfectly thesible and in no way disprovable that Pegasus hasnt existed and died in 56465billion years (or whatever the age of the Earth made by (((scientific community))) is).
No fossils? Well we just havent found them as we havent found weird humans with superweird vestigials (Im not talking about the meme official list, Im talking about legit stuff like half fish humans etc.) but we will soon, Sci-ence-tells-me-so!

Can you dispove that you are possesed by an evolutionary demon?

By the way, that's a good video, I agree with a lot of what Feyeraband says, but it still doesn't change anything, you're still wrong.

youll get there some day, now you are grappling with congnitive dissonance.

The whole "survival of the fittest" paradigm is flawed because it leads people to think that only useful mutations persist so things like a bat's wings are confusing.

its circular thinking at its finest, evolutionary psychology is a total meme. Also IQ is dropping , by its own logic we should call the IQ drop an adaptation (and therefore shouldnt interfere in it dropping). total craziness.

Camden Morgan
Camden Morgan

youll get there some day, now you are grappling with congnitive dissonance
Projection at its finest. I was a christard creationist at one point and I have no intention of regressing back to that mentality, it's literally cancerous mental enslavement to a book of Jewish lies. I don't know why you think I'm grappling with cognitive dissonance, literally nothing in those videos proves you right in any way or disproves evolutionary biology. You can't just say "it's bad to be dogmatic" (which I agree with) and then say "so evolution is wrong", that's a non sequitur. You have to actually show why it's wrong. It doesn't matter what you believe, the only thing that matters is why you believe it. And yet all creationists ever do is try to patch holes in a sinking ship, they never propose any ideas or discoveries of their own in this field because their worldview doesn't allow them to. If it's between the bible and reality, they'll always choose the bible, by their own admission.

I've already given examples of how we can know when the current (((scientific community))) is lying, as is the case with things like race realism or climate change. It isn't terribly difficult to do, just show that the predictions they make are wrong or post evidence and data to the contrary and you know they're full of shit. The fact that you can't do that with evolution and only continue to deflect shows that it stands.

Benjamin Torres
Benjamin Torres

I've already given examples of how we can know when the current (((scientific community))) is lying, as is the case with things like race realism or climate change. It isn't terribly difficult to do, just show that the predictions they make are wrong or post evidence and data to the contrary and you know they're full of shit.

interesting, so now after Science that loves you saved you, your eyes are opened and you can see with supreme intellect how many of evolutionary predictions were wrong?
IQ drop
appendix being vestigial
wisdom teeth
calling deformities vestigial (what is even the difference?)

Asher Gomez
Asher Gomez

also, now after Science saved you..
Can you dispove that you are possesed by an evolutionary demon?

or is that thesis simply empirically unfalsifiable?

Elijah Barnes
Elijah Barnes

Research the difference between Rh+ and Rh-.
Basically Rh-'s are descendants from the Atlanteans, Lemurians and Muians while Rh+ are descendants from a human and monkey hybridized slave race created by precious metals (specially gold) seeking reptilians.
Rh-'s were meant, according to some sources, to rule over the Rh+'s (under the watch of reptilians perhaps since the Rh+ were their pets?).

Owen Collins
Owen Collins

Reminder that the concept and possibility of intelligent design has in the end nothing to do with Christianity or other religions per se.

Attached: Mount-Agung-erupting,-November-2017.jpg (161.62 KB, 1343x2015)

Brody Russell
Brody Russell

I love eating dumplings. Why do you guys want to kill the Chinese?

Luke Gray
Luke Gray

Honestly, the "useless" redundancy provides an advantage. The fact that we have so many anastomoses (multiple blood routes) for veins and arteries in our legs means that if the superficial ones get fucked, our feet don't just die and rot off of our ankles. Similar case in other areas with that kind of vascular structure, the mesentery for example. Also there's some evidence pointing at our "vestigal" appendix having a degree of immune function because of lymph nodule density. t. surgical tech

Angel Stewart
Angel Stewart

Also, didn't mean this as an argument against evolution like the other retard arguing against vestigal organs. Just pointing out that we do have repetitive structures as an argument against the autistic "evolution man vs creation man" thing.

Zachary Jackson
Zachary Jackson

Adaptaion within kind is not disputed by creationists, user. The point is to explain speciegenesis, and evolution does not do that, and nor do your examples of supposed evolution.

No one disputes that heredity and adaptational heredity are true. What is disputed is the claim that this will ever produce anything other than a selectively bred elephant.

Michael Peterson
Michael Peterson

The Catholic church has effectively accepted Freemasonry and the ideology of the world wholesale, user. They have been schismatic since the great Schism, user. Orthodoxy is where it's at, user.

Lucas Brooks
Lucas Brooks

No, it does not. It is one of the central and focal ideologies of the secular and humanistic New World order, and historically a center piece of English (freemasonic) ideology. It is the metaphysical Jewish belief in prima materia (ein sof), clad in secular garments, and contrasted with the Christian belief in creation ex nihilo.

Andrew Hall
Andrew Hall

No, it does not. It is one of the central and focal ideologies of the secular and humanistic New World order

exactly, its nothing more than Hegelian historiosophy with biology as a lite motive.

Attached: this1387374326571.jpg (90.72 KB, 634x448)

Ethan Cooper
Ethan Cooper

Speciation is not macro evolution sorry.

Landon Morris
Landon Morris

13151435
What do you mean by superior ?

Owen Rogers
Owen Rogers

doubling of the chromosome count does not prove macro evolution its just a multiplication of the same genetic material but no new chromosome been added.

Daniel Walker
Daniel Walker

13129703
This stems from you being too stoopid to understand what constitutes an actual prediction in the framework of science. Theories predict a cause and effect relationship as in an outcome. The observation that an orchid by necessity needs an insect capable of pollinating it doesn’t lend support to the theory of evolution. It’s simple, unimpressive deductive reasoning based on Darwin’s experience as a naturalist.

Alexander Lopez
Alexander Lopez

This does raise a good point, and one that I admit is guaranteed to kill threads: even if our world was intelligently designed and evolution is false, which god did it? Most media about intelligent design is written with a Christian mindset, but to say that the Christian God did it without any conclusive evidence is foolish. At most, we could say SOMETHING did it. Not to mention, the evolutionary theory doesn’t preclude the existence of God, just that he didn’t create everything in the way described in the Bible.

Brody Ward
Brody Ward

Yeah, it is.
Macroevolution refers to the concept of large-scale evolution that occurs at the level of species and above.
Macroevolution can be used to describe the differences between two closely related but distinct species, such as the Asian Elephant and the African Elephant, which cannot mate due to the barriers imposed by reproductive isolation. This is the process of speciation, which can be driven by a number of different mechanisms. Additionally, macroevolution can describe differences between organisms belonging to larger clades, for example the different taxonomic groups within the primates.
It's all part of the same theory describing the same phenomena, only concerned with different time scales that allow more and more variations to accumulate.

Samuel Ramirez
Samuel Ramirez

Attached: racenotasocialconstruct.jpg (157.45 KB, 1199x845)

Grayson Phillips
Grayson Phillips

Evolutionism is bullshit. Does anyone believe complicated lifeforms can just start existing by chance? Rarted.

Disable AdBlock to view this page

Disable AdBlock to view this page

Confirm your age

This website may contain content of an adult nature. If you are under the age of 18, if such content offends you or if it is illegal to view such content in your community, please EXIT.

Enter Exit

About Privacy

We use cookies to personalize content and ads, to provide social media features and to analyze our traffic. We also share information about your use of our site with our advertising and analytics partners.

Accept Exit