Religion/Spirituality The Intelligent Design/God/Theism Thread

[Mission249]

It was a joke to show the absurdity of the whole premise. Again, I ask you, I am making it very basic, show me one incident of mycoplasma evolving something else breh.

Stop constantly moving the goal posts. It's sad. Let me be charitable and assume you were joking in that instance. You're the one who brought up the argument that you should have been able to "see it". You weren't joking in that case. Show us where evolution said this one individual should be able to see evolution at a macro scale, large enough for him to arbitrarily perceive that it's significant?

Anyway, here's a more directly link to our common ancestry: http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-family-tree
Fossils available at the Smithsonian. Check them out some time.

 

[blackzeus]

Stop constantly moving the goal posts. It's sad. Let me be charitable and asseme you were joking in that instance. You're the one who brought up the argument that you should have be able to "see it". You weren't joking in that case. Show us where evolution said this one individual should be able to see evolution at a macro scale, large enough for him to arbitrarily perceive that it's significant?

Anyway, here's a more directly link to our common ancestry: http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-family-tree
Fossils available at the Smithsonian. Check them out some time.

Homo floriensis looks like Max Julien in "How to Be a Playa"

All jokes aside, evolution claims something is true, but evolution also claims you can't see it. Does this sound familiar folks?

 

[Mission249]

Homo floriensis looks like Max Julien in "How to Be a Playa"

Hah, dude you're trolling. I'll just consider this a win for me and keep it moving. I'll give you props for starting a lively discussion. Even tho almost everything you said is ridiculous and factually incorrect, it was kinda fun knocking you around and sharpening my debate skills. I even re-learned some long forgotten stuff as I researched some of my points.

Happy New Years everyone. Even @blackzeus

All jokes aside, evolution claims something is true, but evolution also claims you can't see it. Does this sound familiar folks?

Nah, it's more like your misunderstanding of evolution means you'll never be able to see it. Because you believe in a fantasy. I already showed you dog breeding is evolution. You're asking to witness macro evolution on the scale of millions of years, and I showed you the fossils and linked to the scientific literature on the common ancestry.

Essentially you're saying: Show me evidence that you ran a marathon, and I show you a bunch of pictures of me running it (e.g. fossils) and proof (e.g. scientific literature - even from those Berkeley and Princeton people you seem to believe when they agree with you), but it's not good enough for you. You don't understand the concept so you ask me to show you the whole marathon in one picture. It's an illogical request from an illogical person. I can't help you.

 

[tmonster]

It was a joke to show the absurdity of the whole premise. Again, I ask you, I am making it very basic, show me one incident of mycoplasma evolving something else breh.

I don't know how to do that...should I google it?

 

[tmonster]

Homo floriensis looks like Max Julien in "How to Be a Playa"

All jokes aside, evolution claims something is true, but evolution also claims you can't see it. Does this sound familiar folks?

what does evolution claim that you can't see?

 

[tmonster]

Call an improbable theory a well established fact brehs

I mean you saying that does not change anything

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

Hah, dude you're trolling. I'll just consider this a win for me and keep it moving. I'll give you props for starting a lively discussion. Even tho almost everything you said is ridiculous and factually incorrect, it was kinda fun knocking you around and sharpening my debate skills. I even re-learned some long forgotten stuff as I researched some of my points.

Happy New Years everyone. Even @blackzeus

Just tap out.

@blackzeus is just really trolling out here and I've lost patience for it.

I can't argue with an idiot who tries to intellectualize what is ultimately a factually and scientifically untenable position.

 

[tmonster]

Evident Evolution: Lizards Developing to Give Live Birth

Evolution, as we learn in school, is so gradual that changes take place over hundreds or thousands of years. And of course, most of us never get a concrete look at what the process of evolution looks like. But a certain type of Australian lizard is teaching the whole world a lesson about evolution by changing right before our eyes. The yellow-bellied three-toed skink looks like a small snake with tiny legs. In the cold mountainous regions of Australia the skink gives birth to live young, but in the warmer coastal regions the same species lays eggs. Scientists say that we are essentially seeing the lizard in the middle of evolving from egg-laying to live-bearing births.

The process to go from egg laying to live birthing isn’t all that complicated. The females simply start keeping their young inside their bodies for longer and longer, usually because of harsh weather or other environmental factors. Over the generations, the incubation time inside mothers’ bellies gets longer and longer, and egg shells – which once protected the young from the outside world and provided calcium – get thinner and thinner.

Because the process is relatively simple (in evolutionary terms, anyway) it’s happened plenty of times before. In fact, almost a hundred types of lizards have made the switch from egg-laying to live births. Currently, only two types of lizards other than the skinks use both types of reproduction methods. Seeing the skinks in this stage of their evolution is helping scientists figure out exactly how the change is made.

 

[blackzeus]

Let's get to the whole nitty gritty of the improbability of evolution brehs for us simple high school educated folk. The most simplest organism I know is mycoplasma, but I'm not a biologist, maybe some of you evolutionists know a simpler one. Let's assume that the prokaryote (single celled organism) has about 1000 alleles/genes (this is for the sake of argument, I believe it has less, but I don't remember). Let's assume the rate of DNA replication is 1000 nucleotides/min. so basically every minute, this organism has a baby (layman's terms). So...

1 prokaryote in 1 min

2 prokaryotes in 2 min

4 prokaryotes in 3 min

8 prokaryotes in 4 min

16 prokaryotes in 5 min.

^^^This here is what them fancy educated evolutionist folk like to call exponential growth. In this case it is "quadratic", a fancy scientist term meaning that the quantity doubles every minute. So let's make this here into a simple scientist function brehs:

x = 2^(y-1), x being the number of prokaryotes, y being the minute. So using this fancy sciencey equation right hurr, we can just plug in the numbers to see how many bacteria there will be in one year:

60 min/hour x 24 hours/day x 365 days/year = 525,600 minutes in a year, let's see how many of these here prokaryotes we got:

x = 2^(525,600-1) = a pretty big f*ckin number (infinity)

So now, if the bacteria has 1 baby every 1 min, and the average human has perhaps one baby by 30 years old (unless you're dominican ) one million years in bacteria time is 1,000,000/30 = x/1 = 33,333 minutes. So technically speaking (of course, the evolutionists will claim we don't understand ) less than a month (525,600/12 = 43,800 minutes) of prokaryotes servicing themselves () should be enough to demonstrate some sort of evolution, I mean, in a million half-lives (bacteria years in fancy sciency language) we should see some type of evolution from a single celled organism. Nikkaz haven't seen sh*t change in 150 HUMAN years and they wanna claim their sh*t is true It's more likely that God is real than evolution, real talk. They mock Christians but in reality it's evolutionists who believe in unicorns

 

[tmonster]

Let's get to the whole nitty gritty of the improbability of evolution brehs for us simple high school educated folk. The most simplest organism I know is mycoplasma, but I'm not a biologist, maybe some of you evolutionists know a simpler one. Let's assume that the prokaryote (single celled organism) has about 1000 alleles/genes (this is for the sake of argument, I believe it has less, but I don't remember). Let's assume the rate of DNA replication is 1000 nucleotides/min. so basically every minute, this organism has a baby (layman's terms). So...

1 prokaryote in 1 min

2 prokaryotes in 2 min

4 prokaryotes in 3 min

8 prokaryotes in 4 min

16 prokaryotes in 5 min.

^^^This here is what them fancy educated evolutionist folk like to call exponential growth. In this case it is "quadratic", a fancy scientist term meaning that the quantity doubles every minute. So let's make this here into a simple scientist function brehs:

x = 2^(y-1), x being the number of prokaryotes, y being the minute. So using this fancy sciencey equation right hurr, we can just plug in the numbers to see how many bacteria there will be in one year:

60 min/hour x 24 hours/day x 365 days/year = 525,600 minutes in a year, let's see how many of these here prokaryotes we got:

x = 2^(525,600-1) = a pretty big f*ckin number (infinity)

So now, if the bacteria has 1 baby every 1 min, and the average human has perhaps one baby by 30 years old (unless you're dominican ) one million years in bacteria time is 1,000,000/30 = x/1 = 33,333 minutes. So technically speaking (of course, the evolutionists will claim we don't understand ) less than a month (525,600/12 = 43,800 minutes) of prokaryotes servicing themselves () should be enough to demonstrate some sort of evolution, I mean, in a million half-lives (bacteria years in fancy sciency language) we should see some type of evolution from a single celled organism. Nikkaz haven't seen sh*t change in 150 HUMAN years and they wanna claim their sh*t is true It's more likely that God is real than evolution, real talk. They mock Christians but in reality it's evolutionists who believe in unicorns

I told you to stay away from math after your first post

 

[blackzeus]

Hah, dude you're trolling. I'll just consider this a win for me and keep it moving. I'll give you props for starting a lively discussion. Even tho almost everything you said is ridiculous and factually incorrect, it was kinda fun knocking you around and sharpening my debate skills. I even re-learned some long forgotten stuff as I researched some of my points.

Happy New Years everyone. Even @blackzeus

Nah, it's more like your misunderstanding of evolution means you'll never be able to see it. Because you believe in a fantasy. I already showed you dog breeding is evolution. You're asking to witness macro evolution on the scale of millions of years, and I showed you the fossils and linked to the scientific literature on the common ancestry.

Essentially you're saying: Show me evidence that you ran a marathon, and I show you a bunch of pictures of me running it (e.g. fossils) and proof (e.g. scientific literature - even from those Berkeley and Princeton people you seem to believe when they agree with you), but it's not good enough for you. You don't understand the concept so you ask me to show you the whole marathon in one picture. It's an illogical request from an illogical person. I can't help you.

Yeah man, we can continue this on Friday breh

 

[tmonster]

Just tap out.

@blackzeus is just really trolling out here and I've lost patience for it.

I can't argue with an idiot who tries to intellectualize what is ultimately a factually and scientifically untenable position.

I don't think he started out trolling
he's just doing it now to deflect from having been destroyed intellectually

 

[blackzeus]

Evident Evolution: Lizards Developing to Give Live Birth



Evolution, as we learn in school, is so gradual that changes take place over hundreds or thousands of years. And of course, most of us never get a concrete look at what the process of evolution looks like. But a certain type of Australian lizard is teaching the whole world a lesson about evolution by changing right before our eyes. The yellow-bellied three-toed skink looks like a small snake with tiny legs. In the cold mountainous regions of Australia the skink gives birth to live young, but in the warmer coastal regions the same species lays eggs. Scientists say that we are essentially seeing the lizard in the middle of evolving from egg-laying to live-bearing births.



The process to go from egg laying to live birthing isn’t all that complicated. The females simply start keeping their young inside their bodies for longer and longer, usually because of harsh weather or other environmental factors. Over the generations, the incubation time inside mothers’ bellies gets longer and longer, and egg shells – which once protected the young from the outside world and provided calcium – get thinner and thinner.


Because the process is relatively simple (in evolutionary terms, anyway) it’s happened plenty of times before. In fact, almost a hundred types of lizards have made the switch from egg-laying to live births. Currently, only two types of lizards other than the skinks use both types of reproduction methods. Seeing the skinks in this stage of their evolution is helping scientists figure out exactly how the change is made.

I just can't anymore brehs, let's just agree to disagree, y'all testing oil droplets and claiming the logical conclusion to lizards of the same species in relatively close proximity to each other sharing the same birthing habits is evolution

 

[blackzeus]

I mean you saying that does not change anything

Post #428 breh, i'm more likely to see an elf than proof of common descent in my lifetime

 

[gho3st]

Let's get to the whole nitty gritty of the improbability of evolution brehs for us simple high school educated folk. The most simplest organism I know is mycoplasma, but I'm not a biologist, maybe some of you evolutionists know a simpler one. Let's assume that the prokaryote (single celled organism) has about 1000 alleles/genes (this is for the sake of argument, I believe it has less, but I don't remember). Let's assume the rate of DNA replication is 1000 nucleotides/min. so basically every minute, this organism has a baby (layman's terms). So...

1 prokaryote in 1 min

2 prokaryotes in 2 min

4 prokaryotes in 3 min

8 prokaryotes in 4 min

16 prokaryotes in 5 min.

^^^This here is what them fancy educated evolutionist folk like to call exponential growth. In this case it is "quadratic", a fancy scientist term meaning that the quantity doubles every minute. So let's make this here into a simple scientist function brehs:

x = 2^(y-1), x being the number of prokaryotes, y being the minute. So using this fancy sciencey equation right hurr, we can just plug in the numbers to see how many bacteria there will be in one year:

60 min/hour x 24 hours/day x 365 days/year = 525,600 minutes in a year, let's see how many of these here prokaryotes we got:

x = 2^(525,600-1) = a pretty big f*ckin number (infinity)

So now, if the bacteria has 1 baby every 1 min, and the average human has perhaps one baby by 30 years old (unless you're dominican ) one million years in bacteria time is 1,000,000/30 = x/1 = 33,333 minutes. So technically speaking (of course, the evolutionists will claim we don't understand ) less than a month (525,600/12 = 43,800 minutes) of prokaryotes servicing themselves () should be enough to demonstrate some sort of evolution, I mean, in a million half-lives (bacteria years in fancy sciency language) we should see some type of evolution from a single celled organism. Nikkaz haven't seen sh*t change in 150 HUMAN years and they wanna claim their sh*t is true It's more likely that God is real than evolution, real talk. They mock Christians but in reality it's evolutionists who believe in unicorns

sht said billions and millions of years and u reduce it to 150 years and minutes??? Or are you saying the earth is the same as it was millions(or billions) of years ago?