Hey look! a dumb atheist can make a sign!
if you refer back to the first line of your post where you refer to evolution as “just a theory”, that would be the moment i wrote you off an uneducated retard not able to be taught.Why are you awkwardly writing me with choice comments/quotes that I made towards Amadeus when I made several comments towards you directly on page 16 that you have failed to address?
if you refer back to the first line of your post where you refer to evolution as “just a theory”, that would be the moment i wrote you off an uneducated retard not able to be taught.
you later admitted to not even knowing what evolution was then continued to say you cant observe it. Its like arguing with a flat earther at this point. Youve been given answers and showed no progress on your extreme level of ignorance on the subject so im not convinced its worth my effort.
See now i feel bad
Youre jumping into a deep subject without starting from the beginning. Define evolution first.
therefore question genetic mutation as something that requires magic”.
But instead of understanding what a scientific theory is, or what evolution is, youre not going to successfully understand more complex ideas.
Says the guy who continuously strawmans others and ignores evidence that he's wrong.You are representing yourself in an immature way by lowering yourself in this manner.
id align with any standard dictionary definition of those words. this is silly
i know where youre stuck. Ive had this discussion a 1000 times on tw. I know how they go.
youre asking too many questions and saying too much.
lets stick to the question. Can evolution be observed?
If we cannot agree on the definition of “evolution” then this dialogue will be fruitless.
Define evolution
Yep, this is a good faith argument.Fine, then give me the dictionary and number please, so I know what definition you are using, especially the word "observe" or "observation."
Have you read any Dawkins?Why are you awkwardly writing me with choice comments/quotes that I made towards Amadeus when I made several comments towards you directly on page 16 that you have failed to address?
For someone that claims he is knowledgeable on the topic of evolution, you sure seem to be struggling to address any of my thoughtful discussion shown above. If you do not counter any of my points I will just assume that you were simply unable to.
You claim that witnessing something that is rather called "genetic inheritance" is the same as witnessing evolution when it is not. They are two entirely different things.
Your argument is basically the following:
"Observing the passing of genetic traits from parent to child, is the same as watching the gradual slow process of them becoming a tree-hopping amphibious night-vision neon-skinned super advanced creature with 6 eyes, a three foot long tongue, and genius level intelligence that prefers Hawaiian coffee and Russian instagram models over the course of millions and millions of years." -Pagy
And no, just because something inherits helpful and successful traits does not dictate its automatic success, and in many cases, the reverse will happen.
There are people in this world that have way better DNA traits than me that simply get hit by a bus and die. I easily outlived them with my inferior genetics.
This is the law of: "Shit happens."
Even if evolution were true, could it outrun the law of "shit happens?" I'm not convinced and I would like you to prove to me otherwise using a scientific experiment in a controlled environment that is testable, observable, and subject to reproduction while having different variables introduced to see the results.
The man that is mostly famous for proposing the theory of evolution struggled horribly with mental illness all his life. I'm not eager to go to the mentally ill for my sources of truth as you are. Would you also choose a guidance counselor or therapist that is quite sick indeed and spends most of his time in a mental hospital?
Evolution, at its roots, is magical, supernatural, requires blind faith based on weak deduction through evidence, and it is entirely unscientific, and by that I mean, it defies natural laws of the universe as we know them.
Evolution obviously cannot be observed by the human eye. If you wish to prove to me otherwise you are welcome to introduce me to a friend that has seen the full transformation of one animal into an entirely new and totally different one (i.e. a frog becoming a dog). I accept personal testimony as a valid form of ascertaining truth.
I only ask for measurable, observable, testable, repeatable truth. If you can't provide any of that for me, then why would I ever be inclined to believe you? And why would you ridicule someone and say they are "embarrassing themselves" by asking scrutinizing questions to see if a theory holds up? Seems awfully emotional and unscientific to me. It also seems like a wasted opportunity.
Pagy's response:
A) If the sun is so big, why does it look so small?
B) LOL you embarrassing yourself by asking that!
Normal scientific response:
A) If the sun is so big, why does it look so small?
B) Oh, good question. That is because it is very far away.
Generally when people shy away from questions and attempt to ridicule the person talking to them by claiming that they are "embarrassing themselves", it is a sign that they have no answer to the question. This is further emphasized by your unwillingness to answer my very basic, simple, investigate question. You still have yet to provide an answer.
If you claim that a puddle of slime can become a 7-headed-hydra over time if you just "leave it alone for millions of years," then I would like to ask for proof using the scientific method of that being the case.
this is incorrect. evolution is the change of allele frequency within a population over time.Evolution - A proposed theory that an animal, through the process of natural selection, can slowly change itself over great lengths of time into a new and completely different creature that is potentially more highly advanced than before in terms of cognition, physical ability, or characteristics.
i still recall my first bio professors big lecture titled: we are great apesNo. We haven't covered that we did not evolve from chimpanzees.
Sent from my SM-N976U using Tapatalk
We have, actually.No. We haven't covered that we did not evolve from chimpanzees.
Sent from my SM-N976U using Tapatalk
Conveniently, TPK ignored it because it proves him wrong.The theory of evolution does not posit that we evolved from the monkeys of the present day. Rather, humans and present day monkeys share a common ancestor species (and humans share a much closer ancestor with apes).5) "If we evolved from monkeys, why are there still monkey's?
Human evolution - Background and beginnings in the Miocene | Britannica
Again. Too much.
this is incorrect. evolution is the change of allele frequency within a population over time.
read this as: changes in a gene pool within a population over time.
This is the accepted scientific definition. This is the definition i will use.
Now if you accept this definition, i can cite things like pesticide resistant insects, drug immune bacteria, the peppered moth...dogs...and we can see that evolution (changes in a gene pool within a population over time) is an observed and indisputable fact and i bug the fuck out of this thread.
May i bug the fuck out of this thread?
No, it does not.I would never refute that a gene pool in a population changes over time. I don't think anyone ever would?
My question to you would be:
"Do you think pond scum, if left to its own devices, will become a creature of human-like complexity and intelligence over the course of millions and millions of years?"
This is what the theory of evolution proposes. Does it not?
im happy to read this.I would never refute that a gene pool in a population changes over time. I don't think anyone ever would?
no. Evolution is the change of allele frequency within a population over time and im glad to say we both agreed this is an observed fact.My question to you would be:
"Do you think pond scum, if left to its own devices, will become a creature of human-like complexity and intelligence over the course of millions and millions of years?"
This is what the theory of evolution proposes. Does it not?
Please correct me and educate me if I am wrong so that I can learn and increase my understanding.
im happy to read this.
no. Evolution is the change of allele frequency within a population over time and im glad to say we both agreed this is an observed fact.
you’re referring to creation of life from un-life. this is abiogenesis.
Spoileryoure also getting closer to where youre stuck. The question you havent asked yet is what is speciation. When i present evidence of speciation, you will not accept it. I told you i know where this goes