Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Loch Ness Monster Is Real and so Disproves Evolution

Options
1356

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    squod
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,704 ✭✭✭squod


    Corkfeen wrote: »
    His entire argument seems to be hinged on Webster's dictionary definition of 'Theory'.... There is a major difference between a standard theory versus a scientific theory....



    There is no legitimate argument against evolution or any legitimate theory that could take it's place... The numerous studies which have been done, support it as a fact. It is not simply a hypothesis as a result, as it is verifiable. But don't let us get in the way of your absurd belief that it's 'just' a theory. And Evolution is proven.... ;)

    Lets go big guy. Verify it for me.


  • Options
    #63
    kowloon
    Registered Users Posts: 13,434 ✭✭✭✭kowloon


    nacimroc wrote: »
    Its time to build a big wall around these baffoons and let nothing out.

    Or fill it with water and see what happens.


  • Options
    #64
    Corkfeen
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,940 ✭✭✭Corkfeen


    squod wrote: »
    Lets go big guy. Verify it for me.

    This is not my field of study and I don't think I could do it as much justice as this post that dlofnep made. The rest of the topic goes into further detail but i'm sure you will disagree with it all... :pac:


  • Options
    #65
    SdoowSirhc
    Registered Users Posts: 524 ✭✭✭SdoowSirhc


    northernpower wrote: »
    Well it was about that time that I notice that girl scout was about eight stories tall and was a crustacean from the palezoic era,
    And I said get away monster I ain't givin' you no three fiddy!:mad:


  • Options
    #66
    Sarky
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,967 ✭✭✭✭Sarky


    I gave him a dollar.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    Pushtrak
    Registered Users Posts: 4,640 ✭✭✭Pushtrak


    squod wrote: »
    Lets go big guy. Verify it for me.
    1, 2, 3, 4.

    From link 1 above, I'd suggest in particular you might want to start out with this. You may also want to actually read what the science says by doing more than just following the above. It is just a bit to whet your appetite. You may also find it informative if you look in to other areas of science on which you likely have your Answers in Genesis styled "understanding".

    Edit: From link 1, evidence for evolution: http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/search/topics.php?topic_id=14


  • Options
    #68
    joseph brand
    Registered Users Posts: 4,537 ✭✭✭joseph brand


    Sarky wrote: »
    I gave him a dollar.

    I said "we'll take a box of the graham crunch. How much will that be?" Well she looked at me and said "That'll be about tree fiddy." Well it was about this time I noticed that this girl scout was about 8 stories tall and was a crustacean from the protozoic era!


  • Options
    #69
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 91,227 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    Corkfeen wrote: »
    His entire argument seems to be hinged on Webster's dictionary definition of 'Theory'....
    LOL

    Webster's a "dictionary" by someone who deliberately misspelled words.


  • Options
    #70
    dlofnep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,759 ✭✭✭✭dlofnep


    squod wrote: »
    This lad puts it more eloquently than me. Darwinists are trying to make a monkey out of you.



    http://www.waynesvilledailyguide.com/community/blogs/designer_blog/x1208083635/The-Theory-That-Humans-Evolved-from-Apes-Is-Unproven

    Making a monkey out of you is big business. It's not just a Church that's making a few bob.

    Firstly, not only did humans evolve from apes - Humans are apes.

    If we did not evolve from a prior ape ancestor - then perhaps you can explain why we share an impeccable comparative genetic structure with other primates? Perhaps you can explain the psuedogene GLO that exists in all members of the haplorhini family (used once to synthesize vitamin c), which demonstrates common descent between us all?

    Perhaps you could explain the beautiful fossil record in the homo genus, which shows very clearly members of the homo genus becoming less 'ape-like' and more 'human-like'? Not only visually, but also their brain size, intelligence and command of their environment.

    Perhaps you could explain why humans and chimpanzees are ten times more alike genetically than rats and mice? Perhaps you could explain why humans and chimpanzees are more genetically alike than chimpanzees and gorillas are?

    The only reality here is that the author of that article clearing has never studied evolution, on even the most basic level. I'll await your responses.


  • Options
    #71
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,145 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Spot on D. In that link of squod's there isn't one point she makes that holds up to any scrutiny. The comments below her article take them apart one by one. Most of all and one that's constantly trotted out by creationists is there's no missing link, when in fact there are many. I'd love to know what these headbangers think a missing link would look like, because no matter what they'd posit chances are we have an example. And that's human evolution which has a real scarcity of fossils. Fossilisation is rare, humans weren't a common creature at all until recently and we're quite delicate. Even so we have enough fossils to show the adaptations over time.We also have huge quantities of the stone tools we made and they also show a progression.

    Where I would find some common ground with her is when she mentions large reconstructions and big picture theories from tiny bone fragments. That does go on a lot in human evolution. Researchers trying to make a name for themselves making up "new" species from a single tooth or skull fragment. However that's a problem within the science, not any problem with the science itself and over time these exaggerations get taken out.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    dlofnep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,759 ✭✭✭✭dlofnep


    Yup exactly. The fact that we have any fossils at all is remarkable. Fossilization is a very rare occurence. But even if we never had a single fossil outlining the evolution of primates, we'd still be able to prove it from a genetic POV. Fossils are useful to give us a visual outline of the progression of a species. The genetic argument is much more compelling. Either way - it's a demonstrable fact.


  • Options
    #73
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,145 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    mathepac wrote: »
    The US is riddled by all sorts of nut-jobs.
    A large element of that comes with it's early history. Many if not most of the earliest Americans were European religious extremists born of the post reformation free for all in the 17th century. In the UK alone for example you had such as muggletonians, anabaptists, dippers, ranters, lollards(AH faith revival :D), Brownists, grindletonians, quakers et al.

    You couldn't turn your head without bumping into some new and local and increasingly daft sect or other. When Europe finally got the hump for them they legged it for the new world. Their Pilgrim Fathers were Puritan religious extremists, a Christian taliban in many ways*. I find it amusing that American political leaders often rouse their electorate into frenzies at the thought of religious fundementalists elsewhere, when their very country was born from them.

    Anyway, it's no great surprise that a portion of the American culture still has these various fundy sects knocking around. Mix that with a primary/secondary education system once the envy of the world, now very much under par, a media that's incredibly local and avoids anything complicated in case it gets in the way of the ad breaks and no wonder you have such numbers of people who will believe this guff.






    *they didn't wear black BTW. Black was an expensive permanent dye and considered frivolous. They wore browns.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Options
    #74
    srsly78
    Registered Users Posts: 7,157 ✭✭✭srsly78


    squod wrote: »
    Lets go big guy. Verify it for me.

    The pope agrees with it, thus verified.


  • Options
    #75
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Where does the OP get the idea that Christians must automatically reject modern science from anyway? :confused:


  • Options
    #76
    I Heart Internet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,678 ✭✭✭I Heart Internet


    philologos wrote: »
    Where does the OP get the idea that Christians must automatically reject modern science from anyway? :confused:

    From his wet dreams where he's clad in an armour of light facing down the cruel roman church of course!


  • Options
    #77
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,145 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    philologos wrote: »
    Where does the OP get the idea that Christians must automatically reject modern science from anyway? :confused:
    Indeed. There are an awful lot of scientists of various faiths. Extrapolating from one flavour of fundy religion to the rest isn't comparing like with like. Throwing in the Catholic church is just post Irish catholic over reaction, a lets point at the collective boogieman. I grew up in a time when it was still in fairly full flight in this country. Where did I first hear of Darwin, evolution and fossils outside of the telly? A teacher of mine who was a Catholic priest.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Options
    #78
    squod
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,704 ✭✭✭squod


    dlofnep wrote: »
    Firstly, not only did humans evolve from apes - Humans are apes.

    If we did not evolve from a prior ape ancestor - then perhaps you can explain why we share an impeccable comparative genetic structure with other primates? Perhaps you can explain the psuedogene GLO that exists in all members of the haplorhini family (used once to synthesize vitamin c), which demonstrates common descent between us all?

    Perhaps you could explain the beautiful fossil record in the homo genus, which shows very clearly members of the homo genus becoming less 'ape-like' and more 'human-like'? Not only visually, but also their brain size, intelligence and command of their environment.

    Perhaps you could explain why humans and chimpanzees are ten times more alike genetically than rats and mice? Perhaps you could explain why humans and chimpanzees are more genetically alike than chimpanzees and gorillas are?

    The only reality here is that the author of that article clearing has never studied evolution, on even the most basic level. I'll await your responses.


    The answer is no then. You won't verify. You'll just postulate and hope I fall for it. No thanks monkey dude.

    Off topic anyone interested in this should peel a banana and have a human read this to them. It's absolutely the final proof again. (As will be the next BS report on a study.... )


  • Options
    #79
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,145 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    squod wrote: »
    The answer is no then. You won't verify. You'll just postulate and hope I fall for it. No thanks monkey dude.
    He has verified. OK what verification would you require? Don't bother with your previous link as each of her points is debunkeable and debunked in the comments on the same link.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Options
    #80
    oldrnwisr
    Registered Users Posts: 1,594 ✭✭✭oldrnwisr


    squod wrote: »
    The answer is no then. You won't verify. You'll just postulate and hope I fall for it. No thanks monkey dude.

    Off topic anyone interested in this should peel a banana and have a human read this to them. It's absolutely the final proof again. (As will be the next BS report on a study.... )


    The answer is yes, or at least it would be if you had bothered to read dlofnep's posts.

    We can and have verified that humans and modern apes share a common ancestor. If you're really interested in examining the evidence you can find a short, simple example here and a longer primer here.


  • Options
    #81
    Cokeistan
    Registered Users Posts: 361 ✭✭Cokeistan


    Worst. Thread Title. Ever.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    squod
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,704 ✭✭✭squod


    oldrnwisr wrote: »
    The answer is yes, or at least it would be if you had bothered to read dlofnep's posts.

    We can and have verified that humans and modern apes share a common ancestor. If you're really interested in examining the evidence you can find a short, simple example here and a longer primer here.

    You reckon I haven't herd of this? That all this monkey business can be proved and verified by a single post? Seriously.........

    Of course it doesn't matter what I say. People will believe what they want. Waste time and effort on some pipe dream and that's fine. Anyway I expect scientists will come up with a cure for it soon enough.


  • Options
    #83
    dlofnep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,759 ✭✭✭✭dlofnep


    squod wrote: »
    You reckon I haven't herd of this?

    You either haven't heard about it, or you haven't listened. Oldrnwisr has given on many occasions clear and concise evidence for shared ancestry between primates.
    squod wrote: »
    That all this monkey business can be proved and verified by a single post? Seriously.........

    The history of evolution is a long and detailed one. People write books on it that barely scratch the surface in terms of evidence. We have discussed the topic in great detail, covering a huge amount of the available evidence in a thread that was already posted.

    I noticed by the way, you couldn't actually offer any explanations for the evidence I presented to you. Nor could you do so for Oldrnwisr's post. If you wish to engage in a debate on the topic, you're going to need to understand how debating works at an academic level. It certainly doesn't involve one party providing evidence and the other party not actually addressing the said evidence, completely avoiding the issue.
    squod wrote: »
    Of course it doesn't matter what I say. People will believe what they want.

    Belief doesn't come into it. We have science to back up our claims, peer-reviewed science. Evolution is a fact, and the theory of evolution by natural selection best explains that fact.

    I'd be happy to further argue in favour of the evidence of evolution, but if you're going to continue to avoid the evidence presented and not actually debate it - then there is no point.


  • Options
    #84
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,145 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    squod wrote: »
    You reckon I haven't herd of this? That all this monkey business can be proved and verified by a single post? Seriously.........
    Disprove it then, or show reasons for doubt. Should be pretty simple if your argument has legs. Or like I asked before what verification would you accept that humans are apes? That's pretty simple too.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Options
    #85
    squod
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,704 ✭✭✭squod


    dlofnep wrote: »
    you're going to need to understand how debating works at an academic level

    Poor quality put down there. I reckon your psychosis is getting the better of you. I'm no ape or monkey or whatever.


  • Options
    #86
    Scioch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,249 ✭✭✭Scioch


    squod wrote: »
    Poor quality put down there. I reckon your psychosis is getting the better of you. I'm no ape or monkey or whatever.

    Whats your theory then if you dont accept that we evolved from apes ?


  • Options
    #87
    Pushtrak
    Registered Users Posts: 4,640 ✭✭✭Pushtrak


    I'm reminded of a piece of advice that cautions on the provision of food to trolls.


  • Options
    #88
    squod
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,704 ✭✭✭squod


    LordSmeg wrote: »
    Whats your theory then if you dont accept that we evolved from apes ?

    What are we evolving into? Has anyone explained that to you recently?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5R_pS0h5Qk


  • Options
    #89
    Sarky
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,967 ✭✭✭✭Sarky


    Dude, that was a movie.


  • Options
    #90
    squod
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,704 ✭✭✭squod


    Sarky wrote: »
    Dude, that was a movie.

    Explain that to the other posters on here.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    ScumLord
    Registered Users Posts: 28,789 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    squod wrote: »
    Explain that to the other posters on here.
    I'm confused, whats your argument? That evolution is an incorrect theory? Whats the alternitive?


Advertisement