Home Archives Random Quotes Latest Comments Top 100 Submit Quote Search Log In

Quote# 67719


Evolution itself is a mistake that is made quite a lot. The THEORY (yes it is still called a theory) of evolution is soley based on two things. The first is the similarity of apparently related species. Yet the appearance of being related is just a conjecture that, without empirical proof, is no more than a guess. Second is that empirical proof itself. And that is the so called missing links like Lucy and Piltdown Man. Yet every one of the "missing links" has been proven to be either an outright hoax or plain bad science that has been debunked. So that leaves us with just the guess part of it yet the scientists continue to cite the "missing links" and search for more, like the recent so called discovery of Ardi, which has already been shown to be just as false as any of the rest in somewhat record time. But until they come up with real proof all we really have is the Bible; and it's track record is impeccable.

yogi3939, Rapture Ready 35 Comments [11/24/2009 7:16:55 PM]
Fundie Index: 32
Submitted By: M.M.
WTF?! || meh
Username:
Comment:



1 2
The Bad Guy

Yawn.
Don't these morons get tired of repeating themselves, or each other?

11/24/2009 7:18:35 PM



you always make a big deal about it being a theory, but your whatever-the-fuck-you-want-to-call-it isnt EVEN a theory.

11/24/2009 7:25:52 PM

Wehpudicabok

Equivocation and plain ignorance. The same old tripe.

11/24/2009 7:41:52 PM

szena

Why, why, why do people who know nothing about evolution think they're qualified to critique it?

11/24/2009 7:43:06 PM

Bender Bending Rodriguez

You keep using this word "theory."

I do not think it means what you think it means.

11/24/2009 8:19:31 PM



"But until they come up with real proof all we really have is the Bible; and it's track record is impeccable."

If by impeccable you mean incredibly wrong on just about everything, then yes it is.

11/24/2009 8:56:15 PM

Old Viking

The Bible is proof only of your gullibility.

11/24/2009 9:16:43 PM

Rallymodeller

Oh, fuck. Not this again. Yes, evolution is aa theory, just like gravitation and electromagnetism are theories. You are confusing theory with hypothesis. Please try to refrain from expounding on subjects obviously above your grade-level.

2. For every "missing link" we prove to you douchebags, you manage to find another gap on either side.

In conclusion, fuck you. Come back when you have an actual argument.

11/24/2009 9:48:30 PM

Zoo

"yes it is still called a theory"

Because that's what it is. It's the best thing science can produce alongside laws. Hint: in science theory =/= speculation.

As for the rest of that: DNA.

"every one of the "missing links" has been proven to be either an outright hoax"

Really? EVERY one of them? Someone hasn't done diverse enough reading.

11/24/2009 10:42:06 PM

BobsOldSocks

You know nothing about science, you know nothing about the evidence for evolution (that's the *fact* of evolution), you know nothing about peer review and the self-correcting nature of science - you know nothing about nothing, just another ignorant, pompous twat with an inflated sense of their own self-worth.

Your bible is worthless trash, filled with errors, lies and outright fantasy. It's irrelevant when it comes to describing how reality works and you and your ilk are a dying breed.

Seek help for your mental illness.

11/24/2009 11:22:59 PM

Sasha

You've never cracked a science book, have you?

11/24/2009 11:25:05 PM

Trask

"But until they come up with real proof all we really have is the Bible; and it's [sic] track record is impeccable"

Yeah, don't let real-world maths trick you! Pi is, and always has been, equal to three.

Irrational numbers are the work of teh debbil!!11!

11/24/2009 11:30:26 PM

aaa

Ehhh. Bring my cluebat.

11/24/2009 11:41:06 PM

False Responder 001

"Evolution itself is a mistake that is made quite a lot. The THEORY (yes it is still called a theory) of evolution is soley based on two things."
1. Very well, I will call it a fact, or better, I'll call it a law. Yeah, now you're in trouble. ;-)

"The first is the similarity of apparently related species. Yet the appearance of being related is just a conjecture that, without empirical proof, is no more than a guess."
Evidence:
1. DNA comparison
2. mtDNA comparison
3. Closely related species can sometimes have sterile offspring (mules) whereas distant ones can't.

"Second is that empirical proof itself. And that is the so called missing links like Lucy and Piltdown Man. Yet every one of the "missing links" has been proven to be either an outright hoax or plain bad science that has been debunked. So that leaves us with just the guess part of it yet the scientists continue to cite the "missing links" and search for more, like the recent so called discovery of Ardi, which has already been shown to be just as false as any of the rest in somewhat record time."
1. Are you seriously putting Lucy and Piltdown Man on the same level? Yes, Piltdown man was a sham and exposed by researchers. Lucy remains an impressive find.
2. Lucy and Ardi have not be debunked.
3. Also, radiometric dating implies that the Ardi sham must have been setup about 4.4 million years ago.

"But until they come up with real proof all we really have is the Bible; and it's track record is impeccable."
1. Pi is 3? Hahaha.
2. Light is created on day 1, 3 days before the stars.
3. Where did Cain's wife come from?
4. And my personal favorite: bees hiss?
You know what? http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/abs/long.htm

11/25/2009 12:01:47 AM

atheist crusader

well you've still not learnt the word theory have you, so here it is in your language:

Theory(n) A scientifically acceptable body of principes offered to expalin a phemomenon

so you are saying that the apperence of a cat loooking like a tiger or a lion, or a dog looking like a wolf, or a human looking like an ape is conjecture, well if you look in the animal kingdom there are myriad forms that look lke each other because they are related.This is noted not just physically but anatomically, genetically, embrologically, the list is endless. and then what about homology, whereby a bats wing, human forearm etc are made up of identical bones and structure??? thats clearly not evolution in action is it......

also lucy has never been seen as a hoax like your trying to claim. Piltdown man yes admitidly was a hoax, but what about the remains of eregaster, habilis, africanus, neanderthalensis, ramus... are you saying these are hoaxes too? if you ,can prove it the entire scientific community would love to hear from you, and in fact ill get the ball rolling shall i. im sure my collegues in the paleontology dept of Portsmouth University would love to hear from you.

As it stands, apart from lying for jebus, you hav not got a leg to stand on mate, ToE has been around for 150 years and is still as water tight a theory as gravity, or germ theory, or atomic theory. Do you really think the academic institutions are so corrupt that they would lie and decieve the millions of students that walk through the doors of Oxford, Cambridge, Yale, Havard, and all of the other universities worldwide just because they hate your god? you moron How about its because TOE has been proven and backed up not just by biology, but also taxonomy, paleontolgy, genetics, comparitive anatomy, geology biochemistry.... or are you saying these disciplines are fraudulant too

we have the evidence, you have a book of stolen myths. I know where id put my money on

11/25/2009 12:21:18 AM

Eden

(yes it is still called a theory)

In science theory means something else than in layman terms ;) (if a layman calls something a "theory" he usually means something which in scientific terms would be a hypothesis).
A scientific theory however ranges way above a hypothesis insofar as a scientific theory is backed up with evidence.

But until they come up with real proof all we really have is the Bible; and it's track record is impeccable

Could you then please swallow poison? (according to the bible you could do so without harm, as longas you are a believing christian)
Or produce goats with spotted fur out of goats with a single fur color, just by letting them copulate in fornt of a through that is adorned with streaked rods?
Or show us the mountain from which you can see "all the kingdoms of the world"? (where according to the bible Jesus was taken by Satan [something impossible if we don´t assume that earth is flat])

11/25/2009 12:44:04 AM

GodotIsWaiting4U

Yes, it is called a theory, for good reason: IT IS A THEORY. Which is THE HIGHEST POSSIBLE STATUS ANY SCIENTIFIC EXPLANATION CAN ACHIEVE.

The appearance of being related DOES have empirical proof, in the form of transitional fossils. Most of the missing links are actually still accepted and only "debunked" by Creationist pseudoscientists; for example, Lucy is still accepted as a human ancestor. Piltdown Man was a hoax, one of a very very small number of actual hoaxes.

By the way, on the subject of the Bible...

The Gospel according to Luke claims that Jesus was born during a census taken during the reign of Cyrenius in Syria, while Herod was still alive. A census DID occur in Judaea during the reign of Cyrenius...in 6 AD. Several years after Herod was already dead.

What was that about an impeccable track record?

11/25/2009 1:02:05 AM

Dexter

The myth of the "missing link":

RDawkins on "missing links"

And please: Don't consider 2500 year old creation myths as "proof".

MfG

11/25/2009 2:46:08 AM

Clown

First point: genetics.
Second point: citation needed.

11/25/2009 3:17:28 AM

Tallyho

All been done before, getting boring!

11/25/2009 6:10:14 AM

FSMpirate

Too... stupid... to insult... Brain hurting!

11/25/2009 6:28:38 AM

The L

I love how they throw around the word "theory" and pretend that it's equivalent to "hunch" or "conjecture."

And until someone shows me some cud-chewing rabbits, I'm still not claiming an error-free track record for the Bible.

11/25/2009 7:39:00 AM

Mister Spak

"But until they come up with real proof all we really have is the Bible; and it's track record is impeccable."

The bible is a myth. Its record of failure is impeccable.

11/25/2009 8:16:04 AM

Toothygrin

"But until they come up with real proof all we really have is the Bible; and it's track record is impeccable."

Right. That's why they have "versions"

11/25/2009 1:40:39 PM

Swede

Guess everyone else have already said it, but it probably needs at least one more repetition:
The word THEORY does not mean what you think it means.

Evolution is a series of mistakes, yes (ie random mutations). But some of those mistakes work better than the earlier mistakes.

11/25/2009 1:54:19 PM
1 2