Re: Evolution theory, is religulous. Part 1 of 17

[ThieleM]

The Flagellum reduces to a type 3 secretory system. Every cellular biologist on the planet knows this.

[LOLDISNEYLAND]

@ThieleM Rofl.. when I see creationists argue their points, I can't help but piss myself laughing. They make their points but they fail to read about what they are arguing against! It's like a christian without mechanical skills saying that a car has no engine, it just moves by the will of god. The mechanic will tell you that it has an engine and that you are what makes it move. The Christian will argue how the mechanic is wrong, but the mechanic is the one who is qualified more to be credible.

[erich10001]

if your answer is Yes.. i will ask you than why are there different races on this planet? and why do we call them different races, if they are all identical?

[erich10001]

your the expert you tell me

[erich10001]

tryed to read darwin and some others but they are wrong on evolution i jest heard

[rocketmagnet]

FFS! If you want to know, read a modern book on the subject. Don't bother some poor guy on YouTube.

[erich10001]

lol like a religiouse pearson backed in a corner when they get asked a question- don t have an answergetting your obsolete theory thrown at them-- now you cant explain go fuk yourself you cant prove evolution now dont cry cause you cant answer a simple question expert

[rocketmagnet]

Actually, I'm at work, and don't have time to answer every retarded question from some twat who's not interested in learning, rather is just out to start a pathetic fight with some guy on the Internet.

If you're genuinely interested in learning, great, ask me and I'll point you in the direction of some good sources of information.

If you would like to discuss this with me personally for some reason, then you can telephone me, or come to my house, and we will talk properly.

[rocketmagnet]

If you really think you can disprove evolution, then don't waste your time on YouTube. Write a scientific paper discussing your findings and get it published in a scientific journal.

If you sucessfully disprove evolution, you will win a Nobel prize, I guarantee it.

[rocketmagnet]

Or, you can make a video asking serious questions, and I (and others) may make replies trying to answer them to the best of our knowledge.

[rocketmagnet]

Deafening silence . . .

[erich10001]

well read it again--and it has turned out quite different before.. You Say their are a great many varitions within a race than between them- now that would mean all races have the exact same variations within them if there is no difference in Race Correct?

[erich10001]

with that logic then the theory of evoulution was based on his charichter? Origin of the species was a gigantic work of charichter?

[rocketmagnet]

Why do you guys think the Origin of Species is the only thing holding up the theory of evolution. It's not like the bible. The theory is supported by evidence in the real world. Taxonomic, genetic, paleontological, etc.

Actually, the Origin of Species contains some things we now know are incorrect. So what? It's not the bible! People are allowed to be imperfect. Science is a process of correcting its own mistakes.

[erich10001]

ive never said i dont belive in evolution or belive in religion, in fact that book is what started this theory now as we progress through the 20th century , we can find more 'supporting evidence' works of evolution that are more offesive to some races of people, yet these days , pollitically you have to eliminate alot of the theories developed over time ever since its become not popular to call other races 'lesser'. so tell me are all humans = ,in our state of evolution today?

[erich10001]

ill bet jesus with sun glasses would have had a sence of humor

[rocketmagnet]

Yes, science now has a much greater understanding of human evolution and variation now than people did in Darwin's day. We now know that there is much greater variation within races than there is between races. So, really, the idea that there are important differences between races, especially that there are 'lesser' races of humans has been wiped out.

[erich10001]

so your saying that the variations within a race are greater than between 2 seperate races. so wouldent as a whole the variation betwen 2 groups with great varition within them, have an even greater variation then one group with great variations, since all these variations would be added togethor----since 2 is larger than 1---and it is convinent your theories have become more pollitically acceptable overtime

[erich10001]

of course there was the golden year of your theory in 42, im glad that those theories have been corrected---woops mistake of science

[erich10001]

if you looked at both groopups and counted the varitions you would have many more than if you looked at one group now go deeper into that instead of giving me a pollitcally correct line

[rocketmagnet]

I'll be perfectly honest. I have no idea what you're talking about.

Firstly, it's not MY theory. It's nobody's theory.

Secondly, science is not concerned with being politically correct. It could have turned out the other way.

[erich10001]

Oh except this guy who was into Darwin quite abit--

"If I can send the flower of the German nation into the hell of war without the smallest pity for the spilling of precious German blood, then surely I have the right to remove millions of an inferior race that breeds like vermin."

Adolf Hitler

[rocketmagnet]

The character of Darwin, or anyone else who may or may not have accepted the theory of evolution IS TOTALLY IRRELEVANT to the ability of the theory to describe events in the real world.

[erich10001]

thats a paragraph from the book 'the decent of man' not some random coffee table chat ill get the page numbers if you like

[erich10001]

or would you like similar bigoted quotes proving evoulution from leading scientists throughout the century who developed this theory based on their study of humans?

[rocketmagnet]

Still irrelevant. The character of the person has NOTHING to do with the truth of the theory.

[erich10001]

Its not his charicter its his work hes writing this as a scientist on the future evolution of Man---the hitler quote well thats his charichter he was probably mad that day,

[erich10001]

Heres a quote from the great Darwin youd know it you have read all his books

At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world. " C.Darwin

[erich10001]

'At the same time the anthropomorphous apes, as Professor Schaaffhausen has remarked, will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilized state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the Negro or Australian and the gorilla'C. Darwin--anyway evoulutionism has never caused pain or suffering the biggest argument of religion

[erich10001]

should i have dissproven my dying father on his death bed on creationism? would that serve a scientific purpose? takeing away hope..religion is hope..mabey thats its only purpose... serves more of a purpose than atheism, in reality.

[erich10001]

is their a scentific purpose in takeing comfort away from the dying even if thats the only purpose religion serves?

[rocketmagnet]

No, there is no "scientific" purpose in trying to win an argument with the dying. It would be a mean and spiteful thing to do.

In face, not even Richard Dawkins or James Randi would do it. Both have said that explicitly.

[rocketmagnet]

And, look, please don't confuse science with atheism. Science is about trying to discover the truth about Nature.  It has nothing to do with trying to win an argument with a dying man for the sake of being right. That's what's known as being an arsehole.

[erich10001]

ive never done that , im only saying it gives people hope and mabey religions a big load of crap it might be but why care about something that dosent effect anything except making some people more comfortable

[oreilzac]

Most probably in 50 years you will be dead.... how much passion will you have then to support your theory?. .... exactly...so whats the point. enjoy your life now cos when your dead your dead. stop waisting time defending a theory you know is correct. enjoy life now cos in 50 years you wont exist to remember.

[erich10001]

Hey you took the words out of my mouth, wonder how these brave arrogant athiests,ussuly, not this guy. but ex. bill maher, will be on thir deathbeds oh go to my channnel i have a video explaining evoulution in the simplest terms

[oreilzac]

Atheist are funny. they remind me of a group of people who went on a long plane journey. Half way through the long plane journey they forgot the purpose of the journey and got the notion in their heads there was no such thing as a pilot, simply because they could not see him. in fact the pilot became a laughable fairy tale. now the atheists confident in there naivety, vociferously mock and defend the belief that we'r all going to crash and burn when we run out of fuel.

[TaNgLeD2121]

well that goof lisuschristos, didnt allow ratings or comments on his vid just like all the other simple minded people like him,... because he knows he will only recieve overwelming opinion against his,.. read a book

[Exsecrabilis]

rocketmagnet:

Viruses can adapt to new circumstances, which means that they evolve into a new virus type. Now, it is passible for bacterias to adopt as well and evolve regardless of what some people argue; that without certain proteins the bateria would simply die. Perhaps if the bacteria did not adopt before the proteins were taken off they would have died but if the bacteria would have found new proteins, it would not matter if the prior proteins were taken away, it would still live.

[interrelation]

ToE is already obsolete and old. The new theory is Interrelation Theory.

LOok

w3 interrelation-theory com

[Exsecrabilis]

interrelation:

Sounds interesting but what do other scientist think of this theory? I'm curious to know when this theory was date stamped as a theory and what do other scientist wrote on their peer review over this topic.

P.S. Greetings and Salutations.

[togaroc345]

is there proof of god, oh no, so he must not exist

[brucelee6790]

and it wasn't all of America it was just a state or district or something

[brucelee6790]

i've seen his argument on pbs*

[luhyx]

im sorry for you

[brucelee6790]

wow lulhyx what a meaningful and well thought statement you made there, i am awe struck by the genius that you've blessed us with. well anyway the argument that, that latin pig trys to make on a pbs showing, where there is a huge case in america on whether or not they should allow intelligent design to be taught in schools, and his whole argument is disproved by a showing of another bacteria that has a less complicated motor of proteins, but still works... that is a dumbass argument regardless

[luhyx]

im sorry for you too man ... it dosen`t make any sense no matter what you say.

[brucelee6790]

luhyx stfu man... if your not gonna say something intelligent or worth while then why do you throw up a text on a scientific topic? "i'm sorry for you too man... (i think you mean "feel" sorry for me) it doesn't make sense no matter what you say." why do you feel compelled to say such time wasting retarded ass shit like that? jus stfu

[luhyx]

stfu? hmmm very intelligent...

[h8uall66]

Wow, that was a really excellent response. Too bad he never answered you though.

[rocketmagnet]

Thanks. Yes, I'd love to know his answer too.