I've watched the videos on your page. You're trying to tell me they aren't deceptive? They quote outdated articles, they only cite sources which are supportive of their views; not to mention their use of proof texting. I find arguments of ignorance completely coercive. Creation science isn't science, it just tries to punch holes in real science, because they aren't looking for truth because they believe they already have it. "God did it" explains null.
TO ANYONE: If you see 0 reply to some posters below they know they are on ignore for things like name calling, false accusations of lying, personal insults and sometimes worse.Such people follow me (& others) around YT guard dogging evo-supporting vids with such tactics. If you would like to make any of their same points I would be happy to reply and give what I feel is "the rest of the story." However, I only debate with those who are civil & objective.
@LoricaLady And again you don't explain your theory. the fact that you accept micro evolution in one kind but you don't accept macro evolution...
The thing is in one kind, you have multiple form or even functionality depending on the specie. It does matter if they are both fish or not... it is Evolution.
You have to open a real book and read peer review papers!
You want to see evidence.Where is the missing link that u were a child, I want to see evidence that u were a baby one day!
...has been wrong over & over in the scientific community. For ex. at one time even Einstein thought - along with all scientists - that the universe was eternal,also germ theory was ridiculed & so on. What you're being told is "Don't think for yourself. Read our 'publish-what -we-want-or-perish' peer reviews & wait for us to give you our consensus." That ain't the scientific process. But then evolution is not science but pseudo science, even anti science.
@LoricaLady And consequently Einstein recognised his mistake, which is not your case! This is the difference between science and faith, we accept to review our point of view to increase our knowledge. If the given explanation is better and proved to be correct, we accept the theory.
In case of ID, there is no explanation and nothing proved, just assumption and misconception of Evolution process...
...reviews in a self perpetuating, orthodox Darwinian atmosphere are actually used to block dissent. Let's see some things that got great peer reviews. Haeckle's admittedly fraudulent ontology recapitulates phylogony, peppered moth "evolution", coelacanth as a transition - oops then a real one showed up & was 100% fish period - Miller & Urey who actually cooked up amino acids that KILL life - well, the list goes on & on. He wants us to wait for a "consensus..." Consensus...
0 in betweeners. Oh some of them will tell you things like Archaeopteryx are inbetweeners, but then other evolutionists will come along & say, Well, no, not really... There is no universal agreement amongst evolutionists on a single "transitiion" and really not on much else either. We are being told here that peer reviews are part of the scientific process. Not really. Aristotle, Gallileo, Mendell & legions of others taught us much about science w/0 "peer reviews." The truth is peer...
...in any way. We are told, again with magical thinking, that its invisible descendants' invisible descendants led to tetrapods based on imaginary, invisible lines leaving to imaginary, invisible dots. This is like when they tell us that fins turned into feet, feet into wings, fish into tetrapods, scales into feathers & tetrapods into birds when the actual fossil evidence in uncounted BILLIONS shows the exact oppostie. All we see are 100% fish, fin, feet, tetrapods, feathers & birds &....
...similariites....we infer..." and lots & lots of magical thinking. For ex. Miller shows us a fossil of Tiktaalik & tells us "it is as good as it gets for a transitionial fossil." How right he is. It's presented as a bridge between fish & tetrapods but (1) it is 100% lobe finned FISH, which, btw as a conveniently missing back end (2) they have absolutely 0 evidence it isn't just 1 of innumerable extinct dead end animals and ever produced any progeny significantly different from itself...
When Miller uses the word science to describe evo he is using the logical fallacy of equivocation. He is wanting people to equate things like astronomy, medical science, physics and so on with evo. Those other things are testable, repeatable & observable. Evo is not. There is 0 "evidence" for evolution. All of it is based on more logical fallacies & speculation presented as evidence with words like "millions of [conveniently untestable & unobservable] years ago...it is believed...
Oh and btw for those below, true quantum physicis/mechanics deals specifically with random particles and their relation to structured attraction. So don't listen to the YouTube comment section "science experts" who are attempting to debunk centuries of proven physics research with religious excuses regurgitated from their Sunday school lesson. My team got us to the moon (science), your team got us blind faith, religious persecution, an uneducated populace, and fear of hellfire (religion).
Ahh, well spoken sir. I feel that anyone who uses a book of stories as the basis for science should have to pray for their dinner. It's funny how creationists enjoy the fruits of true science in every technology they use on a daily basis and then baselessly argue against it when it comes to evolution. Sad.
@recalibration You think all you have to do to defend evo is give some cut & paste links, showing your...faith...in it? Use YOUR mind & YOUR words if you have something to say. You might even want to try using the actual peer reviewed articles in the evo lit. I don't even have to read the articles however, just the titles to demonstrate that 0 evidence whatsoever of evo is being shown. The lizards are still lizards, finches still finches, sheep still sheep. You are swallowing a line...
@recalibration ...Here is the line: 1) All changes are the result of evo. 2) So if you see new species, that is evolution. 3) New species (sheep, finches, lizards, whatever) eventually turn into a new genus. For ex. fish don't just stay fish but eventually turn into lizards, birds, mammals etc.4) Mutations & natural selection are the vehicles for the new genus changes. Problems: 1) All changes are LIMITED. As Mendell - who actually used the scientific method, unlike Darwin - said peas...
@recalibration ...stay peas, bees stay peas. 2) There is 0 evidence finch, lizards, sheep etc. etc. have ever been or ever will be anything but finch, lizards, sheep. The fo 3) Mutations & NS have NEVER been shown to give rise to anything more complex than a new species. If you will go through those articles with a fine tooth comb you will invariably find what evo support always depends on "might have...probably....we infer...must have...millions of (untestable & unobservable) years ago..."..
@LoricaLady You are like all other creationists. you accept micro evolution but not macro evolution, however you claim something that goes against your own theory. Birds stay birds, fishes stay fishes, bees stays bees, spider stay spider...I like this claim, because you consequently accept the fact that a golden fish and a thon are both fish and then they can evolve with just micro evolution..Right? the thing is that between golden fish and thon, it is Evolution.Same with primate!
@MattleSystem the small fish and the biggest one come all from the ancestor which was a fish... this point, you accept because they are both fish... But do you really think this imply only micro evolution???
No, this is evolution, nothing more, nothing less...
By the way, it would simplify the problem of free space on Noah's Arch, if there was one kind of each animal...one bird, fish, wolf, elephant, ape couple. But the thing is you still need evolution to be totally true.
Of course Noah's Arch is a stupid story, we all know that by looking at the soil stratigraphy, geophysic and diagraphy and borehole from petroleum industry...
And it is stupid also because of fossils discoveries in a certain order...
But I am really interested to hear your explanation about the origin of all fishes with just mirco evolution and one couple of fish or whatever
@recalibration ...and lots of logical fallacies, the faves being Correlation Does Not Imply Causation, Fallacy of the Single Cause & Incomplete Comparison Fallacy. I could tell you a lot more, but I don't debate with those who only cut & paste - don't actually debate - evade responding to all debunks made re the vid, and are neither civil nor objective. You and your insults (here & on my personal channel) are now on block & ignore. BYE!
"I don't even have to read the articles however, just the titles to demonstrate that 0 evidence whatsoever of evo is being shown."
Wow. So again, how are you not displaying wilful ignorance?
I'm sorry you're incapable of reading news articles that require no more than a high school student's vocabulary. As you are someone that clearly lacks a basic understanding of evolution, I consider you blocking me no great loss.
Interesting. Yet another thiest claiming knowledge of fallacies. Let's explore:
Even *if* evolution is incorrect, that does not validate a belief in a god. That would be a fallacy of false dichotomy. Stating that a god is real w/ out showing any actual evidence is known as argumentum ad divintas . Your blatant ignorance of the hard science is known as argumentum ad invincible. I need no false security of faith when I understand the scientific method.
You are a romantic masqurarading as a rational & you are also an intellectual coward. It's called the simulacrum, not "the Matrix", you pop-culture programmed pinion. In closing:
"Gravity is a theory. It is also a fact. Anyone who disagrees is invited to jump out a ten story window." -- R. Dawkins
If anyone makes a comment to me and you see no response it will be because once again I have been Expelled from an evolution promoting video - though I don't try to get anyone to believe in any Diety or the Bible and try to stick to science & logic.
Cont. Little kids are told that fins & fish turned into feet and tetrapods & that scales & tetrapods turned into feathers & birds. Based on 0 "scientific process" and as usual with ANTI science since billions & tons of fossils - the actual evidence - show only 100% fins, fish, feet, tetrapods, birds or feathers, no in-betweeners anywhere on the planet earth. This is just the tip of the iceberg of how the public is deceived into thinking that evolution is using the "scientific process."
Cont. Miller & Urey tried to prove it in the lab. The got l & r amino acids, the kind that kill life. They had no data to show how even the right kind of amino acids could lead to life since amino acids are not alive, and they got great peer reviews with little kids being deceived again, this time by being told that M & U had shown evidence for abiogenesis. Evolution was once again ANTI the scientific process since all data anywhere ever shows that life comes from life 100% of times. Cont.
Evo-evangelists present a picture of evolution as being based on the scientific process. It is not. It is based on speculation presented as if it is actual data along with numerous logical fallacies. Some cases in point: The primal pond theory - mentioned while Miller was on the Colbert show by Colbert, and which Miller let slide by w/no comment as if it was something scientific, -is taught as scientific fact. often in the media Little kids see it in school library books on evo. Cont.
Should domesticated women fear “domestic” violence? Let us be persnickety in whom we worship as our lives, & our children's lives, are inconsequential to warmongers.
The T.S.A. commands that we pretend to be a plane, by outstretching our arms, before we're permitted to board a plane. Corporate media lies by omission.
For over 150 years religious zealots of Evodelusionism have been preaching this religion to our children. Now in the last 20 years we have DNA and in the last 10 the DNA evidence is overwhelming against any form of evolution. It is not possible by any known biological nor genetic function. DNA ONLY shows genetic degradation.
Evolution is a fraud. It is a typical mythological belief used to give some magical reasons to life.
@GoodScienceForYou Now in the last 20 years we have DNA and in the last 10 the DNA evidence is overwhelming against any form of evolution
That´s a crystal clear lie, and shows again you have no clue about real science. You have read a few things, realized its way too high for you to really understand it, so you took the little you did understand and made the rest up as you went along. DNA fully confirms evolution, its in fact one of its best proofs. For example read Jonathan Pritchards recent-->
@GoodScienceForYou findings on human evolution, Max Ingmans findings on mitochondrial DNA, Michael Hammers findings on interbreeding in early hominids and that´s just examples from human evolution. What about golenbergs findings about magnolias ? Or Roose´s and Gottliebs paper on genetic and biochemical consequences of polyploidy in tragopogon. Soltis paper on chloroplast DNA etc.etc.etc.
See that´s the difference between us, i actually have read and understood many scientific papers-->
@MrRichardQED The papers on vegetation have nothing in common with multicellular creatures. However, there has never been any single celled creature, even vegetation, or algae based that has gained any new cells with new functions. Evolution is a fantasy myth. If you believe in fantasy myths, then you are not a scientist. Plant hybridization is just that.
@GoodScienceForYou However, there has never been any single celled creature, even vegetation, or algae based that has gained any new cells with new functions.
Perhaps you should actually read those papers, instead of just claiming you would. Lets take one very prominent example, nylon eating bacteria. They had several mutations after which they where able to process nylon. so it was a beneficial mutation, and your whole argument is debunked.
Oh and since we are at questions, how come all the dating methods we have give a complete sound picture, they all agree with each other, despite being so different in nature. How can that be if they are wrong ?
How come the science you call so wrong agrees with all the other sciences and is the base for so many technology that all works perfect ?
If your "science" is right how come nobody in the science world agrees with you ?
How come no technology/other stuff is based on it? STOP DODGING !
@MrRichardQED Why don't you figure this out. It is really quite easy to understand. You have not studied this religion very long.
All of these systems of dating are based on the same logic. The problem is all of the out of chronology fossils, and the new fossils that get dated by one date and years later are made to fit. This is similar to taking a sledge hammer to make a picture puzzle piece fit. Why don't you know this? It is obvious.
@GoodScienceForYou your little opinion doesnt really matter here, since you cant back it up by any valid evidence ! All you have are a few baseless claims, that are solely based on your opinion.
btw quite a few inventions are based on evolution, and important discoveries in other fields. Its deeply connected to many other fields of science, that all confirm the claims of evolution.
Why don't you know this? It is obvious.
Because its a stupid propaganda lie you fell for in your simple-mindedness
@GoodScienceForYou When will you begin to understand that your claims are about as arrogant and baseless as you can get. Basically you claim you would know better then all the experts in every field of natural science. Yet you have the audacity to claim I would be illogical ? How is it logical that you know so much more then all the experts combined in so many subjects ? That are simply illogical and arrogant illusions ! Start to get a grip on reality and finally take your meds again !
@GoodScienceForYou to really know your way around in every subject,yet you not only claim you would be able to do that,you even claim you would be able to that better then any expert in those fields.To really describe that you would have to invent a whole new word, since arrogant is way to weak to really describe that kind of thinking.You are conceited,haughty,smug,supercilious,assumptive,swaggering and orgulous to think you would posses that kind of knowledge,nobody has that,its impossible !!!
@GoodScienceForYou There are no other technologies based on this idea that simple life has evolved into complex
There are many : evolutionary programming, evolutionary algorithms, it helped make big breakthroughs in the development of artificial intelligence, it helps immensely in creating new vaccinations for illnesses that evolve quickly cause we can predict how it will evolve etc.etc.etc.
This is again an example to show how small your knowledge is
@MrRichardQED Do you understand how a computer works? That is my first question? What is is that causes it to give results? Computer programs are not evidence of anything. Because the programmer determines how the game works. You can project any fantasy you want on a computer. Virus mutate because they adapt. They never evolve into multiple celled creatures with new cell functions. Why don't you know this?
@GoodScienceForYou Do you understand how a computer works? That is my first question? What is is that causes it to give results?
I am pretty sure i understand that better then you do, but obviously you have no idea what evolutionary programming is, or you wouldn´t give me an answer like this ^^ I guess you think it means to prove evolution through a computer program, but that has nothing to do with evolutionary programming, nothing at all. If you don´t know what i am talking about just ask, -->
@GoodScienceForYou instead of making up some bullshit, because you dont understand me.
"Making assumptions in anything involving science is bullshit."
How about you learn a bit about the scientific method. Then you would realize how stupid that comment was. Making educated assumptions is an integral part of the scientific process, and has lead to many great insights and breakthroughs. It is very important in scientific modelling and in developing hypotheses. How can YOU not know that ???
@MrRichardQED "Oh and since we are at questions, how come all the dating methods we have give a complete sound picture, they all agree with each other, despite being so different in nature. How can that be if they are wrong ?" It is obvious and easy to understand. They are all based on the same assumptions. However, there is no way to date replacement fossils by any methods.
@GoodScienceForYou It is obvious and easy to understand. They are all based on the same assumptions.
How can they be, since they are so different ? How is say dendrochronology based on the same assumptions then say carbon dating ? Your claims dont even make sense.
However, there is no way to date replacement fossils by any methods.
Of course there is, for example there are methods that can tell you when soil has for the last time been exposed to sunlight. R.F. are btw only one type of many
@MrRichardQED "If your "science" is right how come nobody in the science world agrees with you ?" You must not read much at all or you limit the scope of your learning to people who only agree with you. Many scientists say the same things that I teach. Why don't you know this?
@GoodScienceForYou You must not read much at all or you limit the scope of your learning to people who only agree with you. Many scientists say the same things that I teach.
Well not everything you teach is wrong, but quite a bit. You understand things from, draw wrong conclusion etc. But claim to be a genius. Also the things i criticize about your "teachings" are not supported by many real scientists, who are expert on the subject, that´s for sure !
@MrRichardQED I make my living with real science. So, your religious bull shit is not science, because it has produced nothing, not even on advancement and it has actually retarded physics.
I have no idea what exactly you mean, but evolution has led to many breakthroughs,inventions,new technologies etc. YOUR ideas havent produced anything. Name ONE important invention,technology etc.anything in that direction that undeniably based on your work.JUST ONE ! You have nothing to show for, NOTHING !
@MrRichardQED Your theoretical particle physics is just a way for people to make money spend lots of money pursuing ideas that make no sense at all and ultimately has no value except in killing people, otherwise governments would not spend money on it.
I have achieved enlightenment. The most important goal there is for a human. All other goals are worthless.
If you are not seeking the Truth, then you are only seeking to perpetuate yours and other's delusions. This is the not debatable.
@GoodScienceForYou D Your theoretical particle physics is just a way for people to make money spend lots of money pursuing ideas
Things like the computer, GPS , MRI scans, CT scans and many other important inventions had their base in theoretical physics, how do they not make sense ? They save lives on a daily basis and have changed the planet tremendously. You call that having no value ? Your argument makes no sense ! What have you achieved ? NOTHING ! You think you have achieved --->
@GoodScienceForYou enlightenment ? Perhaps endarkenment ^^ Why are you dodging my questions ? Are you too embarrassed to admit that you have achieved nothing with your pathetic attempt at doing science ?
Your mistake is your arrogance, you think you are so much smarter then everybody else, but you are really not ! You need to humble yourself and start to listen to others and learn from them, but somehow you too much of an egomaniac to do so ! You constantly make fantastic claims about your ->
@GoodScienceForYou your intellect and wisdom, but as soon as i request evidence like show achievements your science made you try to distract so you dont have to admit there is no evidence. The truths i am seeking have really a lot to show for, and have done so much for humanity. Now that are truths that really have value, yours on the other hand are empty truths it seems.
You cant prove anything you say! Where is your evidence ? Where is the backup for all the claims you constantly boast about ?
@MrRichardQED You are more hung up on being accepted rather than finding the truth. It is obvious from your statements. I only want you to get free, but you want to remain a prisoner of faith and religious human garbage beliefs that have no absolute evidence. They teach you that absolute evidence is not necessary to "believe". WTF is wrong whit that?
Why are people so needy that they fall for this crap?
@GoodScienceForYou You are more hung up on being accepted rather than finding the truth.
In the first 3 comments you just talk out of your ass.You CANT judge what drives me,you don´t have the necessary information, so you simply make something up, as long as you can dodge to answer my questions. If you really think you could distract me from my questions that easy you are dumber then i thought:
WHERE IS YOU EVIDENCE? WHERE ARE THE ACHIEVEMENTS/INVENTIONS/BREAKTHROUGHS THAT BASE ON YOUR "SCIENCE"
@MrRichardQED Only the ego needs to be accepted. I don't need any acceptance by anyone. I personally don't give a crap what you think. I am giving you a chance to get free from human faith and belief disguised as science. DNA ONLY shows genetic degradation. It does not show any form of evolution. DNA is absolute, not up for discussion. You are a degraded creature, and not evolving. Your kind is heading for extinction as all others along this path of only genetic degradation.
@GoodScienceForYou Only the ego needs to be accepted. I don't need any acceptance by anyone. I personally don't give a crap what you think. I am giving you a chance to get free from human faith and belief disguised as science.
Acceptance is what you dream about all the time. You dream that the real scientists finally accept your ideas. In your arrogance you think you know more and better then anybody else. Dont you see how illogical, cuckoo and crazed that is ? Science is a much too big field->
@MrRichardQED I don't have the slightest fantasy that morons will understand real science. It is sad for me to see such limited awareness of the obvious. I really had some hopes for you to get free from human emotional garbage beliefs. The obvious isn't obvious until it becomes obvious.
@MrRichardQED "Acceptance is what you dream about all the time. You dream that the real scientists finally accept your ideas. In your arrogance you think you know more and better then anybody else. Dont you see how illogical, cuckoo and crazed that is ? Science is a much too big field->"
This is called projection. I have no need for anything. I have the Truth. I am free of all human emotional mental garbage. I teach people how to get free. That is what I do. You defend your enslavement.
@GoodScienceForYou I have the Truth. I am free of all human emotional mental garbage. I teach people how to get free.
You have what you think is the truth, without even understanding that something like absolute truth is an ideal that can never be reached. The truth is that you dream about being a real scientists, but cant manage top be accepted by them. So you try to find people here on youtube who are badly educated enough to believe you. I am defending real science against pseudo scientists
@GoodScienceForYou like you. I ask you again what has your science ever done for humanity ? What breakthroughs are based on it, what technologies, what inventions ? The truth is your "science" has achieved nothing except confusing a few morons who believed you. You claim to be free, but you are a slave to your ego. You dream about having followers, to finally have the feeling to have achieved something, since so far everything you have tried was a big failure, even your own family says that.
@GoodScienceForYou I just decided i could need a good laugh, so i watched a few of your videos, BWAHAHAHAHA,you are so making a fool of yourself ! For example your video on fossils QUOTE: You will notice the creature fell on existing dirt.The dirt wasnt made at the same time as the creature. Only a moron would make that assumption"
Only a moron wouldn´t know that what they test is the dirt directly around the bones which are the remnants of the muscles and organ,and thus OF COURSE are created->
@MrRichardQED There are no remnants of muscles or tissue with replacement fossils. Why don't you know this? And when these morons find tissue they don't test it by the carbon dating methods, they use the age of the ground to make the creature seem older. Why don't you know this? Why are you so easy to believe this crap? Only the weak and easy, needy people will fall for faith and belief with no absolute evidence.
@GoodScienceForYou There are no remnants of muscles or tissue with replacement fossils.
I know its a lot to ask, but could you think logic for a minute ? What do you think happens to the muscular tissue? Over many years it rots and becomes soil, and when even more years pass that soil becomes stone, the stone right around the bones ! I mean did you think it would vanish into thin air or what ? Of course there is no tissue left, but the remnants of it are still there smartass !
@GoodScienceForYou And when these morons find tissue they don't test it by the carbon dating methods, they use the age of the ground to make the creature seem older.
Those people who dig out those bones are way smarter then you ever will be, and know more about science then you ever will, no matter how much books you read. The truth is you are jealous, you want to be them, but deep down you haven´t got what it takes ! That eats you up inside, that´s why you need to constantly attack them !!!
@GoodScienceForYou They are living your dream and you could explode that´s how jealous you are ! You would give everything to be more like them, or to be in their place. To be published in a renowned science mag would be the cherry on top for you, the ultimate confirmationa dream you cherrished so long you cant even remember when it began. But you also know you will never achieve that and that drives you insane ! THATS the real reason you feel the need to insult/attack etc. them all the time
@GoodScienceForYou shortly after the creature died.Only a moron could possibly overlook that and think muscles and organs just disappear in a rapid burial^^In other tests its not essential when the material was created,but when it was BURIED(OBVIOUSLY at the same time the creature got buried, the same goes for the minerals that create the fossil btw,their age isnt measured).So how about you find out how those tests you criticize actually work, instead of making stupid assumptions about it?
@MrRichardQED You are a person not capable of thinking for yourself. My only objective is to get you free. Yet you represent the prison that has your mind behind bars and has used your need to be "worth something" against you. There is never any real absolute evidence for mystical beliefs. Yet you are forced to believe in order to be accepted.
Why don't you know this? What happened to you that cause you to fail yourself?
@MrRichardQED There is nothing "obvious" about assumptions based on faith and belief. Why don't you know this? I don't think you are stupid, just ill educated. Assumptions are not part of real science. Only a believer who has faith in this assumption would fall for this dating system of stupid retards.
@GoodScienceForYou There is nothing "obvious" about assumptions based on faith and belief
The conclusions i called obvious where no assumptions based on faith, they where crystallclear logic like that a creature and the earth directly around it get buried at the same time. It cant happen any other way despite the creature gets burried, and much later doug out and burried again, BUT there are ways to exclude that for example by comparing the minerals the body absorbed with the minerals around it
@MrRichardQED Do you even understand basic science and logic? I don't think so. It is utterly illogical to make any assumptions in science. Dating methods are made totally on assumptions. How did you get like this? It may sound logical to a person who handed over reasoning to brainwashing, but to ANY objective observer it is religious crap you believe in.
@GoodScienceForYou It is utterly illogical to make any assumptions in science. Dating methods are made totally on assumptions.
First of all its utter bullshit to claim making assumptions in science would be illogical, this argument is illogical! Its also utter bullshit to claim that the dating methods would be based on assumptions. For quite a few we have an impressive amount of evidence, and those can be used to check the rest of them for validity, so your whole claim is debunked !!!
@MrRichardQED Making assumptions in anything involving science is bullshit. It is how religious human emotional garbage is allowed to propagate in these pseudo science classes. Why don't you know this?
In real science we look at and FOR the absolutely irrefutable evidence first. We only seek that first. Once you find it the rest is easy, because it all fits with that evidence. When scientists ignore a way to look at a premise it is because they are afraid to look. Thats HEMG faith in action.
@GoodScienceForYou In real science we look at and FOR the absolutely irrefutable evidence first. We only seek that first
If you really knew anything about how science works in the real world you would know that absolute evidence does NOT exist. Its one of the first things you learn, any first year student in any natural science should know that. Its the reason theories can be overturned and replaced with new theories. That´s philosophy in action.How can you not know that ? Don´t you read books ?
Its becoming quite obvious that you have trouble to understand science ! I have the evidence on my side, i have the experiments on my side, i have the experts on my side, i have logic and reason on my side etc. ! You can claim as often as you want that evolution would be a religion, that doesnt make it any less dumb ! Evolution fulfills the same academic standards that any science does, and all the experts confirm that, so -->
@MrRichardQED All evidence is on my side. The side of objective reality. I am against all faith & belief in science. All absolute evidence we have in DNA only shows genetic loss and genetic degradation. You must realize that the "earth is flat' fulfills some academic standard also. It took a long time to get rid of that and will take a long time to get rid of evolution because it is what people base their lives on, like the earth is flat people did.
@GoodScienceForYou All evidence is on my side. The side of objective reality. I am against all faith & belief in science. All absolute evidence we have in DNA only shows genetic loss and genetic degradation.
You are either worse informed then i thought, or you are lying cause you cant admit to be wrong^^Can you back this statements up with real experts,real experiments,from reputable sources ? I highly doubt it,but even if you find 1 or 2 sources,I find 10 for each of yours that debunks you !
@MrRichardQED There is ABSOLUTELY no way to date fossils that are completely destroyed and replaced by the minerals around them. PERIOD. end of discussion. What else do you have besides religious beliefs?
@GoodScienceForYou There is ABSOLUTELY no way to date fossils that are completely destroyed and replaced by the minerals around them.
YOU MORON ! That´s NOT what happens. SOME of the minerals in the bone wander out and are replaced by others from the rock. Its NOT completely destroyed, for example the carbon DOESNT get replaced, that´s why you can carbon date you idiot ! Boy and you think you have the knowledge to explain the process to others, you don´t even get the basics,PATHETIC !!!!!
@MrRichardQED I find it funny that you talk about carbon dating to dodge the way that replacement fossils are dated. Do you know that even when they find tissue they don't date it with carbon dating, because they cannot fit the specimen into this religion. They date it with the minerals around it, strata and such all based on the same religious faith based assumptions.
@GoodScienceForYou Do you know that even when they find tissue they don't date it with carbon dating, because they cannot fit the specimen into this religion. They date it with the minerals around it, strata and such all based on the same religious faith based assumptions.
This all just proves you have no idea what you are talking about ! I guess the reason why i mentioned carbon dating was to high for you. A good method are some luminescence methods, with those you can prove when the sediments
@GoodScienceForYou where the last time exposed to sunlight. It was very successfully used for the homo florensis, a find a few years ago that has caused worldwide attention, they also used radio carbon dating here. That dig is also very good evidence that real scientists are ready to change their opinion if the evidence calls for it, contrary to your conspiracy claims, utterly debunking them. Real scientists dont ignore dates or change them because they dont fit in their opinion !!!!!
@MrRichardQED Why was the data rejected so fiercely as the 6.1 million year old up right human with stronger straighter bones and exactly the same angle on the femur to the pelvis? Its evidence of a superior human that we've degenerated from. Why is the Herto rejected? Larger brain capacity from 150K yrs ago? These religious people will not accept the obvious. Its not popular to realize that humans are destroying, not only the earth, but also the human genome, by speeding up degeneration.
@GoodScienceForYou and can name them to back up what i say. You just make claims and use unclear insinuations that science would support your position. If asked for actual evidence you either ignore it or find some excuse.
Larger brain capacity from 150K yrs ago?
Since when does brain size equal intelligence ? Its merely one factor among many, as you should know. So this argument just shows AGAIN you dont really understand this.As for the superhuman, bring your evidence, and i will look at it.
@MrRichardQED DNA is not up for debate. It only shows genetic degradation in all creatures. Period. Humans are degraded and degrading faster than ever with all the mutagens humans are now living with and promoting as a way of life. Human extinction is where we are heading.
Anyone who believes in the mythology of evolution is extremely retarded.
@GoodScienceForYou DNA is not up for debate.It only shows genetic degradation in all creatures.Period
Well then it should be easy to prove,dont you think?So show me your sources and evidence,if you have nothing at least admit you made that up!
Humans are degraded and degrading faster than ever with
With humans that could be the case,but for very different reasons then what you claim.Humans have nearly stopped natural selection through their modern lifestyle with medicine,no predators etc.etc.
@GoodScienceForYou So you cant present any evidence for any of your claims it seems,while i can present evidence and experts that confirm what i say So its really about time to either back up what you say or admit that your claims are bullshit! We are talking about science here,and science rests on evidence.You have high expectation when my evidence is concerned,so how about you fulfill those expectation for your own claims? Or do you have 2 different standards?That would make you a hypocrite!
@MrRichardQED I have repeatedly presented lots of peer reviewed data over on the (google it) "Neutral Evolution Forum". It is common knowledge. I explain in great detail there.
I have read over 27200 papers on evolution. I posted the pertinent ones over on the forum.
@GoodScienceForYou I have repeatedly presented lots of peer reviewed data over on the (google it) "Neutral Evolution Forum".
I was talking about evidence here, you presented NOTHING ! You couldnt answer a single question, you couldnt back up a single claim you made. I have backup for my claims, and also presented some. That you have read 27200 papers is a lie, everybody who can perform basi math can see that. Lets divide it by 40 and we have 680, so you would have to read roughly 2 per day
@MrRichardQED Ego, and faith in crap pseudo science is not reality. Magical bull shit is not science. There are no magical mutations or magical biological mechanisms for evolution. There is only genetic loss as time goes on. You are perfect example of a genetic lineage that has lost reasonableness and traded it for fantasy, because the truth is too difficult for retards to understand.
I read three today and four yesterday. There are over 90,000 peer papers on gene loss alone.
Exactly, which is why you should start to work on your ego and stop claiming your bullshit pseudoscience. You claim you have evidence, you claim you have papers, so how come you aren´t able to show them here for everybody to see? Because you know its bullshit, so you want to have the discussion in your forum, where you can just delete and change what you don´t like. You are a pathological liar, as can many people confirm.
@GoodScienceForYou I mean you have the audacity to criticize me for my ego, when you are the who declares himself a genius, think you are smarter then most scientists, know more about their fields etc. You have lost touch with reality ! I could mathematically proof that its impossible that you have read as many papers as you claim, yet you insist on those completely made up and impossible claims.
You are a typical example oif a psychological phenomenon, that people unknowingly an-->
@MrRichardQED I don't declare myself a genius. I am one. It is one of those obvious things. It is a shame that you think it is ego to express the obvious. It is impossible for you to be as stupid as you seem, but it is obvious. You are in bondage to what you believe. You are a slave to ignorance, ideology, and you think you are a free thinker. WTF?
@GoodScienceForYou I don't declare myself a genius. I am one. It is one of those obvious things. It is a shame that you think it is ego to express the obvious
OF COURSE you do ! You are the one who makes that claim, and nobody else. It´s anything but obvious, or i wouldn´t have brought it up ! Only an egomaniac like you makes claims that. A real genius is declared one by his colleagues or other people, you declare yourself to be one, that´s pure ego, and nothing else !!! As soon as anyone starts
@GoodScienceForYou that you are a genius you start throwing a fit. You insult and attack the person who dares to doubt you. How else can you call that but pure ego ? Those claims about your intelligence are so important to you, that you have to repeat them again and again, cause you fear someone might not have read it the first 10 times ^^ That´s a hardcore ego trip and nothing else !!!
I know i am not stupid, and i know quite a few geniuses personally, NONE of them feels the need to tell -->
@GoodScienceForYou to constantly tell others that they are a genius. They know they don´t need to. Others will find out themselves, or they won´t, it doesnt matter to them. A real genius has enough confidence that it doesnt matter to him if others realize that they are a genius or not.
But your self esteem is so low you constantly feel the need to make such claims as you having a very high IQ, you being a genius, that you have read over 27.000 papers etc.etc.etc. All that shows you are a very
@GoodScienceForYou a very insecure person who constantly needs this acknowledgement from other people. If you don´t get it from someone, like me here, you have to make up reasons why that is the case. You make up claims about the other one being too stupid to see your genius, you attack the other person personally, without having any base for it etc.etc.etc. Those are just excuses that make it easier for you to deal with that rejection.
Its also the reason you make this videos,and that forum->
@GoodScienceForYou You search for people who acknowledge you, with whom you can build a teacher/student relationship, so you can feel above them. You try to force this relationship on anybody you discuss with. You dont want to discuss eye to eye. It gives you a feeling of importance, that you lack in real life cause everything you tried in rl failed miserably.
A real genius wouldnt need all these crutches. He would get more then enough approval and confirmation in real life. So much for that^^
@MrRichardQED A person who reads regularly, can read complex pages in a couple of minutes. Some can read even more than that. If you are not capable of reading that fast, it is because you are not capable of reading that fast.
@GoodScienceForYou A person who reads regularly, can read complex pages in a couple of minutes.
I know, i am able to read that fast, no matter how complex the matter is. I am also able to skim through a text and still get all the important information from it. But that´s not the point. You claim to be an expert on many subjects, so you would have to read papers on many subjects. If you claim to have read over 27.000 papers on evolution alone, i must ask myself what about all those other -->
@MrRichardQED I suggest that you goto evolutionforum (dot) info and read. I just had a long discussion with a scientist. He was polite and is not able to respond any longer.
@GoodScienceForYou fields where you also claim to be an expert ? Obviously you have to read a lot of papers on those subjects as well, to be an expert. Then before you can even start to read scientific papers and understand them you have to get all that basic knowledge in your head. If you combine all that, you see that your claims are impossible !!!
Plus if you really would read scientific papers on a regular basis you would know that just reading the paper alone is not sufficient, you also->
@GoodScienceForYou have to check out/read something else.I bet you have no idea what i am talking about, which shows you aren´t really that familiar with scientific papers.If you would know what i am talking about you would have mentioned that already yourself. I give you one hint, it needs a lot more time, then reading the paper itself
"You are in bondage to what you believe"
Nonsense,i changed my view on things more often then i can count,if new evidence demands i change my view i do so-->
@GoodScienceForYou quite happily.I find it quite thrilling if that happens,and i love it.Especially if the new evidence poses way more questions then answers like the dark flow a few years ago,or dark energy,or dark matter.
EVERY good scientist loves riddles like that, that can change our view of the world extremely,like quantum mechanics did, to give you an example. In physics we live in exciting times right now;) Many questions, and hardly any answers, but i guess that out of your expertise^^
@MrRichardQED Evolution: This magical, religious, idea that by magical processes and mystical causes, creatures have gained in features, become more complex, and have new gene functions that were not ever in the genetic make up of the original of the species.
Magical thinking; "I will drive my car into a wall and smash it about 45KMPH. Then I will drive it backwards into the same wall it it will be perfect again." This is the Evotard philosophy.
Actually its nothing but your straw man argument, which you know very well.
"There are over 4600 genetic defects in the human genome according to"
So what? :
1. most of them are recessive
2. I already explained that humans are a pretty special case, since they nearly stopped natural selection by getting rid of most predators that could be dangerous to us and through modern medicine and other perks of our modern lifestyle
@MrRichardQED "2. I already explained that humans are a pretty special case, since they nearly stopped natural selection by getting rid of most predators that could be dangerous to us and through modern medicine and other perks of our modern lifestyle" That is a religious statement that has absolutely no evidence. Religious slogans are not science.
@GoodScienceForYou Your argument was already debunked by the nylon-eating bacteria, but you care to ignore that. I named also a lot of other examples , which you also ignore. Every one of them debunks your argument that evolution doesn´t exist only degradation. As evidence you claim i just need top read your 90.000 papers, which is obviously impossible. You hide behind massive amount of data, pathetic ! If all that data would really support you:
1. evolution wouldnt be the base of modern biology
@MrRichardQED The nylon eating bacteria has never evolved, it still is a single cell. You really need to read the Neutral Evolution Forum. I have thousands upon thousands of peer data for you to read.
@GoodScienceForYou The nylon eating bacteria has never evolved, it still is a single cell.
What does that have to do with anything ? Of course it has evolved, it has improved itself, period. You claim that organisms couldn´t improve via evolution, but this organism has improved through evolution, so your argument is debunked. I guess you don´t really understand what evolution actually means ^^ THIS is evolution, if you like it or not, it fulfills all criteria !
2. You could, just like i did, name many examples ,but all you presented was the genetic defects in humans. That neither proves that they get more, or that that number is significant anyhow.
3. The support for the ToE wouldn´t be above 99% !
btw i am still waiting for evidence for your superhuman
I am still waiting for a better explanation then evolution etc.etc.
EVERY time i have you with the back t the wall, you simply ignore my comments, how PATHETIC !!!!!
@MrRichardQED You are so stupid. What a waste of time and a waste of a human life. In order to show evolution, you must show 51% net positive mutations that exist in DNA. Humans have over 4600 genetic defects. The "odds" of you having a genetic defect that will cause you to go to the hospital or doctor because of a genetic defect is 100% base on empirical data from science. There is no evolution and you are evidence of genetic degradation. Only weak willed lemmings believe in evolution.
@GoodScienceForYou You are so stupid. What a waste of time and a waste of a human life
Oh why thank you ^^ When morons like you start attacking my intelligence i know they stand with the back to the wall and have run our of real arguments ^^ So ad hominems is all the have left ! PATHETIC !!!
"In order to show evolution, you must show 51% net positive mutations that exist in DNA. "
Says who ? This must be the most stupid argument you used so far ^^ EVERY improvement is evolution, you moron !
@GoodScienceForYou as long as it is hereditary !!! You also need to define positive. You see things that are negative now could be positive or neutral when the environment changes. or when other mutations crop up that work toget5her with this negative mutation and suddenly several negative mutations have a positive effect working together. WHY DON´T YOU KNOW THIS ? It´s funny how you desperately try to attack me on a personal level, cause you more and more realize how superior my knowledge -->
@GoodScienceForYou Then you completely forgot the effects of natural selection.So lets say you have 3 times as much negative mutations as you have positive ones,then natural selection can&will still see to it that the negative ones are discarded,while the positive ones are handed on from generation to generation.WHY DON´T YOU KNOW THIS???This is evolution 101!!!
"because of a genetic defect is 100% base on empirical data from science"
Got a source for that? Dont even try to say evolution forum->
@MrRichardQED The Neutral Evolution Forum has posted over 100 articles from peer review and links to over 110,000 articles on gene loss in evolution, and 90,000 on the pubmed site on gene loss. I also posted all the data on human 4600 defects causing genetic diseases showing that all humans are genetically degraded from mutations. You are lazy.
@GoodScienceForYou The Neutral Evolution Forum has posted over 100 articles from peer review and links to over 110,000 articles on gene loss in evolution, and 90,000 on the pubmed site on gene loss
And AGAIN you try your oldest trick top drown me in data, to disguise the fact you really have no sources for your claims. How can you not realize i don´t fall for this old trick ? I told you often enough. If you really had sources that support you you would point me to an exact source, instead you
@GoodScienceForYou do something completely unscientific and vaguely point to hundreds of articles, very well knowing i cant check them all to debunk/verify your claim. That means you have no source ! I am still waiting for a single source for any of your claims. I could verify my claims by exactly pointing you to an article, and telling you where in the article you will find it. THAT´S how its done in real science,HOW CAN YOU NOT KNOW THAT ????? Because you don´t get your info from real papers^^
@GoodScienceForYou I also posted all the data on human 4600 defects causing genetic diseases
For which you still lack a real source that supports your claims, like you lack support for all your claims ! You see my claims are supported like QUOTE:"Max Ingmans findings on mitochondrial DNA, Michael Hammers findings on interbreeding in early hominids " Now THATS the least you need to do to support your claims, realize the big difference ? I named specific papers by specific experts, so you have ->
@GoodScienceForYou the possibility to check those papers for yourself and see for yourself they debunk your claims. What you do is pointing vaguely at 90.000 papers and claiming somewhere in there would be something to support you, THAT´S ABSURD AND YOU KNOW IT !!!! Its also a lie !!! Had you really evidence in there , you would have directly pointed me at the evidence, and not vaguely claimed it would be in there. Its really pathetic that you still try that despite the fact i don´t buy it-->
@GoodScienceForYou but i guess you don´t find a face saving way out of this. You have no possibility to point me directly at ONE article, since you have no idea where to find anything that supports you (after all you never read those articles) so you have to keep this pathetic and embarrassing charade up, although i never believed your lies about them supporting you. I guess you could impress simpler minds with this scam, but not me. Show me concrete examples, or STFU !!! No matter how often-->
Yea sure, its very lazy of me not to read all those 110.000 articles on evolution, and the 90.000 on the pubmed^^ Do you have completely lost touch with reality ? YOU are the lazy one,cause you dont point me to specific articles that confirm you,but instead just lazy& vaguely point at all of them and say:"its somewhere in there" NOW THATS LAZY !!!! Its also a lie,i have read enough papers to know that, and i really read them, not just claim to have read them^^
@GoodScienceForYou To name a source you have to say EXACTLY where to find it, and not just point to thousands of papers and claim the answer would be somewhere in there. That´s simply unbelievable ! If you have a source you are able to point out exactly where to find it !
"I have thousands upon thousands of peer data for you to read."
Then why aren´t you able to name exact examples, that are quick to find and check ? This is completely implausible ! I think you are lying !!!!!
@MrRichardQED There are over 4600 genetic defects in the human genome according to "the human genome project" where they got a huge gov. grant because they promised cures for diseases from this. All they did was find all the defects. Evolution is not possible from the data we have.
@GoodScienceForYou and you claim to rerad a lot on other sciences as well. Thats completely unrealistic. Even if we say you read most papers on evolution, and on the other fields you read alltogether just half tzhe amount of papers we would still be at 3 per day, without ever having a day off. I mean a paper can have more then a hundred pages in some cases. If you trxy to lie at least make up lies that are realistic/believable, and not stuff only a moron would believe
@GoodScienceForYou So back up your claims,present your evidence,present papers that support your ideas etc.I mean you don´t make your own experiments,do you? So you should be able to present experts that support your ideas,or at least data that supports it like experiments etc.You act like your claims would be common knowledge,so present your sources,experts etc
"Anyone who believes in the mythology of evolution is extremely retarded"
Anyone who makes claims,he cant back up,is extremely retarded
@GoodScienceForYou Now i am still waiting for your evidence. If you really could back upo your claims you would have done so by now, but instead you show off and find excuses. That makes it quite obvious you donmt have any evidence, you dont have any experts backing you up. You made it up, just like the 27200 papers (at least you dont claim 272.000 as you have done before on severall occasions ^^)
@MrRichardQED I have never claimed anything other than the truth on my study. I told you before, over on the "Neutral Evolution Forum" I put many peer reviewed evidence on how genetics really works. There are over 89000 papers just on gene loss on one medical site. All of humanities "ills" are related to gene loss, DNA showing screwed up genes.
@GoodScienceForYou and unwillingly describe themselves when they want to describe others. Its to funny how your description of me fits on you without you realizing it ^^
So, your main argument is debunked, lets we what you have next ^^ btw show some evidence, i mean i can do so, so can you, instead of claiming the age old excuse "my evidence is somewhere else". I mean come on, if you really read all those papers it should be easy to name a few that support you. I could do so after all.
@MrRichardQED You are very lazy, weak and afraid to look at my evidence. It is base on, now, over 90,000 peer reviewed documents on PubMed. You can see the links over on "The Neutral Evolution Forum".
I posted about 40 of them on Youtube videos but they rapidly get lost in all the forum nazis posting. Far better to keep them fresh on the forum.
@GoodScienceForYou You are very lazy, weak and afraid to look at my evidence
YOU are the lazy one here ! I presented my evidence HERE, so why cant you ? I mean i hardly have the time to read 90.000 papers, and i doubt anyone else has ! But if what you say is true, how come evolution is still the accepted theory ? It looks like you just try an old trick, bury your opponent in paper, and claim the evidence would be in there. If you have read them , and the evidence is in there, you would be able->
@GoodScienceForYou to tell me here and now the evidence, and then link the exact paper(s) you are talking about, and tell me where in the paper i would find it. THAT´S how a scientific discussion works, not by saying the evidence is somewhere in these 90.000 papers ^^ I mean come on, we both know that´s just an excuse, so stop the acting ^^ I also made it very clear why I wont discuss with you somewhere where you are in total control of everything ! btw how could you know all 90.000 support--->
@GoodScienceForYou you when you have read "only" roughly 27.000 ? That alone shows your claims are very fishy/suspicious. AGAIN I can present my evidence here, with the help of a few links, that aren´t that much to read for someone who claims to read as much as you do ;)How come you cant present your evidence here in your own words, with links to specific papers or parts of them who support you? If you really read that much that shouldnt be any problem for you,yet you find excuses all the time !
@MrRichardQED We have found from 40,000 years ago larger brain capacity and taller humans. Why don't you know this? Could it be they don't discuss real evidence in the Evotard classroom?
@GoodScienceForYou We have found from 40,000 years ago larger brain capacity and taller humans. Why don't you know this?
I DO know this, stop constantly implying i wouldn´t know certain things. I even already answered this argument, so it6s quite stupid to claim i wouldn´t know this ^^ But larger capacity doesnt necessarily mean bigger intelligence, why don´t YOU know this ? If only size would matter the blue whale would be the most intelligent life form ^^ This IS discussed in the classroom ;)
@GoodScienceForYou why don´t YOU know this?Other factors are also important for intelligence like how the brain is folded.One if the most important factors for intelligence is the cerebral cortex of the brain,why don´t YOU know this?For someone who is as arrogant as you are you have quite many holes in your knowledge^^You really should stop let your ego run wild,or you make a complete fool of yourself !!! You also should stop make unbased assumptions of what is taught in class and what isn´t !!!
@GoodScienceForYou and my arguments are.So since you cant beat me there,and are with the back to the wall,you try to attack me personally,but you don´t realize that all you achieve with that is making a fool of yourself;)
I mean so far all of your arguments got debunked ! All you have left is finding excuses like:
"In order to show evolution,you must show 51%net positive mutations that exist in DNA"
Which is utter bullshit ! First of all most mutations are NEUTRAL, not positive or negative !!!
@GoodScienceForYou You don´t have any sources ! You simply hope by burying me in papers you can hide that they don´t support you, cause you know i cant check them all ! If they really do, you could name EXACT EXAMPLES ! I am still waiting for a single one !!! The more you try this tactic the less believable you are !!!!! Just point me to a real, scientific paper that supports you. ONE, not thousands. I also don´t want to read them in your forum, but from your original source. I simply don´t-->
@GoodScienceForYou trust you. You tend to change things so you look better, so I prefer to read them from the original source, to make sure you didn´t change things to your benefit !!! You know its funny, i asked you thins many times already, but you still couldn´t name a single paper that supports anything you say. Funny, since you claim there are thousands one should think you could name examples^^ The fact that you couldnt name a single one shows you are lying !!!
@MrRichardQED Brain size (brain capacity) is one of the standard ideas of your Evotard religion.
The depressed skull of the hominids are their idea that we expanded our brain capacity from those depressions. However, the opposite is true. The genetic degradation caused by mutagens in the hominids caused, not only depressed skulls and weakened bones, but extinction.
@GoodScienceForYou Brain size (brain capacity) is one of the standard ideas of your Evotard religion.
1. that you think you could better judge if evolution is scientific or not then the experts on the subject shows how arrogant you really are. Pure ego running wild !
2. If you had really read as much papers as you claim you would see that brain size is just one of a few factors. That you don´t know that shows that in reality you get your info from popular science mags that (over)simplify things
@MrRichardQED 1/ I learned very quickly that there are no experts in a field with no real evidence. That all the evidence based on interpretation from faith and belief. Therefore your faith in pseudo science is based on some ridiculous emotionally driven need you have.
With my intelligence it really is difficult to realize how stupid a person has to be to not see what is obvious.
Using complexity as an argument is not a rational one.
Therere 4600 genetic defects in humans & more each day.
@GoodScienceForYou With my intelligence it really is difficult to realize how stupid a person has to be to not see what is obvious.
I believe you that you are too stupid to understand these things, you have proven it often enough. You do not even get that there is no absolute evidence. You also claim you could read 800 papers within a week. Using such easy to see through lies is a sure sign of a low intellect, so is constantly debunking yourself ^^ GET HELP !
@GoodScienceForYou teacher. You don´t become someones teacher by forcing yourself unto him !!! You are also neither qualified nor equipped to teach anybody, with your mental state. So what gave you the impression you would be my teacher ? Did i ever ask you to teach me anything ? I tried to discuss with you eye to eye, but due to your delusions of grandeur you see yourself above everybody else, which is completely absurd. You think you are an expert in almost all fields of natural science-->
@GoodScienceForYou which is impossible due to the vast amounts of knowledge we have accumulated by now. It´s a typical sign for your kind of mental illness that you claim impossible things, like reading 800 science papers in a week, without realizing how absurd your claims really are. In a way you realize these things, but you can´t admit that, not even to yourself.But when asked to describe others, you often describe yourself instead without realizing it, equipping the other person with those->
There are two things that exist: 1/ The Truth. 2/ BS, Human Emotional Mental Garbage. Sometimes retarded believers prop up thier fables, and myths with some truth. It is a common brainwashing technique.
@GoodScienceForYou I repeat my question : what gave you the impression to be my teacher ? Did i ever ask you to teach me anything ? Did I ever say : i accept you as my teacher or anything like that ? I tried to have an eye to eye discussion with you, but your arrogance makes that nearly impossible. You constantly think you are above everybody else. AGAIN that are delusion of grandeur !!!! You need to finally recognize your problem to solve it. There is a reason so many people laugh about you !!!
This has been flagged as spam show
@LoricaLady Creation Science?
I've watched the videos on your page. You're trying to tell me they aren't deceptive? They quote outdated articles, they only cite sources which are supportive of their views; not to mention their use of proof texting. I find arguments of ignorance completely coercive. Creation science isn't science, it just tries to punch holes in real science, because they aren't looking for truth because they believe they already have it. "God did it" explains null.
FinixPoltergeist 9 hours ago
Comment removed
FinixPoltergeist 9 hours ago
TO ANYONE: If you see 0 reply to some posters below they know they are on ignore for things like name calling, false accusations of lying, personal insults and sometimes worse.Such people follow me (& others) around YT guard dogging evo-supporting vids with such tactics. If you would like to make any of their same points I would be happy to reply and give what I feel is "the rest of the story." However, I only debate with those who are civil & objective.
LoricaLady 10 hours ago
@LoricaLady And again you don't explain your theory. the fact that you accept micro evolution in one kind but you don't accept macro evolution...
The thing is in one kind, you have multiple form or even functionality depending on the specie. It does matter if they are both fish or not... it is Evolution.
You have to open a real book and read peer review papers!
You want to see evidence.Where is the missing link that u were a child, I want to see evidence that u were a baby one day!
MattleSystem 6 hours ago
All the intermediate state from now to your birth, but not picture, not a book, not toys, but real evidence of you.
If you give me a tooth... Come on, are you saying that it is possible to create a man from just one tooth??
You cannot provide evidence,such as fossil record cannot be every second since the beginning visible!
This is a detective story, not just, "Hey I know the murder, I have a personal feeling, I have experienced a day where he was angry..."
MattleSystem 6 hours ago
...has been wrong over & over in the scientific community. For ex. at one time even Einstein thought - along with all scientists - that the universe was eternal,also germ theory was ridiculed & so on. What you're being told is "Don't think for yourself. Read our 'publish-what -we-want-or-perish' peer reviews & wait for us to give you our consensus." That ain't the scientific process. But then evolution is not science but pseudo science, even anti science.
LoricaLady 1 week ago
@LoricaLady And consequently Einstein recognised his mistake, which is not your case! This is the difference between science and faith, we accept to review our point of view to increase our knowledge. If the given explanation is better and proved to be correct, we accept the theory.
In case of ID, there is no explanation and nothing proved, just assumption and misconception of Evolution process...
MattleSystem 14 hours ago
...reviews in a self perpetuating, orthodox Darwinian atmosphere are actually used to block dissent. Let's see some things that got great peer reviews. Haeckle's admittedly fraudulent ontology recapitulates phylogony, peppered moth "evolution", coelacanth as a transition - oops then a real one showed up & was 100% fish period - Miller & Urey who actually cooked up amino acids that KILL life - well, the list goes on & on. He wants us to wait for a "consensus..." Consensus...
LoricaLady 1 week ago
0 in betweeners. Oh some of them will tell you things like Archaeopteryx are inbetweeners, but then other evolutionists will come along & say, Well, no, not really... There is no universal agreement amongst evolutionists on a single "transitiion" and really not on much else either. We are being told here that peer reviews are part of the scientific process. Not really. Aristotle, Gallileo, Mendell & legions of others taught us much about science w/0 "peer reviews." The truth is peer...
LoricaLady 1 week ago
...in any way. We are told, again with magical thinking, that its invisible descendants' invisible descendants led to tetrapods based on imaginary, invisible lines leaving to imaginary, invisible dots. This is like when they tell us that fins turned into feet, feet into wings, fish into tetrapods, scales into feathers & tetrapods into birds when the actual fossil evidence in uncounted BILLIONS shows the exact oppostie. All we see are 100% fish, fin, feet, tetrapods, feathers & birds &....
LoricaLady 1 week ago
...similariites....we infer..." and lots & lots of magical thinking. For ex. Miller shows us a fossil of Tiktaalik & tells us "it is as good as it gets for a transitionial fossil." How right he is. It's presented as a bridge between fish & tetrapods but (1) it is 100% lobe finned FISH, which, btw as a conveniently missing back end (2) they have absolutely 0 evidence it isn't just 1 of innumerable extinct dead end animals and ever produced any progeny significantly different from itself...
LoricaLady 1 week ago
When Miller uses the word science to describe evo he is using the logical fallacy of equivocation. He is wanting people to equate things like astronomy, medical science, physics and so on with evo. Those other things are testable, repeatable & observable. Evo is not. There is 0 "evidence" for evolution. All of it is based on more logical fallacies & speculation presented as evidence with words like "millions of [conveniently untestable & unobservable] years ago...it is believed...
LoricaLady 1 week ago
WTF IS A EVANGELICAL ATHEIST!!!???!!???
enyskept 3 weeks ago
i am an evangelical atheist
but i have a ton of respect for this man
coltsrule5150 4 weeks ago
Oh and btw for those below, true quantum physicis/mechanics deals specifically with random particles and their relation to structured attraction. So don't listen to the YouTube comment section "science experts" who are attempting to debunk centuries of proven physics research with religious excuses regurgitated from their Sunday school lesson. My team got us to the moon (science), your team got us blind faith, religious persecution, an uneducated populace, and fear of hellfire (religion).
Sdrewski84 1 month ago
Ahh, well spoken sir. I feel that anyone who uses a book of stories as the basis for science should have to pray for their dinner. It's funny how creationists enjoy the fruits of true science in every technology they use on a daily basis and then baselessly argue against it when it comes to evolution. Sad.
Sdrewski84 1 month ago
Comment removed
LoricaLady 1 week ago
Comment removed
recalibration 2 days ago
Comment removed
recalibration 2 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@LoricaLady
All within the last 45 years:
[Jul 2006] National Geographic: Lizards Rapidly Evolve After Introduction to Island
[Apr 2008] National Geographic: "Instant" Evolution Seen in Darwin's Finches, Study Says
[Jul 2009] Time Magazine Science: The Incredible Shrinking Sheep of Scotland
Your ignorance is staggering.
(1/1 LL00)
recalibration 2 days ago
@recalibration You think all you have to do to defend evo is give some cut & paste links, showing your...faith...in it? Use YOUR mind & YOUR words if you have something to say. You might even want to try using the actual peer reviewed articles in the evo lit. I don't even have to read the articles however, just the titles to demonstrate that 0 evidence whatsoever of evo is being shown. The lizards are still lizards, finches still finches, sheep still sheep. You are swallowing a line...
LoricaLady 2 days ago
@recalibration ...Here is the line: 1) All changes are the result of evo. 2) So if you see new species, that is evolution. 3) New species (sheep, finches, lizards, whatever) eventually turn into a new genus. For ex. fish don't just stay fish but eventually turn into lizards, birds, mammals etc.4) Mutations & natural selection are the vehicles for the new genus changes. Problems: 1) All changes are LIMITED. As Mendell - who actually used the scientific method, unlike Darwin - said peas...
LoricaLady 2 days ago
@recalibration ...stay peas, bees stay peas. 2) There is 0 evidence finch, lizards, sheep etc. etc. have ever been or ever will be anything but finch, lizards, sheep. The fo 3) Mutations & NS have NEVER been shown to give rise to anything more complex than a new species. If you will go through those articles with a fine tooth comb you will invariably find what evo support always depends on "might have...probably....we infer...must have...millions of (untestable & unobservable) years ago..."..
LoricaLady 2 days ago
@LoricaLady You are like all other creationists. you accept micro evolution but not macro evolution, however you claim something that goes against your own theory. Birds stay birds, fishes stay fishes, bees stays bees, spider stay spider...I like this claim, because you consequently accept the fact that a golden fish and a thon are both fish and then they can evolve with just micro evolution..Right? the thing is that between golden fish and thon, it is Evolution.Same with primate!
MattleSystem 1 day ago
@MattleSystem the small fish and the biggest one come all from the ancestor which was a fish... this point, you accept because they are both fish... But do you really think this imply only micro evolution???
No, this is evolution, nothing more, nothing less...
By the way, it would simplify the problem of free space on Noah's Arch, if there was one kind of each animal...one bird, fish, wolf, elephant, ape couple. But the thing is you still need evolution to be totally true.
MattleSystem 1 day ago
Of course Noah's Arch is a stupid story, we all know that by looking at the soil stratigraphy, geophysic and diagraphy and borehole from petroleum industry...
And it is stupid also because of fossils discoveries in a certain order...
But I am really interested to hear your explanation about the origin of all fishes with just mirco evolution and one couple of fish or whatever
MattleSystem 1 day ago
@recalibration ...and lots of logical fallacies, the faves being Correlation Does Not Imply Causation, Fallacy of the Single Cause & Incomplete Comparison Fallacy. I could tell you a lot more, but I don't debate with those who only cut & paste - don't actually debate - evade responding to all debunks made re the vid, and are neither civil nor objective. You and your insults (here & on my personal channel) are now on block & ignore. BYE!
LoricaLady 2 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@LoricaLady
"I don't even have to read the articles however, just the titles to demonstrate that 0 evidence whatsoever of evo is being shown."
Wow. So again, how are you not displaying wilful ignorance?
I'm sorry you're incapable of reading news articles that require no more than a high school student's vocabulary. As you are someone that clearly lacks a basic understanding of evolution, I consider you blocking me no great loss.
(1/1 LL01)
recalibration 2 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@LoricaLady
Interesting. Yet another thiest claiming knowledge of fallacies. Let's explore:
Even *if* evolution is incorrect, that does not validate a belief in a god. That would be a fallacy of false dichotomy. Stating that a god is real w/ out showing any actual evidence is known as argumentum ad divintas . Your blatant ignorance of the hard science is known as argumentum ad invincible. I need no false security of faith when I understand the scientific method.
(1/2 LL02)
recalibration 1 day ago
Comment removed
recalibration 1 day ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@LoricaLady
You are a romantic masqurarading as a rational & you are also an intellectual coward. It's called the simulacrum, not "the Matrix", you pop-culture programmed pinion. In closing:
"Gravity is a theory. It is also a fact. Anyone who disagrees is invited to jump out a ten story window." -- R. Dawkins
Prove him wrong. I look forward to the footage.
(2/2 LL02)
recalibration 1 day ago
Comment removed
LoricaLady 2 days ago
Comment removed
LoricaLady 2 days ago
If anyone makes a comment to me and you see no response it will be because once again I have been Expelled from an evolution promoting video - though I don't try to get anyone to believe in any Diety or the Bible and try to stick to science & logic.
LoricaLady 2 months ago
Cont. Little kids are told that fins & fish turned into feet and tetrapods & that scales & tetrapods turned into feathers & birds. Based on 0 "scientific process" and as usual with ANTI science since billions & tons of fossils - the actual evidence - show only 100% fins, fish, feet, tetrapods, birds or feathers, no in-betweeners anywhere on the planet earth. This is just the tip of the iceberg of how the public is deceived into thinking that evolution is using the "scientific process."
LoricaLady 2 months ago
Cont. Miller & Urey tried to prove it in the lab. The got l & r amino acids, the kind that kill life. They had no data to show how even the right kind of amino acids could lead to life since amino acids are not alive, and they got great peer reviews with little kids being deceived again, this time by being told that M & U had shown evidence for abiogenesis. Evolution was once again ANTI the scientific process since all data anywhere ever shows that life comes from life 100% of times. Cont.
LoricaLady 2 months ago
Evo-evangelists present a picture of evolution as being based on the scientific process. It is not. It is based on speculation presented as if it is actual data along with numerous logical fallacies. Some cases in point: The primal pond theory - mentioned while Miller was on the Colbert show by Colbert, and which Miller let slide by w/no comment as if it was something scientific, -is taught as scientific fact. often in the media Little kids see it in school library books on evo. Cont.
LoricaLady 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Should domesticated women fear “domestic” violence? Let us be persnickety in whom we worship as our lives, & our children's lives, are inconsequential to warmongers.
procommenter 3 months ago
The T.S.A. commands that we pretend to be a plane, by outstretching our arms, before we're permitted to board a plane. Corporate media lies by omission.
procommenter 3 months ago
For over 150 years religious zealots of Evodelusionism have been preaching this religion to our children. Now in the last 20 years we have DNA and in the last 10 the DNA evidence is overwhelming against any form of evolution. It is not possible by any known biological nor genetic function. DNA ONLY shows genetic degradation.
Evolution is a fraud. It is a typical mythological belief used to give some magical reasons to life.
GoodScienceForYou 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou Now in the last 20 years we have DNA and in the last 10 the DNA evidence is overwhelming against any form of evolution
That´s a crystal clear lie, and shows again you have no clue about real science. You have read a few things, realized its way too high for you to really understand it, so you took the little you did understand and made the rest up as you went along. DNA fully confirms evolution, its in fact one of its best proofs. For example read Jonathan Pritchards recent-->
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou findings on human evolution, Max Ingmans findings on mitochondrial DNA, Michael Hammers findings on interbreeding in early hominids and that´s just examples from human evolution. What about golenbergs findings about magnolias ? Or Roose´s and Gottliebs paper on genetic and biochemical consequences of polyploidy in tragopogon. Soltis paper on chloroplast DNA etc.etc.etc.
See that´s the difference between us, i actually have read and understood many scientific papers-->
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@MrRichardQED The papers on vegetation have nothing in common with multicellular creatures. However, there has never been any single celled creature, even vegetation, or algae based that has gained any new cells with new functions. Evolution is a fantasy myth. If you believe in fantasy myths, then you are not a scientist. Plant hybridization is just that.
GoodScienceForYou 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou However, there has never been any single celled creature, even vegetation, or algae based that has gained any new cells with new functions.
Perhaps you should actually read those papers, instead of just claiming you would. Lets take one very prominent example, nylon eating bacteria. They had several mutations after which they where able to process nylon. so it was a beneficial mutation, and your whole argument is debunked.
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
Oh and since we are at questions, how come all the dating methods we have give a complete sound picture, they all agree with each other, despite being so different in nature. How can that be if they are wrong ?
How come the science you call so wrong agrees with all the other sciences and is the base for so many technology that all works perfect ?
If your "science" is right how come nobody in the science world agrees with you ?
How come no technology/other stuff is based on it? STOP DODGING !
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@MrRichardQED Why don't you figure this out. It is really quite easy to understand. You have not studied this religion very long.
All of these systems of dating are based on the same logic. The problem is all of the out of chronology fossils, and the new fossils that get dated by one date and years later are made to fit. This is similar to taking a sledge hammer to make a picture puzzle piece fit. Why don't you know this? It is obvious.
GoodScienceForYou 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou your little opinion doesnt really matter here, since you cant back it up by any valid evidence ! All you have are a few baseless claims, that are solely based on your opinion.
btw quite a few inventions are based on evolution, and important discoveries in other fields. Its deeply connected to many other fields of science, that all confirm the claims of evolution.
Why don't you know this? It is obvious.
Because its a stupid propaganda lie you fell for in your simple-mindedness
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou When will you begin to understand that your claims are about as arrogant and baseless as you can get. Basically you claim you would know better then all the experts in every field of natural science. Yet you have the audacity to claim I would be illogical ? How is it logical that you know so much more then all the experts combined in so many subjects ? That are simply illogical and arrogant illusions ! Start to get a grip on reality and finally take your meds again !
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou to really know your way around in every subject,yet you not only claim you would be able to do that,you even claim you would be able to that better then any expert in those fields.To really describe that you would have to invent a whole new word, since arrogant is way to weak to really describe that kind of thinking.You are conceited,haughty,smug,supercilious,assumptive,swaggering and orgulous to think you would posses that kind of knowledge,nobody has that,its impossible !!!
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@MrRichardQED There are no other technologies based on this idea that simple life has evolved into complex. Name one? Name 1/2 of one even.
GoodScienceForYou 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou There are no other technologies based on this idea that simple life has evolved into complex
There are many : evolutionary programming, evolutionary algorithms, it helped make big breakthroughs in the development of artificial intelligence, it helps immensely in creating new vaccinations for illnesses that evolve quickly cause we can predict how it will evolve etc.etc.etc.
This is again an example to show how small your knowledge is
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@MrRichardQED Do you understand how a computer works? That is my first question? What is is that causes it to give results? Computer programs are not evidence of anything. Because the programmer determines how the game works. You can project any fantasy you want on a computer. Virus mutate because they adapt. They never evolve into multiple celled creatures with new cell functions. Why don't you know this?
GoodScienceForYou 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou Do you understand how a computer works? That is my first question? What is is that causes it to give results?
I am pretty sure i understand that better then you do, but obviously you have no idea what evolutionary programming is, or you wouldn´t give me an answer like this ^^ I guess you think it means to prove evolution through a computer program, but that has nothing to do with evolutionary programming, nothing at all. If you don´t know what i am talking about just ask, -->
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou instead of making up some bullshit, because you dont understand me.
"Making assumptions in anything involving science is bullshit."
How about you learn a bit about the scientific method. Then you would realize how stupid that comment was. Making educated assumptions is an integral part of the scientific process, and has lead to many great insights and breakthroughs. It is very important in scientific modelling and in developing hypotheses. How can YOU not know that ???
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@MrRichardQED "Oh and since we are at questions, how come all the dating methods we have give a complete sound picture, they all agree with each other, despite being so different in nature. How can that be if they are wrong ?" It is obvious and easy to understand. They are all based on the same assumptions. However, there is no way to date replacement fossils by any methods.
GoodScienceForYou 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou It is obvious and easy to understand. They are all based on the same assumptions.
How can they be, since they are so different ? How is say dendrochronology based on the same assumptions then say carbon dating ? Your claims dont even make sense.
However, there is no way to date replacement fossils by any methods.
Of course there is, for example there are methods that can tell you when soil has for the last time been exposed to sunlight. R.F. are btw only one type of many
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@MrRichardQED "If your "science" is right how come nobody in the science world agrees with you ?" You must not read much at all or you limit the scope of your learning to people who only agree with you. Many scientists say the same things that I teach. Why don't you know this?
GoodScienceForYou 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou You must not read much at all or you limit the scope of your learning to people who only agree with you. Many scientists say the same things that I teach.
Well not everything you teach is wrong, but quite a bit. You understand things from, draw wrong conclusion etc. But claim to be a genius. Also the things i criticize about your "teachings" are not supported by many real scientists, who are expert on the subject, that´s for sure !
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@MrRichardQED I make my living with real science. So, your religious bull shit is not science, because it has produced nothing, not even on advancement and it has actually retarded physics.
I have no idea what exactly you mean, but evolution has led to many breakthroughs,inventions,new technologies etc. YOUR ideas havent produced anything. Name ONE important invention,technology etc.anything in that direction that undeniably based on your work.JUST ONE ! You have nothing to show for, NOTHING !
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@MrRichardQED Your theoretical particle physics is just a way for people to make money spend lots of money pursuing ideas that make no sense at all and ultimately has no value except in killing people, otherwise governments would not spend money on it.
I have achieved enlightenment. The most important goal there is for a human. All other goals are worthless.
If you are not seeking the Truth, then you are only seeking to perpetuate yours and other's delusions. This is the not debatable.
GoodScienceForYou 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou D Your theoretical particle physics is just a way for people to make money spend lots of money pursuing ideas
Things like the computer, GPS , MRI scans, CT scans and many other important inventions had their base in theoretical physics, how do they not make sense ? They save lives on a daily basis and have changed the planet tremendously. You call that having no value ? Your argument makes no sense ! What have you achieved ? NOTHING ! You think you have achieved --->
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou enlightenment ? Perhaps endarkenment ^^ Why are you dodging my questions ? Are you too embarrassed to admit that you have achieved nothing with your pathetic attempt at doing science ?
Your mistake is your arrogance, you think you are so much smarter then everybody else, but you are really not ! You need to humble yourself and start to listen to others and learn from them, but somehow you too much of an egomaniac to do so ! You constantly make fantastic claims about your ->
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou your intellect and wisdom, but as soon as i request evidence like show achievements your science made you try to distract so you dont have to admit there is no evidence. The truths i am seeking have really a lot to show for, and have done so much for humanity. Now that are truths that really have value, yours on the other hand are empty truths it seems.
You cant prove anything you say! Where is your evidence ? Where is the backup for all the claims you constantly boast about ?
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@MrRichardQED You are more hung up on being accepted rather than finding the truth. It is obvious from your statements. I only want you to get free, but you want to remain a prisoner of faith and religious human garbage beliefs that have no absolute evidence. They teach you that absolute evidence is not necessary to "believe". WTF is wrong whit that?
Why are people so needy that they fall for this crap?
GoodScienceForYou 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou You are more hung up on being accepted rather than finding the truth.
In the first 3 comments you just talk out of your ass.You CANT judge what drives me,you don´t have the necessary information, so you simply make something up, as long as you can dodge to answer my questions. If you really think you could distract me from my questions that easy you are dumber then i thought:
WHERE IS YOU EVIDENCE? WHERE ARE THE ACHIEVEMENTS/INVENTIONS/BREAKTHROUGHS THAT BASE ON YOUR "SCIENCE"
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@MrRichardQED Only the ego needs to be accepted. I don't need any acceptance by anyone. I personally don't give a crap what you think. I am giving you a chance to get free from human faith and belief disguised as science. DNA ONLY shows genetic degradation. It does not show any form of evolution. DNA is absolute, not up for discussion. You are a degraded creature, and not evolving. Your kind is heading for extinction as all others along this path of only genetic degradation.
GoodScienceForYou 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou Only the ego needs to be accepted. I don't need any acceptance by anyone. I personally don't give a crap what you think. I am giving you a chance to get free from human faith and belief disguised as science.
Acceptance is what you dream about all the time. You dream that the real scientists finally accept your ideas. In your arrogance you think you know more and better then anybody else. Dont you see how illogical, cuckoo and crazed that is ? Science is a much too big field->
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@MrRichardQED I don't have the slightest fantasy that morons will understand real science. It is sad for me to see such limited awareness of the obvious. I really had some hopes for you to get free from human emotional garbage beliefs. The obvious isn't obvious until it becomes obvious.
GoodScienceForYou 3 months ago
@MrRichardQED "Acceptance is what you dream about all the time. You dream that the real scientists finally accept your ideas. In your arrogance you think you know more and better then anybody else. Dont you see how illogical, cuckoo and crazed that is ? Science is a much too big field->"
This is called projection. I have no need for anything. I have the Truth. I am free of all human emotional mental garbage. I teach people how to get free. That is what I do. You defend your enslavement.
GoodScienceForYou 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou I have the Truth. I am free of all human emotional mental garbage. I teach people how to get free.
You have what you think is the truth, without even understanding that something like absolute truth is an ideal that can never be reached. The truth is that you dream about being a real scientists, but cant manage top be accepted by them. So you try to find people here on youtube who are badly educated enough to believe you. I am defending real science against pseudo scientists
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou like you. I ask you again what has your science ever done for humanity ? What breakthroughs are based on it, what technologies, what inventions ? The truth is your "science" has achieved nothing except confusing a few morons who believed you. You claim to be free, but you are a slave to your ego. You dream about having followers, to finally have the feeling to have achieved something, since so far everything you have tried was a big failure, even your own family says that.
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou I just decided i could need a good laugh, so i watched a few of your videos, BWAHAHAHAHA,you are so making a fool of yourself ! For example your video on fossils QUOTE: You will notice the creature fell on existing dirt.The dirt wasnt made at the same time as the creature. Only a moron would make that assumption"
Only a moron wouldn´t know that what they test is the dirt directly around the bones which are the remnants of the muscles and organ,and thus OF COURSE are created->
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@MrRichardQED There are no remnants of muscles or tissue with replacement fossils. Why don't you know this? And when these morons find tissue they don't test it by the carbon dating methods, they use the age of the ground to make the creature seem older. Why don't you know this? Why are you so easy to believe this crap? Only the weak and easy, needy people will fall for faith and belief with no absolute evidence.
GoodScienceForYou 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou There are no remnants of muscles or tissue with replacement fossils.
I know its a lot to ask, but could you think logic for a minute ? What do you think happens to the muscular tissue? Over many years it rots and becomes soil, and when even more years pass that soil becomes stone, the stone right around the bones ! I mean did you think it would vanish into thin air or what ? Of course there is no tissue left, but the remnants of it are still there smartass !
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou And when these morons find tissue they don't test it by the carbon dating methods, they use the age of the ground to make the creature seem older.
Those people who dig out those bones are way smarter then you ever will be, and know more about science then you ever will, no matter how much books you read. The truth is you are jealous, you want to be them, but deep down you haven´t got what it takes ! That eats you up inside, that´s why you need to constantly attack them !!!
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou They are living your dream and you could explode that´s how jealous you are ! You would give everything to be more like them, or to be in their place. To be published in a renowned science mag would be the cherry on top for you, the ultimate confirmationa dream you cherrished so long you cant even remember when it began. But you also know you will never achieve that and that drives you insane ! THATS the real reason you feel the need to insult/attack etc. them all the time
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou shortly after the creature died.Only a moron could possibly overlook that and think muscles and organs just disappear in a rapid burial^^In other tests its not essential when the material was created,but when it was BURIED(OBVIOUSLY at the same time the creature got buried, the same goes for the minerals that create the fossil btw,their age isnt measured).So how about you find out how those tests you criticize actually work, instead of making stupid assumptions about it?
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@MrRichardQED You are a person not capable of thinking for yourself. My only objective is to get you free. Yet you represent the prison that has your mind behind bars and has used your need to be "worth something" against you. There is never any real absolute evidence for mystical beliefs. Yet you are forced to believe in order to be accepted.
Why don't you know this? What happened to you that cause you to fail yourself?
GoodScienceForYou 3 months ago
@MrRichardQED There is nothing "obvious" about assumptions based on faith and belief. Why don't you know this? I don't think you are stupid, just ill educated. Assumptions are not part of real science. Only a believer who has faith in this assumption would fall for this dating system of stupid retards.
GoodScienceForYou 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou There is nothing "obvious" about assumptions based on faith and belief
The conclusions i called obvious where no assumptions based on faith, they where crystallclear logic like that a creature and the earth directly around it get buried at the same time. It cant happen any other way despite the creature gets burried, and much later doug out and burried again, BUT there are ways to exclude that for example by comparing the minerals the body absorbed with the minerals around it
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@MrRichardQED Do you even understand basic science and logic? I don't think so. It is utterly illogical to make any assumptions in science. Dating methods are made totally on assumptions. How did you get like this? It may sound logical to a person who handed over reasoning to brainwashing, but to ANY objective observer it is religious crap you believe in.
Do you even know what a replacement fossil is?
GoodScienceForYou 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou It is utterly illogical to make any assumptions in science. Dating methods are made totally on assumptions.
First of all its utter bullshit to claim making assumptions in science would be illogical, this argument is illogical! Its also utter bullshit to claim that the dating methods would be based on assumptions. For quite a few we have an impressive amount of evidence, and those can be used to check the rest of them for validity, so your whole claim is debunked !!!
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@MrRichardQED Making assumptions in anything involving science is bullshit. It is how religious human emotional garbage is allowed to propagate in these pseudo science classes. Why don't you know this?
In real science we look at and FOR the absolutely irrefutable evidence first. We only seek that first. Once you find it the rest is easy, because it all fits with that evidence. When scientists ignore a way to look at a premise it is because they are afraid to look. Thats HEMG faith in action.
GoodScienceForYou 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou In real science we look at and FOR the absolutely irrefutable evidence first. We only seek that first
If you really knew anything about how science works in the real world you would know that absolute evidence does NOT exist. Its one of the first things you learn, any first year student in any natural science should know that. Its the reason theories can be overturned and replaced with new theories. That´s philosophy in action.How can you not know that ? Don´t you read books ?
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou Do you even understand basic science and logic?
Its becoming quite obvious that you have trouble to understand science ! I have the evidence on my side, i have the experiments on my side, i have the experts on my side, i have logic and reason on my side etc. ! You can claim as often as you want that evolution would be a religion, that doesnt make it any less dumb ! Evolution fulfills the same academic standards that any science does, and all the experts confirm that, so -->
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@MrRichardQED All evidence is on my side. The side of objective reality. I am against all faith & belief in science. All absolute evidence we have in DNA only shows genetic loss and genetic degradation. You must realize that the "earth is flat' fulfills some academic standard also. It took a long time to get rid of that and will take a long time to get rid of evolution because it is what people base their lives on, like the earth is flat people did.
GoodScienceForYou 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou All evidence is on my side. The side of objective reality. I am against all faith & belief in science. All absolute evidence we have in DNA only shows genetic loss and genetic degradation.
You are either worse informed then i thought, or you are lying cause you cant admit to be wrong^^Can you back this statements up with real experts,real experiments,from reputable sources ? I highly doubt it,but even if you find 1 or 2 sources,I find 10 for each of yours that debunks you !
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@MrRichardQED There is ABSOLUTELY no way to date fossils that are completely destroyed and replaced by the minerals around them. PERIOD. end of discussion. What else do you have besides religious beliefs?
GoodScienceForYou 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou There is ABSOLUTELY no way to date fossils that are completely destroyed and replaced by the minerals around them.
YOU MORON ! That´s NOT what happens. SOME of the minerals in the bone wander out and are replaced by others from the rock. Its NOT completely destroyed, for example the carbon DOESNT get replaced, that´s why you can carbon date you idiot ! Boy and you think you have the knowledge to explain the process to others, you don´t even get the basics,PATHETIC !!!!!
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@MrRichardQED I find it funny that you talk about carbon dating to dodge the way that replacement fossils are dated. Do you know that even when they find tissue they don't date it with carbon dating, because they cannot fit the specimen into this religion. They date it with the minerals around it, strata and such all based on the same religious faith based assumptions.
GoodScienceForYou 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou Do you know that even when they find tissue they don't date it with carbon dating, because they cannot fit the specimen into this religion. They date it with the minerals around it, strata and such all based on the same religious faith based assumptions.
This all just proves you have no idea what you are talking about ! I guess the reason why i mentioned carbon dating was to high for you. A good method are some luminescence methods, with those you can prove when the sediments
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou where the last time exposed to sunlight. It was very successfully used for the homo florensis, a find a few years ago that has caused worldwide attention, they also used radio carbon dating here. That dig is also very good evidence that real scientists are ready to change their opinion if the evidence calls for it, contrary to your conspiracy claims, utterly debunking them. Real scientists dont ignore dates or change them because they dont fit in their opinion !!!!!
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@MrRichardQED Why was the data rejected so fiercely as the 6.1 million year old up right human with stronger straighter bones and exactly the same angle on the femur to the pelvis? Its evidence of a superior human that we've degenerated from. Why is the Herto rejected? Larger brain capacity from 150K yrs ago? These religious people will not accept the obvious. Its not popular to realize that humans are destroying, not only the earth, but also the human genome, by speeding up degeneration.
GoodScienceForYou 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou and can name them to back up what i say. You just make claims and use unclear insinuations that science would support your position. If asked for actual evidence you either ignore it or find some excuse.
Larger brain capacity from 150K yrs ago?
Since when does brain size equal intelligence ? Its merely one factor among many, as you should know. So this argument just shows AGAIN you dont really understand this.As for the superhuman, bring your evidence, and i will look at it.
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@MrRichardQED DNA is not up for debate. It only shows genetic degradation in all creatures. Period. Humans are degraded and degrading faster than ever with all the mutagens humans are now living with and promoting as a way of life. Human extinction is where we are heading.
Anyone who believes in the mythology of evolution is extremely retarded.
GoodScienceForYou 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@GoodScienceForYou DNA is not up for debate.It only shows genetic degradation in all creatures.Period
Well then it should be easy to prove,dont you think?So show me your sources and evidence,if you have nothing at least admit you made that up!
Humans are degraded and degrading faster than ever with
With humans that could be the case,but for very different reasons then what you claim.Humans have nearly stopped natural selection through their modern lifestyle with medicine,no predators etc.etc.
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou So you cant present any evidence for any of your claims it seems,while i can present evidence and experts that confirm what i say So its really about time to either back up what you say or admit that your claims are bullshit! We are talking about science here,and science rests on evidence.You have high expectation when my evidence is concerned,so how about you fulfill those expectation for your own claims? Or do you have 2 different standards?That would make you a hypocrite!
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@MrRichardQED I have repeatedly presented lots of peer reviewed data over on the (google it) "Neutral Evolution Forum". It is common knowledge. I explain in great detail there.
I have read over 27200 papers on evolution. I posted the pertinent ones over on the forum.
GoodScienceForYou 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou I have repeatedly presented lots of peer reviewed data over on the (google it) "Neutral Evolution Forum".
I was talking about evidence here, you presented NOTHING ! You couldnt answer a single question, you couldnt back up a single claim you made. I have backup for my claims, and also presented some. That you have read 27200 papers is a lie, everybody who can perform basi math can see that. Lets divide it by 40 and we have 680, so you would have to read roughly 2 per day
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@MrRichardQED Ego, and faith in crap pseudo science is not reality. Magical bull shit is not science. There are no magical mutations or magical biological mechanisms for evolution. There is only genetic loss as time goes on. You are perfect example of a genetic lineage that has lost reasonableness and traded it for fantasy, because the truth is too difficult for retards to understand.
I read three today and four yesterday. There are over 90,000 peer papers on gene loss alone.
GoodScienceForYou 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou Ego, and faith in crap pseudo science is not reality
Exactly, which is why you should start to work on your ego and stop claiming your bullshit pseudoscience. You claim you have evidence, you claim you have papers, so how come you aren´t able to show them here for everybody to see? Because you know its bullshit, so you want to have the discussion in your forum, where you can just delete and change what you don´t like. You are a pathological liar, as can many people confirm.
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou I mean you have the audacity to criticize me for my ego, when you are the who declares himself a genius, think you are smarter then most scientists, know more about their fields etc. You have lost touch with reality ! I could mathematically proof that its impossible that you have read as many papers as you claim, yet you insist on those completely made up and impossible claims.
You are a typical example oif a psychological phenomenon, that people unknowingly an-->
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@MrRichardQED I don't declare myself a genius. I am one. It is one of those obvious things. It is a shame that you think it is ego to express the obvious. It is impossible for you to be as stupid as you seem, but it is obvious. You are in bondage to what you believe. You are a slave to ignorance, ideology, and you think you are a free thinker. WTF?
GoodScienceForYou 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou I don't declare myself a genius. I am one. It is one of those obvious things. It is a shame that you think it is ego to express the obvious
OF COURSE you do ! You are the one who makes that claim, and nobody else. It´s anything but obvious, or i wouldn´t have brought it up ! Only an egomaniac like you makes claims that. A real genius is declared one by his colleagues or other people, you declare yourself to be one, that´s pure ego, and nothing else !!! As soon as anyone starts
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou that you are a genius you start throwing a fit. You insult and attack the person who dares to doubt you. How else can you call that but pure ego ? Those claims about your intelligence are so important to you, that you have to repeat them again and again, cause you fear someone might not have read it the first 10 times ^^ That´s a hardcore ego trip and nothing else !!!
I know i am not stupid, and i know quite a few geniuses personally, NONE of them feels the need to tell -->
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou to constantly tell others that they are a genius. They know they don´t need to. Others will find out themselves, or they won´t, it doesnt matter to them. A real genius has enough confidence that it doesnt matter to him if others realize that they are a genius or not.
But your self esteem is so low you constantly feel the need to make such claims as you having a very high IQ, you being a genius, that you have read over 27.000 papers etc.etc.etc. All that shows you are a very
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou a very insecure person who constantly needs this acknowledgement from other people. If you don´t get it from someone, like me here, you have to make up reasons why that is the case. You make up claims about the other one being too stupid to see your genius, you attack the other person personally, without having any base for it etc.etc.etc. Those are just excuses that make it easier for you to deal with that rejection.
Its also the reason you make this videos,and that forum->
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou You search for people who acknowledge you, with whom you can build a teacher/student relationship, so you can feel above them. You try to force this relationship on anybody you discuss with. You dont want to discuss eye to eye. It gives you a feeling of importance, that you lack in real life cause everything you tried in rl failed miserably.
A real genius wouldnt need all these crutches. He would get more then enough approval and confirmation in real life. So much for that^^
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@MrRichardQED A person who reads regularly, can read complex pages in a couple of minutes. Some can read even more than that. If you are not capable of reading that fast, it is because you are not capable of reading that fast.
GoodScienceForYou 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou A person who reads regularly, can read complex pages in a couple of minutes.
I know, i am able to read that fast, no matter how complex the matter is. I am also able to skim through a text and still get all the important information from it. But that´s not the point. You claim to be an expert on many subjects, so you would have to read papers on many subjects. If you claim to have read over 27.000 papers on evolution alone, i must ask myself what about all those other -->
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@MrRichardQED I suggest that you goto evolutionforum (dot) info and read. I just had a long discussion with a scientist. He was polite and is not able to respond any longer.
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou fields where you also claim to be an expert ? Obviously you have to read a lot of papers on those subjects as well, to be an expert. Then before you can even start to read scientific papers and understand them you have to get all that basic knowledge in your head. If you combine all that, you see that your claims are impossible !!!
Plus if you really would read scientific papers on a regular basis you would know that just reading the paper alone is not sufficient, you also->
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou have to check out/read something else.I bet you have no idea what i am talking about, which shows you aren´t really that familiar with scientific papers.If you would know what i am talking about you would have mentioned that already yourself. I give you one hint, it needs a lot more time, then reading the paper itself
"You are in bondage to what you believe"
Nonsense,i changed my view on things more often then i can count,if new evidence demands i change my view i do so-->
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou quite happily.I find it quite thrilling if that happens,and i love it.Especially if the new evidence poses way more questions then answers like the dark flow a few years ago,or dark energy,or dark matter.
EVERY good scientist loves riddles like that, that can change our view of the world extremely,like quantum mechanics did, to give you an example. In physics we live in exciting times right now;) Many questions, and hardly any answers, but i guess that out of your expertise^^
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MrRichardQED Evolution: This magical, religious, idea that by magical processes and mystical causes, creatures have gained in features, become more complex, and have new gene functions that were not ever in the genetic make up of the original of the species.
Magical thinking; "I will drive my car into a wall and smash it about 45KMPH. Then I will drive it backwards into the same wall it it will be perfect again." This is the Evotard philosophy.
GoodScienceForYou 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou This is the Evotard philosophy.
Actually its nothing but your straw man argument, which you know very well.
"There are over 4600 genetic defects in the human genome according to"
So what? :
1. most of them are recessive
2. I already explained that humans are a pretty special case, since they nearly stopped natural selection by getting rid of most predators that could be dangerous to us and through modern medicine and other perks of our modern lifestyle
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MrRichardQED "2. I already explained that humans are a pretty special case, since they nearly stopped natural selection by getting rid of most predators that could be dangerous to us and through modern medicine and other perks of our modern lifestyle" That is a religious statement that has absolutely no evidence. Religious slogans are not science.
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou Your argument was already debunked by the nylon-eating bacteria, but you care to ignore that. I named also a lot of other examples , which you also ignore. Every one of them debunks your argument that evolution doesn´t exist only degradation. As evidence you claim i just need top read your 90.000 papers, which is obviously impossible. You hide behind massive amount of data, pathetic ! If all that data would really support you:
1. evolution wouldnt be the base of modern biology
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@MrRichardQED The nylon eating bacteria has never evolved, it still is a single cell. You really need to read the Neutral Evolution Forum. I have thousands upon thousands of peer data for you to read.
Evolution is not science. It is a religion.
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou The nylon eating bacteria has never evolved, it still is a single cell.
What does that have to do with anything ? Of course it has evolved, it has improved itself, period. You claim that organisms couldn´t improve via evolution, but this organism has improved through evolution, so your argument is debunked. I guess you don´t really understand what evolution actually means ^^ THIS is evolution, if you like it or not, it fulfills all criteria !
MrRichardQED 2 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou any longer
2. You could, just like i did, name many examples ,but all you presented was the genetic defects in humans. That neither proves that they get more, or that that number is significant anyhow.
3. The support for the ToE wouldn´t be above 99% !
btw i am still waiting for evidence for your superhuman
I am still waiting for a better explanation then evolution etc.etc.
EVERY time i have you with the back t the wall, you simply ignore my comments, how PATHETIC !!!!!
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@MrRichardQED You are so stupid. What a waste of time and a waste of a human life. In order to show evolution, you must show 51% net positive mutations that exist in DNA. Humans have over 4600 genetic defects. The "odds" of you having a genetic defect that will cause you to go to the hospital or doctor because of a genetic defect is 100% base on empirical data from science. There is no evolution and you are evidence of genetic degradation. Only weak willed lemmings believe in evolution.
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou You are so stupid. What a waste of time and a waste of a human life
Oh why thank you ^^ When morons like you start attacking my intelligence i know they stand with the back to the wall and have run our of real arguments ^^ So ad hominems is all the have left ! PATHETIC !!!
"In order to show evolution, you must show 51% net positive mutations that exist in DNA. "
Says who ? This must be the most stupid argument you used so far ^^ EVERY improvement is evolution, you moron !
MrRichardQED 2 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou as long as it is hereditary !!! You also need to define positive. You see things that are negative now could be positive or neutral when the environment changes. or when other mutations crop up that work toget5her with this negative mutation and suddenly several negative mutations have a positive effect working together. WHY DON´T YOU KNOW THIS ? It´s funny how you desperately try to attack me on a personal level, cause you more and more realize how superior my knowledge -->
MrRichardQED 2 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou Then you completely forgot the effects of natural selection.So lets say you have 3 times as much negative mutations as you have positive ones,then natural selection can&will still see to it that the negative ones are discarded,while the positive ones are handed on from generation to generation.WHY DON´T YOU KNOW THIS???This is evolution 101!!!
"because of a genetic defect is 100% base on empirical data from science"
Got a source for that? Dont even try to say evolution forum->
MrRichardQED 2 months ago
@MrRichardQED The Neutral Evolution Forum has posted over 100 articles from peer review and links to over 110,000 articles on gene loss in evolution, and 90,000 on the pubmed site on gene loss. I also posted all the data on human 4600 defects causing genetic diseases showing that all humans are genetically degraded from mutations. You are lazy.
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou The Neutral Evolution Forum has posted over 100 articles from peer review and links to over 110,000 articles on gene loss in evolution, and 90,000 on the pubmed site on gene loss
And AGAIN you try your oldest trick top drown me in data, to disguise the fact you really have no sources for your claims. How can you not realize i don´t fall for this old trick ? I told you often enough. If you really had sources that support you you would point me to an exact source, instead you
MrRichardQED 2 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou do something completely unscientific and vaguely point to hundreds of articles, very well knowing i cant check them all to debunk/verify your claim. That means you have no source ! I am still waiting for a single source for any of your claims. I could verify my claims by exactly pointing you to an article, and telling you where in the article you will find it. THAT´S how its done in real science,HOW CAN YOU NOT KNOW THAT ????? Because you don´t get your info from real papers^^
MrRichardQED 2 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou I also posted all the data on human 4600 defects causing genetic diseases
For which you still lack a real source that supports your claims, like you lack support for all your claims ! You see my claims are supported like QUOTE:"Max Ingmans findings on mitochondrial DNA, Michael Hammers findings on interbreeding in early hominids " Now THATS the least you need to do to support your claims, realize the big difference ? I named specific papers by specific experts, so you have ->
MrRichardQED 2 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou the possibility to check those papers for yourself and see for yourself they debunk your claims. What you do is pointing vaguely at 90.000 papers and claiming somewhere in there would be something to support you, THAT´S ABSURD AND YOU KNOW IT !!!! Its also a lie !!! Had you really evidence in there , you would have directly pointed me at the evidence, and not vaguely claimed it would be in there. Its really pathetic that you still try that despite the fact i don´t buy it-->
MrRichardQED 2 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou but i guess you don´t find a face saving way out of this. You have no possibility to point me directly at ONE article, since you have no idea where to find anything that supports you (after all you never read those articles) so you have to keep this pathetic and embarrassing charade up, although i never believed your lies about them supporting you. I guess you could impress simpler minds with this scam, but not me. Show me concrete examples, or STFU !!! No matter how often-->
MrRichardQED 2 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou . You are lazy.
Yea sure, its very lazy of me not to read all those 110.000 articles on evolution, and the 90.000 on the pubmed^^ Do you have completely lost touch with reality ? YOU are the lazy one,cause you dont point me to specific articles that confirm you,but instead just lazy& vaguely point at all of them and say:"its somewhere in there" NOW THATS LAZY !!!! Its also a lie,i have read enough papers to know that, and i really read them, not just claim to have read them^^
MrRichardQED 2 months ago
@MrRichardQED lemming
A member of a crowd with no originality or voice of his own. One who speaks or repeats only what he has been told.
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@GoodScienceForYou
but can you explain Plant speciation or AB resistance without using evolution theory?
you are not going to deny that random mutations and natural selection are fact, are you?
transtlantic 2 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou To name a source you have to say EXACTLY where to find it, and not just point to thousands of papers and claim the answer would be somewhere in there. That´s simply unbelievable ! If you have a source you are able to point out exactly where to find it !
"I have thousands upon thousands of peer data for you to read."
Then why aren´t you able to name exact examples, that are quick to find and check ? This is completely implausible ! I think you are lying !!!!!
MrRichardQED 2 months ago
@MrRichardQED There are over 4600 genetic defects in the human genome according to "the human genome project" where they got a huge gov. grant because they promised cures for diseases from this. All they did was find all the defects. Evolution is not possible from the data we have.
GoodScienceForYou 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou and you claim to rerad a lot on other sciences as well. Thats completely unrealistic. Even if we say you read most papers on evolution, and on the other fields you read alltogether just half tzhe amount of papers we would still be at 3 per day, without ever having a day off. I mean a paper can have more then a hundred pages in some cases. If you trxy to lie at least make up lies that are realistic/believable, and not stuff only a moron would believe
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@MrRichardQED goto pubmed and look up this modern mutagen from drugs. Humans have more ways to destroy their genome in the name of "good".22030963
GoodScienceForYou 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou So back up your claims,present your evidence,present papers that support your ideas etc.I mean you don´t make your own experiments,do you? So you should be able to present experts that support your ideas,or at least data that supports it like experiments etc.You act like your claims would be common knowledge,so present your sources,experts etc
"Anyone who believes in the mythology of evolution is extremely retarded"
Anyone who makes claims,he cant back up,is extremely retarded
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou Now i am still waiting for your evidence. If you really could back upo your claims you would have done so by now, but instead you show off and find excuses. That makes it quite obvious you donmt have any evidence, you dont have any experts backing you up. You made it up, just like the 27200 papers (at least you dont claim 272.000 as you have done before on severall occasions ^^)
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@MrRichardQED I have never claimed anything other than the truth on my study. I told you before, over on the "Neutral Evolution Forum" I put many peer reviewed evidence on how genetics really works. There are over 89000 papers just on gene loss on one medical site. All of humanities "ills" are related to gene loss, DNA showing screwed up genes.
GoodScienceForYou 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou and unwillingly describe themselves when they want to describe others. Its to funny how your description of me fits on you without you realizing it ^^
So, your main argument is debunked, lets we what you have next ^^ btw show some evidence, i mean i can do so, so can you, instead of claiming the age old excuse "my evidence is somewhere else". I mean come on, if you really read all those papers it should be easy to name a few that support you. I could do so after all.
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@MrRichardQED You are very lazy, weak and afraid to look at my evidence. It is base on, now, over 90,000 peer reviewed documents on PubMed. You can see the links over on "The Neutral Evolution Forum".
I posted about 40 of them on Youtube videos but they rapidly get lost in all the forum nazis posting. Far better to keep them fresh on the forum.
GoodScienceForYou 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou You are very lazy, weak and afraid to look at my evidence
YOU are the lazy one here ! I presented my evidence HERE, so why cant you ? I mean i hardly have the time to read 90.000 papers, and i doubt anyone else has ! But if what you say is true, how come evolution is still the accepted theory ? It looks like you just try an old trick, bury your opponent in paper, and claim the evidence would be in there. If you have read them , and the evidence is in there, you would be able->
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou to tell me here and now the evidence, and then link the exact paper(s) you are talking about, and tell me where in the paper i would find it. THAT´S how a scientific discussion works, not by saying the evidence is somewhere in these 90.000 papers ^^ I mean come on, we both know that´s just an excuse, so stop the acting ^^ I also made it very clear why I wont discuss with you somewhere where you are in total control of everything ! btw how could you know all 90.000 support--->
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou you when you have read "only" roughly 27.000 ? That alone shows your claims are very fishy/suspicious. AGAIN I can present my evidence here, with the help of a few links, that aren´t that much to read for someone who claims to read as much as you do ;)How come you cant present your evidence here in your own words, with links to specific papers or parts of them who support you? If you really read that much that shouldnt be any problem for you,yet you find excuses all the time !
MrRichardQED 3 months ago
@MrRichardQED We have found from 40,000 years ago larger brain capacity and taller humans. Why don't you know this? Could it be they don't discuss real evidence in the Evotard classroom?
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou We have found from 40,000 years ago larger brain capacity and taller humans. Why don't you know this?
I DO know this, stop constantly implying i wouldn´t know certain things. I even already answered this argument, so it6s quite stupid to claim i wouldn´t know this ^^ But larger capacity doesnt necessarily mean bigger intelligence, why don´t YOU know this ? If only size would matter the blue whale would be the most intelligent life form ^^ This IS discussed in the classroom ;)
MrRichardQED 2 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou why don´t YOU know this?Other factors are also important for intelligence like how the brain is folded.One if the most important factors for intelligence is the cerebral cortex of the brain,why don´t YOU know this?For someone who is as arrogant as you are you have quite many holes in your knowledge^^You really should stop let your ego run wild,or you make a complete fool of yourself !!! You also should stop make unbased assumptions of what is taught in class and what isn´t !!!
MrRichardQED 2 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou and my arguments are.So since you cant beat me there,and are with the back to the wall,you try to attack me personally,but you don´t realize that all you achieve with that is making a fool of yourself;)
I mean so far all of your arguments got debunked ! All you have left is finding excuses like:
"In order to show evolution,you must show 51%net positive mutations that exist in DNA"
Which is utter bullshit ! First of all most mutations are NEUTRAL, not positive or negative !!!
MrRichardQED 2 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou You don´t have any sources ! You simply hope by burying me in papers you can hide that they don´t support you, cause you know i cant check them all ! If they really do, you could name EXACT EXAMPLES ! I am still waiting for a single one !!! The more you try this tactic the less believable you are !!!!! Just point me to a real, scientific paper that supports you. ONE, not thousands. I also don´t want to read them in your forum, but from your original source. I simply don´t-->
MrRichardQED 2 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou trust you. You tend to change things so you look better, so I prefer to read them from the original source, to make sure you didn´t change things to your benefit !!! You know its funny, i asked you thins many times already, but you still couldn´t name a single paper that supports anything you say. Funny, since you claim there are thousands one should think you could name examples^^ The fact that you couldnt name a single one shows you are lying !!!
MrRichardQED 2 months ago
@MrRichardQED Brain size (brain capacity) is one of the standard ideas of your Evotard religion.
The depressed skull of the hominids are their idea that we expanded our brain capacity from those depressions. However, the opposite is true. The genetic degradation caused by mutagens in the hominids caused, not only depressed skulls and weakened bones, but extinction.
Extinction is the net result of your evolution.
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou Brain size (brain capacity) is one of the standard ideas of your Evotard religion.
1. that you think you could better judge if evolution is scientific or not then the experts on the subject shows how arrogant you really are. Pure ego running wild !
2. If you had really read as much papers as you claim you would see that brain size is just one of a few factors. That you don´t know that shows that in reality you get your info from popular science mags that (over)simplify things
MrRichardQED 2 months ago
@MrRichardQED 1/ I learned very quickly that there are no experts in a field with no real evidence. That all the evidence based on interpretation from faith and belief. Therefore your faith in pseudo science is based on some ridiculous emotionally driven need you have.
With my intelligence it really is difficult to realize how stupid a person has to be to not see what is obvious.
Using complexity as an argument is not a rational one.
Therere 4600 genetic defects in humans & more each day.
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@GoodScienceForYou With my intelligence it really is difficult to realize how stupid a person has to be to not see what is obvious.
I believe you that you are too stupid to understand these things, you have proven it often enough. You do not even get that there is no absolute evidence. You also claim you could read 800 papers within a week. Using such easy to see through lies is a sure sign of a low intellect, so is constantly debunking yourself ^^ GET HELP !
MrRichardQED 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@GoodScienceForYou teacher. You don´t become someones teacher by forcing yourself unto him !!! You are also neither qualified nor equipped to teach anybody, with your mental state. So what gave you the impression you would be my teacher ? Did i ever ask you to teach me anything ? I tried to discuss with you eye to eye, but due to your delusions of grandeur you see yourself above everybody else, which is completely absurd. You think you are an expert in almost all fields of natural science-->
MrRichardQED 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@GoodScienceForYou which is impossible due to the vast amounts of knowledge we have accumulated by now. It´s a typical sign for your kind of mental illness that you claim impossible things, like reading 800 science papers in a week, without realizing how absurd your claims really are. In a way you realize these things, but you can´t admit that, not even to yourself.But when asked to describe others, you often describe yourself instead without realizing it, equipping the other person with those->
MrRichardQED 2 months ago
There are two things that exist: 1/ The Truth. 2/ BS, Human Emotional Mental Garbage. Sometimes retarded believers prop up thier fables, and myths with some truth. It is a common brainwashing technique.
Get free from faith based "pseudo science".
/watch?v=spuZtAa80qI
/watch?v=emPINOUlfnE
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou I repeat my question : what gave you the impression to be my teacher ? Did i ever ask you to teach me anything ? Did I ever say : i accept you as my teacher or anything like that ? I tried to have an eye to eye discussion with you, but your arrogance makes that nearly impossible. You constantly think you are above everybody else. AGAIN that are delusion of grandeur !!!! You need to finally recognize your problem to solve it. There is a reason so many people laugh about you !!!
MrRichardQED 2 months ago