Debate on evolution and creationism in schools at the Romanian National Television

This is a short fragment from a debate on national television regarding teaching of creationism at science classes in Romania.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• evolution
• creationism
• Romanian
• Humanist
• Association
• education

[mhrby1985]

@AthosAmo I mean, you don't even do a logical fallacy, you merely make a claim without proding an argument, that is very weak.

But alright, you said you had enough of me, that is fine, I also feel already I had enough of you, there is a limit to the take of stupidity I can handle, althrough I will say you are one of the better formulated people on here who take a stance against Evolutionary Theory

[mhrby1985]

@AthosAmo Well, keep telling yourself that I am the one bringing up fallacies.

You do nothing but claim my arguments and data is invalid, without providing reasons, sources or even arguments against them.

Common Descent is proven by the nearly complete fossile record of several species lineage, combined with DNA analysis and many other different methods which all shows the same pattern to be true.

And you call the definition of species subjective, providing no reasons for it being so

[AthosAmo]

@mhrby1985 You implied that I am ignorant but neither proved yourself right, nor proved me wrong. All you've done is fallacies like begging the question. You are just another clueless parrot of the establishment and its sheeple.

[AthosAmo]

@mhrby1985 "I can define species, what about asking me that before you claim I can't?" I never claimed you can't define species. Strawman. "If two population groups cannot breed with each other, they are distinct species." -According to one of the subjective definitions. Opinions.

"Disproving common descent cannot be disproved, true, because it is a fact" Begging the question... YET AGAIN. You are just fallacy after fallacy. A waste of time. I'm done with you after today.

[mhrby1985]

@mhrby1985 Furthermore, I did not ad hominem you, I did not attack you personally, I adressed your argument and merely pointed out the fact it was an argument from ignorance and that your argument clearly lacked a basic understanding of scientific method or knowledge about the modern synthesis of evolution, which is not attacking you, but your arguments validity, but I guess I shouldn't be surprised if you cannot seperate the two, AthosAmo

[mhrby1985]

@mhrby1985 (continued) with how the diversity of life came about, which means the mechanisms of natural seleciton, sexual selection and so forth, which drives the diversity of life and has produced the lifeforms we see today, if the theory is correct, which all evidence indicates it is.

That humans and apes share a common ancestor is not up for debate, it is a fact. How the common ancestor became two species, that is theory

[mhrby1985]

@AthosAmo The theory of Evolution only deals with how evolution happened, because Evolution is a fact.

It is not really hard to grasp if you bother researching the subject.

Take gravity: An object falling down when released without any suspension to hold it up until it hits something that can hold it up, is a fact. The theory of gravity concerns itself with why that fact is.

Life evolved and living species share common ancestory, that is a fact. Theory of evolution merely deals with how(cont)

[mhrby1985]

@AthosAmo I can define species, what about asking me that before you claim I can't?

You can seperate living entities into species by the population groups ability to interbred with viable off-spring as the result.

If two population groups cannot breed with each other, they are distinct species.

And you can disprove Evolutionary Theory, as far as the mechanics by which Evolution happened.

Disproving common descent cannot be disproved, true, because it is a fact

[AthosAmo]

@mhrby1985 No one can define species objectively. Once more you beg the question that speciation has been observed. It's just an opinion. If it were fact, you'd have an objective definition of species to be able to say that one species is now another. "and by the way, a fly becoming a "non-fly" would disprove evolution." Common descent would not be disproved. The backbone of your myth is unfalsifiable. It is not even a theory because it can't be proven wrong. I notice you ad hominem. Goodie.

[mhrby1985]

@AthosAmo Then give a clear working definition of the word "kind" that can be used scientifically, as all others I have seen present your argument (from ignorance) has failed to be able to even define what "kind" means.

Speciation has been observed countless times, and by the way, a fly becoming a "non-fly" would disprove evolution.

Maybe you should actually try and read and learn about a subject before you take a stance against it?

Evolution is fact.

Creationism is demonstrably false