Darwinist LEAPS and HALLUCINATIONS

Darwinists see supposed "proofs" BECAUSE THEIR PRE-BIAS MAKES THEM SEE THINGS, FROM THEIR A PRIORI PARADIGMS AND PREJUDICES........
and also confusing simple adaptations and variations within species and family types for "evolution".
With the same unproven gas of "little changes over time lead to big macro changes"....
the problem is that that's not empirical observable science, but neurotic speculation and rag hypothesis.
But regardless, the empirical observable facts show that no matter how many mutations, generations, and adaptations, or variations...
cats remain cats,
birds remain birds,
bacteria remain bacteria,
and the same for polar bears and fruit flies...
The DNA barrier at a certain point simply cannot be breached. Families remain constant.
but no matter, either by inventing "transitional forms" in a full-of-holes-and-blanks fossil record, or seeing "common ancestor" because of things like proteins....they believe what they want to believe, and see things that are not really there, in their exaggerations and hallucinations...

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Darwinism
• Richard
• Dawkins
• Variations
• Adaptations
• Evolution
• Leaps

[Xsuprio]

I swear... sometimes I can't tell if these people are being cynical. No observable science, but neurotic speculation...? That's a joke, right?

[sweetmikser]

@Xsuprio no...what Darwinist dumbbells hold up as "observable" proof for their myths is what's a "joke". (The straw-men like errrgg "E. Coli" or "Moths" etc). That you don't understand the point is a "joke". Listen to the whole video again if you have to. There's ZERO testable observable "proof" for "ape-men ancestors" or "fish ancestry of humans". This has even been ADMITTED by Darwinists. Their cop-out is: "well you can't do a 10 million year experiment...so of course you don't see it now."

[Xsuprio]

@sweetmikser =] K, bud.

[sweetmikser]

@Xsuprio that jerky infantile brain-dead response is NO surprise, kid. I mean, you're the same moron that thinks we have "observable proof" for ape-men myths and "fish ancestors". Dr Patterson, paleontologist (and Darwinist):

"Is Archaeopteryx the ancestor of all birds?  Perhaps yes, perhaps no. It is easy enough to make up stories of how one form gave rise to another. But such stories are not part of science, for there is no way of putting them to the test."

[beatonm198]

@sweetmikser This is pitiful. Evolution is a proven, observable fact. Get over it, man.

[sweetmikser]

@beatonm198 what's "pitiful" is your sad silly and drone-ish repeated junk of "errggh, evolution is proven observable fact" when you have NO "proof" for saying that, except the old straw-men and pathetic desperate examples like "drug-resistant bacteria" or variations WITHIN species or types, (did you even see the whole video here, idiot?) There's NO "observable" anything for "ape-men" myths. Speculation is NOT "science". Neither is force-fitting scattered meager fossils, for agendas.

[sweetmikser]

@beatonm198 There's NO "observable" anything for "ape-men" myths. Speculation is NOT "science". Neither is force-fitting scattered meager fossils, for agendas. What's "pitiful" is your sad silly and drone-ish repeated junk of "errggh, evolution is proven observable fact" when you have NO "proof" for saying that, except the old straw-men and pathetic desperate examples like "drug-resistant bacteria" or variations WITHIN species or types. lol... Did you even see the whole video here?

[LamStock]

there's no "observable proof" of evolution? where is the "observable proof" that there is a god, or there was a jesus or any of that? "exaggerations and hallucinations"... that would be you guys, making up fairytales to explain life.

[Inferno41]

I'm curious if you can outline a biochemical mechanism that would ensure, to paraphrase you, that cats will remain cats, dog will remain dogs, etc.

[personEks]

Lame.

[dnvanderbilt2]

@sweetmikser Hi. Xsuprio wanted to let you know you accidentally blocked him from commenting. He just wanted me to tell you that he wasn't arguing with you. Obviously you do not think this video is a joke. Fair enough. =] K, bud?