Comments Thread For: Extremist Group Had Plot To Kidnap Manny Pacquiao, Bomb Manila

[Cutthroat]

When you say that there is no missing link..... that is impossible.

There must be a " missing link ", or it didn't happen.

And..... forget 1 missing link, there must be millions of missing links if the Theory of Evolution is true.

There is no missing link because they're not missing anymore they've been found, practically all of these are different forms of human's ancestors which ultimately became modern humans. We've discovered quite a bit of fossils over time, science was barely in it's infancy in the 1900's.




We actually found out that Neanderthal is NOT related to human based upon it's nasal structure. Modern humans actually share Neanderthal genes, therefore a large % of people on earth have the ancestry of a NON human.

A monkey did not fall asleep one night, then wake up as the missing link..... and then fall asleep the next night, and wake up as man.....

..... for that theory to be true, evolution would have taken place over thousands, if not millions of years..... there would be thousands of missing links, and millions of fossilized remains proving it...... but, nadda/zero/zip.

We got fossilized records confirming everything that came first (dinosaurs), and yet we have no fossilized records confirming what supposedly came 2nd (mankind's supposed evolutionary chain)..... that **** would be everywhere, in every museum..... there would be thousands/millions of fossilized skeletal remains in various stages of development..... but all we got, is crickets.

The more you investigate evolution the clearer it becomes that it is just a theory supported only by hypothesis..... and if it was true, there would be insurmountable evidence, and we would not be discussing it.

Whale/dolphin/hippo evolution:




We humans evolved from a common ancestor to modern apes. This common ancestor was separated through migration. Based upon it's environment it naturally evolved to adapt to that particular environment.
Some of these evolutionary branches went extinct, others became different types of apes, others became modern human.

It's called Natural Selection, the environment acts like a filter. If a creature evolves certain features that make it thrive, it will then mate and populate. These features then become more and more common over time over the general population in that area.

Ethnicity is an example of evolution, Asians for example have something called an epicanthal fold, which is beneficial in a windy, snowy environment:

https://www.quora.com/Why-do-Asians-have-different-eyes

Again, there literally is NO controversy regarding evolution, the majority of people/scientists regard it as fact. The only people that don't are these arm chair bible thumping scientists that have NEVER been able to disprove evolution.

Without knowledge of evolution we would not be able to develop vaccines/antibiotics for deadly diseases.

[buge]

There is no missing link because they're not missing anymore they've been found, practically all of these are different forms of human's ancestors which ultimately became modern humans. We've discovered quite a bit of fossils over time, science was barely in it's infancy in the 1900's.




We actually found out that Neanderthal is NOT related to human based upon it's nasal structure. Modern humans actually share Neanderthal genes, therefore a large % of people on earth have the ancestry of a NON human.



Whale/dolphin/hippo evolution:




We humans evolved from a common ancestor to modern apes. This common ancestor was separated through migration. Based upon it's environment it naturally evolved to adapt to that particular environment.
Some of these evolutionary branches went extinct, others became different types of apes, others became modern human.

It's called Natural Selection, the environment acts like a filter. If a creature evolves certain features that make it thrive, it will then mate and populate. These features then become more and more common over time over the general population in that area.

Ethnicity is an example of evolution, Asians for example have something called an epicanthal fold, which is beneficial in a windy, snowy environment:

https://www.quora.com/Why-do-Asians-have-different-eyes

Again, there literally is NO controversy regarding evolution, the majority of people/scientists regard it as fact. The only people that don't are these arm chair bible thumping scientists that have NEVER been able to disprove evolution.

Without knowledge of evolution we would not be able to develop vaccines/antibiotics for deadly diseases.

Why post a bunch of pics (that are obviously just someone's guess) that relate monkeys to Lebron James?

and your ****** chart LMAO ... That's no proof whatsoever, all you have is a chart of some animals that share some characteristics, so they must be evolved versions of each other.

I could create something like that, step by step "this is sort of like that" cases, relating a fly evolving from humans or a plant evolving from a penguin. Show me repeatable proof of animal species jumping. There is none and there never will be. You hide behind "it takes millions of years, so trust me" ... uh, no thanks. Just admit that evolution is your religion and you are taking it on faith.

[Cutthroat]

Why post a bunch of pics (that are obviously just someone's guess) that relate monkeys to Lebron James?

Their outside characteristics such as hair color, skin color, eye color etc. are guesses, everything else is accurate. We are able to recreate these fossils thanks to 3D imaging which helps us recreate the full skeleton.

and your ****** chart LMAO ... That's no proof whatsoever, all you have is a chart of some animals that share some characteristics, so they must be evolved versions of each other.

I could create something like that, step by step "this is sort of like that" cases, relating a fly evolving from humans or a plant evolving from a penguin. Show me repeatable proof of animal species jumping. There is none and there never will be. You hide behind "it takes millions of years, so trust me" ... uh, no thanks. Just admit that evolution is your religion and you are taking it on faith.

Except you can't, NO scientist has been able to disprove evolution. The only controversy lies within a bunch of uneducated bible thumpers that think they know more than the actual scientists with their "fancy" education, it's a ****ing joke. That's what this all comes down to.

Animals that shared a common ancestor like Whales/Hippos will have physical characteristics that were left over from their previous form.

It's group A, filled with scientists responsible for some of humanity's greatest achievements, advancing our society that accept and regard evolution as fact.

vs

Group B, filled with bible thumpers that hate science/evolution as it contradicts their religion, thus they are completely unable to provide any actual counter arguments and pump out lies/propaganda. They have NO proof that disproves evolution period. All these people do is prevent the progress of our society.

[aboutfkntime]

There is no missing link because they're not missing anymore they've been found, practically all of these are different forms of human's ancestors which ultimately became modern humans. We've discovered quite a bit of fossils over time, science was barely in it's infancy in the 1900's.




We actually found out that Neanderthal is NOT related to human based upon it's nasal structure. Modern humans actually share Neanderthal genes, therefore a large % of people on earth have the ancestry of a NON human.



Whale/dolphin/hippo evolution:




We humans evolved from a common ancestor to modern apes. This common ancestor was separated through migration. Based upon it's environment it naturally evolved to adapt to that particular environment.
Some of these evolutionary branches went extinct, others became different types of apes, others became modern human.

It's called Natural Selection, the environment acts like a filter. If a creature evolves certain features that make it thrive, it will then mate and populate. These features then become more and more common over time over the general population in that area.

Ethnicity is an example of evolution, Asians for example have something called an epicanthal fold, which is beneficial in a windy, snowy environment:

https://www.quora.com/Why-do-Asians-have-different-eyes

Again, there literally is NO controversy regarding evolution, the majority of people/scientists regard it as fact. The only people that don't are these arm chair bible thumping scientists that have NEVER been able to disprove evolution.

Without knowledge of evolution we would not be able to develop vaccines/antibiotics for deadly diseases.

Dude, I have studied it...... all you did was post the basic premise behind The Theory of Evolution.

Nothing changed, that theory is completely unfounded by science, and by evidence.

Ethnicity is NOT an example of evolution, that is completely incorrect..... epicanthal folds, skin pigmentation, height, etc..... are all signs of adapting, NOT evolving.....

I am referring to the MOUNTAINS of missing evidence that should render this conversation defunct, were the theory true.

Many mainstream scientists openly doubt the Theory of Evolution.

The Scientific Case Against Evolution
by Henry M. Morris, Ph.D.

Belief in evolution is a remarkable phenomenon. It is a belief passionately defended by the scientific establishment, despite the lack of any observable scientific evidence for macroevolution (that is, evolution from one distinct kind of organism into another). This odd situation is briefly documented here by citing recent statements from leading evolutionists admitting their lack of proof. These statements inadvertently show that evolution on any significant scale does not occur at present, and never happened in the past, and could never happen at all.

Evolution Is Not Happening Now

First of all, the lack of a case for evolution is clear from the fact that no one has ever seen it happen. If it were a real process, evolution should still be occurring, and there should be many "transitional" forms that we could observe. What we see instead, of course, is an array of distinct "kinds" of plants and animals with many varieties within each kind, but with very clear and -- apparently -- unbridgeable gaps between the kinds. That is, for example, there are many varieties of dogs and many varieties of cats, but no "dats" or "cogs." Such variation is often called microevolution, and these minor horizontal (or downward) changes occur fairly often, but such changes are not true "vertical" evolution.

Evolutionary geneticists have often experimented on fruit flies and other rapidly reproducing species to induce mutational changes hoping they would lead to new and better species, but these have all failed to accomplish their goal. No truly new species has ever been produced, let alone a new "basic kind."

A current leading evolutionist, Jeffrey Schwartz, professor of anthropology at the University of Pittsburgh, has recently acknowledged that:

. . . it was and still is the case that, with the exception of Dobzhansky's claim about a new species of fruit fly, the formation of a new species, by any mechanism, has never been observed.1
The scientific method traditionally has required experimental observation and replication. The fact that macroevolution (as distinct from microevolution) has never been observed would seem to exclude it from the domain of true science. Even Ernst Mayr, the dean of living evolutionists, longtime professor of biology at Harvard, who has alleged that evolution is a "simple fact," nevertheless agrees that it is an "historical science" for which "laws and experiments are inappropriate techniques"2 by which to explain it. One can never actually see evolution in action.

Evolution Never Happened in the Past

Evolutionists commonly answer the above criticism by claiming that evolution goes too slowly for us to see it happening today. They used to claim that the real evidence for evolution was in the fossil record of the past, but the fact is that the billions of known fossils do not include a single unequivocal transitional form with transitional structures in the process of evolving.

Given that evolution, according to Darwin, was in a continual state of motion . . . it followed logically that the fossil record should be rife with examples of transitional forms leading from the less to the more evolved.3

Even those who believe in rapid evolution recognize that a considerable number of generations would be required for one distinct "kind" to evolve into another more complex kind. There ought, therefore, to be a considerable number of true transitional structures preserved in the fossils -- after all, there are billions of non-transitional structures there! But (with the exception of a few very doubtful creatures such as the controversial feathered dinosaurs and the alleged walking whales), they are not there.

Instead of filling in the gaps in the fossil record with so-called missing links, most paleontologists found themselves facing a situation in which there were only gaps in the fossil record, with no evidence of transformational intermediates between documented fossil species.4

The entire history of evolution from the evolution of life from non-life to the evolution of vertebrates from invertebrates to the evolution of man from the ape is strikingly devoid of intermediates: the links are all missing in the fossil record, just as they are in the present world.

http://www.icr.org/home/resources/resources_tracts_scientificcaseagainstevolution/

All I am saying is, it is a theory, until PROVEN correct.

They also taught me at school that we went to the moon.

[Cutthroat]

Dude, I have studied it...... all you did was post the basic premise behind The Theory of Evolution.

Nothing changed, that theory is completely unfounded by science, and by evidence.

Ethnicity is NOT an example of evolution, that is completely incorrect..... epicanthal folds, skin pigmentation, height, etc..... are all signs of adapting, NOT evolving.....

Adaptation is the result of natural selection based upon the environment, things such as the epicanthal fold are signs of evolution. I also posted the common ancestor of Hippos/Whales/Dolphins as they are all related, they all shared a common ancestor but branched out evolving in different ways.

I am referring to the MOUNTAINS of missing evidence that should render this conversation defunct, were the theory true.

Many mainstream scientists openly doubt the Theory of Evolution.

The Scientific Case Against Evolution
by Henry M. Morris, Ph.D.

http://www.icr.org/home/resources/resources_tracts_scientificcaseagainstevolution/

All I am saying is, it is a theory, until PROVEN correct.

They also taught me at school that we went to the moon.[/QUOTE]


Have you googled who Henry M. Morris is? He's a creationist, this is EXACTLY what I was talking about. None of the top scientists take this man's work seriously, he is a joke. Creationist scientists in general contribute almost nothing to the world of science, nobody takes their work seriously. All these people can do is lie and manipulate because they cannot disprove evolution. They're pretty much just a huge waste of space.

Evolution is a scientific theory, not a theory. Scientific theory=proven fact with evidence, a regular Theory=just a theory with no evidence.

In Evolution & the Modern Christian (1967), Morris hoped to "open the minds and hearts of young people to the true Biblical cosmology." T.E. Fenton, Professor of Agronomy at Iowa State University, wrote "scientific value of the book is nil; the author selectively chooses the areas of science that he accepts and rejects other areas of accepted science".[20] David Vogel, Professor of Biology at Creighton University, reviewed the book explaining "his theology is shallow; his exegesis is maddening; his science is wrong; and he tops it off by offending millions of Bible-believing Christians who also accept evolution".[21]

Many in the scientific community have said that Morris' representation of evolution as a complete religious system is a straw man.[17] In particular, Massimo Pigliucci criticized Morris' omission of material that interfered with his "mission" and "beliefs".[18] Pigliucci also criticized Morris' interpretation of thermodynamics.[19] Morris' position had also been the subject of debate among Evangelical scholars of the Old Testament and among Evangelicals working in various fields of science.[citation needed]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_M._Morris

You can read more criticism there. They cannot disprove evolution, therefore they must lie and manipulate information.

[Cutthroat]

Dude, I have studied it...... all you did was post the basic premise behind The Theory of Evolution.

Nothing changed, that theory is completely unfounded by science, and by evidence.

Ethnicity is NOT an example of evolution, that is completely incorrect..... epicanthal folds, skin pigmentation, height, etc..... are all signs of adapting, NOT evolving.....

Adaptation is the result of natural selection based upon the environment, things such as the epicanthal fold are signs of evolution. I also posted the common ancestor of Hippos/Whales/Dolphins as they are all related, they all shared a common ancestor, a land mammal, but branched out evolving in different ways.

I am referring to the MOUNTAINS of missing evidence that should render this conversation defunct, were the theory true.

Many mainstream scientists openly doubt the Theory of Evolution.

The Scientific Case Against Evolution
by Henry M. Morris, Ph.D.

http://www.icr.org/home/resources/resources_tracts_scientificcaseagainstevolution/

All I am saying is, it is a theory, until PROVEN correct.

They also taught me at school that we went to the moon.

Have you googled who Henry M. Morris is? He's a creationist, this is EXACTLY what I was talking about. None of the top scientists take this man's work seriously, he is a joke. Creationist scientists in general contribute almost nothing to the world of science, nobody takes their work seriously. All these people can do is lie and manipulate because they cannot disprove evolution. They're pretty much just a huge waste of space.

Evolution is a scientific theory, not a theory. Scientific theory=proven fact with evidence, a regular Theory=just a theory with no evidence. Evolution is also observable in bacteria/viruses, without evolution they would not be able to mutate/adapt counters to cures.

In Evolution & the Modern Christian (1967), Morris hoped to "open the minds and hearts of young people to the true Biblical cosmology." T.E. Fenton, Professor of Agronomy at Iowa State University, wrote "scientific value of the book is nil; the author selectively chooses the areas of science that he accepts and rejects other areas of accepted science".[20] David Vogel, Professor of Biology at Creighton University, reviewed the book explaining "his theology is shallow; his exegesis is maddening; his science is wrong; and he tops it off by offending millions of Bible-believing Christians who also accept evolution".[21]

Many in the scientific community have said that Morris' representation of evolution as a complete religious system is a straw man.[17] In particular, Massimo Pigliucci criticized Morris' omission of material that interfered with his "mission" and "beliefs".[18] Pigliucci also criticized Morris' interpretation of thermodynamics.[19] Morris' position had also been the subject of debate among Evangelical scholars of the Old Testament and among Evangelicals working in various fields of science.[citation needed]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_M._Morris

You can read more criticism there. They cannot disprove evolution, therefore they must lie and manipulate information.

[aboutfkntime]

Adaptation is the result of natural selection based upon the environment, things such as the epicanthal fold are signs of evolution.

That is completely unfounded.

It is a statement of opinion, without ANY supporting evidence.

We do NOT see any sign of evolution happening during present day, nor are there any fossils/scientific proof that it happened EVER..... just like leading evolutionist, Jeffrey Schwartz, professor of anthropology at the University of Pittsburgh, has recently admitted.....


". . . it was and still is the case that, with the exception of Dobzhansky's claim about a new species of fruit fly, the formation of a new species, by any mechanism, has never been observed.1
The scientific method traditionally has required experimental observation and replication. The fact that macroevolution (as distinct from microevolution) has never been observed would seem to exclude it from the domain of true science."

I also posted the common ancestor of Hippos/Whales/Dolphins as they are all related, they all shared a common ancestor but branched out evolving in different ways.

You posted the original theory, without any supporting facts whatsoever.

Science has not been able to prove any aspect of that theory.

They also taught me at school that we went to the moon.

Have you googled who Henry M. Morris is? He's a creationist, this is EXACTLY what I was talking about. None of the top scientists take this man's work seriously, he is a joke. Creationist scientists in general contribute almost nothing to the world of science, nobody takes their work seriously. All these people can do is lie and manipulate because they cannot disprove evolution. They're pretty much just a huge waste of space.

Evolution is a scientific theory, not a theory. Scientific theory=proven fact with evidence, a regular Theory=just a theory with no evidence.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_M._Morris

You can read more criticism there. They cannot disprove evolution, therefore they must lie and manipulate information.

I don't give a fk about creationism, but wiki says this.....

Morris was awarded a master's degree in hydraulics (1948) and a Ph.D. in hydraulic engineering (1950).

In 1951, he became a professor and chair of civil engineering at the University of Louisiana at Lafayette and served as the Acting Dean of Engineering in the fall of 1956.

Morris then served as a professor of applied science at Southern Illinois University in 1957.


Rather than decry that particular scientist (which is pointless, because there are many others) you need to focus on the fact that there is no scientific evidence whatsoever to prove, or even support, the Theory of Evolution.