Theist ➤ Why ☠ Evolution is not Scientific ✔

[robvalue]

Lets apply those criteria to God, shall we?

Oh wait, no one cares about science when they're talking about God.

Dude, it's good you have become aware of these criteria. And they are important. But now you need to go learn about evolution. Actual evolution isn't just scientific, it's blatantly obvious. The Theory of Evolution however, does fulfil all those criteria. Your ignorance of it is not an argument.

[robvalue]

All scientific theories must meet those criteria. Or else they don't get made into theories. You're suggesting no one except you has noticed and reported this supposed problem with TToE.

It's especially strong because it's just about the only theory that religious people question, yet it still withstands all this scrutiny.

Progressive theists have no problem with evolution, they just wind it into their narrative. It's only fundamentalists who insist on having a competition with science and reality.

[Fake Messiah]

Maybe from now on admins should automatically lock every thread on this forum that is supposedly disproving evolution because there really is nothing to discuss and people just shout insults. Especially since this is in atheist subforum and not science.
If someone decided to be ignorant on evolution it's their problem.

[Jesster]

Especially since this is in atheist subforum and not science.

I was going to point this out and suggest that it be moved to the proper section of the forum, but then I decided that I just don't care enough about this troll's threads. He's just going to make 10 more tomorrow.

[robvalue]

He is getting into bullshit spam troll territory if he carries on with these type of threads. Just my opinion.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Even assuming the OP isn't a troll

Major league assumption there.

Remember, when you assumption you make an ass out of u and mption. 

[The Joker]

Wtf is it with all the theists using big bold fonts nowadays?

Folks I am not falling for evolution, I just don’t take it seriously.  If an idea is not testable, repeatable, observable, and falsifiable, it is not considered scientific, evolution is not science but a philosophical assumption a belief just like creationism.

Evolution is not
·        Testable
·        Repeatable
·        Observable
·        Falsifiable
Therefore evolution is not scientific

Demonstrate that evolution is not testable, repeatable, observable or falsifiable.

We can test for it by cross breeding animals, which has been done for centuries with cattle, chickens, foxes and dogs for example. This can be repeated. It has been observed both in nature and with genetic algorithms. It is falsifiable in that you could demonstrate that what we are observing works by means other than inherited traits, mutation of genetic information and natural selection.

Cross breading is not evolution it is still within the same kind, Another thing is you can't cross bread two kinds of animals so you can't breed a fox and donkey for example. There might be different types of dogs but they are still dogs that is not evolution that is just variation within a kind. The species on earth today descend from the original created kinds of Genesis 1. The many inter-species breedings that are possible today (e.g., zonkeys, wholphins), as well as the close similarities within biological groups (e.g., the canine group) that are distinct from one another, remind us of this fact. 

It is not my job to demonstrate that evolution is not testable, repeatable, observable or falsifiable because my position is the negative position. It is your job to Demonstrate that evolution is testable, repeatable, observable or falsifiable.

---

Especially since this is in atheist subforum and not science.

I was going to point this out and suggest that it be moved to the proper section of the forum, but then I decided that I just don't care enough about this troll's threads. He's just going to make 10 more tomorrow.

It depends on what you mean by "troll", the word troll is highly subjective in this forum. I usually am encountered with the word troll, whenever an atheist cannot stand up to my irrefutable facts, they use it to run away from me like your doing.

---

Maybe from now on admins should automatically lock every thread on this forum that is supposedly disproving evolution because there really is nothing to discuss and people just shout insults. Especially since this is in atheist subforum and not science.
If someone decided to be ignorant on evolution it's their problem.

If you don't find a way to lock this thread, then I will simply progress into destroying all the arguments for evolution.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Wtf is it with all the theists using big bold fonts nowadays?



Demonstrate that evolution is not testable, repeatable, observable or falsifiable.

We can test for it by cross breeding animals, which has been done for centuries with cattle, chickens, foxes and dogs for example. This can be repeated. It has been observed both in nature and with genetic algorithms. It is falsifiable in that you could demonstrate that what we are observing works by means other than inherited traits, mutation of genetic information and natural selection.

Cross breading is not evolution it is still within the same kind, Another thing is you can't cross bread two kinds of animals so you can't breed a fox and donkey for example. There might be different types of dogs but they are still dogs that is not evolution that is just variation within a kind. The species on earth today descend from the original created kinds of Genesis 1. The many inter-species breedings that are possible today (e.g., zonkeys, wholphins), as well as the close similarities within biological groups (e.g., the canine group) that are distinct from one another, remind us of this fact. 

It is not my job to demonstrate that evolution is not testable, repeatable, observable or falsifiable because my position is the negative position. It is your job to Demonstrate that evolution is testable, repeatable, observable or falsifiable.

---

I was going to point this out and suggest that it be moved to the proper section of the forum, but then I decided that I just don't care enough about this troll's threads. He's just going to make 10 more tomorrow.

It depends on what you mean by "troll", the word troll is highly subjective in this forum. I usually am encountered with the word troll, whenever an atheist cannot stand up to my irrefutable facts, they use it to run away from me like your doing.

If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and posts through feathers, it's a duck.

[Brian37]

Computers don't run on electricity because "THOR DID IT".

[The Joker]

Yep.  These fucktards can't believe the whole world doesn't revolve around them.


Here, asshole.

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary...faq.php#e1

• MISCONCEPTION: Evolution is not science because it is not observable or testable.
  CORRECTION: This misconception encompasses two incorrect ideas: (1) that all science depends on controlled laboratory experiments, and (2) that evolution cannot be studied with such experiments. First, many scientific investigations do not involve experiments or direct observation. Astronomers cannot hold stars in their hands and geologists cannot go back in time, but both scientists can learn a great deal about the universe through observation and comparison. In the same way, evolutionary biologists can test their ideas about the history of life on Earth by making observations in the real world. Second, though we can't run an experiment that will tell us how the dinosaur lineage radiated, we can study many aspects of evolution with controlled experiments in a laboratory setting. In organisms with short generation times (e.g., bacteria or fruit flies), we can actually observe evolution in action over the course of an experiment. And in some cases, biologists have observed evolution occurring in the wild. To learn more about rapid evolution in the wild, visit our news story on climate change, our news story on the evolution of PCB-resistant fish, or our research profile on the evolution fish size in response to our fishing practices. To learn more about the nature of science, visit the Understanding Science website.
  

I was looking for something simpler for you but the pictures had already been colored in.

They are from my hostile sources therefore it is false. Why would  any right minded person trust them?