Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: June 27, 2024, 8:56 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Theist ➤ Why ☠ Evolution is not Scientific ✔
#79
RE: Theist ➤ Why ☠ Evolution is not Scientific ✔
(November 22, 2016 at 3:38 pm)Stimbo Wrote:
(November 22, 2016 at 2:26 pm)The Joker Wrote: A kind means the same type of healthy animal that can procreate, in other words it isn't Cat+Dog or horse + cow but rather Cow+Cow, Dog+Dog They are all the same kind.

Here is a diagram showing the relationship between all the different classifications used by modern taxonomists. You may google any words of two or more syllables. Where does 'kind' and/or 'type' fit into this system?

[Image: 230px-Biological_classification_L_Pengo_vflip.svg.png]

Good for bringing this up, Carl Linnaeus a Creationist was the founder of the modern classification system. in the 1700s the image that you brought up was carl Linnaeus taxonomy. Secular scientists have added several new categories in light of their ancestral “tree-based” taxonomy, but use the old system for convenience. It is now:
  • Domain
  • Kingdom
  • Phylum
  • Subphylum
  • Class
  • Cohort
  • Order
  • Suborder
  • Infraorder
  • Superfamily
  • Family
  • Genus
  • Species
The Creationist Taxonomy scale bible standard is different:

Creationist Classification of the mourning dove:
  • Class 1: Day Five
  • Class 2: Winged/Air
  • Class 3: Winged/Flying creatures (owph)
  • Class 4: Bird
  • Class 5: Living
  • Kind: Dove kind (yownah)
  • Sub-kind 1: dove
  • Sub-kind 2: mourning dove
  • Others within the kind: passenger pigeon (now extinct), turtle dove, fantails, pouters, Jacobins, tumblers, homing pigeons, carrier pigeons
Kind is in the Biblical Creationist Taxonomy scale.

(November 22, 2016 at 4:25 pm)The Gentleman Bastard Wrote:
(November 22, 2016 at 1:13 pm)The Joker Wrote: I gave you examples of the theory of evolution is testable, repeatable, observable and falsifiable. 

If that is the case then I would have been convinced by your examples but I am not, why am I not convinced yet?

Because you're a fucking ignorant idiot?
It depends on what you mean.
Reply



Messages In This Thread
RE: Theist ➤ Why ☠ Evolution is not Scientific ✔ - by The Joker - November 22, 2016 at 4:35 pm

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Fine Tuning Principle: Devastating Disproof and Scientific Refutation of Atheism. Nishant Xavier 97 8175 September 20, 2023 at 1:31 pm
Last Post: Foxaèr
  Why did Communists promote Evolution? Nishant Xavier 318 18675 September 7, 2023 at 5:48 pm
Last Post: Simon Moon
  Is Atheism a Religion? Why or why not? Nishant Xavier 91 5470 August 6, 2023 at 1:38 pm
Last Post: LinuxGal
  The fascinating asymmetry of theist-atheist discussion Astreja 5 505 July 22, 2023 at 8:02 pm
Last Post: Thumpalumpacus
  I'm no longer an anti-theist Duty 27 2237 September 16, 2022 at 1:08 pm
Last Post: Angrboda
  I received a letter from a theist, need a good reply Radamand 22 2135 March 22, 2022 at 10:56 pm
Last Post: Ferrocyanide
  Why do theist often drop the letter s when referring to atheists? I_am_not_mafia 56 12472 August 23, 2018 at 4:20 pm
Last Post: Neo-Scholastic
Tongue Disproving Odin - An Experiment in arguing with a theist with Theist logic Cecelia 983 159564 June 6, 2018 at 2:11 pm
Last Post: Raven Orlock
  Why was Newton a theist? Alexmahone 65 13368 March 24, 2018 at 12:39 pm
Last Post: Jehanne
  Why America is anti-theist. Goosebump 3 1153 March 1, 2018 at 9:06 am
Last Post: mlmooney89



Users browsing this thread: 4 Guest(s)