BILL NYE VS KEN HAM: TONIGHT AT 7 PM

[Creed of Heresy]

Hey everyone!
Stat's back and he's necroposting.... well... almost!

I think my response was relevant to the topic, so no necroposting here. I was just busy and had a lot of material to respond to (imagine if you had four of me to respond to every time, scary huh?).

You don't fucking say. I don't think I could stomach much more logical fallacies on this forum. *runs his hands down his face, prepares for the rest*

Several of my best friends are atheists and we have no problems getting together and having a good time.

"I have lots of black friends!"

It’s a form of adaptation (that interestingly enough was first pointed out by a creationist, not Darwin) that nobody disagrees with so I am not sure how it’s relevant to Common Descent.

In other words, there was a creationist who admitted that evolution is a thing.

In other words a creationist couldn't get his shit straight, but then, HAHAHA, WHAT A FUCKING SHOCK, RIGHT?!

No.

Now you’ve entered the realm of story telling my friend. Why did Australopithecus climb down out of the trees (no this is not a chicken crossing the road joke lol)?
We see this all the time though, as we breed dogs and create new breeds we lose genetic information and can never breed them back to their parent breed.

And just like that, I'm lost. Are you agreeing with the creationist viewpoint or that of reality [evolution]?

I am not saying that the new traits are never beneficial, I am merely saying that they are due to a net loss in genetic information. In other words, the mechanism is traveling in the wrong direction; you need something that adds genetic information (and tons of it).

Why do you need "tons of it?" And how do you figure it's traveling in the wrong direction? What, to you, is the "wrong direction?" Are you insinuating you know the "right" direction that evolutionary traits are supposed to move towards?? And if so...HOW?

Examine your foot for a few moments.

It's the best example of evolution being completely chaotic and not exactly going in the "right" direction, if by "right" you mean "beneficial." How many moving parts are involved with it, again?? 26 or something? Who the fuck would consider that the "right direction?"

We are here only because Humans have not existed for nearly as long as you claim that they have; that is the whole point.

Yes, they have. Deal with reality or don't, it'll go on without you, whether or not you like it.

In genetic functionality it is. There are only one or two heavily debatable empirical instances where natural selection may have actually increased genetic information; the rest are all a net reduction.

Dear fucking humanity...

It was yummy bait. Well with the way some of the people talk on here I thought there was absolutely no evidence that supported scripture….

Because there isn't. Scripture, for SOME REASON, has a bunch of followers who keep moving those goal posts endlessly in a terrible, transparent attempt to square the squiggly line. There is no evidence. I defy you to bring forth some that I can't cut apart like an aichmophiliac kindergartener with construction paper.

This reminds me of the old vestigial organs argument. I am afraid your information is a little outdated here. They are actually finding that there really is no such thing as “junk DNA” and that the entire genome is crucial to the organism’s survival. Pseudogenes actually produce proteins and are now known to switch off genes when they are not needed, or to increase their use, when more proteins are required. Another example is that “Junk DNA” originally thought to be the left-overs of viral infections has now been found to be crucial in the control of genes involved in blood cell production and producing proteins which enable the placenta to fuse to the uterus in pregnant mammals. Of course this is an accurate prediction that creationists made many years before.

Sources please, because this just sounds like absolute, unmitigated, unchecked bullshit. ESPECIALLY the part about creationists supposedly "predicting" this. The only "predictions" I've heard a creationist make is that Armageddon is coming and we all need to suck yahweh's cornhole lest we all burn.

Can you give me an example of where natural selection has actually created a new multi-part and fully functioning structure (not removed one or duplicated one)? I am not aware of any myself.

Can you give me an example where it hasn't?

Oh, woops. Burden of proof is supposed to be on the assertion. But hey, that's never stopped creationists from making shit up, eh?

So the story goes, but the empirical evidence does not seem to support that being the case.

Empirical evidence...



http://ofmusingsandwonderings.files.word...d1.jpgThis timeline is not possible given the observed rates of genetic entropy; that’s the entire point of Sanford’s work. We’re actually degrading.[/quote]

Given the intellectual merit of your arguments, and the existence of George "I am a donut" Bush, I'll actually agree with this.

Or 50% to turn a Human into a banana?

Given the implied tone of this reply, I fucking give up. I can't stomach this shit anymore.

[Revenant77x]

Worth a listen.

[Rampant.A.I.]

Waldorf Gish Gallop needs to stop flooding threads with his baseless assertion vomit, and actually join the conversation once in a while.