Theist ➤ Why ☠ Evolution is not Scientific ✔

[I_am_not_mafia]

There is no evidence for stars forming by evolution.

Well you see, when you get a daddy star who loves a mummy star very much, then the daddy star with fall into mummy star's gravitational well and has all its matter sucked out of it. The mummy star then grows bigger, goes super nova and the shockwave creates lots of baby stars in nebula.

[Anomalocaris]

If all members of a gene pool are shown to be all statistically equally likely to survive the travails of life, then evolution is thereby falsified. If traits offering survival advantage in gene pool are all non-heritable, then evolution would also thereby be falsified. There are numerous other ways by which evolution can be falsified. The joker moron confuses the fact that evolution has been tested and have not been falsified by any test with it being unfalsifiable.

[I_am_not_mafia]

But the Law of Biogenesis states that "only life can create life", so where is the evidence for evolution?

The law of Biogenesis was coined by a single man Louis Pasteur who was born almost 200 hundred years ago.

It is also wrong.

[abaris]

I've only read the first page of these 30, but the impression I got is troll. Same as with every thread Joker is creating. Hardly ever contributing, just creating. I wouldn't take him that seriously. Maybe it's just a remaining shred of trust in humanity that nobody can be as stupid while being literate at the same time, but I just say how it looks.

[Angrboda]

First you say that evolution is unfalsifiable, now you say it's been proven false.  You can't have it both ways.

Evolution is falsifiable in the on the sense its unprovable.

That's not what your video says.

[Amarok]

Evolution is falsifiable in the on the sense its unprovable.

That's not what your video says.

I doubt he has even watched his own videos he just reads the titles then declares them disproof

I think he reads enough to parrot creationist memes like throwing the word "assumption "or "presupposition" around but little else

Oh yes and of course appealing to long debunked claims (seriously dude thinks that short term comets are a problem for an old earth we don't even need the cloud to replenish comets)

[robvalue]

Evolution is false as proven here, if you are willing to watch you will understand.

First you say that evolution is unfalsifiable, now you say it's been proven false. You can't have it both ways.

Perfect We have a winner.

I see he's started conflating evolution with abiogenesis now.

So he's desperate to convince us he's not just pretending to be dumb, he really is this dumb?

[chimp3]

"Evolution Exposed: Earth Science" by Roger Patterson 
"Evolution Exposed: Biology" by Roger Patterson 
"The Lie: Evolution/Millions of Years" by Ken Ham
"Taking Back Astronomy" by Jason Lisle 
"Universe by Design" by Dr. Danny Faulkner

I am sure their Nobel Prizes are being prepared right now.

[robvalue]

I'm not saying he's dumb because of his beliefs, but because of his stubborn insistence on ignoring all objections and repeating the same nonsense endlessly.

[Tonus]

I see he's started conflating evolution with abiogenesis now.

There is a reason that creationists often do that. Remember that the creation account explains both the origin of life (god did it) and the diversity of life (god did it). Evolution calls this into question, because if life did not suddenly pop into existence all at once and fully formed then it wasn't created. To them, evolution is an attempt to replace creation as the cause of all the living things we see and therefore must explain how life itself began in order to do so.

To those who understand what the theory of evolution is meant to explain, these are two separate issues. To the creationist, they are inextricably linked.