DNA Proves Existence of a Designer

[I_am_not_mafia]

She's obviously thinking of like a monkey evolving into a turtle or something but without knowing that this is not what the theory of evolution by natural selection says.

[GrandizerII]

If you accept that evolution on a small scale is true, then by extension (and in the absence of evidence to the contrary), evolution on a large scale can also be true.

Adaption on a small scale is true, and it is factual and the most important and well evidenced part of the theory of evol... but....that's a real streeeeeetch to what else they put in there and it is based on conjecture and speculation. Sorry, I like my science to be factual and I just don't accept it unless they can come up with better evidence for one species turning into an entirely different species. (I know their excuse is that we cannot observe it because it supposedly happened over billions of years... ok, fine, but then it's just a guess with some pretty pictures)

We do have evidence, heaps of them actually, of varying types. All of them pointing to the same conclusion. Whether we're talking fossils, sedimentary layers, vestigial organs, DNA patterns, patterns of species distributions, and so on ... they all are clearly and very effectively explained by evolution itself. It's not like scientists were one day high on drugs and then came up with this shit out of thin air. It really is the best explanation for the variety and diversity of life on this planet.

[I_am_not_mafia]

Are you waltzing while you're waiting?

Yes.

Alone.


With a half empty bottle of gin in my hand.


And a hostage in the other.

---

It's not like scientists were one day high on drugs and then came up with this shit out of thin air.

Shit. We're not supposed to do that?

[Everena]

Adaption on a small scale is true, and it is factual and the most important and well evidenced part of the theory of evol... but....that's a real streeeeeetch to what else they put in there and it is based on conjecture and speculation. Sorry, I like my science to be factual and I just don't accept it unless they can come up with better evidence for one species turning into an entirely different species. (I know their excuse is that we cannot observe it because it supposedly happened over billions of years... ok, fine, but then it's just a guess with some pretty pictures)

We do have evidence, heaps of them actually, of varying types. All of them pointing to the same conclusion. Whether we're talking fossils, sedimentary layers, vestigial organs, DNA patterns, patterns of species distributions, and so on ... they all are clearly and very effectively explained by evolution itself. It's not like scientists were one day high on drugs and then came up with this shit out of thin air. It really is the best explanation for the variety and diversity of life on this planet.

I know but it is all based on speculation and conjecture. I am not denying that it might be true. I am just not convinced.

[GrandizerII]

She's obviously thinking of like a monkey evolving into a turtle or something but without knowing that this is not what the theory of evolution by natural selection says.

And also perhaps confusing evolution with individual transformation (sort of like Pokemon).

[The Grand Nudger]

She's obviously thinking of like a monkey evolving into a turtle or something but without knowing that this is not what the theory of evolution by natural selection says.

Going from full bananamanite to a crocoduckophile would be hilarious.

We do have evidence, heaps of them actually, of varying types. All of them pointing to the same conclusion. Whether we're talking fossils, sedimentary layers, vestigial organs, DNA patterns, patterns of species distributions, and so on ... they all are clearly and very effectively explained by evolution itself. It's not like scientists were one day high on drugs and then came up with this shit out of thin air. It really is the best explanation for the variety and diversity of life on this planet.

I know but it is all based on speculation and conjecture. I am not denying that it might be true. I am just not convinced.

-and also on observed instances of speciation in combination with the vast stores biological history contained within our genetics.  

So..not speculation and conjecture at all..in fact.

[I_am_not_mafia]

I know but it is all based on speculation and conjecture. I am not denying that it might be true. I am just not convinced.

So you clearly do not look at any evidence given to you. You just demand evidence, get given it, ignore it, demand it.

Why?

And isn't that exactly what CDF47 does as well?

[Bucky Ball]

[The Grand Nudger]

Theres nothing in there about bio-quantumagical afterlives and her soul mate the meat fairy.  

If she were interested in boring old things like biology and facts she wouldn't be here in the first place. If we really wanted nutballs to have the most basic education regarding modern synth, we'd hide it between the covers of "Jesus Lives!" magazine and interspersed within product testimonials for vaginal eggs and boner pills.

[Everena]