DNA Proves Existence of a Designer

[Cod]

Just noticed Everena got banned

[Anomalocaris]

Just noticed Everena got banned

We no longer need the psychiatric emergency hotline on quick dial.  

[Amarok]

And the smell of bullshit is slowly clearing

[Deesse23]

How comes Everena and CDF have the same nonsensical objections to evolution, while having, allegedly, completely different nonsensical religious beleifs otherwise?
How comes that Everena joined the one and only thread CDF participates in?
How comes that CDF didnt actively participate much as long as Everena argued, and now that Everena is banned, CDF is regurgitating all the same BS? If it wasnt his name on top of those posts, it just as well could be Everena.

[LastPoet]

How comes Everena and CDF have the same nonsensical objections to evolution, while having, allegedly, completely different nonsensical religious beleifs otherwise?
How comes that Everena joined the one and only thread CDF participates in?
How comes that CDF didnt actively participate much as long as Everena argued, and now that Everena is banned, CDF is regurgitating all the same BS? If it wasnt his name on top of those posts, it just as well could be Everena.

There is a different smell on the two kinds of bullshit presented. I might be wrong, mind you.

[Anomalocaris]

How comes Everena and CDF have the same nonsensical objections to evolution, while having, allegedly, completely different nonsensical religious beleifs otherwise?
How comes that Everena joined the one and only thread CDF participates in?
How comes that CDF didnt actively participate much as long as Everena argued, and now that Everena is banned, CDF is regurgitating all the same BS? If it wasnt his name on top of those posts, it just as well could be Everena.

Because there is no actual material factual basis whatsoever underlying creationism,  therefore there is no objective reality against which to measure whether whether one proposition uttered in support of creationism is more sound or has more factual basis than another.   So creationists always feel free to borrow whatever bullshit that seems  more rethorically effective. Hence CDF readily swallow Everena’s bullshit.

Since it takes a strong tendency of biasing towards embracing what sounds good subjectively and away from what actually is objectively to be a creationists, creationists also readily confuse rethorics that sound effective to their individual ears with that which might actually be more effective in serving the purpose they pursue. So CDF also readily regurgitates everena’s bullshit.

Even if one has never read about evolution, and one has never followed the debate, to the intelligent and astute observer, one fact instantly differentiates creationists from evolution scientists and make it clear which speaks from evidence which which purely from rethorics.

That fact is evolution scientists often admit without prompting from the other side that they had been wrong about a particular fact, observation, or theory about mechanism used to support or flesh out the theory evolution.   This is because their objective is to find reality, so they actively observe reality and use what they see to measure and validate their understanding and their model of reality.

Creationists almost never actively admit they had been wrong about some fact or basis for creationism without pressure from outside.  Only when the whole educated world has seen that some of their facts and basis were counterfactualand apply pressure so they sometimes vastly begrudgingly back away from some claims without ever admitting they had been wrong, In most cases they don;t back away cleanly even then.   This is because they would like reality to be so, but has no interest in seeking what reality actually is, and thus has no inclination to actually actively observe reality to validate their understand against reality.

[sdelsolray]

You STILL didn’t answer my question.  Third time’s a charm?

If organisms like plants and fruit flies can speciate; and it has been demonstrsted that they can, and do; why wouldn’t larger, more complex species be able to do so?  You’re making an assertion that there is some line to be drawn (at consciousness?) where, past that line, speciation is no longer biologically possible.  You need to support that claim with evidence.

CDF47 doesn't do evidence, rational thinking or intellectual honesty. He is addicted to religious faith. The mere assertion is his primary discourse technique.

---

How comes Everena and CDF have the same nonsensical objections to evolution, while having, allegedly, completely different nonsensical religious beleifs otherwise?
...

For two reasons:

1) Neither has any appreciable knowledge of what the theory of biological evolution contains and what it does not contain and neither is aware of or acknowledges the actual empirical evidence that has been gathered which supports the various explanations and predictions contained in the theory; and

2) To pretend to fill these gaps, each relies on the same set of lying and disingenuous sources, such as the Discovery Institute, AIG, etc.

[Anomalocaris]

You STILL didn’t answer my question.  Third time’s a charm?

If organisms like plants and fruit flies can speciate; and it has been demonstrsted that they can, and do; why wouldn’t larger, more complex species be able to do so?  You’re making an assertion that there is some line to be drawn (at consciousness?) where, past that line, speciation is no longer biologically possible.  You need to support that claim with evidence.

CDF47 doesn't do evidence, rational thinking or intellectual honesty.  He is addicted to religious faith.  The mere assertion is his primary discourse technique.

---

How comes Everena and CDF have the same nonsensical objections to evolution, while having, allegedly, completely different nonsensical religious beleifs otherwise?
...

For two reasons:

1)  Neither has any appreciable knowledge of what the theory of biological evolution contains and what it does not contain and neither is aware of or acknowledges the actual empirical evidence that has been gathered which supports the various explanations and predictions contained in the theory; and

2)  To pretend to fill these gaps, each relies on the same set of lying and disingenuous sources, such as the Discovery Institute, AIG, etc.

To be honest, there are doctrinarian atheists who advocate evolution as alternative to creationism without really having any deep knowledge of evolution, it’s empirical evidence and why interpretation of these evidence in the context of evolution makes more sense.

But the key is evolution really does flow from ever more rigorous scrutiny of ever more evidence, evidenced by continuous corrections made necessary as centers of gravity of what evidence points to shifts ever so subtlety as more evidences are sought and gathered.  

Creationism does not flow from evidence but a determination to advocate a preconceived position by any means that seem to work, subject to no validation or verification.   So for creationists anything goes that is said to support creationism.

[Deesse23]

But why do they seem not to have an original though themselves? All i ever hear is the same, repetitive BS they read somewhere. Its clear they only have a very superficial understanding of what they present. Its also astonishing that seemingly every single one has the very same misconceptions about evolution and its mechanisms.

The lack of understanding why random mutation and natural selection is something completely different from simple randomness....is it lack of education? Disingenuity? Just intellectual laziness? I really dont get it, how someone can be so uneducated, and keep being that way in the face of ample information and chance to get some proper education.

Or lets take complexity and design. The argument from complexity ist so mind-blowingly stupid, i cant even.....
I am an engineer, and most of my time is not devoted to just *invent* something, but to design by the simplest means, most cheap, most robust, most fucking simple. Simplicity is a hallmark of design (particularly a good one), not complexity. Any idiot can design a spaceship, but only the best engineers pack a ton of scientific instruments into the most lightweight spaceship. Complexity eats up valuable resources, no one wants to eat up more resources than needed. Do these people who endlessly repeat this complexity = goddidit nonsense not have any friends or family in the technical sector? What are they reading or otherwise soaking up information in their minds to keep themselves so monumentally uninformed? Are there really people who take stuff like discovery institute for real or answers in genesis? With this kind of ignorance, how can they even choose which is the best TV or car to buy when they have to buy one? Its utterly absurd.

The only way all of this fits into a picture (for me) is: Its all a desperate attempt to shield ones belief. Not a single person is actually trying to learn or understand or converse. They are just trying to defend what they already believe, and the reasons they believe are certainly not based on the arguments they present. It has been said very often that they have reasons to believe and give reasons to defend said beliefs, but those two rarely ever overlap.

Sorry for ranting, but 1000 pages just for two idiotic trolls who clearly have no clue what they are talking about and certainly dont care about learning anything (even proving flat out lies by quotes of simple claims they made and then, literally a few posts later deny) is just a monumental waste of ...resources. The most ironic thing being that by spitting BS over 1000, they dont lie to most sceptics on this board, whom you certainly cant impress with this nonsense, but they are lying to themselves by being so intellectually dishonest. How anyone can have such a lack of self-respect to make every effort possible to lie to themselves (we and this board are only a tool in this endeavor) just to keep up a fantasy they have been indoctrinated with, its really beyond me.

[Angrboda]

But why do they seem not to have an original though themselves? All i ever hear is the same, repetitive BS they read somewhere. Its clear they only have a very superficial understanding of what they present. Its also astonishing that seemingly every single one has the very same misconceptions about evolution and its mechanisms.

The lack of understanding why random mutation and natural selection is something completely different from simple randomness....is it lack of education? Disingenuity? Just intellectual laziness? I really dont get it, how someone can be so uneducated, and keep being that way in the face of ample information and chance to get some proper education.

Ideological silos. They're not ignorant, they just live in a different world.