So what . So physical phenomena are described by mathematical functions , what has this got to with what a mathematical function is . A function of what .
Absolutely Nothing: Atheists on What They Know About What They Pretend to Discuss
- Thread starter Tiassa
- Start date
- Status
So what . So physical phenomena are described by mathematical functions , what has this got to with what a mathematical function is . A function of what .
All the links go to other Wikipedia pages.
Wrong as always.
I reject the idea darwinism, as it cannot be observed, or tested.
Don't be a dummy...stop changing definitions to suit your own mythical agenda. Does denying the existence of Unicorns imply that they exist?
All you are showing, is the extent at which brainwashing in childish myths as a child, will be indelibly printed into an impressionable, gullible mind that did not reach the adult stage.
macro and micro evolution are different sides of the same coin. To deny such logic and observation, is to be bereft of any and all credibility.
Quite serious. So you fail to accept the words of the christian paleontologist? You are then another idiotic YEC?
Bullshit. All you are doing is proving again my point in how you change definitions and meanings, and even the whole gists of articles, to bolster your silly mythical beliefs.
No not really, simply because it is an observational fact and not a myth like your fanatical sky daddy.
And why shout? Are you angry again, that people are railing and criticising your childish beliefs?
Don't be angry, it isn't good for your health, and remember when you do kick the bucket, that's it...dead, gone, the end amen!
Darwinism , takes to Friggin long to be observed !!!! By us . Or Hundreds of Thousands of generations of us .
Wrong. Now, I doubt very much you'll read this link, but if you do and agree with it, then we'll know you're honest.
If not, then I'm sure you'll continue to lie about it.
https://www.pnas.org/content/106/Supplement_1/10033
paddoboy
You are a nutter.
I always suspected it, but now you have provided sufficient evidence, that shows it to be true.
Sometimes the truth hurts when foolish gullible YEC's and other religious fanatics are forced to confront it.Let me reiterate, you as usual, just as I proved before, have changed the whole gist and meaning of your article and the opinion of the christian paleontologist that made the discovery, to suit your own creationists beliefs and myths.
Or alternatively you could show me where in your article there is any reference to any indication that Darwinism is false.
You won't because you can't. In essence, as per your multitude of other posts, you are pushing shit up hill...or pissing into the wind. Sad, but true.paddoboy
You are a nutter.
I always suspected it, but now you have provided sufficient evidence, that shows it to be true.
Indeed pad is , A nutter .
Evidence has been around for a long time , really .
Can't help you out if you don't know how to click on a link.
Except in the places it is directly observed - like new species evolving as we watch, and animals evolving all sorts of new structures (like wings.)
However, such things are in the domain of science, and we have seen how you feel about science - you reject it, because it conflicts with your fundamentalist political agenda.
Yes one does.
Angry? not in the least! In fact I'm pretty buoyant re the observational fact in seeing you struggle to support your myths. And regarding respect for other people's beliefs, I always have and always will. My Mrs is a devout practising christian and we have been married now for 42 years, and both our first and only marriage. I certainly don't though have any respect for lying, obtuse, evasive evangelists, that lack any intestinal fortitude and continue to deny and redefine facts for their own satisfaction, and in support of their myths.I certainly respect Mary yes, but by the same token I reject lying, obtuse, angry and dishonest evangelists, like yourself, and coincidentally, just as Mary does also. Or did you miss that part? or redefine her words? For your perusal....
"She’s horrified that some Christians accuse her of hiding the true meaning of her data. “They treat you really bad,” she says. “They twist your words and they manipulate your data.”
Hate, like stupidity, is a terrible thing river. I feel for you!Just one question, why are you banned from the sciences?
Yes it is. It is what drives your arrogant stupidity and lies.
Of course you do. It is again, what drives your arrogant lies and obtuseness.
Just one question, why are you banned from the sciences?
pad :
You are officially on my ignore list . ( actually you are the only one on my ignore list ) .
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
Darwinian theory predates all genetics - as Darwin well knew, he had no mechanism.
That's one reason he piled up the data and correlations for so long, in big thick books full of detailed and multifaceted correlations from widely disparate taxonomic categories of living beings - without a mechanism he needed a strong, dense, painstakingly documented base of circumstantial evidence.
The upside is that he did build one, and by necessity it was good for almost any mechanism - when the genome was discovered it slotted right in. So does epigenetics - another way to provide the heritable variation and conservative stability that is all Darwinian theory requires of its reproductive mechanism.
Darwinian evolution does not have to be slow. It just happens to be, in normal circumstances, for multicellular animals especially.
To your last statement ; Darwinism does have to be slow , that is the essence of his theory .
True though if he had been alive today , he would have thought much differently . I'm sure he would found evolution both fast and slow .
- Status