You accuse liberals of name calling, yet you are usually the first to resort to insults. You ignore evidence or dismiss it as a hoax. You close threads when you cannont or will not answer my arguments. You know better than at least 90% of the world's climatologists and 99.9% of the world's biologists. You are invincibly ignorant.
I dont have a problem with name calling. I blame liberals for lack of original thought. I close threads when you rekeatedly avoid offering proof for your assertions. Because all the cool kids are doing it isnt good enough for me. That alarmist claim thar the .005 of mankinds carbon emissons are 100% responsible for any short term variayion of temperature without factoring solar activity or water vapor isnt Good enough for me. Comaring x-rays of Vern Troyer and Shaquille ONeil doesnt prove evolution to me. Groupthink doesnt appeal to me, as it does you. When your Mother asked you if you would jump off a bridge if your friends were doing it, you'd say yes...I look to make sure theres water.
I didn't say they were a hoax. i said rejected by the scientific community. Those fossils are not considered proof of evolution because you know..the horse didn't become anything else.
It's ok. we already know you won't let go of your dogma but don't project onto me. You don't hear me preaching creation do you? I'm just rejecting evolution because I know it's false.
I could not find anything about horse fossils being rejected by the scientific community. I found stuff like this: http://darwiniana.org/horses.htm
I assume you read something from a creationist website. The horses didn't become something else. Something else became horses. Your ignorance of evolution is really striking.
Actually I think I know more than you about the subject.
However I don't care anymore. You refuse to address the fact that if evolution were true there should be literally thousands and thousands of examples of transitional fossils and there are none.
I understand why you won't address it, because you don't have an explanation and neither do any of your 99.9%(made up number) of scientists that believe in evolution. Therefore you and your scientists are either in denial or you're dishonest.
I don't mind having and honest rational discussion or argument about anything but I can't waste my time any more with someone who refuses to face the truth.
You know on global warming you finally came up with one or two scientific articles, after years of my asking for them. True, they didn't prove your point but it was a start. How about ONE scientific article against the theory of evolution that is not from a religious site?
You are a fraud dependent on strawman and ad homimen. In all these years, you havent provided proof that man's carbon is responsible for any warming that may have occured or any evidence of a transitional fossil.
But to shut you up and put this thread to bed, Ill argue like you.
99.9% of Catholic priests agree creationism is real.
I will address the last two comments. The Catholic Church, including the Pope, made peace with the theory of evolution a long time ago, and do not regard it as contrary to their belief that God created the World.
Second, I do not have to explain the "complete lack of transitional fossils" because there are transitional fossils. I would link to the evidence but you would call it a lie without reading it, so what's the point. But since I only need one white crow to prove that all crows arent' black: Archaeopteryx.
Ok Gary you proved there were species of birds and horses millions of years ago. So what did they evolve into exactly? Birds and horses? You done did told us.
So we have established that you are completely ignorant regarding the theory of evolution. Ignorance of the evidence is not evidence, it's just ignorance.
21 comments:
God you are stupid.
Do liberals have any other argument besides stupid, racist or mean?
It'd be helpful if y'all would work on some new material.
If only so many so-called conservatives weren't stupid, racist or mean. For the record, I don't think you're racist.
Once again wrong, you stupid fucking polock.
You accuse liberals of name calling, yet you are usually the first to resort to insults. You ignore evidence or dismiss it as a hoax. You close threads when you cannont or will not answer my arguments. You know better than at least 90% of the world's climatologists and 99.9% of the world's biologists. You are invincibly ignorant.
I dont have a problem with name calling. I blame liberals for lack of original thought. I close threads when you rekeatedly avoid offering proof for your assertions. Because all the cool kids are doing it isnt good enough for me. That alarmist claim thar the .005 of mankinds carbon emissons are 100% responsible for any short term variayion of temperature without factoring solar activity or water vapor isnt Good enough for me. Comaring x-rays of Vern Troyer and Shaquille ONeil doesnt prove evolution to me. Groupthink doesnt appeal to me, as it does you. When your Mother asked you if you would jump off a bridge if your friends were doing it, you'd say yes...I look to make sure theres water.
Also i just read that the horse thing you linked to was rejected by the scientific community a long time ago.
Look it up yourself.
Ah so the horse fossils are a hoax? Because you read it somewhere. Where, Answers in Genesis?
hmmm... I don't think you read real good gary.
I didn't say they were a hoax. i said rejected by the scientific community. Those fossils are not considered proof of evolution because you know..the horse didn't become anything else.
It's ok. we already know you won't let go of your dogma but don't project onto me. You don't hear me preaching creation do you? I'm just rejecting evolution because I know it's false.
I stand corrected, you didn't call the horse thing a hoax, Donkey did.
I could not find anything about horse fossils being rejected by the scientific community. I found stuff like this:
http://darwiniana.org/horses.htm
I assume you read something from a creationist website. The horses didn't become something else. Something else became horses. Your ignorance of evolution is really striking.
Actually I think I know more than you about the subject.
However I don't care anymore. You refuse to address the fact that if evolution were true there should be literally thousands and thousands of examples of transitional fossils and there are none.
I understand why you won't address it, because you don't have an explanation and neither do any of your 99.9%(made up number) of scientists that believe in evolution. Therefore you and your scientists are either in denial or you're dishonest.
I don't mind having and honest rational discussion or argument about anything but I can't waste my time any more with someone who refuses to face the truth.
Im sorry, did I say hoax? I meant to say lie, like all the other lies that the liar Huxley lied about to sell evolution.
You know on global warming you finally came up with one or two scientific articles, after years of my asking for them. True, they didn't prove your point but it was a start. How about ONE scientific article against the theory of evolution that is not from a religious site?
You are a fraud dependent on strawman and ad homimen. In all these years, you havent provided proof that man's carbon is responsible for any warming that may have occured or any evidence of a transitional fossil.
But to shut you up and put this thread to bed, Ill argue like you.
99.9% of Catholic priests agree creationism is real.
Debate over, I said 99.9%.
this is what i'm talking about gary. I asked you a direct question.
how can you explain the complete lack of transitional fossils?
please regoogle me an answer to that question and maybe we can continue.
I will address the last two comments. The Catholic Church, including the Pope, made peace with the theory of evolution a long time ago, and do not regard it as contrary to their belief that God created the World.
Second, I do not have to explain the "complete lack of transitional fossils" because there are transitional fossils. I would link to the evidence but you would call it a lie without reading it, so what's the point. But since I only need one white crow to prove that all crows arent' black: Archaeopteryx.
yawn
Ok Gary you proved there were species of birds and horses millions of years ago. So what did they evolve into exactly? Birds and horses? You done did told us.
So we have established that you are completely ignorant regarding the theory of evolution. Ignorance of the evidence is not evidence, it's just ignorance.
Post a Comment