shinbits

Hi! I noticed an interesting thread on how to debate with a creationist. So I thought it would be fair to make one on how to debate with an evolutionist. Fair's fair, right? Here are some simple ways to debate with an evolutionist: 1) Some evo-supporters may get nervous about this topic, because they may think about some religion they don't want to join. Re-assuring the person that ID doesn't talk about any specific religion may help. 2) You may want to start by debating logically with the person. You may want to bring up the universes vast complexities, and that logically, it's an imposibility. Often, an evolutionist may say that logic is not falsifiable. 3) Since the evolutionist doesn't want to listen to logic, you might want to bring up that evolution violates the second law of thermo-dynamics, which basically states that the every system, left to it's own devices, alwyas moves from order to disorder. In other words, evolution theory violates a scientific law, by saying just the opposite. 4) Ask about proof of humans evolving. While on that topic, you may want to talk about Piltdown Man, or Nebraska Man. 5) Of course, reserch evolution as much as you can. 6) Be respectful. I've met many nice people who believe in evolution. But there are also many who like to insult or use name calling, or say sarcastic, cutting things. (Ensuing comments by some evolutionists will prove this.) The possibility of having to face a God, understandibly, can bother some people. In such a case, if they get rude, still be respectful and just walk away. Also, you may want to refer them to this nice site. It's a creation website that also goes into some depth about evolution: http://emporium.turnpike.net/C/cs/index.htm

Well. Hi boys. Thank you all so much for participating in this debate! And of course, I have another, highly anticipated response. What you all seem to actively try to shove under the carpet is what is the embarassing foundation of evolution. What is that, you say? Dumb luck. Some of you have quickly tried to dismiss this laughably shakey foundation for a "scientific" theory. Some tried to post a link, then move away from the topic. Well I'm not gonna let you off the hook. One of you even said "It's not completely random. There's some other force." Oh really. Well, unless this force has "intelligence" in which to shape these random events, then even this force is there by random chance. You all have hords of questions. Well I have some for you. Go sit in your living rooms. Turn on your TV. Now sit, there, and contemplate for a moment--what are the chances that particles in the universe--given whatever amount of time you wish--would happily be floating along, and by oh so sweet "chance", start to bump into each other. And not just any particles, mind you. The exact ones needed to make a TV. And over times, be it billions, trillions, gagillions---of many years, enough of these lucky particles meet, and then form the shape of a box, and become a TV. Okay? Then--sit there sweating--over what the chances are, that all the right particles of metal, plastic particles for wire, and everything else needed come together-- Then--sit there drooling--over the chances that all the right pixels would come together--and on top of all that, there'd be a power source, which--oh happy day--had "accidentally" come together. But that may fry your little brains. Sit, then, and imagine, what the chances are, that a pen, sitting on your living room table, has developed it's shape, it's ink, and a structure which allows you to "click" it, so you can write. Take your time. I'll give you billions of years so this can happen. Then-- When you're through with the pen, take time to multiply that by what the chances of other little things in the house forming by chance--a book; a fork; a door nob; the door itself; And when you have finally, painstakingly calculated what the chances are, of EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THOSE THINGS COMING INTO BEING BY ACCIDENT-- Go back to the TV. And figure out it's probably, and factor that in too. And THEN-- All the while, pulling your hair, factor every other electric appliance, and then finally, your entire house. Tired? I don't blame you. You see, this is the profoundly idiotic untertaking that evolutionist choose to believe, and try to prove. The chances of an entire PLANET, cyclically spinning and orbiting, multiplied by seasons ending and begining like clockwork, multiplied by millions of ecosystems, billions of species-- Let's just say this is possible. I'll be kind. Do you know what types of things are more probable, than an entire earth being formed by chance? 1) You are more likely to flip a coin 20 billion times, and accurately guess each and every single outcome. 2) You are more likely to have someone hide on any spot on the entire planet, randomly pick a spot--whether it be in the ocean, a desert, or rainforest or mountain--and find it, every day, for 17 million years. 3) You are more likely to mark a quarter with black ink, throw it into a giant ball with a diameter extend from one end of the galaxy to the other, dive in anywhere blindfolded, pick one, and come out of the pile accurately, everyday, for a year. "Hey, I already pasted a link with irreducible complexity.." Good for you. Still doesn't change evolutions rediculous probability. Let me end this. If I told you, that I once played Mortal Kombat with the Pope-- Is it possible? Sure it is. Would you believe me? No. That's too improbable. Yet you believe that wonderfully working DNA structures, billions of trillions of cells on our planet, billions of species, billions of stars---even billions of galaxies--- Are one terribly freak accident. If some one told you your city, with all it's buildings and lights and highways wasn't built by anyone, you'd slap him silly. Well. This breathtakingly retarded theory is founded on this superbly wild chance. This indescribably wild chance is not only the foundation of evolution--for wild chance is needed for it to begin--wild chance is it's driving force--for it says that by way of the perfect conditions, just so happening to be there, uni-celled organisms formed, then got lucky, then grew, then got lucky, and specialized--- So now, my long awaited question. If there's anyone with b*llz enough to answer it, answer this: How in the hell do you justify believing in such wild stupidity? State your case. If you're brave enough. Heh. Now that I think of it-- how do you reason with anyone dumb enough to believe in this?

I wasn't trying to discredit anything. I was just answering a question asked by one of your fellow evolutionists. Someone said that I'm avoiding questions. Look how many posts are on this thread. I couldn't possibly answer them all, I'm just one guy. So instead, I try to answer the most representitive question. But when I answer a question, you acuse me of just trying to discredit everything you say. If I don't answer the question, you say that I'm dodging because I can't answer it. That's not fair. You've put me in a lose/lose situation. And I don't mind if you ask me questions because you are genuinely looking for answers. But this is what everyone's doing: I answer the question about the pelvis--it was asked because they thought it was vistigial--then I answer it, and someone comes and says "it's evolved a purpose." See, all this that I've mentioned just makes it seem like you really aren't looking for answers. This makes it seem like you just hate God no matter what, regardless of what anyone says.

First off, I'd like to apologize for making that "good for something" crack. I'm sorry. It's just that so many people have thrown insults my way, when I've tried to be nice, that it got to me. But that doesn't make what I did right. Sorry. I'm making the point that even evolutionists are admitting the pelvis has a purpose. This also clearly shows that evolutionist views conflict. Which is it? Are pelvic bones in whales are vestigial, or do they have a purpose? This link just shows that ID is everywhere, even in pelvic bones of whales. I love you all.

People accused me of making stuff up. Everything I've said I've backed with a link. I've even gone so far as to back up my links with other links. That's credibility, baby. Many years, huh? Sir Keith died in 1955. The Origin Of Species was published in 1959. If you're going to mass produce publications of a hardcover text--in the 50's-- you need to do things years ahead of time. Many years. Pfft. That's not credibility, baby. Some one asked: "Why do whales have pelvic bones?" Well HERE! I'll even paste it for ya: "In males, this small pelvic bone serves as an anchor for the muscles of the penis." Intelligent design, baby. Scroll to the middle of the page and read it for thyself. You know what the beautiful thing is? This link is from an evolutionist web site. None of the links in this post are from creation sites.

Sorry about the link I put up earlier that didn't work! ARCHAEOPTERYX-is a lie. http://www.tccsa.tc/articles/hoax.html And mezarashi, thank you so much for responding so respectfully. You disagreed, but were nice about. Thanx. and Xyph This same science used to make all our comforts actually prove ID. The more that science discovers, the more intricate we realize our world and our universe is. And the more we discover, the more unlikely it is that all things came about by chance. Does that make sense?

You wake up, lying on your mattress, created and designed for you to be comfortable. You get up and walk to your bathroom, built with a shower, sink, and toilette, spaced out to look as nice as possible. You turn on your sink, which is part of an intricate system of pipes, that lead to sewers which then drain into a lake. Then you turn on your water and squeeze grab a plastic tube, which was created in a factory, full of organized workers with complex machines, which themselves were created in a factory by intelligent people. You squeeze the plastic tube, and out comes this substance, which which was created by people with degrees in the field of dentistry, who spent years studying the field. You start brushing with an aparatus made with bristles made from synthetic fibers. After showering with soap designed with perfumes to keep you smelling good, you leave your house and drive to work or school, in a vehicle assembly-lined in a factory. You drive down the road, which is designed to withstand all types of weather, which is connected to other roads, in an intertwining system, which allows you to drive to any spot in the country. After a few hours in a building, which was designed by an architect, then built with the aid of hundreds of people who painstakingly labored for many hours, and heavy machines created for this sort of work--you then get into your car and drive home. You get on your computer, meticulously detailed and crafted with software and programming, that allows you to get onto something called, "The Internet". While on this "Information Superhighway", full of hundreds of thousands of web pages designed by people, you make the choice to stop and visit a science forum. While on this science forum, also meticulously planned out, you sit in your chair, which was made for you to comfortably sit in, wearing cloths with processed materials and dies to look fashonable--- You look at all the different posts people thought up. Then you, who is on this earth, by the concious will of people who chose to enjoy the act of sex and concieved you--- who then willed to carry you for nine months, and made the concious decision to not abort you--- Then you, using your intellect, type that everything in the universe is an accident. Now, why in the world would anyone do that? Sir Arthur Keith--an evolutionist--, who wrote the forward to Darwin's "Origin of Species" 100th aniversary edition, wrote this: Evolution is unproved and unprovable. We believe it only because the only alternative is special creation, which is unthinkable. - Sir Authur Keith, famous British evolutionist

*sigh*....okay. I meant transitional forms that weren't lies like Archaeopteryx. I have a question for you evolutionists. *chews gum* How many Piltdown Mans and Nebraska Mans are you guys going conjure to up? *shakes head* I'm gonna go get something to eat.

well, it's not p'shawed, just anylized. And if flaws with the evidence given arises, it's not "gouging our eyes out" if we discuss these flaws. That's just being scientific. Any form whatsoever would satisfy me. But let's say for example you find one transitional form. It wouldn't prove evolution, because you'd have to have at hundreds of forms, and from different types of animals from humans to cats to bears to whatever. After all: they was "billions" of years for this to happen. But I'll make it easy for you. Post one. Anyone. Well, let's remember again, ID does not point to any specific religion. If you walked to your house, and discovered the front door was is kicked in'; you're TV was gone; all your jewelry is missing; and yet things like pot's and pans were left behind--things of not much value. From these clues, we can determine that your house was robbed by some one, or some people. It's the same with ID. From looking at just how organized things like our DNA structure is, and our eco-systems, how cyclical the rotation of our earth and the planets are, these things point to the fact that perhaps these things were planned and then set in motion. Now with the house example, sure--perhaps some freakish earthquake could've shook the valuable somewhere else; and perhaps by accident, the rest of the house was unaffected by it. Perhaps some household appliances are more adapted to earthquakes than others. But no one who comes home to this would think it was just an "accident". The clues would justify that some intelligent being orchestrated this. See, ID does not first assume that there is a God, then try to prove it. Rather, by reason of all the scientific clues, such as our incredibly complex brain, ID leads us to conclude that there must be a God. The same way we knew Pluto was out there because of Neptunes wierd orbit. ID stands up to logic, and there's millions of things that prove it. After all, there are millions of species, of which are complex and organized. Evolution can barely cough up one transitional form.

Logical discourse' date=' huh? so much for logical discourse. Something I've been noticing is that when the heat is put on evolution, people seem to start to attack ID. But that's only a cop out when evolution starts to be revealed as something faulty. Let's not stray too far from the thread topic. I want to see if anyone can make the theory of evolution stand on it's own merit. But if no one can, than hopefully we can just be adult and admit that this is a hack theory.

Yes. Thank you my good man. That's exactly the point I was making. Even if ID is religious in nature, that doesn't make it wrong.

wOW! Sooo much to answer to! Let me try to answer as much as I kan--kuz I luv you all so much! 1) The lung fish. That's just one life form. If life originated out of the sea, this brings up a few questions. Like when the animal started to develop lungs, you're saying it came out of the water, couldn't breathe, then kept going back until lungs developed? See, it's just not logical. And I noticed some of you have put what you believe is the way it happened. Is there any proof at all that there was such a change? Or do we just take your word? 2)The fighter plane and the eagles from robbins thing. Some evolutionists like to point out the "2 percent difference" thing. So I was just showing that this isn't evidence that we came from apes. Eagles and robbins are quite similar creatures. Hawks and eagles are even more similar. But it would be quite incorrect to state that eagles came from hawks because of the similarities. The same with apes and humans. 3)What qualifies as a transitional form? What a question. Any animal halfway or partway to becoming another. 4) Inteligent design has religious undertones--So? Charles Darwin in his book "The Evolution of Species", wanted readers to believe that Black people were less evolved than whites. Darwin also wrote that men have come to "A higher esscence than women". That men are better with reasoning, AND (--are u ready?) "simple use of the hands feet." Yet, no one throws out Darwinism because of his racist and sexist views. People just try to look at the science of it. So if ID has a religious agenda, as long as it continues to show logic, that doesn't matter. So in the same way we don't bring up racism and sexism at the heart of the "Father of Evolution", don't point out any specific religion with respect to ID. Okay?

Oh. Well okay then! But what about it's natural surroundings would cause it to start to develop lungs? If it's under water all the time, there'd be no cause for it to have lungs. Natural selection has no way to take place in this situation. I say this respectfully. I hope people can start to see that that evolution doesn't make sense, and makes no valid points. There are no facts whatsoever in existence to back up it's claims--only "maybe this", or "maybe that", or "perhaps this". But no facts.

Thank you. *ahem* "Any intelligent, or-perchance to dream- any rational, maybe even CONSTRUCTIVE feedback?" Come on. Attacking me, instead of the point? That's a low tactic when you know you are unable to make any good points. And about the lung fish--thank you for your post. see folks? that's what I mean by intelligent conversation. But about the lungfish--is that to say it's remained unchanged for millions of years while everything else has been evolving? And your reason as to what caused it to change sounds resonable. But you don't know for sure. In the interview, I was making the point that pretty much every aspect of evoltution is speculative.