This is bunkum!
We have not "evolved" from anything we were created and not by the God of our misguided religions.
Darwin was wrong as the entire concept of intermediary steps in evolution is fundamentally flawed as the changes would have initally been defects hindering the host and its elimination via natural selection.
Stop misinterpreting similarities as genetic ancestry and accept that whilst all life shares similar building-block we are not related.
40 comments
That's a true wignut indeed but it's more of a CTSTDT, at least as it stands.
Though it does beg the question is who or what he does believe created us?
"Darwin was wrong as the entire concept of intermediary steps in evolution is fundamentally flawed as the changes would have initally been defects hindering the host and its elimination via natural selection. "
No no no. MOST mutations aren't beneficial, but the few that are (or just aren't harmful) get passed on. Feedback loop. FAIL!
"Stop misinterpreting similarities as genetic ancestry"
Your son was born ginger wasn't he :(
Edit: Ah Daily Mail that explains a lot
We have not "evolved" from anything we were created and not by the God of our misguided religions.
"We have not "evolved" from anything we were created"
We have the fossils. We win.
"the entire concept of intermediary steps in evolution is fundamentally flawed as the changes would have initally been defects"
We have the anti-biotic resistant bacteria. We win (sorta).
"whilst all life shares similar building-block we are not related."
We (and chimpanzees) have the ERVs. We win.
What the fuck are you talking about..because it definitely NOT modern biology...um, similarites and genetic ancestry IS, by their own inherent properties, absolute proof of decent with modification. You shot yourself in the foot with that one.
A creationist fundie who doesn't beleive in God?
Just when you think you've seen it all, somthing new comes along.
OK, the next fundie who tries to sound more eloquent by using the term "whilst" in place of "while" is getting kicked right in the nuts. We know that you're an idiot, and dressing up your moronic piffle with a couple of fancy words isnt going to fool anyone. Same thing for using the puke-inducing "Adam and Steve" thing....oh yeah man, right in the nuts.
"This is bunkum!"
What the hell? Are you living in the 1920s? Seriously, bunkum? Ha!
"We have not "evolved" from anything we were created and not by the God of our misguided religions."
That's strange. All the evidence seems to indicate the exact opposite of your position. If you don't mind, I'll accept reality over your version of events. Reality has ever so slightly more credibility.
"Darwin was wrong as the entire concept of intermediary steps in evolution is fundamentally flawed as the changes would have initally been defects hindering the host and its elimination via natural selection."
So, going from brown eyes to blue would be a "defect" that hinders the one born with some intermediary shade? What about a lightening of skin tone when going to climates with more cloud cover? Was that also a "defect" that would immediately render the population unviable?
Why is it you people think some major change has to happen before it's evolution?
"Stop misinterpreting similarities as genetic ancestry and accept that whilst all life shares similar building-block we are not related."
Superficial physical similarities aren't why we accept common ancestry. Genetics which show the same fucking genes which couldn't be there without common ancestry is why we accept it.
This is bunkum!
No, no, no! The delivery is all wrong. Do it like this.
This! Is! Bunkum!
Oh, 300 references, will you ever grow old?
Arts_Myth wrote: "Oh, 300 references, will you ever grow old?"Darwinist: A thousand journals of the scientific establishment descend upon you. Our facts will blot out the sun!
Bobbios: Then we shall lie in the shade!
The ignorance of those that try and refute eolution amazes me. First, there is no need for nor is there really any mention of "intermediary" steps in evolution. Secondly, evolution only deals with the FACT that organisms change over time (it does not concern itself with our origins per se). Third, while it is true that a genetic mutation that is fatal would be, well, fatal and therefore not passed on (hence the definition of "Fatal mutation"), it is NOT true that all or most mutations are fatal. Indeed, right now in every living organism are hundreds, sometimes thousands of genetic mutations. A mutation is simply a change. Nothing more. Nothing less. There are several types of mutations. Now, if a mutation causes a phenotypic change and it is favorable in a POPULATION (not individual) then it will be passed on and over time the population will evolve. If it is not favorable, then those with the mutation will fall to the wayside. This is natural selection at work. As for the comment, "we are not related". What a very sad and pathetic worldview. How lonely you must be. Of course, it is this very attitude that is responsible for so much hate, greed, death, destruction, and murder. After all, if we are not "related" (this includes ALL life, not just humans), then I can do whatever I want to you because it will not affect me. Typical attitude of christianity. Sad indeed.
comments: xthetruth1@aol.com
Hey Zyzle,
This post isn't really fundie.
"We have not "evolved" from anything we were created and not by the God of our misguided religions."
CTSTDT really, pleas put them in the right place.
But the 'everybodys wrong except me' is always fun.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
