Thread 16833369

there are people here who unironically believe this shit

the image is stupid but evolution is correct though

>>16833372
>evolution is correct though
evolution is made up bullshit though*

>>16833369 (OP)
How did you get this picture of my extended family?

>>16833374
as opposed to creationism, which is based upon a vast range of empirical evidence, right?

>>16833369 (OP)
This meme picture gets a lot of stuff wrong, but the general geist is correct. It's not a complicated idea, we have DNA, which slightly varies from parent to offspring, and given geologic time, the changes that allow for a better chance at survival until reproducing are selected by the fact that those are the organisms that reproduce more.

You agree that dogs have changed a lot in the past few thousand years, correct? Well now take that idea, and instead of humans breeding the dogs for traits, traits are naturally selected by the fact that they give a better chance at reproducing, and instead of thousands of years it's millions and even billions of years

>>16833379
Also want to add it's usually not the best idea to look at evolution as a linear timeline like in that picture (which would be the equivalent of looking at every picture of your mother, mother's mother, mother's mother's mother, etc) and instead a massive tree for which humans are one branch

/pol/tards fuck off from my board

>>16833377
>if you don't believe in my pet theory then you're a flat earther schizo
this type of disingenuousness demonstrates clearly that the darwinism fundamentalists have no interest in scientific discourse and their beliefs have nothing do to with rationality.

>>16833523
How do you explain the diversity of life on earth? Which different organisms relatedness can be measured from the genetic code, and the huge amount of transitional fossils going back hundreds of millions of years

>>16833523
please share your theory with us then

picture of your great, great ..... great, great grandpa

>>16833523
>my pet theory
>the most well accepted and supported by evidence explaination for life and its diversity
Nigger

>their beliefs have nothing do to with rationality.
As opposed to believing... humans came from dirt based on a book written when people didnt know what a brain was?

>>16833759
You’re fat and gay

>>16833759
So question retard

What are you questioning in evolution?
Or are you just going to cry like a fag?

>>16833374
OK, explain the alternative.

>>16833411
this type of behavior exposes how the evolution hardliner's beliefs have no basis whatsoever in scientific observation and are purely political.
the evolution hardliner has no interest in discussing evidence or alternative theory, their only concern is censoring by any means possible beliefs which differ from their own. they aren't capable of rationally justifying why they consider themselves infallible, their unwillingness to consider that their beliefs might be correct is taken strictly on an irrational emotional basis.

of course for a theory to be legitimately scientific then it must be potentially disprovable and if the theory's adherents aren't willing to countenance nonbelievers then they are themselves declaring that evolution is not a valid scientific theory.

>>16833841
Answer the questions you retarded faggot
>>16833536
>>16833540

>>16833841
Im gonna give you one more chance to actually try to make a point against evolution instead of just whining "b-but th-the basedentists are not taking me seriously:((((((" before i start to assume youre just trying to bait

>>16833845
He’s just pretending not to be a creationist. He knows that there is no alternative theory with any substance and is just coping

>>16833369 (OP)
>NOOO STOP THAT!! WHALES CAN’T HAVE LEGS!!!

>>16833369 (OP)
rolling

>>16833979
He's literally just shitposting, /sci/ is generally much better at recognising this and ignoring it when it happens

>>16833979
>my theory is correct because the academic establishment does not permit the publications of alternative theories

>>16833801
Lack of evidence basically, its mostly imaginary stories. Or so it looks to me, i'm not an expert at all in the subject matter. Which brings an interesting point, why should laymen have the correct understanding of topics they are not experts on? Its harmless if laymen get the wrong idea about things, you basically cant fix that without tyrannically imposing a science police which goes against the spirit of free discussion of ideas and always backfires, politically.
Best compromise for you is to stay in your science club and let others stay mistaken.

>>16833379
> slightly varies from parent to offspring,
So where are the 6 gorilion failures to achieve one positive mutation?
>
So humans evolved with the planet formation?
Further their generation interval is similar to bacteria's?

You agree that dogs have changed a lot in the past few thousand years, correct?
Isn't breeding a pure argument for creationism?

>>16833841
>the evolution hardliner has no interest in discussing evidence or alternative theory,
It's a church, they have to hold the narrative.
The lack of arguments about critic immediately turns into personal insults. Poor believers, hope there are paid for.

>>16834408
Low IQ people will do low IQ things, half the population is below average intelligence and those idiots will always be prone to having erroneous and poorly thought out beliefs.
>my beliefs aren't religious and irrational in nature even though i adhere to a rigid dogma that i can't defend or justify because i named my belief system "science" or "atheism"

If Darwinism were a rational scientific belief system then challenging it would be not only acceptable, but encouraged and the adherents would look forward to seeing every failed challenger, but instead they censor and ban all challenges to it. The famous (famous if you've actually studied biology, if you haven't then this is probably the first you're hearing of it) case of Warwick Collins' excommunication from academia 50 years ago for disputing a small aspect of Darwinism really pulls back the curtains on what a shabby belief system evolutionists cling to.

>>16834428
Collins wasn't excommunicated, he became disenfranchised because of the closed mindedness of his supervisor on any interpretation which went against his life's work. Big problem, but not the one you were trying to showcase. A better example is what they did to Watson when he claimed IQ is genetic.

>>16833369 (OP)

This is a basedjak TREASURE TROVE. GEM after GEM after GEM! Will get to it later today.

>>16833377
>creationism
misreading of the bible due to bad translations.
Humans are a created species, or at leat adamites/ben'adam are

>>16834447
>he claimed IQ is genetic.
He didn't claim, he stated it as fact backed by all the data, this upset believers in magic

>>16834404
>So where are the 6 gorilion failures
Well you are one, for a start.

>So humans evolved with the planet formation?
>Further their generation interval is similar to bacteria's?
ESL?

>>16835012
>he stated it as fact backed by all the data
So when people go against what you agree with it's not a claim but instead a fact. However, you dislike Darwin so his proponents are acolytes who defend their dogma.

You are laughable.

>>16835076
Are africans dumb or not? Will them being dumb affect their potential for economic development?
Is it right to throw a fit and strip an old man of his hard earned awards because he said something you don't agree with?

>>16833369 (OP)
>>16834989

Actually, the illustrations are perfect as they are.

>>16833369 (OP)
Reminder: if you believe that genes exist, you believe in evolution.

>>16834112
no, /sci/ is NOT better at ignoring this shit what the fuck are you smoking

every fucking FUCKING day it's thread after thread exactly like this with fucking autistic retards who cant control their power level who get baited every single fucking goddamn time into posting ACKSHUALLY and looking like stupid idiots that only justify the trolls coming here and being faggots

>>16833379
Agreed. 100 percent with this post. The only problem I have with many people who misunderstand evolution is they think it's a good thing. Sometimes bad traits get selected for. Some traits make it, some don't. Some are good for you, some are bad. Bassically evolution is directionless. It describes the process of change. Not nessessarily good or bad.

>>16835405
>her 3 years into marriage vs her when dating

>>16835498
This is part of why Darwin used the term natural selection more than evolution.

>>16834270
>why should laymen have the correct understanding of topics they are not experts on? Its harmless if laymen get the wrong idea about things, you basically cant fix that without tyrannically imposing a science police which goes against the spirit of free discussion of ideas and always backfires, politically. Best compromise for you is to stay in your science club and let others stay mistaken.
So your best argument is "im a retard but you guys cant do anything about it without imposing a tyrannical dictatorship ;) checkmate atheists"

The creationists are not sending their best

BROTHER! CORRUPT "SCIENTISTS" AND DEMOCRATIC TRAITORS ARE HIDING THE TRUTH FROM US!! AND PEOPLE ARE TOO DUMMY TO NOTICE!! WAKE UP PEOPLE!! GOD CREATED US! YOU ARE NOT FUCKING MONKEYS!

>>16835628
So true girl! Whitey on the moon, amirite?

>>16834242
Quiet, Lamarck

>>16833369 (OP)
yeah bro we all come descended from Richard Karn. totally

>>16835577
as soon as anyone starts talking about laymen in order to pretentiously infer they themselves are some sort of superior intellect you know you're dealing with someone on the narcissistic personality disorder spectrum.
why does /sci/ specifically attract that class of people in droves?

>>16835707
kek

You don't need evidence of every minute detail to posit that evolution is the most likely explanation for how the world we know came to be. You only need a few historic samples, and to understand how a naturally selecting algorithm works. You get, on average, a world much like our own.
It would be very difficult to even start to prove a fundamentally different explanation.
At best you could say "ok there's this additional influence" (ie sexual selection) or "this parameter isn't set right in our models" - but these are tweaks, or amendments, not alternatives.

>>16835577
>So your best argument is "im a retard but you guys cant do anything about it w
Not a retard, but not a specialist in the topic. Because of that, i cant tell that the experts are right either. Fact is, i cant tell apart an expert from a non-expert.
This is because the subject at hand isnt science btw. I know that a cell phone repairman is an expert if i see him repair a cellphone, with an alleged evolution expert i must simply... trust?
Sorry but not, i will kill believing and posting possibly wrong things, because they may be right, i cant be proven wrong, i cant be shown to be wrong and its also fun.
And yes, you cant do anything about it.

>>16833369 (OP)
>begin turning into mammals
>before getting small

I find this unlikely

Had to be reptile -> small -> mammal

>>16834428
>If Darwinism were a rational scientific belief system
You're not in the targeted audience if a message is too dumb for you. In fact that idiotic hallucination has to be contradictory and stupid to attract the cattle to milk and build the congregation. People with analytical skills or the ability to think for themself are the last ones needed. So they try to expel with insults or their (((expert))) BS as if in questions like this human experts can exist. The pawns of the church of satan, low minded low level.

>>16833801
>>16834270

You sound HIV positive.

>>16836344
HIV DOES NOT REALLY EXISTS! WAKE UP. IF YOU INFORMED YOURSELF YOU WOULD SHOW A LITTLE INTELLIGENCE

>>16833979
>As opposed to believing... humans came from dirt based on a book written when people didnt know what a brain was?
humans came from non-living chemicals in YOUR world view retard
>>16835076
>So when people go against what you agree with it's not a claim but instead a fact.
You can test differences in IQ at the population level. Its called science brainlet nigga keep up
>>16835930
>you only need a few historic samples to determine bacteria evolved into humans
holy fuck...

>>16833379
Dogs are still dogs though.

>>16833369 (OP)
dumb people have stupid beliefs, half of all people are of below average intelligence, so people who have stupid beliefs are extremely common.

>>16836902
>a few
I mean if you want to call hundreds of thousands of fossil specimens and the entire field of genetics “a few” then sure

>>16838980
Not necessarily they're just more likely to hold onto stupid ideas because they don't have a way to argue against them properly.

>>16836344
No one has ever presented real evidence that HIV causes AIDS, it's all running off false trust to generate funding for the CDC and multinational drug pushers.

The longest running study literally found that a statistically insignificant number of the long term partners of HIV positive people were also HIV positive.
The only official conclusion from this I remember was "that HIV seems to be a difficult disease to transmit".

>>16837386
But are they wolves?

Where did african wild dogs come from?

>>16839486
They’re their own dhole-adjacent thing

>>16835983
>with an alleged evolution expert i must simply... trust?

How about reading up on the subject and using your wits to decide if what they say makes sense? You don't have to be a fucking world class expert yourself to do this.

If you take your car to the repair shop for a broken dog bone and they tell you oh yeah your transmission's about to blow too and needs to be fixed right now, you don't need to be a repairman yourself to tell whether they're taking you for a chump. But you should know something about cars so you can make an educated judgement.

>>16839524
>How about reading up on the subject an
Sorry but that wont cut it. Biologists need to study for years, just reading up on a topic isnt going to make me an expert, at that level its would simply be propaganda, i would not have the expertise required to tell apart propaganda from facts. Most biologists likely dont, as they are all women trying to graduate and they dont care about their own career.
I would rather read and spread misinformation, you really cant stop me, you'd have to send me for years to a university for the purpose of studying biology.
This is unlike a cellphone repairman, that can show he knows his stuff by repairing phones. I dont need to know how to repair a phone to recognize that a broken phone has been repaired.
In university i would just be exposed to a bunch of stories i cant prove. Not like anyone would give me fossils or DNA sequencing equipment.

>>16835418
kek

>>16839555
>as they are all women trying to graduate and they dont care about their own career.
blackpilled truth

>>16833369 (OP)
people who believe in darwinism are stupid monkeys, people who don't were created in god's image

>>16833379
>and given geologic time
evolution is the reddit and memes of "science". just say time is literally magic, and you can interject with whatever bullshit you like.

>>16835498
>Bassically evolution is directionless.
Basically, you're a fucking idiot who thinks life is just random bullshit with no purpose.

>>16833979
Why does creationism being le bad prove evolution is true? It's still nigger babble with no evidence.

Pigs are devolved humans

Why a fish needs a nose?

>>16841159
creationism is based on misunderstandings and mistranslations
humans are a modified organism created by some high intelligence species

>>16841302
To smell with

>>16841159
>Why does creationism being le bad prove evolution is true?
That isn’t not the point of what was said. The point was that he’s claiming not to be a creationist and trying to act like evolution by natural isn’t the only explanation with any evidence for speciation, biodiversity, etc. But then when you ask what alternative theory he is suggesting he goes silent
>It's still nigger babble with no evidence
Cope