The Dangers Of Creationism In Education

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
Here is a an example:

Evolutionists claim that a shark called Isurus Hastalis has evolved in to the modern Great White Shark, which is the more advanced shark according to them.

The teeth of Isurus Hastalis does not have serrations but they are of almost same shape as that of GWS. The teeth of GWS however have serrations.

Now common sense dictates that Isurus Hastalis and GWS have different behavioral and habitual niches as this can be judged from the teeth. Isurus most likely [b]chomped it's prey, while the GWS would tear it's prey apart by slicing it, in which the serrations will help.

So this is a major issue with Evolutionists. They make silly claims that an animal has evolved in to a better animal using fossil remains as an example (that can deceive us) and fail to consider other aspects of things. [/B]

What the hell, this is all wrong.

1. "What the hell is an "evolutionist"
2. the whole Isurus hastalis is NOT accepted.
3. NOTHING ABOUT EVOLUTION IMPLIES "BETTER THAN BEFORE"

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
Dinosaurs have faced extinction 3 times and not just one time. This shows that sudden change in envoirnment can cause extinction but it cannot stop a species from [b]re-emerging. [/B]

When?

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
You understood the basics of my point but failed to understand the logic behind it.

A Kodiak Bear is a mammal. It can tolerate changes in environment to a certain extent but this does not means that it can evolve to adopt to an entirely different environment. And despite being warm blooded, it will die in that new environment which is not suitable for it. This clearly goes against Evolution, which tends to say that a species can evolve to adopt to major changes in environment or a new environment, which is not true. No species can evolve to adopt to a different environment. It will simply die in a different environment, if it cannot tolerate it.

case and point: exotic species.

Evolution is about change, if you transfer a frog from SAY 30 degrees to 90 degrees...it dies, but if you raise the temperature slowly over many generations...they survive. This has been done. Its about TIME. Not acclimitization.

Originally posted by Bardock42
No, no, no, you are supporting a "theory" that has no evidence for it, it is not in any way a scientific theory. Very different.

In simple words:

- Barnacles remains Barnacles.
- GWS remains GWS.
- Man remains Man.
- Ape remains Ape.

And someone have already admitted here that Darwin also have made mistakes.

Originally posted by AngryManatee
He doesn't seem to understand that, regardless of the number of times that's been pointed out to him so far.

Originally posted by inimalist
its debates like these that show why people are not equal at all...

Originally posted by Alliance
What the hell, this is all wrong.

Originally posted by Alliance
1. "What the hell is an "evolutionist"

Originally posted by Alliance
2. the whole Isurus hastalis is NOT accepted.

Check the link: Click!

Originally posted by Alliance
3. NOTHING ABOUT EVOLUTION IMPLIES "BETTER THAN BEFORE"

Originally posted by Alliance
When?

Second Mass Extinction: Happened in Jurassic period about 200 million years ago.

Third Mass Extinction: Happened in Cretaceous period about 65 miliion years ago.

There are rumors that a fourth mass extinction process also took place during the age of Dinosaurs.

You really have very limited knowledge, mate!

Originally posted by Alliance
case and point: exotic species.

Let me tell you another basics of nature. When you will go in to a new location, you will try to eat different food too that you may not have been accustomed to. This is about survival and has nothing to do with evolution. But if you will fail, you will die.

Man is simply messing up with Nature and this will one day lead to disastrous results.

Originally posted by Alliance
Evolution is about change, if you transfer a frog from SAY 30 degrees to 90 degrees...it dies, but if you raise the temperature slowly over many generations...they survive. This has been done. Its about TIME. Not acclimitization.

Let me give you a simple example: A man who is living in hot conditions becomes accustomed to such conditions. He can survive in it without difficulty. But if you throw a man who is accustomed to cold environment, in to hot conditions. He will become very uncomfortable and might die, if he does not tolerates the immense heat. This does not means that the man living in hot conditions is more evolved then the other man who is not accustomed to hot conditions.

Gibberish followed by an inept understanding of modern evolutionary concepts and biology in general followed by more gibberish with some more inept understanding of evolutionary concepts as garnish. If a species becomes extinct it cannot reemerge, no-wit. Dinosaurs are not collectively a species. 🙄

Oh noes, Darwin wasn't infallible back in the 1800s! fear

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Gibberish followed by an inept understanding of modern evolutionary concepts and biology in general followed by more gibberish with some more inept understanding of evolutionary concepts as garnish. If a species becomes extinct it cannot reemerge, no-wit. Dinosaurs are not collectively a species. 🙄

Try to refute my points.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Oh noes, Darwin wasn't infallible back in the 1800s! fear

He was the one who came up with this theory. People believed in him and they do even now. But now people can argue against him due to better understanding of nature and it's mechanisms.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
You do not understand even the basics of nature. Try to refute my points. I have also studied about Evolution. The problem is that it is riddled with inconsistencies.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
But he is now infallible, right? 🙄

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
I don't understand the basics of nature? Irony, considering the garbage from your "studies of evolution" you've spewed that's somehow fallen onto the keyboard in semi-coherent sentences. Refute stupidity? Now, I already told you I didn't speak Retarded.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Try again when your idea of discussing evolution extends beyond copying and pasting things unreferenced from the unreferenced Wikipedia.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Strawman. Try again, plebe.

I still cant beleive in this day and age that we even have to argue about evolution. There is concrte evidence for this, its called genetics. You can actually see in our genes that humans have 96% similar genes to chimpanzees- our closest relatives.

Originally posted by Crimson Phoenix
I still cant beleive in this day and age that we even have to argue about evolution. There is concrte evidence for this, its called genetics. You can actually see in our genes that humans have 96% similar genes to chimpanzees- our closest relatives.

And why does chimps do not finally evolve in to humans?

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
You are retarted. You cannot refute my points and you are attacking my level of understanfing of things. You have yet to refute my points.

To acknowledge anything you've written as a "point" would be folly, as it's just plain gibberish. I'm not attacking your level of understanding because there is no understanding to attack as noted by your repeated use of the words "better" and "more advanced" and what can be construed as a belief in evolution occurring at an individual level.

Case-in-point.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
LOL!

And why does chimps do not finally evolve in to humans?

Comparative developmental biology. Palaeontology. Molecular genetics and comparative genomics. All refute you.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
Check the edited text above.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
LOL!

And why does chimps do not finally evolve in to humans?

You seem to be under the impreesion the evolution happens in a day. It takes MILLIONS of years. If you think its a proces you physically see in you lifetime, then you'll never understand it (or many other scintific theories)

Originally posted by Crimson Phoenix
You seem to be under the impreesion the evolution happens in a day. It takes MILLIONS of years. If you think its a proces you physically see in you lifetime, then you'll never understand it (or many other scintific theories)

The case of Millions of years is just an excuse to support this theory. There are some animals alive today that are millions of years old but they have yet to evolve.

Want an example?

Take the case of the Great White Shark. This shark came in to existance about 10 million years ago. It remains the same thing and occupies the same niche.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
If one wants to insult someone with the word retarded, they should spell it correctly. Otherwise they just end up looking... retarded. 313

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
To acknowledge anything you've written as a "point" would be folly, as it's just plain gibberish. I'm not attacking your level of understanding because there is no understanding to attack as noted by your repeated use of the words "better" and "more advanced" and what can be construed as a belief in evolution occurring at an individual level.

And better refute my points or drop the argument. Because you are now only making lame excuses to spoil the debate.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Case-in-point.
"ROFFLECOPTER humans OMGWTFBBQ chimps"

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Comparative developmental biology. Palaeontology. Molecular genetics and comparative genomics. All refute you. Yes, evolution has remained completely unchanged for the past century and a half. 😐

All those fields haver yet to prove Evolution happening.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
LOL!

And why does chimps do not finally evolve in to humans?

That's a joke, right? You moron.

Culex pipiens insecticide resistance.

Antibacterial resistance.

Hemoglobin-myoglobin evolution.

Cetacean beta- and kappa-casein.

"Why does chimps do not finally evolve in to humans?" (sic) 😐 😐 😐

You not only lack understanding of evolution you lack understanding of science as a method. Run along back to "studying evolution" on Wikipedia and/or some bullshit creationist website.

Originally posted by Bardock42
That's a joke, right? You moron.

I want to know that why do they stay Chimps despite having genes that are 96% same of ours. There is only 4% more to go.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
No retard.

I want to know that why do they stay Chimps despite having genes that are 96% same of ours. There is only 4% more to go.

N-no, there's only 4% more to go for us to become them.

You seem to assume that humans are the pinnacle of evolution and that everything is directed at evolving into humans...well, it isn't.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
I never said that Evolution happens in a day.

The case of Millions of years is just an excuse to support this theory. There are some animals alive today that are millions of years old but they have yet to evolve.

Want an example?

Take the case of the Great White Shark. This shark came in to existance about [b]10 million years ago. It remains the same thing and occupies the same niche. [/B]

Exactly. There hasnt been as huge evolutionary pressures on the sharks, so the species hasnt evolved drastically. But still there has been changes to the great whites milions of years ago and the sharks of today.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Culex pipiens insecticide resistance.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Antibacterial resistance.

Anti-bacterial resistances exist in all the animals. The immune system protects against different types of bacteria to prevent them from invading our bodies. When an animal dies, it's anti-bacterial resistances are gone and the body starts decaying due to reactions caused by the invading bacteria.

And we often use advanced medical treatments in the shape of anti-biotics and drugs to make ourselves capable of protecting against those micro-organisms, whom we cannot naturally defend against.

However it is true that the bacterial forms or micro=organisms can often improve and then manage to breach the resistances of the available anti-biotics that protect us against them but despite this improvement, they remain the same damn bacterial forms or micro-organisms.

The rest of the explanation will be posted soon.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD

The rest of the explanation will be posted soon.

Please don't bother.