Sea Breeze - so many fallacies in one post!
Got to rush now but will get back to you in detail this evening (UK)
the old creation book had a lot to say about the fossil record.
if i remember correctly it was some lie about all the fossils ever found would fit on a single table.
the reality is that there is an embarrassment of riches illustrating the evolution of life.
Sea Breeze - so many fallacies in one post!
Got to rush now but will get back to you in detail this evening (UK)
she certainly is passionate about climate change.
🤔.
It would be much better if you look at her argument from an empiric scientifically way - Bugbear
Her arguments are hysterical, fear-mongering nonsense.
Climate change is real; human activity is a significant part of the problem. Greta and her cult are still way out of order.
When did we start asking children how to organise the world?
"brussels plans to insist that in order to get that "quick and dirty" deal, the prime minister would have to sign up to eu conditions: alignment with eu environmental, state aid and tax regulations for example.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-50777995.
would such a deal represent what they thought they were voting for in the referendum?.
she certainly is passionate about climate change.
🤔.
She is as certain of her cause as I was about the imminent end of the world when I was 16.
ewart chitty was appointed as secretary-treasurer , which position he held until his appointment to the governing body in november 1974.. when in brooklyn, chitty seems to have preferred younger men as roommates.
the actual charge brought to the gb against chitty was made by a former roommate and involved some sort of inappropriate conduct.
the gb concluded that chitty had homosexual tendencies, and asked him to resign.. a rare photo of chitty in happier days.
I knew the Greenlees family in Glasgow. They had a chain of (cheap) shoe shops. It was funny that in the 70s they sold shoes that any JW would have been told off for wearing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=678&v=noj4phmt9oe&feature=emb_logo.
these scientists all seem to agree that the traditional view darwinism cannot possibly be true.
.
Why do creationists think that clicking 'Dislike' is an adequate response to a detailed factual answer?
Coming soon - Another creationist thread consisting of a 2 hour video by somebody who knows nothing about biology.
far from uniting the british people, the election result on black friday will go down in history books as the day the brexit chasm got wider & deeper imo.
whatever the result, thanks to the past 42 months of unprecedented political bitterness many people's attitudes will harden.
there won't be many "good losers.".
I doubt if my local village hall will need security tomorrow. Probably be me and a farmer with his border collie.
How long before Labour replace Jeremy with Jeremy in a skirt?
incorrect assumptions surrounding evolution and creation include:.
life was inevitable.
changes were improvements.
It's similar to the common misunderstanding about what 'survival of the fittest' means.
Depending on the environment the 'fittest' specimens might not be the strongest but the ones most willing to cooperate.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=678&v=noj4phmt9oe&feature=emb_logo.
these scientists all seem to agree that the traditional view darwinism cannot possibly be true.
.
Okay I'm dipping into the conversation by watching a few minutes here and there at random. Every time so far I find them saying things that are just plain wrong and that has been thoroughly debunked by actual scientists.
I can see why someone who has never read a biology textbook in their life might be impressed but a high school student who paid attention in class could see through it
Sea Breeze why not tell me the one argument from this conversation that you find most compelling and present it in your own words and I will accept the challenge of responding to it in defence of evolution.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=678&v=noj4phmt9oe&feature=emb_logo.
these scientists all seem to agree that the traditional view darwinism cannot possibly be true.
.
So you agree there is nobody in the video who is qualified to debunk one of the most fundamental facts in all of science. Just a bunch of philosophers, artists and authors shooting the breeze.
Actually you frame this thread as if it was about evolution but I bet most of the conversation is actually about abiogenesis.
I posted a very detailed explanation of why their prognostications about the probability of evolution is much mistaken. Predictably you ignored every word of it. Mustn't let facts get in the way of religious dogma.