15 Feb 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieall bacteria aren't one species. new species of bacteria are evolving all the time, the one i linked to evolved in under laboratory observation. not only did they speciate, they evolved a completely new ability. this is way beyond mere adaptation that ignorant creationists like to bawl out.
no its not you doofling, its still bacteria, clutchety clutch at strawety straw.
if there was no evolution, we would have eliminated all disease by now. but since bacteria keep evolving, we need to keep finding new ways to kill them.
15 Feb 12
1 edit
Originally posted by RJHindsOpen your mouth when you know anything about evolution. Learn first, talk later.
Again, you evolutionists are confusing evolution with adaptation and the way
God created things to work. Evolution simply does not happen no matter
how much you wish it would. We have only evidence of God's program in
action to allow adaptation of the organisms, not evolution. {moron symbol deleted}
Robbie gave a good advice: "Don't talk about things you know nothing about." Is he a christian liar, do you think?
15 Feb 12
Originally posted by FabianFnasi wouldn't put robbie much over ron. they're both daft.
Open your mouth when you know anything about evolution. Learn first, talk later.
Robbie gave a good advice: "Don't talk about things you know nothing about." Is he a christian liar, do you think?
creationists think evolution is a bacteria giving birth to a giraffe. that's how little they know about the subject.
15 Feb 12
Originally posted by divegeesterYou quite clearly neither understand evolution nor basic science. A moth is not a 'species', and 'species' is a man made rather loosely defined classification word.
I understand the theory of evolution,
Whether of not the theory of evolution of species is factual, I do not accept that natural selection within a species is evidence of that fact. In the OP for example the moths were still moths it was mearly a matter of one characteristic (colour) being naturally selected.
You are also quite clearly confusing "The Theory of Evolution", evolution theory, and evolution, or at least being rather unclear about which you are referring to.
I would agree that evidence for natural selection does not in itself prove that all species have a common ancestor. However it clearly is evidence that speciation could take place. It is evidence that supports The Theory of Evolution, and it is evidence in support of common ancestry (though clearly not sufficient on its own).
15 Feb 12
1 edit
Originally posted by divegeesterAt no point does your link suggest that the example lacks scientific credibility. Would you care to provide any actual references to that effect?
Right.
http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/photo_database/image/the_peppered_moth
Firstly choose an example with scientific credibility.
15 Feb 12
1 edit
Originally posted by VoidSpiritRight. But Robbie actually wrote that "If you don't know what you're talking about, then shut, and stay shut." Perhaps Rob doesn't follow his advice himself (which it inself is a bit schizoid), but Ron think he has the right to lie, even when he knows he lies. That makes Ron to a despicable person. Rob has some honour left. Rob knows when he is on thin ice.
i wouldn't put robbie much over ron. they're both daft.
creationists think evolution is a bacteria giving birth to a giraffe. that's how little they know about the subject.
15 Feb 12
Originally posted by VoidSpiritthey are still bacteria and not evolving into something else.
all bacteria aren't one species. new species of bacteria are evolving all the time, the one i linked to evolved in under laboratory observation. not only did they speciate, they evolved a completely new ability. this is way beyond mere adaptation that ignorant creationists like to bawl out.
if there was no evolution, we would have eliminated all disease by now. but since bacteria keep evolving, we need to keep finding new ways to kill them.
15 Feb 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieNot at all, those were the terms you used to describe yourself remember. As for the other thread, if that's what you're alluding to, i'm merely firing back language that you had used in the thread previously. 🙂
my my the insults are flying today, and actually i brought this very species to the
attention of Andrew Hamilton when he used to frequent the site !
15 Feb 12
Originally posted by divegeesterI am well read regarding the theory of evolution my good man.
Are you saying you do not understand 'classification of species' and you don't accept that the theory of evolution provides a long-term genetic platform for one species, through natural selection over millions of years to become so changed, that it would be re-classified as a different species?
15 Feb 12
Originally posted by RJHindsWhenever you've read about evolution and understood it, then come back, or shut and stay shut (according to robbie).
You apparently never learned to understand what you read. You should
have started with the Holy Bible. {moron symbol deleted}
15 Feb 12
Originally posted by VoidSpiritYou are confusing evolution, which does not occur, with adaptation, which does.
all bacteria aren't one species. new species of bacteria are evolving all the time, the one i linked to evolved in under laboratory observation. not only did they speciate, they evolved a completely new ability. this is way beyond mere adaptation that ignorant creationists like to bawl out.
if there was no evolution, we would have eliminated all disease by now. but since bacteria keep evolving, we need to keep finding new ways to kill them.