vaxx:
Evolution is a lie because I am broadcasting to an anonymous who have no qualification in biology and so can say anything you like about it without having to know anything about it. keep it up. you guys never like to learn anything that exposed your believe.

Do you not see your did jointed thinking "Evolution is a lie because I am broadcasting to an anonymous..."?

Like saying the Camry is a lie because the journalist is...."

Please, coordinate yourself else someone may come and call you an slowpoke.

Dtruthspeaker:


Do you not see your did jointed thinking "Evolution is a lie because I am broadcasting to an anonymous..."?

Like saying the Camry is a lie because the journalist is...."

Please, coordinate yourself else someone may come and call you an slowpoke.

it is surprising you can relate with your own gullibility. Don't you obviously see that statement express your gullibility. it isnt disjointed but a proper statement made to exposed your gullibility in thought and reasoning. it is meant to identify your ignorance.


you are an anonymous, and what i am doing here is called broadcasting not chatting as you may gullibly think. it is a forum, anybody can pick it and broadcast it back to the public .

vaxx:
Don't you obviously see that statement express your gullibility. it isnt disjointed but a proper statement that exposes your gullibility in thought and reasoning.

you are an anonymous, and what i am doing here is called broadcasting not chatting as you may gullibly think. it is a forum, anybody can pick it and broadcast it back to the public .

Ah, you are truly insane! Every one knows that normal rational thinking does not flow this way but many, is very wrong with you.

Dtruthspeaker:


Ah, you are truly insane! Every one knows that normal rational thinking does not flow this way but many, is very wrong with you.

The reason i say you are gullible . how will you even identify a rational thinker when one is bequeathed to you? if a testable and repeated evidence such as evolution can be consider a lie according to you.


mr anonymous, you are an idiot.

vaxx:
The reason i say you a gullible . how will you even identify a rational thinker when one is bequeathed to you? if a testable and repeated evidence such as evolution can be consider a lie according to you.

mr anonymous, you are an idiot.

You obviously do not see that you yourself are also anonymous here and you proof that you are really insane to not know this.

Dtruthspeaker:


You obviously do not see that you yourself are also anonymous here and you proof that you are really insane to not know this.

Yes i am an anonymous to you. Any issue with that? or you are finding it strange because i called you by such word.


i made a factual statement that creationist ideology are for the feable mind. i.e the gullible like you and you reply that is a lie because your religion or biblical ideology say so. how gullible is that?

Evolution is a repeated evidence that can be identify by anybody using the major standard of science. i.e empirical evidence. This is against an heresay that is poorly written and composed by some archaic men who are looking less gullible than you.

TechMod:
Respectful argument please!! Check out video for facts

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqICl9iy9N8

Considering I'm more inclined to accept more rigorous proven theories, I'd have a bias towards evolution.

But on creation, it really depends on what we're talking about here.
One form of creationist theory is the universe is infact created by ?, but everything in it formed through natural or guided processes. This version of creation doesn't contradict evolution or evidence all that much.

The other version is a more religious, literal one, it's of how man and other organisms, in their current form were created separately by a Being. Or of how women were created from the rib of a man. This is the version that is at odds with evolution.

vaxx:
Yes i am an anonymous to you. Any issue with that? or you are finding it strange because i called you by such word.

That's why I am saying that you must be insane for Nairaland clearly means "Anonymous land"

vaxx:

i made a factual statement that creationist ideology are for the feable mind. i.e the gullible like you and you reply that is a lie because your religion or biblical ideology say so. how gullible is that?

This is you, already pre-attacking your opponent, (Fall of Ad-hominen Argument) spilling hatred and venom even before the grounds of the contentions have been established..

So, by your fallability of Ad Hominem, you have already lost the argument simply because you show that you know that the argument you would have brought will not be valid and True therefore, you pre-attacked me because you already know that I would tear it apart if you presented it.

vaxx:

Evolution is a repeated evidence that can be identify by anybody using the major standard of science. i.e empirical evidence.

And the question is not what evolution is for as I said earlier, "it is not evolution to repeat the procedure of mixing Milk and Milk."

This is not the evolution in view but fabrication and "cooking" like our wives evolving vegetable and water leaf to form "Vegetable Soup".

Evolution has to occur without the interference of any man for it to be proven it occurred or occurs, for the evolution which you claimed occurred, occurred naturally and without the interferance any man, therefore, THE PROOF OF IT CAN NOT BE CONJECTURES.

IT MUST BE PROVEN NATURALLY AND NOT BY CONFINEMENT TO A CERTAIN ROOM.

THE EVOLUTION WAS OUTSIDE, THEREFORE, THE PROOF OF IT MUST BE DONE OUTSIDE AND NOT INSIDE A ROOM CALLED LABORATORY.

vaxx:

This is against an heresay that is poorly written and composed by some archaic men who are looking less gullible than you.

More insults given, I'll absorb it, while I move on to say what I wanted to say.

Good you have heard of Hearsay Evidence! Then I hope you have a good and valid counter why the evidence given by the Bible should be rejected.

But right now, you are the one making your case and presently, you shot yourself by starting with a Fallacy of Ad Hominem, which means you know your case is not True and valid.

So validly respond, if you can. I predict, it is insults you would be bringing and not a valid presentation of a Solid Truth.

So I have queried your presentation, so validly rebut if you can.

vaxx:
Evolution is a lie because I am broadcasting to an anonymous who have no qualification in biology and so can say anything you like about it without having to know anything about it. keep it up. you guys never like to learn anything that exposed your believe.

IMAliyu:

Considering I'm more inclined to accept more rigorous proven theories, I'd have a bias towards evolution.

But on creation, it really depends on what we're talking about here.
One form of creationist theory is the universe is infact created by ?, but everything in it formed through natural or guided processes. This version of creation doesn't contradict evolution or evidence all that much.

The other version is a more religious, literal one, it's of how man and other organisms, in their current form were created separately by a Being. Or of how women were created from the rib of a man. This is the version that is at odds with evolution.

Exactly.. as stated in the video, Evolution doesn't really 100% discard the creationist theory, but the idea we all came from Adam and Eve is next to stupid to say the least, because we can't all look at the mega-tons of evidence shown from evolution to belive the creationist, which only has one source... The bible.

TechMod:

Exactly.. as stated in the video, Evolution doesn't really 100% discard the creationist theory, but the idea we all came from Adam and Eve is next to stupid to say the least, because we can't all look at the mega-tons of evidence shown from evolution to belive the creationist, which only has one source... The bible.

Your statement here is not a balanced one for mega, magatons of fabricated evidence never amounts to a Proof of Truth. It's reeks of a gargantuan love for Lies.

Meanwhile, it is clearly proven by Nature that a Nucleus Family, Extended Family and Family related to the Nuclear Family, commences with one man and one woman.

So you unfairly and untruthfully hold your opinion simply because you are afraid of The Truth of The Mighty Creator, Who is Against all evil souls.

Dtruthspeaker:


Do you not know that this is the way to lie, when you want a lie to be taken as Truth?

"Recorded cases" do not work for Natural Things. Nature Always Proves itself by repeating things regularly.

Ojo, the hunter in the forest will give his own honest and unprovoked sightings of monkeys lesbianing and Musa in Kenya will do so for the lions gaying, which will also be repeated in the different parts where these animals can be Proven.

That's how nature Proves The Truth of things.

So your recorders are Lying, none of these things happen.

I am really struggling to get your point.

You were saying?

Monogamy:


I am really struggling to get your point.

You were saying?

It's in English language, how can you write in english and yet not be able to read responses written in English?

TechMod:

Exactly.. as stated in the video, Evolution doesn't really 100% discard the creationist theory, but the idea we all came from Adam and Eve is next to stupid to say the least, because we can't all look at the mega-tons of evidence shown from evolution to belive the creationist, which only has one source... The bible.

Another problem with the creation hypothesis I always encounter, is that it's Judeo-Christian centered.
Every culture and religion has there own differing creation story, featuring different origins & deities. So which ones are we going to pick or discard, because literalist creationists can't surely think everyone in the world is going to go along with the Bible version.

Evolution, makes sense if you understand the concept of natural and artificial selection, something that is observable, and some rudimentary understanding of genetics, where if genes can be used for paternity tests and ancestry tests and are considered reliable. Then if genetics telling us we share a lot of commonality with all other life on the planet, and this could also mean a possible common ancestry, then I don't have a reason to argue.

IMAliyu:

Evolution, makes sense if you understand the concept of natural and artificial selection, something that is observable, and some rudimentary understanding of genetics, where if genes can be used for paternity tests and ancestry tests and are considered reliable. Then if genetics telling us we share a lot of commonality with all other life on the planet, and this could also mean a possible common ancestry, then I don't have a reason to argue.

Does a tyre prove a car? How can a tiny thing like genes prove the bigger more seeable thing, like man, animals, land?

Secondly, "commonality" only proves similarity eg man, cars and snakes have the commonality and similarity of requiring maintenance.

But that can not prove their manufacturing processes. (Creation)

Dtruthspeaker:


Does a tyre prove a car? How can a tiny thing prove the bigger more seeable thing?

Secondly, "commonality" only proves similarity eg man, cars and snakes have the commonality and similarity of requiring maintenance.

But that can not prove their manufacturing processes. (Creation)

I see you are still making your flawed analogies. Comparing life, to man-made objects.

Couldn't you read, I'm talking about genes here. Do you believe that paternity tests are reliable?

So you admit there is no way to prove creation?

IMAliyu:

I see you are still making your flawed analogies. Comparing life, to man-made objects.

Couldn't you read, I'm talking about genes here. Do you believe that paternity tests are reliable?

So you admit there is no way to prove creation?

But you are using genes to interpret the big picture of man (paternity) which is also coming from the bigger picture of this House, called the world.

So it is you who is using a wrong analogy to establish the story you want people to accept as True, saying "Evolution, makes sense" whereas, it has no identifiable, valid and solid pillar and foundation of Truth.

Dtruthspeaker:


But you are using genes to interpret the big picture of man (paternity) which is also coming from the bigger picture of this House, called the world.

I believe it's actually a valid one. Because this is the most fundamental component of life.

So it is you who is using a wrong analogy to establish the story you want people to accept as True, saying "Evolution, makes sense" whereas, it has no identifiable, valid and solid pillar and foundation of Truth.

You know, this is something only someone with no idea of the decades of the scientific research in the fields studying the branches of biology would say.
Speciation is an established fact.
Genetic mutations are an established fact.
Selection is an established fact.

So, what is this solid, valid pillar you are talking about? Or is your definition of Truth rather specific to you?

Monogamy:


Dog cross breeding is a typical example of evolution. At least that is visible

ARE YOU SERIOUS? WHY CAN'T DOG CROSSBREED WITH GOAT. WHAT YOUR SAYING IS LIKE A BRITISH MAN AND AN AFRICAN OR ASIAN WOMAN PROCREATING IS EVOLUTION

CREATION SAID ALL THINGS WERE CREATED ACCORDING TO THEIR KIND, AND IT HAS REMAINED SO SHOW ME INTERMEDIARY BETWEEN APE AND MAN

WHY HAS EVOLUTION CEASED AND PROCREATION REMAIN. JUST THINK DON'T ALLOW BLIND SCIENCE TO DESTROY YOU

IMAliyu:

I believe it's actually a valid one. Because this is the most fundamental component of life.


You know, this is something only someone with no idea of the decades of the scientific research in the fields studying the branches of biology would say.
Speciation is an established fact.
Genetic mutations are an established fact.
Selection is an established fact.

So, what is this solid, valid pillar you are talking about? Or is your definition of Truth rather specific to you?

PLEASE WHEN DID EVOLUTION EXCEED THE THEORETICAL STAGE AND BECOME FACT. EVEN SOME STATES IN AMERICA HAVE REMOVED EVOLUTION FROM THEIR SCHOOL CURRICULUM FOR LACK OF A SINCE EVIDENCE OF THE BLIND SCIENCE HYPOTHESIS.
IT IS ONLY THOSE THAT DID NOT STUDY ANY OF THE LIFE SCIENCES THAT CAN OPEN MOUTH TO TALK OF EVOLUTION
ANSWER ME HOW DID MALES N FEMALES EVOLVE AT THE SAME TIME. HOW CAN THINGS THAT WERE EVOLVING SUDDENLY ABANDON EVOLUTION AND START PROCREATION THOSE TWO ARE EXTREME OPPOSITES

vaxx:
Yes i am an anonymous to you. Any issue with that? or you are finding it strange because i called you by such word.


i made a factual statement that creationist ideology are for the feable mind. i.e the gullible like you and you reply that is a lie because your religion or biblical ideology say so. how gullible is that?

Evolution is a repeated evidence that can be identify by anybody using the major standard of science. i.e empirical evidence. This is against an heresay that is poorly written and composed by some archaic men who are looking less gullible than you.

WHO FORMULATED THE EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE? IS LIKE SAYING WEIGHT IS MEASURED IN Kgs EVEN THOUGH YOU WRRE THE ONE THAT FORMULATED THE Kg IN THE FIRST PLACE. THERE IS NO SINGLE EVIDENCE OF EVOLUTION IF THERE IS I CHALLENGE YOU TO PROVIDE ONE

IMAliyu:

I believe it's actually a valid one. Because this is the most fundamental component of life.

C'mon Aliyu, you couldn't have said this.
"You believe it's actually a valid one. Because this is the most fundamental component of life".

Like saying "I believe it is valid because Food is a fundamental Component of life"

Does that make sense? Is this how validity is arrived at?

See, you guys are very capable of believing anything you want including believing that it is morning right now in Nigeria if you wanted it so but that does not mean it is True.

And as you yourself can see, you can not validly and Truthfully Support your postulation of evolution.

IMAliyu:

You know, this is something only someone with no idea of the decades of the scientific research in the fields studying the branches of biology would say.

This sounds exactly like a Fallacy that should be called "Begging the Questionnaire" because of inability to support a proposition.

IMAliyu:

Speciation is an established fact.
Genetic mutations are an established fact.
Selection is an established fact.

This is a Change of Post for the issue is proof of evolution of the world and not the proof of the alteration or tampering or modification/fabrications of the the things in the world under names speciation, man's tampering with genes called genetic mutation, selection as carried out by men.

IMAliyu:

So, what is this solid, valid pillar you are talking about? Or is your definition of Truth rather specific to you?

You already gave your pillars to wit, "genetics" and "commonality" and I have challenged them and now you have fled to components of life, speciation etc.

Changing Post is always the Proof of the Absence of Truth.

TechMod:

Exactly.. as stated in the video, Evolution doesn't really 100% discard the creationist theory, but the idea we all came from Adam and Eve is next to stupid to say the least, because we can't all look at the mega-tons of evidence shown from evolution to belive the creationist, which only has one source... The bible.

PLEASE CAN YOU SINCERELY GIVE ME ONE JUST ONE OF THE EVIDENCE OF EVOLUTION

capnies:


PLEASE CAN YOU SINCERELY GIVE ME ONE JUST ONE OF THE EVIDENCE OF EVOLUTION

Lmao.. really you want one? How about your biology text-book ? How about you search on Google "Molecular Biology" and Natural-Selection and genetics? Pleaseeee anything apart from your bible.

IMAliyu:

Another problem with the creation hypothesis I always encounter, is that it's Judeo-Christian centered.
Every culture and religion has there own differing creation story, featuring different origins & deities. So which ones are we going to pick or discard, because literalist creationists can't surely think everyone in the world is going to go along with the Bible version.

Evolution, makes sense if you understand the concept of natural and artificial selection, something that is observable, and some rudimentary understanding of genetics, where if genes can be used for paternity tests and ancestry tests and are considered reliable. Then if genetics telling us we share a lot of commonality with all other life on the planet, and this could also mean a possible common ancestry, then I don't have a reason to argue.

Bro.. exactly, you are getting the point exactly? what are we going to believe?? Which is true which isn't?

capnies:


WHO FORMULATED THE EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE? IS LIKE SAYING WEIGHT IS MEASURED IN Kgs EVEN THOUGH YOU WRRE THE ONE THAT FORMULATED THE Kg IN THE FIRST PLACE. THERE IS NO SINGLE EVIDENCE OF EVOLUTION IF THERE IS I CHALLENGE YOU TO PROVIDE ONE

Wait, Asians, Black, Hispanics, White, and we all came from Adam and Eve? Please explain.

capnies:


PLEASE WHEN DID EVOLUTION EXCEED THE THEORETICAL STAGE AND BECOME FACT.

I don't remember saying evolution was a fact. What I said were speciation, mutation & selection were proven facts.
These are what the theory are based on, (on the rudimentary level). And Evolution is a "scientific theory". If you don't know what a theory means in science, then having this discussion is not worth it.

EVEN SOME STATES IN AMERICA HAVE REMOVED EVOLUTION FROM THEIR SCHOOL CURRICULUM FOR LACK OF A SINCE EVIDENCE OF THE BLIND SCIENCE HYPOTHESIS.

Could you list these states please?

IT IS ONLY THOSE THAT DID NOT STUDY ANY OF THE LIFE SCIENCES THAT CAN OPEN MOUTH TO TALK OF EVOLUTION

Did you study the life sciences yourself?

ANSWER ME HOW DID MALES N FEMALES EVOLVE AT THE SAME TIME. HOW CAN THINGS THAT WERE EVOLVING SUDDENLY ABANDON EVOLUTION AND START PROCREATION THOSE TWO ARE EXTREME OPPOSITES

They didn't Asexual reproduction is the way single cell organisms reproduce. Sexual reproduction only came about in multicellular organisms, and the hypothesis behind that is that it came about through the processes & advantages of genetic recombination, which allows for genetic variation. This gave a greater advantage in adaption to changing environments for said organism.

For the bolded, that seems to be your own misconception, evolution requires reproduction. Or could you explain why you think procreation and evolution are extreme opposites?

Dtruthspeaker:


C'mon Aliyu, you couldn't have said this.
"You believe it's actually a valid one. Because this is the most fundamental component of life".

Like saying "I believe it is valid because Food is a fundamental Component of life"

Does that make sense? Is this how validity is arrived at?

You want me to be more specific?

Everything considered as life possess either DNA or RNA (genes). The nucleotides that code for everything about an organism, it's natural life span, reproduction, behavior and physical characteristics. This is what I mean by fundamental component.
Is this clear enough for you?

My use of the word "believe" should not be your concern here.
So, could you stop with the diversion?

See, you guys are very capable of believing anything you want including believing that it is morning right now in Nigeria if you wanted it so but that does not mean it is True.

And as you yourself can see, you can not validly and Truthfully Support your postulation of evolution.

Same would be said of you.

This sounds exactly like a Fallacy that should be called "Begging the Questionnaire" because of inability to support a proposition.

No, I'm calling out your ignorance on the topic.

This is a Change of Post for the issue is proof of evolution of the world and not the proof of the alteration or tampering or modification/fabrications of the the things in the world under names speciation, man's tampering with genes called genetic mutation, selection as carried out by men.

The evolution of life. I don't know what "evolution of the world" means.
Once again why I said you're ignorant on the topic. Were the things I mentioned (speciation, mutation and selection) not the drivers of evolution according to the theory?
See definition of evolution
Change in the genetic composition of a population during successive generations, often resulting in the development of new species. The mechanisms of evolution include natural selection acting on the genetic variation among individuals, mutation, migration, and genetic drift. source: https://www.thefreedictionary.com/Evolution+of+life

You already gave your pillars to wit, "genetics" and "commonality" and I have challenged them and now you have fled to components of life, speciation etc.

Changing Post is always the Proof of the Absence of Truth.

Is that so?
Why haven't you answered my first question of do you consider paternity tests to be reliable?

Mr lawyer, I know you're good with words and at being slippery, you keep going on about solid proof and truth, but you conveniently ignored my other enquiry "So you admit there is no way to prove creation?"

IMAliyu:

You want me to be more specific?

Everything considered as life possess either DNA or RNA (genes). The nucleotides that code for everything about an organism, it's natural life span, reproduction, behavior and physical characteristics. This is what I mean by fundamental component.
Is this clear enough for you?

My use of the word "believe" should not be your concern here.
So, could you stop with the diversion?


Same would be said of you.

No, I'm calling out your ignorance on the topic.


The evolution of life. I don't know what "evolution of the world" means.
Once again why I said you're ignorant on the topic. Were the things I mentioned (speciation, mutation and selection) not the drivers of evolution according to the theory?
See definition of evolution
Change in the genetic composition of a population during successive generations, often resulting in the development of new species. The mechanisms of evolution include natural selection acting on the genetic variation among individuals, mutation, migration, and genetic drift. source: https://www.thefreedictionary.com/Evolution+of+life


Is that so?
Why haven't you answered my first question of do you consider paternity tests to be reliable?

Mr lawyer, I know you're good with words and at being slippery, you keep going on about solid proof and truth, but you conveniently ignored my other enquiry "So you admit there is no way to prove creation?"

� �

IMAliyu:

You want me to be more specific?

Everything considered as life possess either DNA or RNA (genes).

Do you not see that you have Changed Your Post?

First, you are arguing for evolution in respect of creation of this world saying "Evolution, makes sense if you understand the concept of natural and artificial selection,"

Now you have Moved from Proving why Evolution makes sense based on the queries I have raised up to "life possess either DNA or RNA (genes" which is not in issue.

See, how you are moving from place to place and experiencing serious difficulty to explain what you believe?

That is because it is impossible to use A tyre nut to explainhow a whole vehicle from which it comes from, was created, which is the issue of this thread. (Putting aside all the other sub issues and remote issues)

IMAliyu:

Is that so?
Why haven't you answered my first question of do you consider paternity tests to be reliable?

I did not answer this question because, you are the one with the burden of proving how your evolution created this world.

And when you supply your explanation, (as you did give) then the burden shifts to me to ask any reasonable question which arose from your answer.

Therefore, I enjoy the privilege of asking reasonable questions, while you have the burden of answering them.

At this time, you do not have the right to ask questions for you are the one making a presentation.