Mocking Creationists

And vice versa.

But if people can stop downplaying the holes in macroevolution, that would be great.

If people could understand what it is first, that would be equally great.

If someone calls speculation and bad science "evolution", nobody bats an eye. If people point out its many flaws, everyone loses their minds and says you just don't understand it.

The reason we need a different flu vaccine every year is precisely because of evolution:

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/viruses/change.htm

Eleven days of evolution in bacteria in a Harvard medical experiment:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=plVk4NVIUh8

Like it or not, evolution is a fact. The statistical certainty of that rivals the heliocentric model. The evidence is so overwhelming that even the Vatican accepts it.

Absolutely false. This is just one example of how evolutionary thinking has *hindered* medical science. What do you have? A virus. What did it change into? Nothing, still a virus. No evolution happening here. Your assertions and appeal to the Vatican as an authority are irrelevant. Sorry to disrupt your religion with reality. Maybe you should learn how science works and your own belief system before joining with Darwin's Flying Monkeys™ in spreading propaganda.

What is observed above is the very definition of the word "evolution." Hence the point about people objecting to it being completely oblivious to the topic. I said it a year ago, I'll say it again:

"If people could understand what it is first, that would be equally great."

I suggest opening a biology text book and reading it from cover to cover before engaging anyone with these kindergarten level arguments. It's plain as day that your problems with evolution are religious in nature.

Have a nice day.

So, only someone who fully understands the naturalist view of evolutionism dare speak against it, never mind observable science. Got it. Hang around with fascist much?

Bottom line: Whether it's evolution or anything else, you will never be able to refute something until you understand a subject at a level sufficient to do so. On this subject, you clearly don't, even a year after this was pointed out to you. Unfortunately for you, you'll forever fail to convince anyone who knows more than you do about this subject. Sorry to say it, but that includes most human beings inhabiting the planet today. You're in the minority, friend, and that minority is shrinking. Take a close look and you'll realize that the only holdouts are the religious ones with a precious creation story to protect. Where are their published research papers in the scientific journals refuting anything having to do with evolution? There aren't any. None. Zero. That's where the real debates happen and they are completely absent.

Look, you're clearly interested in this. Why not learn the subject? Get off the creationist sites for awhile and look through the rebuttal sites where PhDs routinely rip the answers in genesis bullshit to shreds. Better yet, grab a biology textbook or take some online courses to see what it's really about. Learn how DNA works. Learn how DNA transfers from one generation to the next. Learn how mutations work. Even better, learn how we KNOW how they work. Learn the history of the field. You can keep Jesus lovingly in your pocket for the whole trip just like Dr. Ken Miller did.

What better way is there to question a subject than to learn the subject? Right now you're in the position of the first grader and don't realize it, lacking so much knowledge that you're incapable of recognizing the significance of any evidence presented to you in support of evolution. A biologist could come in here and talk about markers in the human genome all day and none of it would mean anything to you. Dr. Ken Miller's talk did nothing for you because you don't know the subject well enough to recognize the stunning significance of the fused chromosome evidence he put forward. You just KNOW the fused chromosome evidence is wrong even though you don't understand a word he said. Who's brainwashed here, exactly?

Ken might as well have thrown a plate of spaghetti at the wall. The same goes for the video of anti-biotic resistance evolving in bacteria dozens of times over about a week. I might as well have posted a video of Barney or the Teletubbies.

One last thing: You should knock off the "argument from authority" stuff. My example of the Pope was not an argument from authority. It was an example of how the evidence for evolution is so overwhelming that even the Vatican accepts it.

Miller didn't present an argument from authority either, and neither did I by posting those videos. He presented evidence in the form of chromosome counts and specific DNA sequences that were found in a lab. The Harvard Medical School video of evolving bacteria is also not an argument from authority. It is a video of evolving bacteria.

There are specific things in all those to discuss or refute, but you elected not to. Why? I'm betting it's because you have no idea what the hell you're talking about.

Please fix that. Open a book and read. Don't be dumb on purpose. If you think you know more about all this than Ken Miller, I have some bad news for you:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect

What else would you suggest? We argue with experts on subjects we DON'T know anything about?

This is silly. If a first grader struggling to grasp basic arithmetic decides to argue with a tenured MIT professor with a PhD in mathematics that Green's Theorem in calculus is wrong, we should all acknowledge that the first grader is a dope and hopelessly out of his league. We should refer to the calculus professor on matters pertaining to Green's Theorem, not the kid. There's no ground here for the kid to reject his professor's proofs as "arguments from authority." If we listen to the first grader or consider him to be on equal footing with the professor on this subject, we're damned fools. One person knows what he's talking about. The other doesn't. End of story.

The trouble today is everyone thinks they're an expert on everything. Everyone's opinion is equal. It isn't. The first grader is just wrong. He should be taught to recognize that on the subject of mathematics he is horribly outclassed and out of his lane. After the first grader has earned his Ph.D and is on equal footing with the professor, he is free to challenge Green's Theorem. Until then he is incapable of doing so regardless of how confident he is in himself.

What I'm saying is we should all learn about any subject we're going to debate first, at least learn what the words we're using mean ("evolution" and "argument from authority") before we attempt to rebutt or disprove any well established facts in the areas we're discussing. If we don't do that, we'll rightly look like fools in front of anybody with any expertise.

Have you tried throwing a few "argument from authority" rebuttals in the direction of your own authorities/family/church friends who might have convinced you Adam came into existence as a fully formed adult male from a pile of dirt before his rib fell out and transformed into an adult woman who got conned into eating an apple by a talking snake? If that's the case, how is that perfectly acceptable to your mind, but bacteria evolving antibiotic resistance isn't, even after you're shown a time lapse video of it occurring dozens of times over a period of less than two weeks?

The ones arguing from authority are the clowns blabbering about Adam/Eve and the talking serpent. In their case, they argue from the ultimate authority: God himself. Their evidence? The Bible. It's a joke.

On fascism: Disagreeing with you isn't fascism. Grow up.

You can go from a wolf to both of these in a few thousand years via selective breeding. That's evolution via artificial selection. If you just say "yeah, but they're both dogs" you're not seeing what's going on. :D

By calling it "evolution", you don't know science, genetics, or your religion of evolution.

Every biologist on the planet for the last 150 years will call it what I have just called it. I'm not the one who's confused, dipshit.

You've obviously never seen the inside of a biology book. For the love of Jeebus, go to a university and study biology. Just take an introductory course. Pick any university you wish anywhere in the world. The above dog breeding process will be called "evolution via artificial selection." It is the same process of evolution, only the breeding is controlled (artificial selection) instead of running without human intervention (natural selection).

It extends to plant life too.

https://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/evo_30

Broccoli, cabbage, cauliflower, kale, yellow bananas, and zillions of others didn't exist thousands of years ago. They were bred from other plants. We got them the same way we got all these dog breeds. Every see a wild golden retriever or chihuahua?

You appear to think Harvard Medical School (and undoubtedly Berkley after this post), every university, and all biologists over the last 150 years are confused about evolution, and you are right.

You, sir, are the poster child for the Dunning-Kruger effect.

Biologists use DNA evidence and physical specimens in the fossil record. You know, physical evidence. You use the Bible. Which one is religion?

Funny Family Guy clip:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMJYw0sxZ0k

Pretty much nails the creationist viewpoint on this.

This is Ken Miller testifying at the Dover school trial on intelligent design versus evolution being taught in schools in the United States. He's a biologist who was brought in as an expert on the side of evolution. Ironically, he's a Christian who believes in God. Like many Popes and virtually everyone in Vatican city for several decades now. He has managed to reconciled any conflicts between observed biological reality and his religious convictions. He isn't an intellectual pussy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bYhAaX-pizA

Look him up on YouTube. He has done hours of video taped lectures on the subject. He knows what the word "evolution" means.

Big deal. That is just another appeal to authority. Stop appealing to Popes and the Vatican, your appeal to Roman Catholicism is irrelevant. The Pope (the current one isn't really even Catholic) does not speak for Christians, and is not an authority on the Bible or evolutionism. Many of us are not compromisers. Why are you so determined to convert people into believing evolutionism? Hang around with fascists much?

That's not what an appeal to authority is. Using that as rebuttal when the person is in fact an authority is a fallacy. I'll let particle physicist Sabine Hossenfelder explain it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nOpzJFExkg

You're making Christians look stupid. By all means continue. It serves my purpose well. :)

" Why are you so determined to convert people into believing evolutionism?"

I'm not the one who made a meme claiming it was incorrect. You've just dismissed expert witness Dr. Ken Miller who helped win a landmark national court case on this very issue a few years ago during the portion on his presentation concerning a specific gene fusion process, even pointing out precisely which telomere is involved, as an "appeal to authority" which means you don't know understand that terminology either. He didn't merely stand up and say "evolution is true" and sit back down, expecting us to take his word on authority. No, he presented physical evidence. He is qualified to do so. You, my dear overconfident friend, are not.

If someone makes a meme claiming 2+2 = 4 is wrong, they should be corrected by a mathematician. An attempt to refute the correction by screaming "appeal to authority" without even looking at, much less comprehending the argument is absurd

As for why I'm doing this: I want the same thing teachers around the world want. I want the world to get smarter instead of dumber. I want people to know what the current state of human knowledge has been in the biological sciences stretching back 150 years so when I'm on old man I'm not surrounded by people who don't know how to cure diseases or develop any new technology.

Joe Rogan summed it up well in one of his comedy bits:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sf8R5ZlDiJg

Again on:

" Why are you so determined to convert people into believing evolutionism?"

I'll ask a similar question back to you. Your meme was referring to the "question evolution project." So following the tone of your question, why are you so determined to convert people OUT of believing in "evolutionism," as you put it?

I looked up the Question Evolution Project. On their front page are links to "answers in genesis" and a whole slew of other Bible thumping websites. This is a religious organization with an agenda. That agenda is to preserve their Bible story about Adam and Eve and the rest of creation at all costs.

We're apes. The phylogeny is crystal clear. Grow up and deal with it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ape

One of us is wrong. I have every biologist and medical researcher on the planet on my side. What have you got? A bunch of religious yahoos?

One of those sides is making arguments from authority. The other isn't. I say the ones filming bacteria evolving anti-biotic resistance and studying the exact fusion of chromosomes in the ape family probably aren't the ones arguing from authority.

On another note, I'm genuinely curious why you chose to reply to this today after a full year had already passed since you posted the meme. Strikes me as kind of funny.

Oh, noes! The mighty Wikipedia, the biased and unreliable source by anonymous writers used by anonymous atheopaths! I am undone. Call me when you grow up and learn some logic and stop being such a bigot, mmmkay, Skippy?

Apparently you missed the 37 citations and references at the bottom of the Wiki page, and the thousands of papers I just referred you to. Good job, dipshit.

You use ad hominems, circular reasoning, straw man arguments, dodge the points I have made, and insist on lying for Darwin. You cannot be intelligently telling me I'm wrong when you do not know creation science and you do not even know evolution. You are not worth my time.

A medical friend just shared this with me. It's a test result for a patient who has developed resistance to every antibiotic shown. It's as real as real can be. This person could die as a result of the evolution you believe doesn't exist. If you would like to be the one to do the eulogy at this patient's funeral the next time she gets an infection and dies as a result of said evolutionary processes, let me know. Perhaps I can hook you two up.

Here's a note from the doctor responsible for the test:

“This goes to the lady who complains because I don't prescribe antibiotics for her child sick with the flu. To the patient who throws a tantrum because his throat hurts and wants me to leave him azithromycin.

To people who take amoxicillin for a headache.
For those who insist that for fever, the best is benzetacil, because it heals all infections and kills all "bugs".

This goes to the friend who only took half the treatment because he wanted to drink at the end of the week and because his bacteria adapt, they are adapting to all kinds of antibiotics, and all because of the blessed culture of saying "this doctor knows nothing, with antibiotics, I heal faster".

With you ladies and gentlemen, a bacteria resistant to all antibiotics..

And yet you've not bothered to refute a single argument I've put forward. You've got nothing, bruh. I'll wait around for another 100 years to see if you jackasses ever take it to the science journals. You won't, because you can't.

#FactsMatter

I suggest you take a few hours to read through some of the transcripts from the Scopes trial in 1925, nearly 100 years ago, available here:

http://moses.law.umn.edu/darrow/trials.php?tid=7

You'll likely find all your objections were raised and dealt with at that time. Your arguments are literally 100 years old. Since then, scientists have accumulated an additional 100 years of data on this matter, all of which supports the theory.

Literally every time this issue comes before a court of law, like it did yet again in Dover under the new guise "intelligent design" in yet another sleazy attempt to sneak God into the science classroom and pretend your religious ramblings have any bearing on observed physical reality, you idiots lose. In the Dover case, the most qualified scientist arguing on behalf of evolution was probably the previously mentioned Dr. Ken Miller, a Christian.

If you'd like to see what the scientists had to say nearly 100 years ago on this matter when creationists tried to argue their Biblical bullshit, you can start here on page 231 in the section entitled:

"Statements of Noted Scientists
as Filed Into Record by
Defense Counsel"

http://moses.law.umn.edu/darrow/documents/Scopes%206th%20&%207th%20days.pdf

If you honestly can't recognize which side is arguing from religion, you ought to visit a neurologist and get a CAT scan. Maybe you have a brain tumor. You people make yourselves look like asses when you play the "I'm rubber, you're glue" game and call evolution a religion.

You people are to biology what flat Earthers and geocentrists are to astrophysics: A joke to be ridiculed and laughed at. You dumb f**ks have earned it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R9uhE4CT2xM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BS5vid4GkEY&list=PLAC3481305829426D

I tried to engage you in specific arguments about specific points, starting with the chromosome fusion Ken Miller pointed to along with the Harvard Medical School video of the evolution of antibiotic resistance. All you did is point out that the bacteria didn't turn into an animal in 11 days and cry about fascism and bigotry.

One of us doesn't know what the f**k he's talking about. After having written computer simulations of this process and seen the mathematical inevitability of intergenerational changes in biology over time in the presence of mutations and other gene transfer events, I assure you I'm not the one who's ignorant on the subject.

"Your assertions and appeal to the Vatican as an authority are irrelevant. Sorry to disrupt your religion with reality. Maybe you should learn how science works and your own belief system before joining with Darwin's Flying Monkeys™ in spreading propaganda."

Serious questions: Are you in a cult? 6,000 or 10,000 year Young Earth?

Look, dummy, I just went through the rest of your memes. Literally every one of them is about evolution or creationism, so don't give me any flying monkey business about propaganda. Your account's only purpose is to spread anti-science propaganda. It's literally the only reason you're here. It's perfectly clear which one of us is on an anti-reality religious crusade.

Honestly, what's the deal with you people? Are you afraid you're going to hell if you mistakenly think evolution is true on the day you die? So what if we're apes? What's the big deal?

You do know that you have a vestigial tailbone, right? Have you heard of vestigiality where people are born with tails when certain genes get activated? Why is that? You know whales have vestigial legs under their blubber in their hind sides? Tell me, genius, what possible reason could there be for whales having legs? Have you ever seen the inside of a penguin or the laryngeal nerve in a giraffe? Nylon eating bacteria?

Jesus, you people are such pussies.

The really unbelievable thing to me is you've been at this for at least four years and know nothing about it. How is that possible? In reference to the Harvard Medical School video demonstrating antibiotic resistance evolution, you responded:

"What do you have? A virus. What did it change into? Nothing, still a virus. No evolution happening here. "

That's just unbelievable. What do you expect in 11 days? A chicken? If no chicken then no evolution? Are you 8 years old?

Look, dipshit, the reason you get a different flu shot every year is because the bug evolves antibiotic resistance precisely as shown in that video. That's evolution defined. It doesn't have to turn into a damned bird or cat, you infantile man-child. If it wasn't evolving, we could eradicate it in one year with the right flu shot. Unfortunately we can't because it has an extremely high mutation rate. It evolves too quickly to keep up with it. That's the definition of the word, numnuts.

"Absolutely false." [in reference to my claim that evolution is a fact]

Here are 4000 papers by people with advanced degrees pending publication just in the evolutionary biology category alone.

https://www.biorxiv.org/collection/evolutionary-biology

That doesn't include any of the other 58,470 pending papers on biology or anything that's been published in the 150 years in the medical and biological science journals since Darwin's time. There are well over 3000 in the genetics category alone, more than 4000 in genomics, more than 1700 in molecular biology, and on and on. These are the facts. 100% of them agree with me and precisely zero of them agree with you. I challenge you to find ONE paper in there that doesn't support evolution.

Best of luck.

Wow, what a series of tantrums! Too bad there's no logic, only bigotry. You're very knowledgeable on the facts you make up, but not so good with reality. Since you are so fond of throwing links at me, here is my latest article:
https://www.piltdownsuperman.com/2019/09/evolution-disreputable-girlfriend-of.html

Oops, you failed the challenge. You couldn't find one actual paper by a biologist out of 58,470 to support you, so you cited your own article. Great job, dipshit.

Lets' add "bigotry" to the list of English words you don't understand. Please continue, I'm finding this is all quite hysterical.

Evolution is a fact that is supported by mountains of evidence, observations, predictions, experiments, and relevant facts, and is demonstrably true. Evolution has been directly observed in controlled and uncontrolled conditions in the lab and field, including speciation, which is macroevolution. The theory has given us the flu shot, an ability to fight back against newly evolved viruses, such as Coronavirus, and effective treatment for AIDS that provides a full life for those afflicted. Evolutionary biology is the bedrock of all of biology, and scientists will explain that nothing in biology makes sense without evolution. To deny the fact and theory of evolution puts you right on the same primitive level of flat-Earthers who deny the existence of gravity.

Your blind faith an ignorance are admirable. Keep on preaching and telling yourself these Darwinoid talking points even though they have been refuted many times over.

I don't do faith, as it is belief without evidence or proof. I guess you didn't pay attention to anything I wrote, since you missed the part where there is evidence and observation to show evolution is a fact. You are projecting your own faults onto those who don't share them, and who refuse to share them.

You have to have the Dunning-Kruger effect in order to think you can falsify evolution without a PhD in the subject, a Nobel prize, and the immense fame that would go with such an accomplishment.

Show me a peer-reviewed journal with an article that shows evolution is false.

Your comments are incoherent and irrational. You have faith in materialism, but do not do logic and reason. Bigotry, intellectual dishonesty, cowardice — you do those quite well, and do not earn more than thirty seconds at a pop from me.

Prove I have faith in materialism.