Comon’, sure you can - you know you want to!Welp, there it is. Four minutes into Thursday, and I'm sure I'll not read something this stupid the entire rest of the day.
Holy ****!
I'm out...I just can't.
Comon’, sure you can - you know you want to!Welp, there it is. Four minutes into Thursday, and I'm sure I'll not read something this stupid the entire rest of the day.
Holy ****!
I'm out...I just can't.
So just one species out of trillions has gained our intellectual level? Certainly not repeatable…What do you mean it works or it doesn't? Lots of evolutionary changes didn't work.
Last I heard, evolution was a theory. Thus there is no concrete repeatable proof it is correct. It is merely the best explanation based upon known data. Scientists are always looking for more data to prove it, or in some cases to disprove it I imagine.
I wonder how much government grant money is available for those on track disproving evolution?Scientists are always looking for more data to prove it, or in some cases to disprove it I imagine.
I don't think there have been trillions of species on this planet.So just one species out of trillions has gained our intellectual level? Certainly not repeatable…
Is there money for proving it?I wonder how much government grant money is available for those on track disproving evolution?
I can do this all day.Welp, there it is. Four minutes into Thursday, and I'm sure I'll not read something this stupid the entire rest of the day.
Holy ****!
I'm out...I just can't.
That worked well for my sons.Get your kids out of the government schools.
How about that?
Lots of money given to the study of evolution. Given to those that are doing the work the funders want. If they suspect for a second one hopes their research results counter the evolution narrative they will never fund it. Please tell me you are just cantankerous on this and do not believe they would?Is there money for proving it?
What’s your repeatable alternative theory?So just one species out of trillions has gained our intellectual level? Certainly not repeatable…
The most repeatable theory is that man does not know but a thimble in an ocean of unknown. That the heart of man in evil. That man is an arrogant creature uncomfortable in the admission that he does not know, and currently is incapable of knowing…What’s your repeatable alternative theory?
That is the only way to give them a proper education without the propaganda the government allows nowadays.Get your kids out of the government schools.
How about that?
Is there government money? Private money is irrelevant.Lots of money given to the study of evolution. Given to those that are doing the work the funders want. If they suspect for a second one hopes their research results counter the evolution narrative they will never fund it. Please tell me you are just cantankerous on this and do not believe they would?
Too bad. Agnosticism is a much better defaultIt takes no faith to not believe in an invisible being in the sky. Period.
Atheism is the default setting at birth. You are taught what to believe.
Guess what you would most likely be if you were born in Saudi Arabia...
The most repeatable theory is that man does not know but a thimble in an ocean of unknown. That the heart of man in evil. That man is an arrogant creature uncomfortable in the admission that he does not know, and currently is incapable of knowing…
FIFYThat is the only way to give them a proper education without the propaganda the government requires for the people to get their own money back nowadays.
That “theory” is taught as fact, children in schools are not taught that we don’t know for sure.That's supported by plenty of evidence but that's not an alternate theory to what we're talking about here.
I mean, we’re pretty sure. But I would rather they present it more as “scientists believe x” than “it is x”.That “theory” is taught as fact, children in schools are not taught that we don’t know for sure.
We are not “pretty sure” that macro evolution led to Homo sapiens. They may believe that but the evidence record is significantly lacking. It was millions of years for pea brain to become golf ball brain but in thousands of years grew to the size of today.I mean, we’re pretty sure. But I would rather they present it more as “scientists believe x” than “it is x”.
Thousands? As in less than 10 thousand?We are not “pretty sure” that macro evolution led to Homo sapiens. They may believe that but the evidence record is significantly lacking. It was millions of years for pea brain to become golf ball brain but in thousands of years grew to the size of today.
Micro evolution does not prove macro evolution…
More like 50-75 thousand as I have read.Thousands? As in less than 10 thousand?