andhi's Comments

What proof? Are you referring to peppered moth or have you actually read anything in the past 30 years? Please, be my guest and give me a proof. I am so eagerly waiting.

Have some fun and look up irreducible complexity, DNA sequencing probabilities or simply look up the LAW of Entropy. Oh yeah, do consider that it is a open system, re-evaluate it and then what happens when you shine light on an open system.

Nothing personal of course, I just happen to be one of those ignorant people you refer to. Obviously you probably aren't familiar with any of this because you wouldn't be bothered to speak with any of those evil people who target young children.

So....why do you think they are wrong? I mean, the carbon dating display on the wall to the left is basically bunk. The fossil dating the rock and the rock dating the fossil is basically how the scientist overcome "non-conformity" (look it up) issues with the fossil layer not agreeing with evolutionary gradualism. So whats your issue? You really think the schools are teaching anything less than fairy tales when they drive evo down kids throats. They don't even get their rhetoric right. "The porcupine evolved bristles to protect itself from predators" my arse! The majority of you over self righteous, arrogant, creationist bashers don't even know what the theory states, where it has gone or even how to refer to it. I am so over you people acting all smart when you haven't spent the time and energy to even understand the very theory that you put so much FAITH in. Do you even know what gradualism means and how important it is to evolution and how it doesn't happen? No, I thought not. Cheers!

Kudo's, you looked up the definition of the word theory on wikipedia just like i did before posting. I still think I get it.

I am a bit disappointed that you stopped there. You must understand that saying 'species evolved is a fact and so therefore we must explain it with a theory' is a tautalogical arguement. This is just as irritating as the preacher man saying we are here so we must have been built. They both make sense (given your sensibility). Neither face the issues.

I am truly sorry you stopped reading. I had the respect to read all of yours.

In science, a theory is a mathematical or logical explanation, or a testable model of the manner of interaction of a set of natural phenomena, capable of predicting future occurrences or observations of the same kind, and capable of being tested through experiment or otherwise falsified through empirical observation. -wikipedia-

Please note that it says tested through expiriment or otherwise falsified through empirical observation. I ask you again, why is it still a theory after almost 100 years?

Oh and by the way, this isn't personal...but it is fun:)

Wow, gee. Great response. Nothing like avoiding thinking. Congrats dude. You are a full member of the "inside the box" thinking club. Have fun with it.

Well and simply said...and so, simply responded to.

I argue that people do not in fact spend all that much time disproving creationists. They spend a little time rolling their eyes and slapping down a few high and mighty words about data and facts. If indeed they spent some time trying to disprove them (the informed ones) it might benefit both.

Creationists who know what they are talking about refer to evolution as a theory, like the rest of the world. You know a predictive, logical, testable opinion of why something is. It remains, however, a theory. That which "has not been adequately tested". Kind of funny really when about a hundred years of science hasn't been able to prove it.

Regarding the comment about not being able to win an argument with someone who has already made up their mind, that does work both ways.

Regarding Noah, consider this.

Why does man have so much problem believing that a being could make them. Furthermore that a being could make them and not build them an environment. Did Noah take a million animals? Were other animals created afterwards? Who knows? Look at the computer you are using right now. Someone built it. The premise of science is to understand and control. Is a being further advanced than us such a impossibility? Why then do we strive to learn and understand. where are we going?

I sincerely ask you to actually spend the time looking at the data and the facts. Do your best to really disprove it. Not this moron on the video but real creationists. It is a good endevour and you will learn much.

Sorry for the short comments here. It is not a good forum. I am sure i have overstepped. Let me just say. I spent the time and stduied and argued with some creationsist scientists. Phd's. Got my butt kicked over and over. Learning is hard but good for you.

Yippie, another "smart" person finding the dimmest rival and "revealing" their stupidities. It reminds me of that song about the guy who beats up his girlfriend. "do you feel like a man now?" Well, do you? It seems far more of a challenge to find a rival of equal intellect to bash. I don't suppose the maker of this film will have much trouble given his/her choice orf opponent.

Ever read Darwin on Trial by Phillip Johnson or page through the evolution cruncher? No, I thought not.

C'mon, this fella hopefully does not represent even the median intellect of the Creationists. Let's play an even game guys.