Kevin R McCarthy- Choking on Analogies

-
Yup, Kevin Retard McCarthy is at it AGAIN. This time he is choking on arguments from analogy.

Kevin sez:

The problem here is that there is a fundamental difference between a watch and a living thing. Living things are capable of self-reproduction and will often have mutations that result in differences from the parent organism.
 

Earth to Kevin- reproduction is the very thing that needs to be explained and your position has nothing to explain it.

IOW Kevin, once again you prove to be an ignorant chump.

Oleg Tchernyshyov - Ignorant of Biology

-
Oleg is such a fool- this time Oleg sez:

Chromosomes. are. all. connected. It is one long polymer. Called the DNA.

Write that down, Joe.
 

Well, no, I am not going to write down your ignorant spewage oleg, but I will tell people of your ignorance.

For those who do not know, chromosomes are NOT all connected. They are separate strands of DNA and only a moron would say what oleg did.

Specific Examples of the Weaknesses of Evolutionism

-
Kevin Retard McCarthy is spewing more nonsense. This punk will lie and lie, have his lies exposed and just continue to spew the same lies.

This time he wants to know of any specific examples of the weaknesses of evolutionism. Evolutionism is the untestable claim that all organisms have descended from common ancestors solely through an unguided, unintelligent, purposeless, material processes such as natural selection acting on random variations or mutations; that the mechanisms of natural selection, random variation and mutation, and perhaps other similarly naturalistic mechanisms, are completely sufficient to account for the appearance of design in living organisms.

1- It's grand claims are untestable and hide behind eons of time

2- It cannot be quantified

3- It cannot be measured- no one knows how many mutations it takes to get from one body plan to another

Those are 3 MAJOR weaknesses of the theory of evolution.

But Kevin does say something that is right- teach the evidence. Leave the philosophy out of it. Then you wouldn't have to teach ID, it flows from the pages of biology textbooks.

IOW teach BIOLOGY in BIOLOGY classrooms and leave the theory of evolution out of it. And those who would want to explore/ examine the theory have them try to develop testable hypotheses based on blind and undirected chemical processes, ie accumulations of genetic accidents.

It would also be nice if the teachers did away with the strawman that all who oppose the theory of evolution oppose any sort of change. IOW tell the students the truth about ID and baraminology

Kevin also sez:

There’s no such thing as ‘biological’ evolution and ‘chemical’ evolution. There is evolution. If there is a population of anything that can change over time, then it’s evolution. Whether that population be of humans or pre-biotic RNAs.
 

 Kevin has some sort of god complex as he always thinks what he sez is the last word. Well Kevin, biological evolution refers to, well living organisms, and chemical evolution would refer to pre-biotic evolution, ie abiogenesis. And if you are going to define evolution so broadly as to include all change it pretty much makes the concept useless.

But anyway Kevin, if I get my say I am going to get a disclaimer read in biology classrooms stating that neither Intelligent Design nor YEC baraminology are anti-evolution (especially in the broad sense you use)- or maybe legislation to that effect.

The New Strawman- If the Universe is Designed Then EVERYTHING is Designed

-
The shit these anti-intellectual evoTARDs pull from their ass and munch on like candy, is astounding.

Now we have:

 "If the universe is designed then everything is designed and the design inference is useless!!!1111!!!11!!"
 

And yet Dr. Behe himself wrote:

“Intelligent design is a good explanation for a number of biochemical systems, but I should insert a word of caution. Intelligent design theory has to be seen in context: it does not try to explain everything. We live in a complex world where lots of different things can happen. When deciding how various rocks came to be shaped the way they are a geologist might consider a whole range of factors: rain, wind, the movement of glaciers, the activity of moss and lichens, volcanic action, nuclear explosions, asteroid impact, or the hand of a sculptor.

The shape of one rock might have been determined primarily by one mechanism, the shape of another rock by another mechanism.

Similarly, evolutionary biologists have recognized that a number of factors might have affected the development of life: common descent, natural selection, migration, population size, founder effects (effects that may be due to the limited number of organisms that begin a new species), genetic drift (spread of "neutral," nonselective mutations), gene flow (the incorporation of genes into a population from a separate population), linkage (occurrence of two genes on the same chromosome), and much more. The fact that some biochemical systems were designed by an intelligent agent does not mean that any of the other factors are not operative, common, or important.”
 

Cars are designed. That doesn't mean there aren't any automobile accidents.

We can still determine what nature, operating freely, can and cannot produce and what requires agency involvement. And obvioulsy it matters because we have entire fields dedictaed to telling the difference. Even Richard Dawkins admits it makes all the difference in the world.

But anyway, the desperation of these morons comes through loud and clear with these uncreative, childish strawmen.

Thank you. Please keep up the good work.

Cowardly Thorton Runs to Dr Hunter For Protection!

-
LoL! Like the coward it is thorton ran crying to Dr Hunter for protection- what a pussy you are occam's afterbirth/ thorton.

Of little baby cowards can dish it out but can't take it. And here is the fag-boy from California doing exactly that.

Nice job fag-boy coward, thorton

Neil Rickert- Odd Man Out

-
Yup good ole Neil is at it again, this time as the odd man out.

Neil sez:

The reaction of the ID community to ENCODE and, before that, to junk-DNA, has always seemed odd.
 

Really? That's odd that you would say that. He continues:

It seems to be driven purely by theology.
 

LoL! Only if computer programming is a religion. Ya see, Neil, the non-junk DNA call was made by looking at the way we design things, espacially computer programs as that is what DNA has been compared with.

So we look at computer programs and we do NOT see junk code. So when we turn back to look at living organisms we would not expect junk DNA- especially not 50%+ junk DNA

Neil goes on:

Of course, all of ID is driven by theology, but at least there’s a pretense of doing science. 

Of course Neil can't support any of that. And he doesn't appear to know anything about science.

It’s been hard to see where that pretense fits in with junk DNA. 
 

That is because you are a scientifically illiterate ass, Neil.

I suspect that they are deeply offended by the “junk” part of that name, and think it an insult to their imagined designer.
 

And we suspect that you are a blathering idiot. And your posts support that suspicion.

 

Of Evolutionism, Dogs and Cats

-
Evolutionists are still a clueless lot. Now I have a couple evoTARDs saying that dogs cannot evolve into cats because they are on existing separate branches of the tree of life.

Unfortunately they do not say how nor why that prevenst said evolution.

Also they seem to be saying that if cats never existed then it would be possible for dogs to evolve into cats. Somehow the non-existence of cats magically allows that evolution to occur.

This is a prime example of why evolutionism has to be stopped- it makes people dumber than shit.

keiths- STILL Humping That Strawman

-
Atheists are such a pathetic lot. Their lives, unfulfilled, they must invent stawman after strawman in order to feel substantiated. In this case keiths is still fixated on what he calls "the problem of evil".

He sez:

Why do evil and suffering exist if the world is presided over by a God who is all-knowing, all-powerful and perfectly loving?
 

Who sez that the earth is presided over by God? And even if earth was presided over then we could easily say that evil and suffering exist because we, the people, allow them to. We did it. And WE need to take responsibility for it.

This has been explained to keiths but he won't have any of it. It seems that atheists have to have someone, or some thing, else to blame.

Not only that but evil and suffering allow us to learn. Tooth decay led to dentistry and an understanding of our teeth and gums. Suffering leads to cures driven by the desire to ease that suffering.

And without evil you couldn't judge people- you wouldn't have anything to grade them against. IOW without evil and suffering this would be a very boring place. We wouldn't have any impetus for learning or trying to make ourselves better.

Just think what our planet would look like if nothing died. That "be fruitful and multiply" order would be pretty stupid.

So pain, suffering and imperfection make for an active and dynamic place. Static is boring.

But anyway it is hilarious that keiths thinks that just because God is  "all-knowing, all-powerful and perfectly loving", that everything God creates has to be perfect. It just doesn't follow.

Keep humping that strawman keiths...