Responded to the latter part of this blog here:
“Fossils there are NO transitory fossils found since Darwin”
This is a stunning lie. We not only have found literally thousands of them, but they found transitional fossils darwin specifically predicted in his lifetime, like darwin’s prediction of older bird fossils with un-fused digits. I mean don’t even take my word for it, google “transitional fossil”. Here and here are two blogs I did with pictures and links to pictures of dozens of them.
I absolutely cannot stand liars, and there are so many of them in the anti-evolution movement.
Btw I’m not calling you a liar, I’m saying that guy is a huuuuuge liar.
“Apes most all the famous pictures transforming from ape to man, most were fake or hoaxes”
The classical illustration can give someone who doesn’t read the actual chapter in the book the false impression that humans evolved from modern ape species, but that isn’t the illustration’s fault, that is the reader’s fault. However we have the fossils to back up the illustration, for instance here are but a handful of them.
And it’s worth mentioning that humans are still classified as apes to this day. Ape refers to a group of species, like mammal or reptile, not one species like gorilla, chimpanzee etc do.
“Chance my favorite method. the math and the odds of all happening by chance are beyond believability”
No, these arguments consist of made up numbers and distortions of how probability works. Claiming evolution is “mathematically impossible”, for instance, when it’s easy to do mathematically impossible things, and people do them all the time. Mathematical impossibility describes how unlikely it is for something to happen exactly the same way twice. Mathematically impossible things are easy to do the first time around. E.g., flip a coin 1,000 times. The odds of anyone flipping a coin 1,000 times and getting the same exact pattern of heads/tails results is extremely remote, probably what is considered mathematical impossibility. Does that mean it’s impossible to flip a coin 1,000 times? The reason it doesn’t matter is that the odds are as remote no matter what the outcome is. And when you flip a coin 1,000 times you’re not aiming for any one outcome. Neither is evolution, as evidenced by the vast diversity of life.
The characterization of evolution as “chance”, “random chance” etc is also a misrepresentation designed to mock the processes of evolution without actually explaining how they work and how we know they work. Because if they explained how natural selection functions and how we can observe it working all around us, in bacteria that adapt to antibiotics and cancer tumors that evolve new physical traits to become immune or resistant to chemo therapy treatments, or insects adapting to pesticides so we have to invent new pesticides every so many years, previously non-bio-degradable man-made substances becoming biodegradable as life adapts to be able to eat it, etc. [edit: I meant to say if they explained what evolution was and how it works they would shoot their own foot so they prefer to mock it by means of caricature rather than accurately informing people about evolution, but I got carried away with observable examples of evolution (there are so many) that I forgot to finish the sentence properly, lol. I’m such a nerd.]
I could give observable, factual examples of this process these charlatans claim is impossible all day, and I’m not even a scientist. High school students in america even do evolution experiments and watch insects evolve over a handful of generations as reaction to changes in their environment.
Evolution isn’t magical, scientists understand how and why it works so well they can predict how it will happen and watch it unfold. This is what allows scientists and doctors to manufacture, distribute and administer vaccines to inoculate you from a virus that hasn’t gotten here yet. Haven’t you ever wondered how they do that? Evolution science.
“Empirical Science primarily the arguments from cause and effect, which is basic to scientific pursuit but which evolutionists have to suspend for their thesis to have success.”
This is vague and almost certainly BS like the above. Evolution is a causal mechanism. It is by definition how gene pools are affected by changes in their environments making the possessors of different genetic and physical variations survive and pass their genes on at different rates, changing the genetic composition of the species over multiple generations. It works the same as selective animal breeding, if you only let the taller dogs breed or let them breed at a higher rate, the average height of the population will increase. If, in nature, un-affected by human intervention, something in the species’ environment reduces the chance of reproduction [or survival*] of taller or shorter animals even a little, the genetic variations which produce that characterization must become less common by definition.
“Recapitulation interesting fact that Haeckel was charged with fraud for his doctored drawings.”
Haeckel’s drawings were never the basis for evolution. Creationists often lie and claim that haeckel’s drawings were in On The Origin Of Species, which has a section on embryology, but the embryology in darwin’s books, and the illustrations, were all accurate and his book was published years before haeckel’s fraud. The evidence for evolution through embryology is still there despite the cartoonish exaggerations in the embryo drawings. Humans still have tails and a coat of body-wide hair in the womb, whales have four limbs in the womb and many retain hip-bones into adulthood (though they no longer have hind legs) etc. It is to this day a legitimate line of evidence, and is no more falsified by one or two frauds than the frauds you are (I suspect inadvertently) promoting in this blog falsify the idea of a creator, which btw darwin believed in all his life.
“no so funny is how all of the above are still in school textbooks today as fact when actually none are substantiated and many evolutionists have even abandoned them, yet still in the textbooks.”
Haeckel’s drawings (the only falsehood not invented or distorted by creationists) has not been in the science textbooks (except as a forgery) since shortly after it was debunked by scientists. Creationists have claimed for years however, that accurate embryology pictures are “haeckel’s drawings” in modern science books.
“Eureka, the TV show, had a reference this past week to something being another Piltdown [man] — which was a hoax and that was the basis for the show, that a scientist was creating a fraud with a fossil.”
The piltdown man was a fraud invented by a non-scientist who claimed he had an important transitional fossil in his private collection. It was debunked by scientists, not invented by them.