Do you believe in human evolution?

Do you think what constitute "science" is simply a matter of opinion?

I was speaking idiomatically.

Quote:

Belief in the absence of evidence.

The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence.

Look, all I'm saying is that there are known-knowns, known-unknowns and unknown-unknowns-- Things we don't even know that we don't know.

-Samuel L. "Bad Mother Fucker" Jackson

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Quote:

Look, all I'm saying is that there are known-knowns, known-unknowns and unknown-unknowns-- Things we don't even know that we don't know.

-Samuel L. "Bad Mother Fucker" Jackson

Duo Maxwell: I thought that was Donald Rumsfeld.

FELIPE NO

I don't think you understood what I meant when I said you were cruisin' for a bruisin', DK. Drop the fucking links shit. Linking a source is a staple of the Codex, and if you have a problem with that, then argue the source, not the use of it.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

Originally Posted by DarkLink2135

Case in point, you've been WRONG about damn near everything you have posted,

no.

Quote:

including wrinkles.

Although you're right here. I misthought; aging in general is caused by the gradual breakdown of cells, which cellular mutation is a part of. It wasn't just wrinkles and wrinkles aren't caused merely by cell breakdown.

Quote:

For some reason you have been absolutely convinced that YOU know the answers to life, the universe, and everything,

Fuck your Hitchhiker's reference, nerd.

Quote:

while the world's brightest minds don't know those answers for sure.

Here's this: I am convinced that you don't understand evolution properly. The world's brightest minds are also convinced of that (I asked them). Hey!

Quote:

If you don't agree with me, fine, but stop acting as though the entire evolutionary theory were proven fact.

Evolution as you understand the question is proven, son. You can't use the debates of professionals in the topic about extremely specific parts of evolutionary theory to say the jury's out on it.

At least creationists have faith and religion to explain themselves. You're worse, you're intellectually lazy.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by a lurker

Evolution as you understand the question is proven, son. You can't use the debates of professionals in the topic about extremely specific parts of evolutionary theory to say the jury's out on it.

I don't know where the hell you got your education, but they need to be shut down, fast.

I think my posts speak for themselves. It's pretty ironic, you calling me "intellectually lazy."

People like you are impossible. Although funny to laugh at. But ultimately impossible. You are so absolutely convinced you have the answer because you want one so bad. For some reason you are completely unable to live with any doubt in your mind, so you viciously attack anyone who disagrees with you. Funny and pathetic at the same time. Insanely predictable too. You are probably going to write another word-by-word flamefest and then whine about me trying to psychoanalyze you. But you know what? It doesn't even take that much. You are just that transparent. You have to resort to using petty, ridiculous, unrelated flames to make any point, and you just get madder when it miserably fails.

I posted what I believed and why, you started nipping away at tiny little statements I made, very few of which had anything to do with the evolutionary theory, and then threw a fit when you couldn't even attack them correctly. The only resort you have left is to act like you are 100% correct, and pretty soon here you are probably going to sink even lower and resort to some sort of threat because of your position on these boards.

Evolution as a whole is still a theory. It has NOT been proven, and it is unlikely that it will ever be so in the near future. Not because it is right or wrong, but because of the evidence required to do so. Acting like anything else is true is either extreme arrogance or extreme stupidity. I'm not sure what catagory you fall into.

Good day.

PS: Macroevolution isn't an "extremely specific" part of the evolutionary theory. It's a rather large part. Unless of course you are going to use the whole "I don't understand anything" rhetoric.

Additional Spam:

Originally Posted by a lurker

You can't use the debates of professionals in the topic about extremely specific parts of evolutionary theory to say the jury's out on it.

That's strange, you using this line on me, because as I recall, kinky was the one posting the professional papers of extremely specific parts of evolutionary theory, and you were the one defending them. Nevermind that these papers didn't even say the jury was out on it...

There's nowhere I can't reach.

PROOF:

Spoiler:

YouTube Video

Most amazing jew boots

Originally Posted by Ulysses

PROOF:

Spoiler:

Wow.

I relent then. The Simpsons supercedes all .

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

That's enough dicking around with semantics for this thread.

I was speaking idiomatically.