Your reason for accepting evolution

You remember how I told you that you shouldn't recite nonsense about things of which you are ignorant?These lies that you have been taught to repeat are in fact lies. More stuff that you've made up in your head. Another standard creationist lie. There are lots of intermediate forms in the fossil record, as you would know if you'd ever bothered to learn anything about it. ... says the man who's been reciting a bunch of silly lies to us without ever bothering to find out if they're true.Do, please, lecture us on "brainwashing", we could do with a good laugh. Wow, you just inadvertently said something that's true.

Do you ever get tired of being wrong? I think you mean half-arm, half-wing. At the top, the hand of an archosaur (the group ancestral to dinosaurs), at the bottom, the wing of a modern bird, and in between ...Actually, I'm going to ask you to guess. Where would you say the saurians leave off and the birds begin?Half-fin, half-leg? You mean like Tiktaalik? You know, you could have found out this stuff for yourself, it's not like it's a secret.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

Yes, and each time it improves. So there's not a snowball's chance in hell that scientists will go back to a Bronze Age hypothesis that they know to be balderdash. I take it that you have absolutely no proof for this assertion. ... says the man who recites creationist rubbish without bothering to find out if it's remotely true.Project much?Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

Yes. This is because what we want to see actually exists.That's how we know we're right.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

But this is just what these people don't have. They are brutally indifferent to nature --- to beautiful, fascinating, complex, wonderful nature.I think they scarcely live in the real world. Reality, to a creationist, is defined not by observing the world, but by the line of bullshit they find most comforting. The idea of looking anywhere outside their silly jumble of windy words for truth ... does not occur to them.

The two are not exclusive. Of course your lies make sense to you. You are telling me lies about what I think. This is not going to convince me. Which don't exist, which is why you can present no evidence for this ridiculous falsehood. Why should I bother to give a proper reply to a claim without any back-up but your say-so?Still, if it'll make you happy.* There is no such thing as "the" coelacanth --- coelacanths are an order, not a species, as you would know if you'd ever bothered to find out what you were talking about.* The modern coelacanths are quite different from those found in the fossil record (which can, therefore, still be used as index fossils) as you would know if you'd ever bothered to find out what you were talking about.* Scientists do not claim that tetrapods evolved from coelacanths, but from rhipidistians, which are a completely different order of lobe-finned fish, as you would know if you'd ever bothered to find out what you were talking about. There are lots. As for "debatable", anything can be debated --- alll you need is an ignorant crank with a soapbox. The proposition that the Earth is not flat is also "debatable". It's debated by idiots. What an interesting fantasy. Which intermediate forms do you claim have gone "into the garbage"? If you were motivated by a desire for truth, you'd have spent some time trying to find out if any of the nonsense you're reciting was in fact true.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

Let's have a few more intermediate forms, shall we?Here we see the evolution of the middle ear bones of mammals from the reptillian jaw. Nice. Let's have a whale with legs, shall we? Ah, yes, Ambulocetus.To quote Stephen Jay Gould:"If you had given me a blank piece of paper and a blank check, I could not have drawn you a theoretical intermediate any better or more convincing than Ambulocetus. Those dogmatists who by verbal trickery can make white black, and black white, will never be convinced of anything, but Ambulocetus is the very animal that they proclaimed impossible in theory."How about some assorted hominins? Primitive fish? I give you Haikouella. Fins, yes; hard parts, no, apart from pharangeal denticles for feeding. Eyes are primitive light-sensitive spots. Known from over 300 specimens. Dinosaur to modern bird, anyone? Edited by Admin, : Reduce image size.

Hey, look, you said something true again! And now you're back to talking bollocks.You know who knows about modern genetics?Modern geneticists.You know who knows bugger-all about modern genetics?You.Modern geneticists have no time for the puerile fantasies of creationists.This is why you won't find a single geneticist who supports your krazy kreationist krap about mutations and information. More sad little lies. Ths is the second time you've repeated this weird little fantasy. What on Earth do you think you're talking about? I have never seen an evolutionist froth at the mouth. We obviously move in very different circles.Perhaps you could show us a photograph of such an incident?Or perhaps you made this up. Well, that was easy for you to say. However, it isn't actually true, is it? Paranoid lunacy is its own reward, I guess. Wait, I mean punishment, don't I?Damn, I feel sorry for you people. Why do you keep on reciting this dreary crap about "assumptions"?The existence and location in the fossil record of Tiktaalik were predicted by the theory of evolution.The evolutionists were right.That's science for you.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

Let's have some foraminifera, shall we? And now some ceratopians, eh?

Summary:I accept evolution because I know about biology.People reject evolution because they know damn-all about biology, and so are suceptible to being brainwashed with stupid lying bullshit by pathetic stupid ignorant halfwitted creationist liars.I trust that this answers the question in the OP.

Cool. I want to add one.If there was any case at all against evolution, then creationists wouldn't have to recite stupid lies in order to argue against it. They could tell the truth instead.I'm sure that they would if they could.

... but if you want to pretend that your latest garbage is true, and it will be amusing to watch you try, since some of it is very funny indeed, then you're going to have to find or start a thread in which it's on topic.In the meantime, I shall content myself by pointing out that with the exception of a couple of weasel half-truths (are you losing your grip?) it's just as false as all the other stuff you've recited, which is why you were incapable of producing a scrap of evidence for your falsehoods.Bringing me back to the OP: I like evolution because biologists do have evidence. And because they do check that what they're saying is true.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.