Rebuttal To Creationists - "Since We Can't Directly Observe Evolution..."

Theodoric:

---

I am not making any claims on knowledge of that subject. You are making claims about what I asked you.
​
I have not heard the rubber and glue argument since I was in elementary school. But you seem to have adopted it as your only argument.

---

Yep, and I support my claims with experimental evidence, a mathematical description, and an explanation using the laws of physics (something that biologists didn't get in their survey of mathematics and survey of physics courses). I learned the mathematics in elementary school. Too bad you only learned about rubber and glue.

If you understand that, why don't you understand that you are related to your cousin but you are not descended from your cousin? Why don't you understand that mammals are related to fish but they are not descended from fish? You're misunderstanding AGAIN. I am descended from my ANCESTORS, not my relatives. You need to learn the difference between descent and relationship. Related to, yes. Descended from, no. Since YOU can't understand the difference between related and descended, YOI don't know enough about evolution to say anything on the subject.

You haven't supported your claim about fish evolving into mammals AT ALL. You run away from the issue. You have never been able to show where anybody but YOU has ever made such a claim.

Kleinman:

---

He is related to fecal bacteria but not descended from fecal bacteria.

ringo:

---

If you understand that, why don't you understand that you are related to your cousin but you are not descended from your cousin? Why don't you understand that mammals are related to fish but they are not descended from fish?

---

---

If you want to believe you are related to fecal bacteria, go for it.

Kleinman:

---

So tell us pea shooter, which bacteria are you descended from?

ringo:

---

You're misunderstanding AGAIN. I am descended from my ANCESTORS, not my relatives. You need to learn the difference between descent and relationship.

---

---

So you don't know which bacteria you are descended from, you are only related to them. Maybe you descended from a fungus. That would mean there is a fungus among us.

Kleinman:

---

Just because you believe you are related to fecal bacteria ....

ringo:

---

Related to, yes. Descended from, no.

---

---

Maybe you descended from a retrovirus?

Kleinman:

---

... doesn't mean you know how drug resistance evolves....

ringo:

---

Since YOU can't understand the difference between related and descended, YOI don't know enough about evolution to say anything on the subject.

---

---

At least I don't flush my relatives down the toilet.
Message 2718

Kleinman:

---

... I support my claims with experimental evidence....

ringo:

---

You haven't supported your claim about fish evolving into mammals AT ALL. You run away from the issue. You have never been able to show where anybody but YOU has ever made such a claim.

---

---

I wonder what that selection pressure was that evolved a bacteria into a fake cowboy.

It isn't a matter of "wanting to believe. It's a matter of accepting reality. I keep telling you, relatedness and descent are diffrent. You are not descended from ANY of your cousins. No. Again, that is a relative, not an ancestor. You really should learn some basic concepts before you try to talk about evolution. Relative, not ancestor. You really should learn some basic concepts before you try to talk about evolution. There's no room in there with you. You're in way over your head.

He thinks he's related to dust, being descended from a Golem. And he sees no reason to try to rise above that.

Kleinman:

---

If you want to believe you are related to fecal bacteria, go for it.

ringo:

---

It isn't a matter of "wanting to believe. It's a matter of accepting reality.

---

---

We now know what you think is your relatives. Why would you want to flush your relatives down the toilet?

Kleinman:

---

So you don't know which bacteria you are descended from, you are only related to them.

ringo:

---

I keep telling you, relatedness and descent are diffrent. You are not descended from ANY of your cousins.

---

---

So you are not related to your parents?

Kleinman:

---

Maybe you descended from a fungus

ringo:

---

No. Again, that is a relative, not an ancestor. You really should learn some basic concepts before you try to talk about evolution.

---

---

Now I get it. You are related to everything except your parents and they aren't a fungus.

Kleinman:

---

Maybe you descended from a retrovirus?

ringo:

---

Relative, not ancestor. You really should learn some basic concepts before you try to talk about evolution.

---

---

Did your parents appear in the primordial soup?

Kleinman:

---

At least I don't flush my relatives down the toilet.

ringo:

---

There's no room in there with you.

---

---

Now you are just being silly, I don't flush my relatives down the toilet, that's your fantasy.

Kleinman:

---

I wonder what that selection pressure was that evolved a bacteria into a fake cowboy.

ringo:

---

You're in way over your head.

---

---

That's what your relatives said just before you hit flush.

dwise1:

---

He thinks he's related to dust, being descended from a Golem. And he sees no reason to try to rise above that.

---

I wonder if dwise1 knows that is where he shall return.

Conman the Bullshit Peddler is going to teach us how the gypsies created the fossil record.

Tanypteryx:

---

Conman the Bullshit Peddler is going to teach us how the gypsies created the fossil record.

---

Tany will now explain to us the lack of transitional forms found in the fossil record. He will do this with retroviruses since he can't explain how descent with modification works. And that humans got 200,000 retroviral infections which caused no harm to the lineage. He will then show us his collection of dead bugs in life-like poses. After all, Tany got social promotions in his survey of physics and survey of mathematics course which prepared him for a lifetime of bug chasing.

Conman the Bullshit Peddler is going to teach us how the gypsies created the fossil record.

Tanypteryx:

---

Conman the Bullshit Peddler is going to teach us how the gypsies created the fossil record.

---

Tany is confused, this is from Tany's imagination. Perhaps Tany wants to tell us the selection condition(s) that would evolve a bacteria into a fake cowboy or a poorly trained biologist.

Please, please take a class in biology. Preferably one that teaches evolution. Or maybe physical anthropology would be better (as per Dr Eugenie Scott's story; see below (not for you, but rather for those unafraid to learn something) ). Perhaps then you would finally no longer be so terrified of ringo's question that you've been running away from for ... how many months?: Anybody with even the most minimal understanding of evolution would be able to answer that question with ease. Yet you repeatedly run away from it in terror.Very similar to every other creationist I have encountered in the past four decades being terrified of that one question that none of them has ever been able to answer: "What the hell are you talking about?" For the edification of those inclined to learn:  Now just for fun. I have seen you respond with interest to a fellow creationist's mention of young-earth claims. Here's one from "Dr" Kent Hovind (his "PhD" is from a diploma mill, plus it's in "Religious Education" though he uses it to try to pose as a scientist):

quote:

---

For instance, the Sun is burning, of course, and it's burning an enormous amount of fuel. It's losing about 5 million tons every second. Well, if the earth is billions of years old that creates a problem, because you couldn't go back 5 billion or 20 billion years like they say with the Sun constantly getting larger and larger and heavier and heavier. The Sun's gravity would of course become real great and would suck the earth in. Plus the Sun would be bigger and burn the earth up. It can't possibly be true that it's billions of years old.

---

Now, the 5 million tons per second rate is slightly exaggerated, but still within reason. The 5 billion (10⁹) years figure is also slightly high, but still within reason (we can safely ignore the 20 billion year figure as him misspeaking on a radio show).So what do you think of that young-earth claim?

dwise1:

---

Please, please take a class in biology. Preferably one that teaches evolution. Or maybe physical anthropology would be better (as per Dr Eugenie Scott's story; see below (not for you, but rather for those unafraid to learn something) ). Perhaps then you would finally no longer be so terrified of ringo's question that you've been running away from for ... how many months?:

ringo:

---

Do you understand yet that A → B and A → C are NOT the same as B → C ?

---

---

It is good to know that ringo isn't the only one that knows that DU → MB. So when is the master of C-- programming going to explain to us that since the internet exists, universal common descent is true? It won't be because he understands the physics and mathematics of descent with modification or how drug resistance evolves and why cancer treatments fail. Try to understand the mathematics for descent with modification. It is simple enough that even a
C-- programmer can understand it.

Conman the Bullshit Peddler thinks he's a gypsy mind reader.