The better half of the joke

[Eloi]

... is that evolutionists not only say that some animal species come from previous ones, but they also say that each plant species comes from another previous one (or that they used to say BEFORE)... This, after, according to them, plants stopped living in the water to start living on land... kind of like when fish ceasing to be aquatic to become semi-terrestrial amphibians ... or humans stopped living in caves to start building houses

Did you know this part of the story? It is never ending.

Do you think that the millions of years that the planet has existed are enough for so many SUPERDUPERULTRASLOW transformations that these scientists talk about?

[boatsnguitars]

[Replying to Clownboat in post #30]

Sadly, they have been taught that God can do anything. Poof! He can create things in a matter of days (why days and not seconds... don't ask).

So, they simply will say "I don't need to explain it, I justneed to believe it."

We have to face it, they simply don't want to learn or recognize the world "God made" - they want to worship the ideas of men in their mythology.

[Eloi]

...
Finished things needed to finish other things? Not sure I can decipher what that is supposed to mean.
...

The slow evolution of all things that theorists try to make others believe IMPLIES that every single thing in the Universe must have gradually emerged from something that existed before it.

But think on this, for example: for any nose and any smell to enter into some kind of relationship: there must be a nose capable of smelling and an odor ready to be smelled. That is not a relationship that can exist without the existence of one of them.

BUT for this, a fully developed brain that knows how to distinguish odors would be needed, to start making classifications based on already existing information related to odors with which the brain can compare, supported by the job of very specialized cells capable of transforming information from the environment into a specific format to be later interpreted internally by the brain. Even more: it would be necessary for there to exist subjects that were capable of possessing fully developed mechanisms to release odors to the outside, and an environment capable of allowing the transmission of odor from one point to another up to a certain distance without dissipation... and the list of things that occur to me that would be necessary for the real conditions for a nose-smell relationship to exist would be endless.

Slow evolution implies that each part of this complex relationship nose-smell needed their own time to develop, BUT the reality is that for the relationship of all of them to exist, all of them had to exist fully developed or at least being completely functional. Evolutionists are speculating about a practically infinite process where each thing appears by itself, slowly, and after being complete begins the process of relating to other things that also took time to complete, creating a scenario where the millions of years calculated for the entire universe are not enough for the supposed slow evolution in which everything that exists today has fully developed as we see it today.

The nose, the smells and the brain are just one of the millions upon millions of millions of relationships that exist on our planet alone. It would not be enough an entire forum to talk about eyes and sight and colors, the earth and the moon and the sun, water and soil and plants, mouth and flavors and fruits, the chicken and the egg and the rooster, the man and the woman and the baby, ...

Obviously evolution does not explain reality as we know it. It is fiction.

[DrNoGods]

[Replying to Eloi in post #32]

Slow evolution implies that each part of this complex relationship nose-smell needed their own time to develop, BUT the reality is that for the relationship of all of them to exist, all of them had to exist fully developed or at least being completely functional. Evolutionists are speculating about a practically infinite process where each thing appears by itself, slowly, and after being complete begins the process of relating to other things that also took time to complete, creating a scenario where the millions of years calculated for the entire universe are not enough for the supposed slow evolution in which everything that exists today has fully developed as we see it today.

This is just another set of comments that show you don't understand even the bare basics of how evolution, and biology, work. And the universe isn't millions of years old, it is billions ... you're out 3 orders of magnitude. Why not at least try to learn a little something about evolution, how it actually does work, the actual time frames involved, etc. before making comments that are clearly just personal opinion and only further demonstrate ingorance of the subject you are trying (and failing) to discredit.

Obviously evolution does not explain reality as we know it. It is fiction.

Your personal opinions based on old religious stories certainly don't support this claim. The problem you have here is that with all your complaining about evolution, you've offered up absolutely nothing to refute or discredit the science behind it.

[Eloi]

I don't need to understand what evolutionist invented and called "evolution" ... I just need rational thinking and own criteria.

[Miles]

I don't need to understand what evolutionist invented and called "evolution" ... I just need rational thinking

And for many people that train never arrives.

My condolences.

.

[DrNoGods]

[Replying to Eloi in post #34]

I don't need to understand what evolutionist invented and called "evolution" ... I just need rational thinking and own criteria.

That's probably why you didn't study any science or educate yourself on the subject of evolution. "Own criteria" just means your personal opinion, which is of no use when discussing science issues (which is what evolution is). And it is certainly not compatible with rational thinking ... just the opposite (ie. ignore the science and make an uninformed decision based on 2000+ year old myths from a "holy" book).

Fortunately, the tiny number of people who think like you do on evolution will never have any influence on the subject or alter the scientific results that prove its validity. So complain away on the internet all you like ... it won't have any effect.

[Eloi]

I just read your disqualifications and laugh at you... How are you sure I'm not a college graduate, if you don't know me?

The way you use personal disqualifiers when you can't respond to some logical reasoning amazes me... Reading you makes me laugh.

If I were to strip your comments of personal attacks, conceit, and website links (which you are trying to use to presume that you know something about something discussed here), they would come to naught.

The strangest thing of all is that even if I've already told you, you keep doing it over and over, non-stop, as if you were programmed for it, instead of debating the ideas that are put on the table.

You have censored comments from others as a forum moderator. How come you use so many personal attacks against others and nobody censors you?

If you think that apology turns evolutionary fiction into fact, well NO, get that idea out of your mind.

Bad attitude and falacies of apologists ridicule their arrogance and exposes it for the empty conceit that it is.

[DrNoGods]

[Replying to Eloi in post #37]

I just read your disqualifications and laugh at you... How are you sure I'm not a college graduate, if you don't know me?

Not sure what you mean by "disqualifications." This is the debate section of the forum, and you initiated several threads in the Science and Religion section (including this one) complaining about evolution. You're being challenged on claims you are making, but instead of debating the issue and providing some kind of support, backup, links, etc. for the claims all you have done is respond with your personal opinions on the science issues without any attempt to debate them or offer any support whatsoever beyond referencing some bible verses, when the bible or any other "holy" book is not evidence in this section for any claims being made. You may well have multiple Ph.D. degrees ... but from your own comments it is clear that you have not studied evolution and the science behind it (which was my comment ... I never said or implied that you have no education). Pointing that out isn't a "disqualification" or insult ... it is an attempt to get you to debate the claims you are making rather than just repeating a personal opinion based on religious beliefs.

The way you use personal disqualifiers when you can't respond to some logical reasoning amazes me... Reading you makes me laugh.

What logical reasoning have you presented in this thread, or any of the others made in this debate section? You keep repeating your opinion that evolution isn't valid, but have yet to back that up with anything that would support it, or refute the science, etc. Do you have anything other than your personal opinion to legitimately challenge the validity of evolution? If not, why keep creating threads on the same subject ... that is nothing more than preaching.

[Eloi]

We, JWs, preach in the streets, face to face, not like atheists who preach online.

[Miles]

We, JWs, preach in the streets, face to face, not like atheists who preach online.

One example of our preaching please. Keeping in mind:

preach
/prēCH/
verb: preach; 3rd person present: preaches; past tense: preached; past participle: preached; gerund or present participle: preaching

• deliver a sermon or religious address to an assembled group of people, typically in church.

• publicly proclaim or teach (a religious message or belief).

• earnestly advocate (a belief or course of action).

source: Oxford Languages Dictionary

(all emphases mine)

.