menxer:
This guy get time.

Darwin's theory is just a drop in the ocean, trying to explain the origin of man.

Other "theories" exist that defies creationism: the origin of the Olmecs, Sumers, annunakis, nefilims

Choose the one that best suits your belief and move on.

promise10:

How would a sane man rely on a "DROP in the ocean" and say that creation is false?

To rely on a DROP can be very dangerous!!!

naijadeyhia:



You that knows all about evolution explain it to him na. Lol
Suddenly clothes are also part of the big bang evolution theory.

Smh

menxer:


Who said creation is false?

Well, it depends on your definition of creation.

Creation story (in bible) has parallels in other ancient cultures, some are even more detailed and elaborate.

raphieMontella:

this is where creationists tend to deceive themselves...
The orgin of the universe...orgin of the species and how life began/started existing are three different topics bt u wudnt knw cause u choose not to knw...
I cannot spoon feed him on what evolution is..i believe he used a phone to log into nairaland and not a magic wand...
And if u do not knw that technology is a form of evolution as per the cloth aspect...then dnt come here blabbing...

felixomor:


So because the homo sapien is not wearing clothes, the diagram is wrong?
Abeg i dont have comments for u. Abeg Just move.

raphieMontella:

u clearly have no idea of what evolution is...
The picture is wrong because it shows man-ape
my reference for clothes comes from ur statement that the eskimo's shud have grown fur...
Understand smtin..
Im nt u..i dnt talk awta context or say rubbish..
P.s .

naijadeyhia:



If you had read the OP then you would have deciphered the kind of evolution we were refering to.

Do I need to also spoon feed you or take a laser stick and point out specifically where the OP talksa about genetics? Get your head screwed on right.

When you about to differentiate between genetics and technological evolution you can speak on this thread until then go to romance section.

naijadeyhia:


Must you tow his line? Even Eskimos have some form of technological advancement but not genetical advancement otherwise as felixomor said theh would not be needing man made fur to keep warm they would have evolved some kind of hairy skin sincd its the law of natural selection at work but guess what, I am in the tropical region of africa and I have hairs on my legs, arms, chest, back and bum while the eskimos have hairless baby skin and I wonder why.

raphieMontella:

evolution occurs only tru natural selection?..
Kai this boy is so ludicrous...
Their brain man..since they've evolved way to keep them self warm tru clothes..
Body heat tru clothes is selected as a useful trait and is copied..and the parents pass on their method of keeping their body warm with technoloy is copied and passed on as a trait to their offspring..
Or are u tryna say parents dont pass on their acquired traits to their kids?

naijadeyhia:



The billions of years time frame being declared around by science is the issue. Will you alive to witness another evolutionary process? Absolutely not!

Was anyone around to witness rhe first evolutionary process? Absolutely not as well.

Even science declares that evolution "probably happened" as the very theory has been declared as inconclusive by science and scientists.

So let me apply the same probability here;

Calculations on the probability of life forming by chance do take into account the possibility of multiple events, put the probability for the formation of the most basic of cells by natural processes at (at best) 1 in 1040,000 — that’s a number one with 40,000 zeros after it! Even this assumes all the ingredients are present, which is impossible! Now, if every atom in the universe were an experiment repeated every millisecond for the 15 billion years age of the universe commonly claimed by evolutionists, how does that affect the probability? It is now about 1 in 103900. So, when such improbable events are being discussed, the number of conceivable experiments has little effect on the matter. It is usually agreed that something with odds of less than 1 in 1050 will never happen. In other words, the origin of life without an intelligent designer is as impossible as it is impossible to be!

Also, there are no actual experiments to show that non-living matter can overcome the many chemical hurdles to form a self-reproducing cell That’s why no-one has claimed the $1.35 Million (USD) Origin-of-Life Prize.

Teempakguy:
I strongly believe that you are mistaking evolution for abiogenesis.

There is only one evolutionary process. And it is not a one time event. Instead, it continues to happen. Evolution makes no claims on the origin of life. But rather, the origin of species. You are strawmanning.

Second, science is not a living thing, or an organization for it to make statements like "probably happened. "
The closest I can get you, is the scientific community. And there, evolution is as much an established fact as everything else; it probably happened. You can also probably die if you jump off a 100 story building.

naijadeyhia:



Go to romance section pls. You have minus zero knowledge of evolution. You always type without thinking and I cannot dialogue with you on this level

felixomor:


So because the homo sapien is not wearing clothes, the diagram is wrong?
Abeg i dont have comments for u. Abeg Just move.

naijadeyhia:



That was why I used probability to speak on the same probable occurrence. Do you realise that scientists have declared the theory of evolution as inconclusive? Yes or no

Teempakguy:
no. Scientists have NOT declared the Theory/fact of evolution wrong during any period. You are referring to the creationist community.

naijadeyhia:


Really Ok let me offer you links so you can read up.

Teempakguy:
no. Scientists have NOT declared the Theory/
fact of evolution wrong during any period. You are referring to the creationist community.

Teempakguy:
no. Scientists have NOT declared the Theory/fact of evolution wrong during any period. You are referring to the creationist community.

Teempakguy:
oh please, by EVERY MEANS POSSIBLE.

promise10:
I just wonder how this false evolution is now turning science into a religion! If evolution is real, it shouldn't require this much faith.

Science shouldn't require faith, but from the FIRST day I started studying about evolution, I considered it the WORST religion of mankind! It requires FAITH from it's foundation!!! If a foundation require faith then what about the whole of it? So bad!

Teempakguy:
the diagram is wrong. Not because they are naked, but because the tree is wrong.

It did not come from chimpanzees to human beings. The ancestors of BOTH humans and chimpanzees are extinct. You need to stop thinking you are somehow the evolutionary improvement on chimpanzees. A one year old chimp will beat the crap out of you without flinching. All you have is a membership card to a species with bigger brains. Evolutionary-wise, you and the chimp are on the same level.

naijadeyhia:


Must you tow his line? Even Eskimos have some form of technological advancement but not genetical advancement otherwise as felixomor said theh would not be needing man made fur to keep warm they would have evolved some kind of hairy skin sincd its the law of natural selection at work but guess what, I am in the tropical region of africa and I have hairs on my legs, arms, chest, back and bum while the eskimos have hairless baby skin and I wonder why.

raphieMontella:

u clearly have no idea of what evolution is...
The picture is wrong because it shows ape-man
my reference for clothes comes from ur statement that the eskimo's shud have grown fur...
Understand smtin..
Im nt u..i dnt talk awta context or say rubbish..
P.s .

felixomor:


I laugh. Who told u thats a chimp? Is it written there? Please go and study, i dont have ur time.

Teempakguy:
hahaha, alright, what is it then?

felixomor:


Its like u have a problem with english but u r yet to know.
Someone else read ur comment too.
U did likewise in another thread, u would write something and then deny its obvious meaning even almost immediately.
It tells a lot about your age.

That aside, u certainly dont know about the evolution homo sapien as postulated.
No need for blind argument,
Pls if u have a different diagram on the evolution of homo sapien, let us see it.
If u cant produce a different diagram,
Please keep shut, i beg u

raphieMontella:

keep on displaying ur unintelligence..
I cant spoon feed u..and i wont..i believe u used a phone to type this comment nt a wishy magic wand..
I think u need to buy a lot of textbooks on evolution and read up man's evolution frm different sources so that it will finally sink into ur head..
Ape to man and u claim to be knowledgeable in evolution..
How evident...
P.s ignorant illiterate

felixomor:


Quiet. Produce your diagram or shut up.

raphieMontella:

when u finally learn how to use ur internet..then we wud have discussions..
If u have smtin reasonable to lay down as a case file..u do...
I cant do this kinda argument with a proper fool...one who claims to have evolutionary knowledge and yet says the proper evolutionary diagram is ape-man...
Im yet to see any evidence of knowledge in u