Teempakguy:
You can't "debunk" Evolution in a 2 minute Youtube video. that's ridiculous.

Evolution is a scientific finding. several different fields have converged to approve it independently. it has enough credibility to be called a theory. which means it's a very reliable stand. when something reaches theory level in science, it's almost impossible to "debunk" it and in fact, just correcting a tiny mistake often requires high levels of scientific knowledge.

A more correct term would be, "complains about."

I'm pretty sure the arguments are going to lie along the lines of "humans aren't monkeys!" crap we've all overheard.

taurus25:
if evoulution theory should be debunked , the only way its to be done is using scientific process....write a paper providing facts why evolutioion theory should be debunked, submit your work for review and if it really makes sense then the theory would be debunked or modified.....untill then the theory of evolution stands....no youtube videos no creationist websites no nairaland arguments debunks it

asalimpo:


Yeah, save your elitism. And if convincing paper is written, will the atheistic scientific community publish it?
By the same vein, if the bible is to be debunked,
Scientists should be capable of creating life from nothing. Creating a universe from nothing.
Then they'd be able to say with authority, how a world and life can be created. They can't
so for now they are just babbling observers spewing their ungodly opinion.

Also, prove authoritatively that there's no spirit world.

Like i said and like is known, qualified and educated scientists are not agreed on evolution.
It's still a myth.
You can debunk any claim by a simple explanation. All complexity can be relayed in simple terms.

taurus25:

first off......when you write your paper you would be the one to submit it for review, whoever debunks your paper would do so with cogent reasons...dont be scared try first before complaining...okay?.

secondly permit me to asume from your write up that you think the bible would be debunked when life is created by scientists.......its funny that your belief is hanging on such a very slim thread.

let me tell you sth brother, you would be deceiving yourself if you think or believe the evolution theory isnt accepted in the scientific community........so till you publish your paper debunking evolution, it stands

asalimpo:


Like i said, your elitist stance is pathetic.
You want to say, that to debunk evolution, i should become a scientists (probably get a phD),
in other words, without complicated knowledge, i should simply accept the stance of scientists?
You're a joker. Even this stance is illogical.
But you want others, to accept the theory (conjecture) who don't have formal education in science?
see the hypocrisy in you. Why not require that the people you preach to obtain, a formal degree first and publish peer reviewed papers first before you preach your theory to them?

A scientific theory has to be logical. Failing the laws of logic it becomes nonsense.

2) The 'theory' is a conjecture and many scientists within the community, a percentage, are not agreed on it.

taurus25:


excellent........no body is asking to go get a phD.....now the point is before you critisize something or call something rubbish you should have in depth understanding about the concept, examine the facts, understand why it is accepted in the first place, so in order to debunk it you must also provide cogent reasons with facts and if possible experiments and not just because it doesnt agree with your religion or simply becuase it sounds funny


Great advice, you atheists fail at keeping when critiquing christianity.
Take these advice and use it as a yardstick for analysing your arguments against the bible and you'd
not only see that you types fall short of it. You deliberately, choose to fall short!!

.........i must admit that it actualy sounds funny to imagine man once had a form that looks quite like apes but facts cant be discarded on that basis.

Yeah, you can accept something as implausible as that. But you guys scoff at a talking donkey!!!
ha- you guys are good at accepting the seemingly implausible.
Proving that atheism,theism is nothing but a choice.


science didnt start up with the purpose of disproving god or gods, its mission is to take a closer look at nature and understand how things work, if along the line it goes against what your god tells you then you have a choice to listen to nature or a book. A classical example is you expect me to think that whenever i see a rainbow it is one superhuman deity remembering his promise rather than a mere refraction of sunlight.?

The scientific stance you are assuming is not final.
Like i said, the erudite ,scientific community is divided.
And those on the other side are presenting their arguments with logical/mathematic evidence debunking
evolution.
Calling evolution a fact when people far smarter than you and equally qualified to question the claims
of it are debunking it ,is to be nothing but biased.

im going to repeat this one last time...the evolution theory is [b]highly accepted in the scientific community[/i]
[/b]
Atheism is a willful stance backed by reason. REason is used as an excuse to stay atheist.
You know this, most atheists know this.
It's basically, I want to be an atheists, so that i will not be morally accountable to any being.
Even if it means believing something as illogical and mathematically nonsensical as evolution.

Science is already moving away from the old stance that the universe has no intelligent creator

There's a subtle error in assuming that logic enough is not enough to critique a logical proposition ,which evolution is.
It is.
Because, evolution cannot violate the laws of logic, and still be valid.
Science is based on logic.

asalimpo:


Apart from mathematics, a theory in science is still a conjecture.
And eminent scientists are divided on the stance of creation.
Even under the scientific method, evolution continually falls short.

Teempakguy:
I am very sure you don't know what you are talking about when you say that.

But don't worry. I'm sure Germ theory is also a conjecture. I mean, come to think of it, we've never really seen any of those pesky "germs." have we?

asalimpo:

I said, eminent and qualified critics within the scientific community are debunking evolution theory.
How many mathematical theorems have been debunked? - answer that.
Evolution is simply not a fact but a conjecture.
An an extremely illogical one at that.

Stay on point.
Besides, your second argument is slamming you atheists,
after all, the spiritual isnt real because nobody has "seen" it.

Teempakguy:
Mathematics isn't the same as science. They are two different things.
And even in the Mathematics community, there are many contested theories. so don't act smug here. If you follow the mathematics community, you'll find that they have problems of their own. even when all they require is thinking, they are always disagreeing unless a definitive proof comes along.

There is no community where theories are completely accepted. there will always be nutjobs. Flat-earther case in point.
The problem here is, do you want to be that nutjob?

asalimpo:


Apart from mathematics, a theory in science is still a conjecture.
And eminent scientists are divided on the stance of creation.
Even under the scientific method, evolution continually falls short.

asalimpo:

Mathematics is the language of science. A mathematical theory is incontestible. To be upgraged to the status of a theory it must be logically bullet proof. Yes, they are factions and splits in the mathematical community but they dont fight over theories. They fight over conjectures.
If mathematical theories were ever in doubt, the world as we know it would nt be. Mathematics is the foundation for the modern world.

In the scientific (non mathematics) community , a theory is just that a conjecture. That's why it they are contestible.

Teempakguy:
Right. and guess the oldest and most established mathematical concept?

Addition.

Applied to evolution, it means that organisms will ADD up changes in their gene structure over a period of time and due to the fact that too much difference necessitates a new species, new species will eventually develop. It's as logical as shii.

We have already observed these changes being accumulated several times. The only logical conclusion is that it will continue until the descendants are distinguishable from the parent. it's everywhere. everything on earth changes. the logic is overwhelming.

And yet, here you are, telling me that for living things, it will some how be different. they will change. sure, the changes will add up . . . but it will never be significant.

And you are seriously expecting me to believe you instead of the millions of scientists from different fields who have looked at the subject?

My guy, argue something else.

taurus25:

youve mentioned logic alot in your post and i really doubt you know what it means........please define logic and explain how evolution theory is illogical.

arguing that people are atheist because they dont want to be accountable to any being is very very shallow and nonsensical

since you still want to go back and forth about this..help urself here

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Level_of_support_for_evolution

asalimpo:


Addition, is not a theorem but a function.
A theorem in mathematics is different.
Your last statement is a conjecture - again, many scientist refute these "conjectures" touted as theorems.
One of the videos i posted from youtube has the maker clearly contesting these conjectures.
That no new species come from old life forms. That what scientist claim as evolution is adaptation.
Scientists have "observed this" , the strongest evidence so far is about a fossil of a bird, scientists claim
was once a reptile etc and morphed to a bird. It's a single isolated evidence but even that is contested.
Even, the lucy ape being is contested.
Fact, is mathematical theories CANNOT be contested. They are truths.
Why do you think, so much money is staked for who can prove/disprove a math conjecture?
Because, once proved /disproved it stops being a conjecture. It becomes a truth. You can stake technology on it.
You can send a man to the moon on it. You can tell whether computer cryptography can be broken or not on it.
if evolution is a truth, eminent scientists wont question it.
I'm not talking of trying to put it down, i'm talking of spotting illogical and large loop holes in it that defy
the tenets of science and logic.

Teempakguy:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Level_of_support_for_evolution

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Applications_of_evolution
You can't apply a goddamn myth/conjecture

One thing you'll note, is the scientists that reject evolution, do so solely on the grounds of their religion. that is biased thinking and cannot be considered seriously. so far, none of the scientists that reject it have been able to debunk it. sounds hopeless.

You can either keep deluding yourself that elite scientists have proof that evolution is false. They don't. most of them are like you. they think with their feelings when it comes to the topic. and even those guys don't deny the power of the theory..

Teempakguy:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Level_of_support_for_evolution

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Applications_of_evolution
You can't apply a goddamn myth/conjecture

One thing you'll note, is the scientists that reject evolution, do so solely on the grounds of their religion. that is biased thinking and cannot be considered seriously. so far, none of the scientists that reject it have been able to debunk it. sounds hopeless.

You can either keep deluding yourself that elite scientists have proof that evolution is false. They don't. most of them are like you. they think with their feelings when it comes to the topic. and even those guys don't deny the power of the theory..

asalimpo:


Logically, evolution is C.RAP.
Save yourself. Buy some books on counters to evolution and read them.

asalimpo:


Yeah, save your elitism. And if convincing paper is written, will the atheistic scientific community publish it?
By the same vein, if the bible is to be debunked,
Scientists should be capable of creating life from nothing. Creating a universe from nothing.
Then they'd be able to say with authority, how a world and life can be created. They can't
so for now they are just babbling observers spewing their ungodly opinion.

Also, prove authoritatively that there's no spirit world.

Like i said and like is known, qualified and educated scientists are not agreed on evolution.
It's still a myth.
You can debunk any claim by a simple explanation. All complexity can be relayed in simple terms.

bxcode:
People that believe in evolution actually exercise more faith more than those who don't, we are talking of billions of years stuff here... mathematically the possibility of evolution being a fact is 10^1,000,000,000.
Evolution is just theory, it has not been proven and never will.
The architect of the universe is God almighty, take it or leave it.

Ayomikun37:
I'll like to see you prove that the architect of the universe is "God almighty", that this purported God demands for our worship and craves our love, and finally, that he is in fact your own actual God... Good luck with that...

asalimpo:


Are you kidding yourself?!
Or you desperately need assurance of evolution to blank you mind with.
Scientists debunking evolution wouldnt have a case if they cloaked their beliefs with religion.
The scientific community would see through their scams and expose it.
Do your homework.

You can apply a conjecture-
golbach's conjecture hasnt been proven wrong - but it hasnt been proven.
It is still a conjecture.

I am talking of eminent scientists giving talks debunking evolution.
With evidence not feelings.
Save your rhetoric. Evolution will never rise to the status of an irrefutable fact.
It's a hoax and a farce. And a fiercely defended lie.
C'mon bro. Evolution theory has to be made to fit, because, outside of it scientists have to believe
there's a God. And they dont want to. So at the cost of their lives and career they have to keep selling
and embellishing this horse sh*t.

Like i said, - NEW SPECIES - , coming from old life forms is a blatant scientific lie.
The so called observed incidents are simply EXAGGERATIONS.
The case for some evolutionary foundations, are mathematically impossible yet,
scientists fiercely hold on to them.

Logically, evolution is C.RAP.
Save yourself. Buy some books on counters to evolution and read them.

Teempakguy:

Everything you've just said here is a whole lot of assertions. baseless and useless ones at that. You have not proved that evolution is wrong or false. you are speaking from an essentially biased viewpoint. and the ONLY reason why you are opposed to evolution, is because you are a die hard theist.

you're no different from a flat earther. which makes this entire thread a complete waste of my time.