₦airaland Forum

chudidonas:
With over 700 picture likes, its safe to say u'r the Agbani Darego of nairaland o

evy1:
Am really sure palmwintapper is munachi.

chudidonas:
How do you manage to do it with his smelly mouth biko?

waxxydude:
C'mon i know joor.

Dawdy:
9 Scientific Facts Prove the "Theory of Evolution" is False

Scientific Fact No. 1 - Birds Prove Natural Selection is Naturally Wrong

The body and soul of Darwin's Theory of Evolution was the idea that evolution was made possible through natural selection. This concept is based on the suggestion that those members of a species that are a little stronger, a little larger, or run a little faster will live longer to procreate offspring with these superior adaptations.

Darwin's theory suggests that millions of generations later the changes will result in new species. These adaptations are called links or intermediates between the old species and the new.

The idea of natural selection sounds great when considering deer. The deer that can sense danger the quickest and run the fastest are able to escape the predator on a more consistent basis. However, other examples on the "evolutionary tree" have many flaws.

One of the best examples of evolution nonsense is the thought that a wingless bird began to evolve a wing. Why this would occur is not answered by evolutionists. The wing stub did not make the bird more adaptable to his environment. The first wing stubs would be much too small for the bird to fly.

Why would a bird evolve wing stubs that are useless? This is backwards from the evolutionary theory of natural selection, which states that birds adapt and change in order to survive better in their environment. The bird with a half-size wing is placed at a disadvantage in its environment.

Why would the bird continue for millions of generations to improve a wing stub that is useless? The Theory of Evolution is based on natural selection of the most adaptable member of a species, not the weakest. A bird with a useless wing is at a severe disadvantage. This is the opposite of natural selection.

According to natural selection, the members of the bird species with the smallest useless wing would be the most adaptable and most likely to survive in the largest numbers. According to the theory of natural selection birds could never evolve to fly.

We are then led to believe that some birds got tired of carrying around a worthless half-size wing, so they grew fingers on the end to help climb trees. The wings became arms and a new species was developed.

Evolutionists say birds grew hollow bones for less weight in order to fly. How would a bird pass this long-term plan to the millions of generations in order to keep the lighter bone plan progressing? The evolutionary concept of growing a wing over millions of generations violates the very foundation of evolution: the natural selection.

Birds aren't the only species that proves the theory of natural selection to be wrong. The problem can be found in all species in one way or another. Take fish for example.

We are told by evolutionists that a fish wiggled out of the sea onto dry land and became a land creature. So let's examine this idea. OK, a fish wiggles out of the sea and onto the land, but he can't breathe air. This could happen. Fish do stupid things at times.

Whales keep swimming up onto the beach where they die. Do you think the whales are trying to expedite a multi-million generation plan to grow legs? That concept is stupid, but let's get back to the fish story.

The gills of the fish are made for extracting oxygen from water, not from air. He chokes and gasps before flipping back into the safety of the water. Why would he do such a stupid thing? This wiggling and choking continues for millions of generation until the fish chokes less and less. His gills evolve into lungs so he can breathe air on dry land, but now he is at risk of drowning in the water.

One day he simply stays out on the land and never goes back into the water. Now he is a lizard.

Giant dinosaurs literally exploded onto the scene during the Triassic period. The fossil record (petrified bones found in the ground as at the Dinosaur National Park in Jensen, Utah, USA) shows no intermediate or transitional species. Where are the millions of years of fossils showing the triassic period. The fossil record (petrified bones found in the ground as at the Dinosaur National Park in Jensen, Utah, USA) shows no intermediate or transitional species. Where are the millions of years of fossils showing the transitional forms for dinosaurs? They do not not exist, because the dinosaurs did not evolve.

Books published by evolutionists have shown the giant Cetiosaurus dinosaur with the long neck extending upright eating from the treetops. They claimed natural selection was the reason Cetiosaurus had a long neck. This gave them an advantage in reaching fodder that other species could not reach.

One day during the assembly of a skeleton for a museum display someone noticed the neck vertebrae were such that the neck could not be lifted higher than stretched horizontally in front of them. The natural selection theory was proven to be a big lie.

The Cetiosaurus dinosaur was an undergrowth eater. The long neck actually placed the Cetiosaurus at a disadvantage in his environment, just the opposite from the natural Theory of Natural Selection.

Evolutionists will now claim the animal evolved a long neck because he had the advantage of eating from bushes on the other side of the river. This is typical logic of an evolutionist.

kafeii123:
try position 4 with some old Yoruba mothers and watch her take you for deliverance when you wake up.

yutsuf:
let's av a deal

Haute:
Just don't rape anybody.

princeakins:
Three gbosa for you...

Chibuhealth:
stop using condom nah

heryurh:
Sinaj & co, I should probably photoshop you guys together with the former heavy

seyitanhep:
Chisus!!!
Abomination!!!!
How can you be pregnant FOR your second child
You can be pregnant with your second child.

Ramon92:
..and what's stopping you??

leetech:
My dear sinaj,let me ask you a question.do you think the man is a fool?

Hazardd:
that link get virus..open at your risk

YUNGLURD:
I dnt knw y guys do reason this way.There re some gals that love guys without money being attached, just depend on the way we throw ourselves to gals. For instance, if u woo a gal dat doesnt av any fling for u & starts showing off u av this u av dat, there's no way she aint gonna take advantage of such ediot.The same ediot would still be the one shouting gals n money re 5 n 6.

ShaqFu:
You unko, you don marry?

Yeye dey smell.

bosschinalu:
Abeg how was it abused.... I dey interested for your tori.