religion

[Eliseus]

You're the one that told me to do that. Don't like the results? Tough shit you little bitch.

[Eliseus]

I was trying to search for my claims of evolution was real. All I came up with was debunked stuff D:

[RobotElvis]

To go from AARDVARK to BASEBALL, six micro-steps took place in between the two real words. However, the first six “words” could be labeled as A-species, while the last word could be labeled as a new B-species (based off of the first letter of each “word”). Therefore, A-species to B-species could be considered a macro-evolutionary step, while the little “in-between” steps are micro-evolutionary.




Here we see an example of ignorance in action.
To understand this analogy you must concede the fact that letters imply design and intelligence. You also must concede the fact that a certain pattern or order will be maintained to go from one word(animal) to another word (animal) all while not disrupting the pattern that takes you from one to the other.

This is a fatal flaw in the argument against teleology in Darwinian evolution.

Order and final cause must on some level be maintained for the finite result of AARDVARK to BASEBALL.

If not then using these eight letters we would have a nearly infinite number of possibilities to reach point B from point A.

[leewong]

Originally Posted by RobotElvis [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

To go from AARDVARK to BASEBALL, six micro-steps took place in between the two real words. However, the first six “words” could be labeled as A-species, while the last word could be labeled as a new B-species (based off of the first letter of each “word”). Therefore, A-species to B-species could be considered a macro-evolutionary step, while the little “in-between” steps are micro-evolutionary.




Here we see an example of ignorance in action.
To understand this analogy you must concede the fact that letters imply design and intelligence. You also must concede the fact that a certain pattern or order will be maintained to go from one word(animal) to another word (animal) all while not disrupting the pattern that takes you from one to the other.

This is a fatal flaw in the argument against teleology in Darwinian evolution.

Order and final cause must on some level be maintained for the finite result of AARDVARK to BASEBALL.

If not then using these eight letters we would have a nearly infinite number of possibilities to reach point B from point A.

Except, DNA can fuse but letters cannot. DNA has random mutations that are selected by environmental pressures. I see no accounting for either here.

[Glenzig]

Originally Posted by leewong [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Except, DNA can fuse but letters cannot. DNA has random mutations that are selected by environmental pressures. I see no accounting for either here.

Really? Random mutations that are selected by environmental pressure. So they are both random and selected. They happen by coincidence and by guidance.

[G13]

Originally Posted by leewong [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Except, DNA can fuse but letters cannot. DNA has random mutations that are selected by environmental pressures. I see no accounting for either here.

Random mutations are destructive

They don't create legible genetic code

This has already been explained to you simpleton

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Originally Posted by G13 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Random mutations are destructive

They don't create legible genetic code

This has already been explained to you simpleton

Next you'll tell the class that hairless cats are a hoax.

[leewong]

Originally Posted by G13 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Random mutations are destructive

They don't create legible genetic code

This has already been explained to you simpleton

Destructive, eh? Ever hear of bacteria that have evolved to eat nylon? How about drug resistant bacteria? How about every living creature on this planet that in one way or another proves this wrong?

[RobotElvis]

Originally Posted by leewong [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Destructive, eh? Ever hear of bacteria that have evolved to eat nylon? How about drug resistant bacteria? How about every living creature on this planet that in one way or another proves this wrong?

Bacteria that's still bacteria. What a nail in the coffin for ID

[RobotElvis]

Originally Posted by RobotElvis [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

To go from AARDVARK to BASEBALL, six micro-steps took place in between the two real words. However, the first six “words” could be labeled as A-species, while the last word could be labeled as a new B-species (based off of the first letter of each “word”). Therefore, A-species to B-species could be considered a macro-evolutionary step, while the little “in-between” steps are micro-evolutionary.




Here we see an example of ignorance in action.
To understand this analogy you must concede the fact that letters imply design and intelligence. You also must concede the fact that a certain pattern or order will be maintained to go from one word(animal) to another word (animal) all while not disrupting the pattern that takes you from one to the other.

This is a fatal flaw in the argument against teleology in Darwinian evolution.

Order and final cause must on some level be maintained for the finite result of AARDVARK to BASEBALL.

If not then using these eight letters we would have a nearly infinite number of possibilities to reach point B from point A.

Is this the post you sre speaking of?