Trump crying about Stephen Curry... lol

[jamesmiller14]

Maybe because the divide is caused by idiots on the left who denounce anyone from the right, and this is a clear example of it.

I thought people wanted unity and to create a discussion. Well a good way to do that is to talk with the president. You know a bad way to do that? Denounce your country, your president, half of the population of America as racist, and break traditions that brought the country together.

And the main caveat being that they will not admit it, under any circumstance. They are just as part of the me vs them politics as your most hardened, idiotic right-winger. But it's okay for them, because being a left-winger is somehow morally correct.

 

[Strychnine]

Whats that got to do with anything i said? I asked what the protests are attempting to accomplish. And you waffled on about rights. The Constitution has very little to do with this.

What the peaceful protests are about is to bring about awareness (and then hopefully change), of the injustices carried out daily on minorities/poor people daily by the justice system.

 

[Bargey]

What the peaceful protests are about is to bring about awareness (and then hopefully change), of the injustices carried out daily on minorities/poor people daily by the justice system.

Which injustices? Can you be specific on which laws / government agencies discriminate against blacks and other minorities and the manner in which they do it?

I mean I know they discriminate against Asians when it comes to education and higher education in favor of Blacks but do you have any #BLM type grievances with specifics?

Edit: I must have asked this question 3 or 4 times in various threads and no sherdogger has even attempted to provide a coherent response.

 

[oleDirtyBast4rd]

And Darwin was proven wrong
https://www.wired.com/2014/12/fantastically-wrong-thing-evolution-darwin-really-screwed/
Weird what happens when you're a scientist, and dont rely upon revelation, and actually do the scientific work.

Yes, it's everyone else who's arrogant. It's everyone else, who have actually learned about earth sciences, we're the wrong ones. The Bible, that places mammals before Reptiles, is wrong despite the clear evidence.

Once again, you ail to address, or reflexively dismiss the information provided.

You are patently dishonest, and Jesus would be ashamed of your action.

You're still being a smug prick. Go read your posts. I'm arrogant because i dont believe the same thing you do? That doesn't make sense. Prove your case or move along. You go on and on about evidence, while you've only posted one thing we could actually analyze (those pictures) to which you moved on from immediately.

You call me dishonest when I've already caught you red handed lying about me. That's a bunch of fluff though because you're afraid to debate the topic.

 

[hillelslovak87]

You're still being a smug prick. Go read your posts. I'm arrogant because i dont believe the same thing you do? That doesn't make sense. Prove your case or move along. You go on and on about evidence, while you've only posted one thing we could actually analyze (those pictures) to which you moved on from immediately.

You call me dishonest when I've already caught you red handed lying about me. That's a bunch of fluff though because you're afraid to debate the topic.

You are arrogant because you are promoting mythical stories confidently, while ignoring all the evidence, the evidence that has actually led to countless breakthroughs in so many fields. You confidently assert that you know evolution is wrong. You are then presented massive rafts of evidence as to why you are wrong by multiple people, you dont read any of it, then dismiss or deflect.

I'm not the one who knows the creator of the universe personally, and knows he loves and approves of me. Nobody else on the fact based side is pretending as if their truth from revelation will be the ultimate perfect idea until the end of time. That is the height of arrogance.

You failed at your pathetic attempts to reconcile a bronze age mythic story with scientific truths, and then when presented with evidence, scoff. You notice how it was not just me arguing with you? Is everyone else, the people who actually bring cited works done by actual scientists the blind assholes, or is it you, the one who dismisses information you are ignorant of, the arrogant one? Nobody else is dismissing information they are completely ignorant on, like you, and nobody else is demonstrating a stunning lack of aptitude in seeing the facts provided. The mere fact that you wanted to see the first reptile and the first mammal shows you have 0 knowledge of natural selection.

Luckily we have people who do the research, who find the truth, and make our world better, rather than relying upon sand strewn barbarians who were terrified of semen and menstrual blood.

 

[oleDirtyBast4rd]

You are arrogant because you are promoting mythical stories confidently, while ignoring all the evidence, the evidence that has actually led to countless breakthroughs in so many fields. You confidently assert that you know evolution is wrong. You are then presented massive rafts of evidence as to why you are wrong by multiple people, you dont read any of it, then dismiss or deflect.

I'm not the one who knows the creator of the universe personally, and knows he loves and approves of me. Nobody else on the fact based side is pretending as if their truth from revelation will be the ultimate perfect idea until the end of time. That is the height of arrogance.

You failed at your pathetic attempts to reconcile a bronze age mythic story with scientific truths, and then when presented with evidence, scoff. You notice how it was not just me arguing with you? Is everyone else, the people who actually bring cited works done by actual scientists the blind assholes, or is it you, the one who dismisses information you are ignorant of, the arrogant one? Nobody else is dismissing information they are completely ignorant on, like you, and nobody else is demonstrating a stunning lack of aptitude in seeing the facts provided. The mere fact that you wanted to see the first reptile and the first mammal shows you have 0 knowledge of natural selection.

Luckily we have people who do the research, who find the truth, and make our world better, rather than relying upon sand strewn barbarians who were terrified of semen and menstrual blood.

I kinda skimmed this over and didn't see any evidence so...

 

[hillelslovak87]

I kinda skimmed this over and didn't see any evidence so...

You brought a book with no evidence, you had the scientific evidence brought to you by multiple people, and scoffed, despite not reading it. Ignorance and arrogance often go hand in hand.

 

[oleDirtyBast4rd]

You brought a book with no evidence, you had the scientific evidence brought to you by multiple people, and scoffed, despite not reading it. Ignorance and arrogance often go hand in hand.

Links aren't an argument. Also the burden of proof lies on the person making the claim. You claimed evolution disproved the Bible. I don't have to prove the Bible is right. You have to prove its wrong. Have you given up? I see a lot of words coming from you, but not much substance

 

[hillelslovak87]

Links aren't an argument. Also the burden of proof lies on the person making the claim. You claimed evolution disproved the Bible. I don't have to prove the Bible is right. You have to prove its wrong. Have you given up? I see a lot of words coming from you, but not much substance

I hate to break it to you, but there is no more argument on natural selection. There has not been for a long time.

You are perfectly free to go through the massive amount of information that has been provided for you by multiple people, over days, which you have dismissed without reading. Nobody can read and understand for you.

Here is Biologos, the christian science team that you dismissed.
http://biologos.org/common-questions/scientific-evidence/what-is-evolution
There is very little debate in the scientific community about this broad characterization of evolution (anyone who claims otherwise is either uninformed or deliberately trying to mislead). The observational evidence explained by common ancestry is overwhelming. Of course new data causes scientists to adjust some of the specifics (like how long ago species diverged, or which species are most closely related), but this core view is overwhelmingly supported and agreed upon by the vast majority of scientists in the field.

These honest christians are referencing dishonest people like you.

I await the "show me the evidence ( I wont read)"

http://biologos.org/common-questions/scientific-evidence/what-is-evolution

 

[oleDirtyBast4rd]

1. I hate to break it to you, but there is no more argument on natural selection. There has not been for a long time.

2..You are perfectly free to go through the massive amount of information that has been provided for you by multiple people, over days, which you have dismissed without reading. Nobody can read and understand for you.

Here is Biologos, the christian science team that you dismissed.
http://biologos.org/common-questions/scientific-evidence/what-is-evolution
There is very little debate in the scientific community about this broad characterization of evolution (anyone who claims otherwise is either uninformed or deliberately trying to mislead). The observational evidence explained by common ancestry is overwhelming. Of course new data causes scientists to adjust some of the specifics (like how long ago species diverged, or which species are most closely related), but this core view is overwhelmingly supported and agreed upon by the vast majority of scientists in the field.

These honest christians are referencing dishonest people like you.

I await the "show me the evidence ( I wont read)"

1. We aren't discussing natural selection at the basic level. You expect me to believe complex animals of today came from single cell organisms. Then you say I'm stupid for questioning this

2. I didn't start this to share links. I came to debate and answer your questions. Apparently you came to post links

3. So a Christian scientist thinks something so I have to? I can find secular scientists that find evolution troublesome. It proves nothing

4. You won't be waiting long. Drop the fluff. Out with the evidence.

 

[hillelslovak87]

1. We aren't discussing natural selection at the basic level. You expect me to believe complex animals of today came from single cell organisms. Then you say I'm stupid for questioning this

2. I didn't start this to share links. I came to debate and answer your questions. Apparently you came to post links

3. So a Christian scientist thinks something so I have to? I can find secular scientists that find evolution troublesome. It proves nothing

4. You won't be waiting long. Drop the fluff. Out with the evidence.

You were provided with plenty of evidence that shows how all animals came from single celled organisms, step by step, and why humans share a genetic lineage with other animals and plants.

We all posted links because those link, along with pictures and quote, contain the information that proved your claim was false. You have steadfastly refused to read any of it. At this point, the onus is on you, not everybody else.

You can find secular scientists that disagree about natural selection, and their papers are shown through peer review to be biased, incorrect or both.

We cant hand you two fossils showing a genetic link through your computer screen....

Contrary evidence could change my mind, whereas you are not willing to even read the evidence.....

You might want to check out these links, because they contain something called information. You see, you can use this information to learn things! This information gives what is known as results. Crazy!!

They figured this shit out well before 73
http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//full/1973AREPS...1..131C/0000131.000.html
http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//full/1973AREPS...1..131C/0000131.000.html
http://corior.blogspot.com/2006/02/part-6-gulf-between-reptiles-and.html

http://www.nytimes.com/1982/11/02/s...eptile-verge-being-mammal.html?pagewanted=all

http://www.palaeontologyonline.com/articles/2017/fossil-focus-first-mammals/

I have no faith in your ability to be open, honest, and willing to accept facts. Inb4 "fluff, links"

 

[oleDirtyBast4rd]

1. You were provided with plenty of evidence that shows how all animals came from single celled organisms, step by step, and why humans share a genetic lineage with other animals and plants.

2. We all posted links because those link, along with pictures and quote, contain the information that proved your claim was false. You have steadfastly refused to read any of it. At this point, the onus is on you, not everybody else.

3. You can find secular scientists that disagree about natural selection, and their papers are shown through peer review to be biased, incorrect or both.

4. We cant hand you two fossils showing a genetic link through your computer screen....

5. Contrary evidence could change my mind, whereas you are not willing to even read the evidence.....

6. You might want to check out these links, because they contain something called information. You see, you can use this information to learn things! This information gives what is known as results. Crazy!!

They figured this shit out well before 73
http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//full/1973AREPS...1..131C/0000131.000.html
http://corior.blogspot.com/2006/02/part-6-gulf-between-reptiles-and.html

http://www.nytimes.com/1982/11/02/s...eptile-verge-being-mammal.html?pagewanted=all

http://www.palaeontologyonline.com/articles/2017/fossil-focus-first-mammals/

I have no faith in your ability to be open, honest, and willing to accept facts. Inb4 "fluff, links"

1. You showed HOW they could have evolved. You didn't prove that they did.

2. Who is "We"? Falsefawn disappeared faster then a black guy in a 90s horror movie

3. You keep talking about natural selection. One can believe natural selection exists withoiut taking It to the extreme evolutionists do. This reminds me of the climate change debate. The climate does change, duh, that isn't really what is being questioned...

4. Never asked you to.

5. Ive done a lot of reading on the topic and am not convinced. Ive done some reading in the links you provided as well despite your ignorant claim. Since you didn't highlight anything from the links, I'm not sure what discussion you were expecting from posting them

6. I'm not a child. Regardless of how people feel about my position I think they'd agree I've been mostly respectful towards you. Just about every post of yours towards me oozes with condescension. Whether called for or not, do you respect somebody who constantly condescends another?

Thanks for the links, I'll check em out

 

[oleDirtyBast4rd]

@hillelslovak87 I vaguely remember you saying something like mammals show reptile characteristics but not the other way around?

How do you explain some reptiles being warm blooded?

 

[Throttlehead]

@hillelslovak87 I vaguely remember you saying something like mammals show reptile characteristics but not the other way around?

How do you explain some reptiles being warm blooded?

Is Steph Curry a reptile?

 

[hillelslovak87]

1. You showed HOW they could have evolved. You didn't prove that they did.

2. Who is "We"? Falsefawn disappeared faster then a black guy in a 90s horror movie

3. You keep talking about natural selection. One can believe natural selection exists withoiut taking It to the extreme evolutionists do. This reminds me of the climate change debate. The climate does change, duh, that isn't really what is being questioned...

4. Never asked you to.

5. Ive done a lot of reading on the topic and am not convinced. Ive done some reading in the links you provided as well despite your ignorant claim. Since you didn't highlight anything from the links, I'm not sure what discussion you were expecting from posting them

6. I'm not a child. Regardless of how people feel about my position I think they'd agree I've been mostly respectful towards you. Just about every post of yours towards me oozes with condescension. Whether called for or not, do you respect somebody who constantly condescends another?

Thanks for the links, I'll check em out

@hillelslovak87 I vaguely remember you saying something like mammals show reptile characteristics but not the other way around?

How do you explain some reptiles being warm blooded?

Recognizing the fact that Suaropsids were around for millions of years before therapsids and synapsids, and the latter two evolved from the former is not taking it to the extreme. It is roundly agreed to be fact within the scientific community. It is attested by genetic, geological, and fossil data for the better part of a century now. This has been explained like a dozen times, with data.

They are extremely rare, but reptiles who have the ability to become endothermic evolved those traits. Reptiles are not precluded from having this genetic marker, but it is incredibly rare, because there are not many environments in which reptiles would need it. Endothermic ability is more of a water reptile thing, ones like ichthyosaurs, plesiosaurs, and mosasaurs. Some modern water reptiles do this as well, and it can be explained quite easily in the fact that they dive for prey much further downward than most other reptiles and water mammals.

 

[oleDirtyBast4rd]

Recognizing the fact that Suaropsids were around for millions of years before therapsids and synapsids, and the latter two evolved from the former is not taking it to the extreme. It is roundly agreed to be fact within the scientific community. It is attested by genetic, geological, and fossil data for the better part of a century now. This has been explained like a dozen times, with data.

They are extremely rare, but reptiles who have the ability to become endothermic evolved those traits. Reptiles are not precluded from having this genetic marker, but it is incredibly rare, because there are not many environments in which reptiles would need it. Endothermic ability is more of a water reptile thing, ones like ichthyosaurs, plesiosaurs, and mosasaurs. Some modern water reptiles do this as well, and it can be explained quite easily in the fact that they dive for prey much further downward than most other reptiles and water mammals.

Just because they were around before them doesn't mean they evolved from them.

Let's be real here. You believe a fish in the ocean became an amphibian, then became a land reptile, then became an animal, then went back into the ocean as a warm blooded whale?

 

[Helden]

Just because they were around before them doesn't mean they evolved from them.

Let's be real here. You believe a fish in the ocean became an amphibian, then became a land reptile, then became an animal, then went back into the ocean as a warm blooded whale?

You clearly didn't even look up a basic video on youtube about evolution did you?
Step 1: Actually gather some basic understanding of the concepts you are arguing against
Step 2: Get back to me when you complete Step 1

 

[oleDirtyBast4rd]

You clearly didn't even look up a basic video on youtube about evolution did you?
Step 1: Actually gather some basic understanding of the concepts you are arguing against
Step 2: Get back to me when you complete Step 1

Where was I wrong?

 

[Helden]

Where was I wrong?

Pretty much right here:

"You believe a fish in the ocean became an amphibian, then became a land reptile, then became an animal, then went back into the ocean as a warm blooded whale"

 

[oleDirtyBast4rd]

Pretty much right here:

"You believe a fish in the ocean became an amphibian, then became a land reptile, then became an animal, then went back into the ocean as a warm blooded whale"

Which part do evolutionists disagree with?