/sci/ - Science & Math

>believe

derp

Greeeeeat.

http://www.facts4u.com/OffSite_Stored_Pages/wyd_files/wyd01.htm

What theotard faggotry is this?

OH MAN

Today, OP was a huge faggot. He is too lazy to learn about evolution because it might challenge his closely held belief in his sky daddy (and that can never be wrong). You fail OP, you just fail.

THIS IS WHAT CHRISTIANS ACTUALLY BELIEVE.

>mfw i always use this image when jack chick threads come up

PARTY TIME

Science vs religion? HOW ORIGINAL

>>2316931
>"OP POSTS THIS SO HE MUST BE A CHRISTIAN"
>"EPIC FAIL OLOLOLOLO

go back to /b/ faggot

>>2316931
>>2316935
>i post legitimate arguments against evolution
>receive ad hominem attacks

oh well liberals

>>2316964
>arguments against evolution
>legitimate

>gluons doesn't exist
full retard

>>2316964
>i spent my evening posting a comic someone else made containing evidence i have never heard of or can recite.
>no one gives a shit

oh well, must be *POLITICAL VIEW*

Every time I see this thread, I hear in my mind
"Blowout soon fellow stalker"
"When?"
"NOW"

>>2316964
>get laughed at
>dey must be gawd damn liberals

>>2316964
>legitimate arguments

Look up the definition for both, legitimate and argument.
Then come back here.
Also, it would be even more helpful if you wouldn't be underage.

>>2316944
I thought I was trolling in a unique and enraging way :(

need to lurk /sci/ moar

>>2317008
>Legitimate: well-founded; well reasoned and sincere
>Argument: reason; a reason put forward in support of or in opposition to a point of view
0/10, legitimate argument is still legitimate

>>2316883
oh fuck i raged

>>2316883
>>2316883
>>2316878
>>2316878
>>2316874
>>2316874
>>2316865
>>2316865
>>2316867
>>2316867
>>2316853
>>2316850
>>2316897
I don't care how many times I see this.

But here's what I really think about the theory of evolution: It's not real. It is not the way we got here. In fact, the life you see on this planet is really just a list of creatures God has allowed to live. We are not creations of random chance. We are not accidents. There is a God, a Creator, who made you and me. We were made in His image, which separates us from all other creatures. By the way, without him, I don't have any power. But with Him, the Bible tells me, I really can do all things and so can you.

OP is actually right. The main perpetrator of this monkey lie is Charles Darwin. He claims to have developed this “theory” after studying “finches” on the Galapagos “Islands,” but I can guess why he really came up with it. He was on the Galapagos Islands for spring break, got smashed, woke up in bed next to a monkey, and then had to come up with a theory that made it all okay.

>>2317091
He's right though. Gluons don't hold nucleons together, neutral pions do.

When I'd was typing this comment I was also praying on it. I'd felt the POWER OF THE LIVING GOD GOING THROUGHT TO THE KEYBROAD.

>>2316835
>Richard Lekey found a normal human skull under a layer of rock dated at 212 million years
Is this one true???

>>2317267
Yeah.
>the date of the rock was mentioned
>but not the carbon-date of the skull
The young skull was indeed found next to old rocks.

>>2317287
So what are we supposed to conclude from that then? What was the carbon dating of the skull?

>>2317315
Dunno, my only source was the cartoon, which helpfully neglected to mention the age of the skull.
My point was that without a date on the skull, you can say whatever you like, plant whatever evidence you like, and generally do whatever since there's no quantifiable proof to say one way or the other.

>>2316835
Here he says that the age of the skull is 212 million years because it was found next to 212 million year old rocks
>>2316865
Here he says that the age of the fossil is independent of the area it was found

So when the refutation for one argument is both baseless and contradictory of a refutation for another argument, you know you've got no leg to stand on. This cartoon kid can't even argue evolution when the person arguing against him is fictional and purposely ignoring significant evidence and not shrugging off responses that aren't relevant or contradictory of the evidence provided.

Even in fiction creationists can't debunk evolution.

I never understood why people reject evolution. It feels as absurd as rejecting DNA and physical laws. Maybe before DNA when the mechanism was less understood people had some reason to question it, even if the facts were around them, but today?

>>2317267
Geologyfag here. Rocks can upturn and have the layers flip, so older rock will be above new rock. Finding something below a layer doesn't prove that it's older than the layer, or even as old as the oldest layer.

>>2317397
That and the mountain of dated fossils is literally a mountain.
Well it would be if it wasn't kept in well organised shelves in massive basements of museums all around the world.

>>2317397
Same reason people still believe the current incarnation of the big bang theory despite mountains of failed predictions and evidence against

>>2317399
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geology_of_the_Alps
common and spectacular example of this.

When you see a car do you know who design it?
When you see a building do you know who design it? When you see a painting do you know who paint it? When you see a fashion do you know who design it? Can you see the wind?

Guys, OP is trolling. Noone on /sci/ would have the wherewithal to actually put any stock in a Jack Chick tract.

I'm trying my best not to use any big words for nonchristians can understanding me. People and animals live long to 100 year. The animals could grow bigger than a house.
God'd stop the growing to let us have a second chance. You guys hate me just like the villagers use to hate Naruto.