What evidence would you accept for human evolution?

[Age]

...

Fuck off, Age.

'This', some BELIEVE is a VERY MATURE thing TO DO, in a 'philosophy forum', of ALL PLACES.

[Age]

you thinking...

Again, Age, I have zero interest in your comments. They are IQ 95, at most. You're in the wrong place.

LOL 'This' COMING FROM 'the one' who BELIEVES, ABSOLUTELY, that a 'male gendered thing' CREATED ABSOLUTELY EVERY thing, ALL AT ONCE.

And then 'it' WANTS TO TALK ABOUT the so-called 'intelligence quotient' OF others.

Also, OBVIOUSLY you have NO INTEREST, AT ALL, in MY COMMENTS, BECAUSE MY COMMENTS SHOW and PROVE, EXACTLY, WHERE, HOW, and WHY 'your comments' ARE False, Wrong, Inaccurate, Incorrect, ABSURD, IRRATIONAL, ILLOGICAL, and just PLAIN OLD BIZARRE.

LOL "Immanuel can" ACTUALLY BELIEVES that A "he thing" CREATED ALL things', which, in and of itself, CONTRADICTS ITSELF, but ALSO BELIEVES that ABSOLUTELY NOTHING just EVOLVES. So, HOW MUCH is your 'intelligence quotient', EXACTLY, "Immanuel can"?

[Age]

We're going to move this topic to a new thread, Will, and leave this one for its original purpose. You'd be welcome to pose this question there.

So I have.

Well...Evolutionary theory claims to explain how beings capable of understanding evolution came to exist, so grab some ingredients from the periodic table, head off to your nearest lab and produce a system that can understand its own synthesis.

Scientific reproducibility and all that.

OBVIOUSLY, GIVEN the EXACT SAME AMOUNT of 'time', then the EXACT SAME CAN BE REPRODUCED, AGAIN OBVIOUSLY.

[Skepdick]

OBVIOUSLY, GIVEN the EXACT SAME AMOUNT of 'time', then the EXACT SAME CAN BE REPRODUCED, AGAIN OBVIOUSLY.

Fuck off, Age.

[Skepdick]

...

Fuck off, Age.

'This', some BELIEVE is a VERY MATURE thing TO DO, in a 'philosophy forum', of ALL PLACES.

Fuck off, Age.

[Age]

OBVIOUSLY, GIVEN the EXACT SAME AMOUNT of 'time', then the EXACT SAME CAN BE REPRODUCED, AGAIN OBVIOUSLY.

Fuck off, Age.

So, OBVIOUSLY, 'this one' can NOT counter NOR refute what I just SHOWED, and POINTED OUT. Therefore, 'this one' has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, AT ALL, other than what it SAID, here.

AGAIN, OBVIOUSLY, what has OCCURRED can be, WITH ENOUGH 'TIME', REPRODUCED.

Therefore, and AGAIN, it IS, IRREFUTABLY SO, through 'evolution' ALL things CAN and HAVE been 'created'.

[Skepdick]

blah blah blah

Fuck off, Age.

[Will Bouwman]

What evidence would you accept for human evolution?

Well, two things: first, a complete accounting of all the intermediate stages of development of human beings, and secondly, a complete fossil record of the (allegedly) billions of "missing links" and failed evolutionary stages of human development, as a matter of empirical confirmation.
Oh, and you'd have to show that God didn't exist, too, since He says it happened otherwise.

You still don't understand evidence. The fossil record, though incomplete, is nonetheless evidence for human evolution. No one is compelled to conclude that human evolution is the best explanation for the incomplete fossil record, but in the absence of a better one, it is.

[Flannel Jesus]

You still don't understand evidence. The fossil record, though incomplete, is nonetheless evidence for human evolution. No one is compelled to conclude that human evolution is the best explanation for the incomplete fossil record, but in the absence of a better one, it is.

Can I ask you, why do you care what evidence he would accept? Some people just don't have any reasonable acceptance criteria. He's spelled out for you that he doesn't. If you don't have the bones of literally every single one of your ancestors going back to when your ancestors were single-celled, he's gonna reject it.

You're not gonna convince him. And that's okay, we all have a right to our own beliefs. So why not just move on?

[Age]

blah blah blah

Fuck off, Age.

AGAIN, it IS, IRREFUTABLY SO, through 'evolution' ALL things CAN and HAVE been 'created'.

[Age]

You still don't understand evidence. The fossil record, though incomplete, is nonetheless evidence for human evolution. No one is compelled to conclude that human evolution is the best explanation for the incomplete fossil record, but in the absence of a better one, it is.

Can I ask you, why do you care what evidence he would accept? Some people just don't have any reasonable acceptance criteria. He's spelled out for you that he doesn't. If you don't have the bones of literally every single one of your ancestors going back to when your ancestors were single-celled, he's gonna reject it.

You're not gonna convince him. And that's okay, we all have a right to our own beliefs. So why not just move on?

1. Even ACTUAL PROOF, which is ALWAYS IRREFUTABLE, is NOT ACCEPTED, by some.

2. you human beings do NOT have 'a right' to your OWN 'beliefs'. If one's 'beliefs' lead to the ABUSE of ANY thing, then 'that one' does NOT have 'a right' to 'that belief'.

[Skepdick]

more blah blah blah

Fuck off, Age.

[Age]

more blah blah blah

Fuck off, Age.

So, AGAIN, 'this one', here, SAID and WROTE:

Well...Evolutionary theory claims to explain how beings capable of understanding evolution came to exist, so grab some ingredients from the periodic table, head off to your nearest lab and produce a system that can understand its own synthesis.

Scientific reproducibility and all that.

And, as I have INFORMED, and SHOWED, 'this one', and others, here, GIVEN ENOUGH 'time', what 'this one' TOLD another TO DO, IS ACTUALLY REPRODUCIBLE.

And, 'this' IS BECAUSE EVERY thing 'created' 'evolves' TO 'interact with other things', causing MORE 'created', and 'evolving', things.

See, it is THROUGH 'evolution', itself, that ALL things ARE 'created', ALWAYS.

And, 'this one' does NOT like 'this' IRREFUTABLE Fact. Especially so because it has NO WAY OF countering NOR refuting 'this' AT ALL.

[Skepdick]

some BS

Fuck off, Age.

[Age]

some BS

Fuck off, Age.

'This' REALLY WAS HOW some 'adult human beings' REALLY USED TO 'react', back when this was being written, and WITHIN ACTUAL 'philosophy forums', of ALL PLACES.

Literally, when they could NOT back up and support their BELIEFS, and CLAIMS, or when they could NOT counter NOR refute what was PRESENTED TO them, and what was PRESENTED went AGAINST their 'current' BELIEF/S, then they had NOTHING, other than TO RESORT TO RESPONDING like 'this one' is DOING, and SHOWING, here, FOR 'me'.