forum Politics and Society ›› Evolutionists ›› new reply Post Reply
Baby Cole
43,589 Posts

offline  mobile reply   (13)
January 17 2019 11:45 AM   QuickQuote Quote  
Originally posted by: Kadesh

Originally posted by: Davey.

Originally posted by: Kadesh

If you are an evolutionist you must also conform to racism. Believing in the theory of evolution subscribes to the notion that certain races are more highly evolved.
So which one are you? Are you more a evolved or a less evolved race of humanity?


God created humanity & all species with the genetic ability to "adapt" to an environment that it lives in, given enough time, not evolve. There are currently no transitional fossils. If this theory was correct, transitional fossils should be common because every species evolved many times.
Adaption is actually what Darwin observed those islands many years ago...

-Humans look different in different parts of the world because they have adapted to fit their environments. Nobody in their right mind would say that any particular nationality is more evolved than any other.

-There are transitional fossils. Every time scientists plug a gap in the fossil record with a 'transitional' creature, creationists say that two new gaps have appeared either side of it. Believing in the bible is fine, but you need to stay away from science and evolution if you are going to be disingenuous about it.

There are no transitional fossils that transition from one animal to another, outside of it's species. Fact.

You know that animals evolve. You know that dogs came from wolves. You can see how humans have changed cattle to fit their own specifications. This is nothing but forced evolution, exaggerated over a shorter time for our own needs.

Like I said in the original post, animals "adapt" within their species. It's the same thing with humans, would you say you are more evolved or less evolved than a black man?

If you believe in adaptation, then you believe in evolution. Individuals of a species, isolated for long enough, can adapt to such an extent that they can no longer produce viable offspring with the rest of the species they were separated from. In doing so they have evolved to become something different.

Well, specifically adaptation is obvious. There is ample evidence for that but to say that you can adapt so much as to change your entire species is taking it to far. Darwin took adaptation to far, with no evidence.

As always, there is nothing to think about or debate. You just need educating.

As always, you're still not reading the words.

Your statement about there being no fossils in between species is absolutely meaningless and false. The science of taxonomy seeks to name and classify all animals. Countless fossils have been shown to be midway points between other species. Any decent museum will have examples, not only of clear evolution from one type of creature to another, but of animals living in the sea becoming land-dwelling.

I already explained to you that no races of humans are more evolved than others. I've got no idea why you are asking this question unless you are trying to draw a parallel between evolution and eugenics.
No I am not more evolved than a black man. I'm also not more evolved than a bacterium.

It is the religious who like to place humans at the top of the animal kingdom, separate and superior. Those who understand science know that survival of the fittest is about adapting to your surroundings.
forum Politics and Society ›› Evolutionists ›› new reply Post Reply

Quick Reply - RE: Evolutionists

Connect with Facebook to comment: Login w/FB

or Sign up free! - or login:


wrap selection with italics
wrap selection with bold
insert less than symbol
insert greater than symbol

google image Insert Google Images
Share a Band

Your ad here?