Why Evolutiontheory is just a theory and not an Evidence

[ScimitarXEdge]

No I didn't the word range was in my first statement look

A Neighborhood is a distance, sometimes range surrounding a number which contains values within that range, if those range of value exist in the set, then the set is open. You could have used Epsilon Ball, I'd have accepted that but your explanation was non-explicit

Your problem is you don't understand mathematical definitions correctly

If S is a subset of X then a neighbourhood of S is a set V which includes an open set U containing S. It follows that a set V is a neighbourhood of S if and only if it is a neighbourhood of all the points in S. Furthermore, it follows that V is a neighbourhood of S iff S is a subset of the interior of V.

In a metric space M = (X,d), a set V is a neighbourhood of a point p if there exists an open ball with centre p and radius r, such that

is contained in V.
V is called uniform neighbourhood of a set S if there exists a positive number r such that for all elements p of S,

is contained in V.
For r > 0 the r-neighbourhood Sr of a set S is the set of all points in X which are at distance less than r from S (or equivalently, Sr is the union of all the open balls of radius r which are centred at a point in S).

[ScimitarXEdge]

Learn to speak english, learn what is a set and what is a distance and then talk to me.[/B]

learn mathematics then claim you understand math mister "moar"

[ScimitarXEdge]

hhhheheh I think I ruined the Taliban's day

[goblin]

there is no evidence of anything, it just depends on what you want to believe.

[Alchemist]

@Alchemist, if I'm not mistaken, in another thread, you said that Neanderthals, Homoerectus, homohabilis, etc were different species of humans. How do you justify their existence whilst stating that evolution is a farce? Why is it that the fossil record shows that human species that are more "ape-like" existed a long time ago while, progressively, human species started becoming more and more "human-like" and less "ape-like" over time?

The fact is that the evidence for evolution is so overwhelming now that people who deny it are like the Catholic Church that threatened Galileo with death when he introduced the heliocentric model to the world.

For example, there have been so many experiments with cichlids (cichlids are fish that adapt very fast) that have shown natural selection at work. Now given the fossil and genetic evidence for evolution, such experiments are not necessary to prove the theory of evolution but in any case, they work just as they're supposed to. If you want, I can give you the specifics.

I said different races...and I proved that they were different races...

You are so delusional that your weak mind tricked you into believing I said different "Species".

There is no evidence of natural selection.
It's just something you believe in blindly.

[ScimitarXEdge]

I said different races...and I proved that they were different races...

You are so delusional that your weak mind tricked you into believing I said different "Species".

There is no evidence of natural selection.
It's just something you believe in blindly.

Different races which can't cross breed reproductively viable offspring anymore

I guess since that's how you're defining race, then all species of animals are just different races of each other according to your logic.

Epic Logic and Scientific Fact Fail

[ozymandias]

I said different races...and I proved that they were different races...

You are so delusional that your weak mind tricked you into believing I said different "Species".

There is no evidence of natural selection.
It's just something you believe in blindly.

Sorry to say, but no scientist believes in evolution or natural selection blindly. Lay people might, but scientists, by definition are educated (or are being educated) in the natural sciences, and have been presented plenty of evidence to support these topics.

[Afghanistan2010]

Sorry to say, but no scientist believes in evolution or natural selection blindly. Lay people might, but scientists, by definition are educated (or are being educated) in the natural sciences, and have been presented plenty of evidence to support these topics.

yes scientists were also those who ones claimed that the shape of the Earth is flat (disktheory).
until the renaissance,then it was changed by newer devolpement.
to your astonishment , my prophet ( peace and blessing of Allah be upon him) who was sent with the truth,said that the earth is not flat but like an egg (the egg of a stork),and it is like this recorded in Quran.But you stil dont believe, we tell you Adam (as) was the first man to be created and then his wife from one of his bones,and then it followed.

Verily you will be among the loosers if you continue this path and follow blindly theories.

[ozymandias]

yes scientists were also those who ones claimed that the shape of the Earth is flat (disktheory).

And scientists, unlike the religious, reject false beliefs when presented with new evidence.

until the renaissance,then it was changed by newer devolpement.

That's not true at all. Scientists have long held the belief that the Earth was a sphere, and it was the lay-people, mostly due to religious teachings that disagreed with that.

to your astonishment , my prophet ( peace and blessing of Allah be upon him) who was sent with the truth,said that the earth is not flat but like an egg (the egg of a stork),and it is like this recorded in Quran.

Unfortunately for you, this is not the whole story. The shape of the Earth was known long before the Koran was written. The Greeks universally agreed that the Earth was a sphere by 500 BCE. That gives plenty of time for the belief to spread far and wide.

But you stil dont believe, we tell you Adam (as) was the first man to be created and then his wife from one of his bones,and then it followed.

Indeed, I don't believe, for many reasons. Guessing the correct shape of the Earth has no bearing on the origin on the human species. They are completely unrelated topics.

Furthermore, the claim you just made both is counter-logical, but is also contradictory to the only evidence that has been found. Of course I reject that.

Verily you will be among the loosers if you continue this path and follow blindly theories.

Once again, I feel the need to correct your misuse of the word 'blindly'. I do not follow any theory blindly, nor does any scientist, for that matter. The only one following 'blindly' would be those rejecting the evidence and 'blindly' following something that rejects the evidence. I don't mean to be rude, but it's very ironic that you are accusing scientists of blind faith, but then you turn around and throw claims from the Koran out as evidence -- and they are claims easily refuted, at that.

[ozymandias]

I just looked it up -- not only was the shape of the Earth known in 500 BCE, the actual circumference was calculated in 240 BCE, and was fairly close -- only being off between 2 and 20 percent from the modernly calculated value. Not bad for a man using the sun, a well, and a shadow.

[Alchemist]

Different races which can't cross breed reproductively viable offspring anymore

I guess since that's how you're defining race, then all species of animals are just different races of each other according to your logic.

Epic Logic and Scientific Fact Fail

I am getting tired of arguing with dim wits like your self and ozy and lewanay. You fools don't even know the first thing about biology and run your mouths off out of your ignorance.


Neanderthals, Humans Interbred

I posted the evidence 5 times already but as is the case with people who live in the internet - you suffer from amnesia.

Like you keep telling everyone that Al Jahz believed in Evolution but there is no evidence that he did. His only manuscript has barely survived by a few pages, and you only want to believe he did because some one else paraphrased one sentence out of his book... But I showed you a direct link to the arabic manuscript in which he argued against a theory that was similar to evolution in his own times...and you didn't pay heed to it.

Its like you all are suffering from a mental disease which disallows you from objectively studying the proofs given to you. I told lewanay that scientists say that we carry 5% neanderthal dna, and he believes that I said they were different species....now comes ****mitar saying that they are species again, and so I failed...wow
Honestly, I feel like I am arguing with retards here. Now comes ozy, who said he will read all the threads on evolution if I showed to him how anti-biotic resistance is not an example of evolution....after going on a tangent for several pages, they still didn't concede that it was an example of microevolution = that variation exists. Of course the existence of variation is not proof of natural selection.

Even though there is no evidence of natural selection, they still go about this backwardly because their egos are attached to their beliefs in origin. And even if darwin comes back from his grave and tells these buffoons that natural selection is a debunked theory, they still won't belief because they have dedicated days and nights to arguing for it.

You people are just hopeless. Your idea of winning an argument is to keep repeating the same thing over and over until you've spammed the crap out of the forum.

[ozymandias]

I am getting tired of arguing with dim wits like your self and ozy and lewanay. You fools don't even know the first thing about biology and run your mouths off out of your ignorance.

Then how come we keep proving you wrong?

Neanderthals, Humans Interbred

I posted the evidence 5 times already but as is the case with people who live in the internet - you suffer from amnesia.

What is this supposed to be evidence of again?

Like you keep telling everyone that Al Jahz believed in Evolution but there is no evidence that he did. His only manuscript has barely survived by a few pages, and you only want to believe he did because some one else paraphrased one sentence out of his book... But I showed you a direct link to the arabic manuscript in which he argued against a theory that was similar to evolution in his own times...and you didn't pay heed to it.

Its like you all are suffering from a mental disease which disallows you from objectively studying the proofs given to you.

[quote]

Funny. You are describing yourself. The main core of science is objectively studying evidence -- which is what we are doing.

I told lewanay that scientists say that we carry 5% neanderthal dna,

You can say what you want -- but this logically cannot be true. We share more than 90% of the same DNA with the other Great Apes. Why would we be so different from the neaderthals? I suspect you are referring to the fact that European descended peoples share more DNA with neaderthals than African descended peoples.

and he believes that I said they were different species....now comes ****mitar saying that they are species again, and so I failed...wow
Honestly, I feel like I am arguing with retards here.

Trust me, we share the feeling.

Now comes ozy, who said he will read all the threads on evolution if I showed to him how anti-biotic resistance is not an example of evolution....after going on a tangent for several pages, they still didn't concede that it was an example of microevolution = that variation exists.

I am a single person, and I did not go off on a tangent. You went off on some mathematical tangent. I have tried to stay on topic.

Also, my exact quote is "I'll make a deal with you. You make a single good case in this thread, I will read every post, and link in the linked threads."

Since you have been disproven and corrected at any point, I have no need to concede anything.

Of course the existence of variation is not proof of natural selection.

Most certainly. No one but you is even pretending anyone made claims otherwise.

Even though there is no evidence of natural selection,

Just because you willfully ignore it does not mean it does not exist.

they still go about this backwardly because their egos are attached to their beliefs in origin. And even if darwin comes back from his grave and tells these buffoons that natural selection is a debunked theory, they still won't belief because they have dedicated days and nights to arguing for it.

Unfortunately for you, only religion takes the word of zombies as proof of anything. Scientists require actual evidence. Even the greatest scientists are expected to provide evidence. Science avoids the fallacy from authority fallacy, sorry.

You people are just hopeless. Your idea of winning an argument is to keep repeating the same thing over and over until you've spammed the crap out of the forum.

Stop looking into a mirror and describing yourself. You are just looking foolish, as you are describing your own behavior, and not mine.

[Alchemist]

Then how come we keep proving you wrong?



What is this supposed to be evidence of again?

Evidence that you are an idiot.

You can say what you want -- but this logically cannot be true. We share more than 90% of the same DNA with the other Great Apes. Why would we be so different from the neaderthals? I suspect you are referring to the fact that European descended peoples share more DNA with neaderthals than African descended peoples.

Such studies are fallacious because they assume the phylogenetic tree to be true, ad hoc. I have already explained in detail the faults of such studies in other threads.

Then again, look at how stupid is your argument. Neanderthals share 5% DNA with our race, but we share 90% with Great Apes?

Do you even understand what it is you are talking about?


Really, you are pathetic. Show me where you proved me wrong? You copy/pasted some paragraphs from talkorigin, and feel satisfied with the "evidence".

I highly recommend that you read the previous threads on evolution because I have already presented all the evidence and arguments against it. You are being stubborn and foolish.

[ozymandias]

Evidence that you are an idiot.

Perhaps I should rephrase. I am aware of what you think you are proving -- but you have yet to share any evidence to back up your claims. Where is it? Mind sharing any of it?

Personal attacks do not count as evidence.

Such studies are fallacious because they assume the phylogenetic tree to be true, ad hoc. I have already explained in detail the faults of such studies in other threads.

Well, once you make a single solid argument in this thread, I will read those threads. Until that point, you are simply going to have to try to prove *something* in this thread.

Then again, look at how stupid is your argument. Neanderthals share 5% DNA with our race, but we share 90% with Great Apes?

Actually, that's *your* problem. I stated that your claim that we share only 5% of our DNA is obviously silly, as we share more than that with the Great Apes. You are the only one claiming we share only 5% with the Neanderthals.

[/quote]

Do you even understand what it is you are talking about?

[/quote]

Clearly, I do, but you don't, given your misinterpretation of what I just stated. I said your claim is clearly false, and provided evidence showing why this is so -- and your reply went on to pretend I accepted your claim (which I pointed out was obviously false) and then combined it with my counter-evidence.

Really, you are pathetic. Show me where you proved me wrong? You copy/pasted some paragraphs from talkorigin, and feel satisfied with the "evidence".

You claimed that macroevolution never occurred, so I cited multiple organisms and cases where it occurred and was observed, thus proving you wrong.

I highly recommend that you read the previous threads on evolution because I have already presented all the evidence and arguments against it. You are being stubborn and foolish.

And I have already pointed out that that is a waste of time. If you have a single valid argument, present it here, and we can discuss it here. Once you have shown that anything you say on evolution has *any* merit, I will look into those threads. All you have done so far is prove that you don't understand anything about evolution, and like to claim that you have made a valid point -- when every point you have made if trivially debunked. Why should I read page after page of similar drivel? Why spread this conversation out over multiple threads, when you are going to continually reject reality, and the scientific method? What good would such a discussion do, other than waste my time and effort, and spread it out over multiple similar threads?

I will say again, present your best arguments in this thread. As soon as you make a single valid point disproving evolution, I will read every post in each one of those threads. Until then, quit whining that I won't read them.

[Alchemist]

You are just an arrogant douchebag too LOL


why don't you click on the link and see who actually says we share 5% DNA with neanderthals?

Yes...a scientist!

Just google it - Neanderthal DNA.

The evidence is all there.

Why are you playing stupid?