"Evolution is a fact."

>"Evolution is a fact."

Other urls found in this thread:

ifstudies.org/blog/sex-and-divorce-whats-the-connection
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3119480/
youtube.com/watch?v=STqkZR2PSR4
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

>Christianity is fact

>"evolution is just a theory."

>The bible is a fact book

>I'am too intelligent to believe in religion and intelligent people are atheist

Good god. Fucking Ossis, i swear.

>believing a 3000 year old book written by primitive sheep fuckers in the desert over science

Only reason retards believe in any religion is because it gives them false hope.

>Ancient Jew fables is fact.
>modern understanding of life is lie.
Now who could possibly be behind this post?
|>

it's a religious theory put forward as science that was created to shit on the Irish

>Trust me, I'm a scientist!

>another creationfag thread

sage in all fields.

fuck off blini-nigger

I'm interested in the cyclical conception of human history that pre-Abrahamic cultures had. The Ancient Greeks had a cyclical conception of human history that was similar to the cyclical conception of human history that the Hindus had (and STILL have). The Ancient Greeks had a Golden Age (equivalent to Satya Yuga in Hinduism), a Silver Age (equivalent to Treta Yuga in Hinduism), a Bronze Age (equivalent to Dwapara Yuga in Hinduism) and an Iron Age (equivalent to Kali Yuga in Hinduism). I call the model of human history that is currently dominant among historians 'the linear-progressive model of human history'. The linear-progressive model of human history basically says that the further back in human history you go, the more primitive that humans, their cultures and their technology becomes. The linear-progressive model of human history embraced by modern historians and modern anthropologists actually has its roots in Judeo-Christian beliefs, ironically enough. Virtually EVERY pre-Abrahamic culture WORLDWIDE embraced a conception of human history that was CYCLICAL, with civilisations rising and falling one after the other over VAST periods of time and humans being EXTREMELY OLD. Take the Puranas (a collection of ancient Indian writings), for example. The Puranas describe human lineages going back over a BILLION YEARS into the past and we have PHYSICAL EVIDENCE (in the form of fossils and artifacts) that confirms this.

Here is merely SOME evidence (though DEFINITELY not ALL of the evidence) suggesting not only a human presence on Earth BILLIONS of years ago, but also suggesting complex human civilisations on Earth BILLIONS of years ago:

* A human skull fragment from Hungary dated between 250,000 and 450,000 years ago
* A human footprint with accompanying paleoliths (stones deliberately chipped into a recognisable tool type), bone tools, hearths and shelters, discovered in France and dated 300,000 to 400,000 years
* Paleoliths in Spain, a partial human skeleton and paleoliths in France; two English skeletons, one with associated paleoliths, ALL at least 300,000 years old
* Skull fragments and paleoliths in Kenya and advanced paleoliths, of modern human manufacture, in the Olduvai Gorge in Tanzania, dated between 400,000 and 700,000 years
* Neoliths (the most advanced stone tools and utensils) in China of a type that indicate full human capacity, dated to 600,000 years
* Hearths, charcoal, human femurs and broken animal bones, all denoting modern humanity, in Java, dated to 830,000 years
* An anatomically modern human skull discovered in Argentina and dated between 1 million and 1.5 million years years (eoliths -chipped pebbles, thought to be the earliest known tools- at Monte Hermoso, also in Argentina, are believed to be between 1 and 2.5 million years old).
* A human tooth from Java yielding a date between 1 and 1.9 million years years
* Incised bones, dated between 1.2 and 2.5 million years, have been found in Italy
* Discoveries of paleoliths, cut and charred bones at Xihoudu in China and eoliths from Diring Yurlakh in Siberia dated to 1.8 million years
* Eoliths in India, paleoliths in England, Belgium, Italy and Argentina, flint blades in Italy, hearths in Argentina, a carved shell, pierced teeth and even two human jaws all bearing a minimum date of 2 million years (end of part 1)

(start of part 2) Curiously enough, several of the very earliest artifact discoveries display a truly extraordinary level of sophistication. In Idaho, for example, a 2-million-year-old clay figurine was unearthed in 1912. But even this discovery does not mark an outer limit. Bones, vertebrae and even complete skeletons have been found in Italy, Argentina and Kenya. Their minimum datings range from 3 million to 4 million years. A human skull, a partial human skeleton and a collection of neoliths discovered in California have been dated in excess of 5 million years. A human skeleton discovered at Midi in France, paleoliths found in Portugal, Burma and Argentina, a carved bone and flint flakes from Turkey all have a minimum age of 5 million years.
How far back can human history be pushed with discoveries like these? The answer seems to be a great deal further than orthodox science currently allows. As if the foregoing discoveries were not enough, we need to take account of:
* Paleoliths from France dated between 7 and 9 million years
* An eolith from India with a minimum dating of 9 million years
* Incised bones from France, Argentina and Kenya no less than 12 million years old
* More paleolith discoveries from France, dated at least 20 million years ago
* Neoliths from California in excess of 23 million years
* Three different kinds of paleoliths from Belgium with a minimum dating of 26 million years
* An anatomically modern human skeleton, neoliths and carved stones found at the Table Mountain, California and dated at least 33 million years ago
But even 33 million years is not the upper limit. A human skeleton found in Switzerland is estimated to be between 38 and 45 million years old. France has yielded up eoliths, paleoliths, cut wood and a chalk ball, the minimum ages of which range from 45 to 50 million years.
There's still more.

(start of part 3) In 1960, H. L. Armstrong announced in Nature magazine the discovery of fossil human footprints near the Paluxy River, in Texas. Dinosaur footprints were found in the same strata. In 1983, the Moscow News reported the discovery of a fossilised human footprint next to the fossil footprint of a three-toed dinosaur in the Turkamen Republic. Dinosaurs have been extinct for approximately 65 million years.
In 1983, Professor W. G. Burroughs of Kentucky reported the discovery of three pairs of fossil tracks dated to 300 million years ago. They showed left and right footprints. Each print had five toes and a distinct arch. The toes were spread apart like those of a human used to walking barefoot. The foot curved back like a human foot to what appeared to be a human heel. There was a pair of prints in the series that showed a left and right foot. The distance between them is just what you'd expect in modern human footprints.
In December 1862, The Geologist carried news of a human skeleton found 27.5 m (90 ft) below the surface in a coal seam in Illinois. The seam was dated between 286 and 320 million years. It's true that a few eoliths, skull fragments and fossil footprints, however old, provide no real backing for the idea of advanced prehistoric human civilisations.
But some other discoveries do.
In 1968, an American fossil collector named William J. Meister found a fossilised human shoe print near Antelope Spring, Utah. There were trilobite fossils in the same stone, which means it was at least 245 million years old. Close examination showed that the sole of this shoe differed little, if at all, from those of shoes manufactured today.
In 1897, a carved stone showing multiple faces of an old man was found at a depth of 40 m (130 ft) in a coal mine in Iowa. The coal there was of similar age.

(start of part 4) A piece of coal yielded up an encased iron cup in 1912. Frank J. Kenwood, who made the discovery, was so intrigued he traced the origin of the coal and discovered it came from the Wilburton Mine in Oklahoma. The coal there is about 312 million years old.
In 1844, Scottish physicist Sir David Brewster reported the discovery of a metal nail embedded in a sandstone block from a quarry in the north of England. The head was completely encased, ruling out the possibility that it had been driven in at some recent date. The block from which it came is approximately 360 million years old.
On 22 June 1844, The Times reported that a length of gold thread had been found by workmen embedded in stone close to the River Tweed. This stone too was around 360 million years old.
Astonishing though these dates may appear to anyone familiar with the orthodox theory of human origins, they pale in comparison with the dates of two further discoveries.
According to Scientific American, dated 5 June 1852, blasting activities at Meeting House Hill, in Dorchester, Massachusetts, unearthed a metallic, bell-shaped vessel extensively decorated with silver inlays of flowers and vines. The workmanship was described as 'exquisite'. The vessel was blown out of a bed of Roxbury conglomerate dated somewhat earlier than 600 million years.
In 1993, Michael A. Cremo and Richard L. Thompson reported the discovery 'over the past several decades' of hundreds of metallic spheres in a pyrophyllite mine in South Africa. The spheres are grooved and give the appearance of having been manufactured. If so, the strata in which they were found suggest they were manufactured 2.8 BILLION years ago.

That sense of "false hope" seems to work the best when it comes to the creation of communities, the maitnence of good moral code and the removal of degeneracy in society. Even if you dont believe in the bible being divine the importance of religion is something that can be proven and has been recorded.

Take for example, more religious women tend to have less sex than their religious counterparts, especially outside of marriage.

>Research connecting sex and religion in older adulthood, however, remains slim. Much more is known about it at earlier stages of the life course. Most of this has been conducted among adolescents, and the majority of these studies find a negative association between heightened religiosity and a variety of sexual outcomes, including the timing of first sex, number of sexual partners, and the propensity to have premarital sex (Regnerus 2005; Rostosky, Wilcox, Wright, & Randall, 2004; Uecker 2008).

The lower frequency of premartial sex and sexual activity also correlate well with divorce rates.

ifstudies.org/blog/sex-and-divorce-whats-the-connection

Which means that the prevalence of religion in society aids in mitigating the divorce epidemic and the record numbers of unmarried couples - which all seems to correlate with the increased number of sexual partners women on average have ( save religious ones of course).

(start of part 5) What are we to make of these perplexing discoveries? They cannot simply be dismissed. If even ONE of these discoveries is TRUE (and I believe that MANY if not ALL of these discoveries are TRUE), then it changes EVERYTHING that modern mainstream anthropologists THOUGHT they knew about the human species. (end)

Here is the Nampa figurine (placed next to a coin for size comparison). The Nampa figurine is a tiny figurine made of clay found in 1889, when workers were drilling near Nampa, in southwest Idaho.

“The record of the well shows that… they had penetrated first about fifty feet of soil, then about fifteen feet of basalt, and afterwards passed through alternate beds of clay and quicksand…down to a depth of about three hundred feet when the sand pump began to bring up numerous clay balls, some of them more than two inches in diameter, densely coated with iron oxide,” geologist of Boston Society of Natural History, George Frederick Wright (1838-1921) reported in his book “Origin and Antiquity of Man” (1912).

The Nampa figurine appears to be of a female human and was discovered at a strata dated to about 2 million years.

A coin with curious and indecipherable inscriptions was discovered in Illinois in strata that would date it between 200,000 to 400,000 years ago. The finding was reported in 1871 by William E. Dubois of the (((Smithsonian Institution))). What makes this coin so significant is what Dubois said about it - he described the UNIFORM THICKNESS of the coin and concluded that it must have "passed through a rolling-mill; and if the ancient Indians had such a contrivance, it must have been pre-historic." Pic related (it's a depiction of the coin).

Edit:

Take for example, more religious women tend to have less sex than their IRRELIGIOUS counterparts, especially outside of marriage.

arguing against evolution is a pretty steep uphill battle

Dr. Peter Gariaev is a Russian scientist who took eggs that were laid by a frog and then zapped those eggs with a laser light that had gone through eggs laid by a salamander. When the 'frog' eggs hatched, salamanders emerged from them - not frogs. The only thing that is necessary to rewrite DNA is wave information, which means that evolution can occur not through millions of years but instantaneously.

The agricultural division of the Ciba-Geigy corporation (now Sygenta) discovered that existing plant seeds could be transformed into extinct varieties, simply by zapping them with a weak electrostatic current. This process generated stronger and faster-growing wheat, extinct fern species, and tulips with thorns. Italian scientist Pier Luigi Ighina energetically transformed a living apricot tree into an apple tree, actually causing the fruits on the branches to metamorphose from apricots into apples in only sixteen days. Ighina also zapped a rat with DNA-wave information from a cat, and this caused the rat to grow a cat-like tail in four days.

Source for religion and sexual activity:

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3119480/

I believe that evolution is true, but that evolution is caused by a conscious, intelligent field of energy underlying the entire universe (which you can call 'God' if you want, but I won't, because that word has religious connotations that I would rather avoid) which cranks out life anywhere and everywhere. Also, humans are BILLIONS of years old and are NOT NATIVE to Earth. Start watching this video from 10:27 (ignore the whole 2012 thing, because Wilcock is still right about how evolution really works):

youtube.com/watch?v=STqkZR2PSR4

I also don't like the term 'intelligent design', because 'intelligent' is a loaded word and somewhat anthropomorphic. I prefer using the term 'self-aware design' or 'intentional design'. And what I'm advocating is not magic, as it can be described in a purely scientific way. There you go. Evolution is correct, but (((Darwinian evolution))) is false. Evolution is never random.

...

good dope

The thing is this, you ask people "How do you know X?" and they'll probably reply by saying something like "Well, because it's in my science books." or "Well, because it's been peer-reviewed." or "Well, because it's been agreed upon by a majority of scientists.", but these are flimsy defences, because unless YOU can verify for yourself whether something is true or not either by OBSERVATION or by doing an experiment about it BY YOURSELF, you are relying essentially on external sources for your information and it is naïve to think that those sources don't have agendas.
What people call 'mainstream science' has been hijacked by politics, religion and corporations. So-called 'peer review' these days is usually nothing more than a circle-jerk. Just as people support the separation of church and state (and RIGHTFULLY so), I support the separation of SCIENCE and state. We owe it to our innate intelligence to QUESTION EVERYTHING.

racists, using obama's most recent white house portrait.

>So-called 'peer review' these days is usually nothing more than a circle-jerk
Key point

Only good thing about religion is that it prevents degeneracy, to a degree. I don't think it's beneficial to society as a whole to believe in an obvious lie, it holds us back. The world would be alot better without overzealous, stupid redneck Christians and filthy mudslimes.

From math cs guys perspective, archi and bio/evolution sounds more like voodoo than actual science. You could potentially be proven wrong if some fossil or shit gets discovered or sth. There just isnt any exhaustive proof, unlike cs or math

Indeed.

BUT HEY

Stating evolution is a fact is a contradiction to the very science you believe in

Expect it isn't, evolution has been proven and observed,

All of science is founded on inductive reasoning, and therefore technically it is all fallible

We can only come up with theories and have a high degree of certainty in them (i.e. if their predictions are repeatedly accurate)

There's a difference between Evolution and The Theory of Evolution as the Origin of the Species. idk why this is so hard for you fucks to understand.

>evolution has been proven

Okay then, show us the proof. That should be easy.

For math, with given axiom system, thats not necessarily true , to a degree

Fallible indeed, but to a very small degree for accepted theories.
So you can practically call theories factual.

Adaptation certainly is, now let me tell you about how is he affected humans...

the site doesn't work for me.

Ask Bill Nye, he's a very good scientist.