Evolution doesn't real

I keep seeing arguments on this board for natural evolution falsely equivocating micro and macro evolution by positing that one necessarily follows from the other. This is obviously false. Just because two words share the same root word doesn't mean one follows from the other. Microevolution has only to do with phenotypical expression of existent genotypes. Macroevolution has to do with addition of genotypes. Some try to argue that reorganization of existent base pairs constitutes addition of genotypes, but this is false, as any new genotype from an old genotype also constitutes a loss of a genotype. A true addition of genes necessitates more genes than there were before and a larger genome. To make this concept simple for you, a genotype consisting of 1 billion base pairs can't be rearranged to make 2 billion base pairs. There are mutations that add base pairs, but the point is that macroevolution doesn't follow from microevolution.

There's also the argument that "junk DNA" is evidence of evolution. There is no such thing. "Junk DNA" is functional. You can research this for yourself, but try not just to read your favorite pro-atheism websites. Additionally, even if there were junk DNA existent in "pre-evolved" ancestors, this would not be implicative of evolution. One could try to assert that it's "evidence," but that seems to be a word used often in trying to assert one's hypothesis is correct while disregarding one's burden of proof. Evidence is only evidence if probability of truth can be explicitly quantified from it, else it is just something people interpret in such a way that makes them "right," regardless of if they have a position in science or any field.
>But science! hurrr
There are plenty of scientists who question evolution, but they're simply defined as being wrong. Afterall, why take seriously a "pseudoscientist"?
>b-but [insert argumentum ad populum]

People also try to cite similarities between physiology, morphology, and DNA between life forms. Structures exist as they do simply because it is physically necessary for function. Function is only obtainable via a set number of structures, therefore there will be similarities in the structure of similarly functioning things. Therefore similarities also don't serve as proof of evolution.
>But it's evidence!
See above.

>a genotype consisting of 1 billion base pairs can't be rearranged to make 2 billion base pairs.
Why not?

That being the case, OP,
in your worldview,
how do you account that you are an ape?

I say that you are an ape, because you ARE an ape, in the SAME WAY as a Cat is a feline,
that a scottish terrier is a Dog.

Evolution can account for why you are an ape.
Without evolution, how do you account for being an ape?

Because it's too complicated for weak minded. So endlessly complicated god did it all, atheists btfo!

c'mon op. Don't be a total fag,
I want to hear the fizzing as you try to resolve this one.

I'm guessing blatant denial, and reference to scripture.

So, I am an ape. An intelligent ape that knows that evolution is bullshit. Unlike you, you're just an ape.

I REPEAT,
how do you
ACCOUNT
for the fact that you are an ape?
How do you resolve this fact?

WHY are you an ape? Can you tell me?

Evolution can tell us, but I'm helping you out here. Have the 'evolution is bullshit' point. Ill let it slide.

How do you account for the fact that you are an ape, without evolution?

1. Genetic mutations occur, including deletions and duplications
2. While most of these mutations are harmful or fatal to the organism, at least some are not harmful or even beneficial.
3. Genetic material is passed from generation to generation.
4. Some genetic material results in the organism carrying it having more offspring than organisms that don't carry it.
5. Life has been on Earth for a very, very long time.

That's all you need for evolution to be not only possible but inevitable. Which do you disagree with? And please don't tell me you believe in micro- but not macro-evolution. That's like saying you believe in water droplets but not oceans - the latter is just an accumulation of the former.

Its 6am, kiwifag.
Im an insomniac, and insane to boot, so thats why I'm on this shitboard. Why are you here?
And no, I don't anticipate any quality posts in this thread.

Please continue OP. Just book dropping.


Books:
The Creation Answers Book: David Catchpoole
Taking Back Astronomy: The Heavens Declare Creation: Dr. Jason Lisle
Ultimate Proof of Creation: Dr. Jason Lisle
Learn the Bible in 24 Hours: Chuck Missler
Has God Spoken: A.O. Schnabel
The Genesis Flood 50th Anniversary Edition: by John C. Whitcomb (Author), Henry M. Morris (Author)
Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of the Genome: Dr. J. C. Sanford

You don't believe in macro evolution? That's cool, man. You do you.

But what DO you believe, OP?

Genetic load outweighs any possible beneficial mutations having any net positive effect.

Any "beneficial" mutations discovered are questionably so.

I just enjoy a little light shitposting with my morning coffee before work. I've sadly gotten to the point in my life where 5am is no longer time to go to bed, but time to get up.

Ok, number 2 then. Would you care to explain why we need a new flu vaccine every year if it's not due to mutations that are beneficial to the influenza virus? Or, if you prefer, how do bacteria develop resistance to antibiotics that persists over many generations?

Its cool, we can wait.
Pol Is a CHRISTIAN board, you know.

:)

Of course it's not real, it's pretty much the dumbest religion ever pushed.

But Sup Forums consists of weak normies that are simply not ready for this level of redpilling yet. They are mostly atheist converts that don't really have a strong grasp of reality.

I agree. I SPIT on the stupid religion of evolution.

Um,
but, you know, now that we're here, how do you account for the fact that you're an ape?
That we are both apes?

Have you heard of positive mutations? Like retardeds have one more chromosome and makes them idiotic this could happen the other way arround and in a situation of constant fight for survival the individuals with this positive mutation would have higher survival chances and therefore of becoming the new dominant species in a long time process. This happening after and after is evolution, and we are preventing it from happening.

See this example, folks?

A non-ape from a prison island was literally brainwashed to advocate being an ape.

And he even gets triggered when you try to explain to him that he's not an ape.

It's unbelievable, but in his head, he can't understand how dumb we are. Kek.

You ARE an ape.
You can twist, dodge and squirm all you like, but if you have opposable thumbs, a dry nose, our specific kinds of jaws, and the host of other diagnostic categories that cannot be debated because they are DIAGNOSTIC, and therefore descriptive,

EVEN WITHOUT EVOLUTION,
you are
still an ape.

Explain to me how we are NOT apes when I just pointed out, and can prove, and it HAS been proven,
that we ARE apes,

please,

or

Account for why we ARE apes.

Calling me dumb when you haven't answered my REALLY SIMPLE question doesn't make me look stupid.

He's right though, you ape.

Trying to argue with people this retarded.

You would have an easier time learning how to fly to a rabbit.

I understand that they don't speak very good english over there in Slovenia, so I tried to use small words to help.

Perhaps he didn't understand the question.

Australia was the prison by the way, NZ is just nowhere land.

You get it, we are animals descending from bacteria.

Do you know what the word animal means?
Would you debate being an animal?

The term animal refers to a

multicellular
metazoan
amniote
with a digestive tract.

If you think you are not an animal, explain why you don't have those traits (you do).

Or acknowledge that you fit the descriptive category of (animal) of which (apes) are a sub-set.

Serbturd doesn't seem to get it though

can't wait for this thread to get 300 replies just like the last 1000000000 iterations of it

I couldn't explain it that well since I studied it in my language.

That's my point, many people talks about humans like if we weren't animals.

If there's an actual flaw in my reasoning there I'd be genuinely grateful if you pointed it out - I find learning more enjoyable than just holding opinions. If you're unable to, perhaps you should reconsider which of us is retarded.

Do you realize you're an idiot?

Evolution doesn't say we evolved from an ape or gorilla. It never said that. What it says is that we shared a common ancestor.

Idiots who deny Evolution don't even know what it says.

because they don't really acknowledge that claiming we aren't is ignoring
WHY we are,

or that to do so is a case of special pleading to not be apes.

Like all other animals we evolved by competing. Competition is the only constant.

The NZ poster didn't say we evolved from apes but that we are in fact apes. Which humans are. Please stop shitposting in an already shitposted thread.

I think his point was we are nothing more than a more evolved ape. Maybe primate would have been more appropriated but in any case he didn't say we evolved from an ape directly at any point.

such large claims need large evidence behind it

>evolution doesn't real
KÊK

OPs evidence is that it's OBVIOUSLY false.

No, because it's physically impossible. There is no God of that gaps in saying, truly, that's physically impossible.

I diagree.