The world is going crazy

Just program a software and Darwin theory could be proved wrong on-screen just to satisfy. And you believed that teacher? Maybe she mis-read the text imparting improper knowledge?

 

Yes it is absolutely false. Those people were his family, not people with vested interest.
http://creation.com/did-charles-darwin-recant
http://christiananswers.net/q-aig/darwin.html
https://answersingenesis.org/creationism/arguments-to-avoid/darwins-deathbed-conversion-a-legend/

How anyone doesn't understand evolution in this day and age is incredible to me.
http://necsi.edu/projects/evolution/evidence/evidence_intro.html

 

Well, the lib scientists were adamant about climate change, now it looks like they cooked climate change books just to further promote their agenda:

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2017...bama-presentation-whistle-blower-charges.html

Same goes for all other theories and ideals they have supported and adhered to through the centuries. An inconvenient truth scares the shit out of them. Pride doesn't allow them to admit they've been wrong.

 

LoL! That really doesn't deserve a response however if you can't see that the world is getting hotter every single year with records being broken 13 out of the last 16 years then you're a lost cause really. But what that has to do with Darwinism is beyond me.

The title of this thread is very apt.

 

Sure. Sure. You're the entitled one. The lib scientists and anthropologists have no proof or evidence that there's a common lineage between humans and apes that goes back to a common ancestor yet, by golly, we are somehow related. No proof, no evidence, just some empirical nonsense. Some of it borderlines with a complete and utter insanity: "Although it happened 4 million years ago we are still pretty sure we know how it all occurred." Yeah, right. What a dopey science.

 

No proof or evidence? Are you kidding me? Best open your eyes and try looking for some as there's plenty. Start with the link I provided above. I suspect you simply don't understand basic logic.

What's your alternative? God did it all?

Entitled one? How does that fit into the equation? Entitled to what, a brain?

 

That's why I don't watch news. Maybe once in a while to know how the world is moving. But no news at all. And i think is better to keep my mind clean of so many junk induced and advertised every single day.

 

Just saying again, there is a difference between a lack of confirmed proof, and something being absolutely false. Appeals to authority (e.g., "Darwin's family said so") and absolutism ("the evidence can ONLY be interpreted this way") are part and parcel to evolutionary dogma. The data overall actually better supports the creation side, when both it and the evolution approach are fairly and critically compared.

The same is true of climate change dogma, which usually ignores data and scientists which contradict it, or put the issue in context (leaked emails and other admissions show the scientists whose research advanced the view massaged the evidence to push that conclusion, and discounted the larger amount of evidence of cyclical cooling or warming of the earth over the centuries).

http://yournewswire.com/climate-change-expert-jail-fraud/
http://govtslaves.info/world-leaders-duped-by-manipulated-global-warming-data/
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/globalwarming.html

 

My sales teams and I used to sell the very modeling /simulation software used by NOAA and many other meteorological/climate research organizations around the world. This was before the big uproar about global cooling, global warming, climate change (you pick the name du jour) and they would always admit that their models were so full of holes as to be almost silly, though they kept plugging away in scientific pursuit of refining their models and hopefully understanding the weather, the climate, etc., slightly better than they did the year before. The problem of course, with modeling/simulation is that you need to know ALL of the data points/variables that could affect the system and also have a long history of all of this data to optimize the model. The same software was used to model airplanes, for example, and those engineers would run thousands of real world tests of wings, engines, etc., to gather enough data to simply have enough for a starting point model. So, to accurately model climate change, you would need hundreds (and probably thousands) of years of data to have any hope of having even a reasonable accurate model to base predictions on. And, you would need to know ALL of the variables involved. Heck, these guys still cannot reliably predict a small weather pattern a few days out and we are willing to listen to their thoughts on the next few decades or centuries of potential climate change around the globe? Totally absurd, and they would have told you so themselves years ago, but now there is big money involved in climate research and they stand in line with their hands out looking for big grants (can't blame them as it is their paycheck of course.) So, they nod and wink and tell the politicians and major donors what they want to hear and get their grants and all is well. As is the case with all political issues: follow the money.

 

The theory that we evolved from apes does seem a little sketchy. Maybe we did, maybe we didn't. But, have you read about the ideas of transhumanism and singularity? That seems very plausible. Over time, it's likely that even what it means to be a human being will be challenged. What I mean is how the rapid change in technology will effect us. Man-made evolution. Maybe by about 2030, genetic modifications will be much more common. They've even mixed spider DNA with goats, I think so the military can make some special vests out of the strong, silky stuff from their milk. If they haven't already, there will be humans/animals with mixed DNA. Also, it will be more common to have computer prosthetics, some people will use them cosmetically and for greater performance. Some would rather have bionic arms? You might want advanced sight, etc. And if you are 51% computer or animal, are you still a human being? Some countries may or may not agree with the moral implications, but they'll do it all anyway for defense.

They don't want any country to be more advanced. And science will also keep pushing to improve human life. But, the person that is for example, mixed with a certain animal to achieve a particular trait, they may consider themselves advanced over regular humans. Same goes for those mixed with computers, they will obviously have greater skills. Most likely, they will feel superior. And maybe the people that are 100% human will believe they are the best, just based on the fact they are 100% human. Maybe they'll all hate each other and there will be war. Instead of color of skin, religion, nationality, they will fight against each other based on level of humanness. In the meantime, computers will get more powerful and powerful, maybe they will just take over the world. I believe the human race will evolve but I'm just not sure if we were ever apes.

I had to quote that bolded part. I hope not, but you're probably right. Eventually, it's going to happen.

 

It is. And always have been.