What are your unpopular opinions?
Discussion
Front bottom said:
I believe in things beyond known science.
Does this mean you believe that there are questions science can't answer? Which is quite right.Or does it mean that you believe in a whole load of utter fking made up bks that flies in the face of what science does know, using the pathetic mantra of "Well science doesn't know everything" which is fking obvious otherwise we wouldn't still be doing it.
E34-3.2 said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
You might want to do a bit of research on the subject. Darwin's theory is not applicable at all according to modern atheist scientists. science is a wonderful thing as it can prove that something written in mid 1800 is actually not working when simulated.
And which respected journal / university published it ?
SystemParanoia said:
So whats the name of the replacement peer reviewed theory ?
And which respected journal / university published it ?
I am sure that you know how to do some research on Google, no?And which respected journal / university published it ?
If not, read articles from Berlinsky and many others.
On top of that they discovered soft tissues on the bones of a T-rex, which completely throw away the theory of the age of the dinosaurs. soft tissues could not exist on bones as old as what they thought they dated them originaly. i find it interesting as all that lot are a total bunch of atheist, so it's not about christians v atheist but about old unproven science v modern science with proven research. enjoy.
Edited by E34-3.2 on Sunday 25th February 00:36
E34-3.2 said:
If not, read articles from Berlinsky and many others.
You do your credibility no good whatsoever when you cannot even spell your hero's name correctly.So Berlinski doesn't like Evolution, but doesn't subscribe to Intelligent Design either. Does he have any other explanation for life as we know it?
(Edit : sorry, am I feeding a troll?)
gothatway said:
You do your credibility no good whatsoever when you cannot even spell your hero's name correctly.
So Berlinski doesn't like Evolution, but doesn't subscribe to Intelligent Design either. Does he have any other explanation for life as we know it?
(Edit : sorry, am I feeding a troll?)
Hero? I don't have a hero. So Berlinski doesn't like Evolution, but doesn't subscribe to Intelligent Design either. Does he have any other explanation for life as we know it?
(Edit : sorry, am I feeding a troll?)
It's not like he doesn't like it but he has proven with many other scientists that Darwin's theory is completely wrong.
Troll?
E34-3.2 said:
paulguitar said:
I am really looking forward to your explanation of how 'evolution has been proved wrong'.
Waiting with genuine interest, checking in tomorrow.
Check the conversation above. Read or listen scientific explanations from some specialists and make your own mind. Waiting with genuine interest, checking in tomorrow.
I will be back tomorrow to read your debunking of both gravity and the Earth orbiting the sun.
paulguitar said:
Yes indeed, I actually did a bit of reading since my post.
I will be back tomorrow to read your debunking of both gravity and the Earth orbiting the sun.
So instead of starting some smart insults, what did you make of what you read? I am genuinely interested on your scientifical knowledge on the matter. I will be back tomorrow to read your debunking of both gravity and the Earth orbiting the sun.
The 95% of drivers who reportedly think they are above average may actually be correct. It's certainly perfectly possible that 5% of drivers are total nutters and 95% are doing their best with varying degrees of competence, in which case the mean average is between the 2 and only 5% of drivers are below average.
paulguitar said:
E34-3.2 said:
Well, science (evolution) has been proved wrong for a while so good on you.
I am really looking forward to your explanation of how 'evolution has been proved wrong'.Waiting with genuine interest, checking in tomorrow.
The mechanisms of evolution are not fully understood but the fact it happens is not debated in the scientific community.
E34-3.2 said:
I am sure that you know how to do some research on Google, no?
If not, read articles from Berlinsky and many others.
On top of that they discovered soft tissues on the bones of a T-rex, which completely throw away the theory of the age of the dinosaurs. soft tissues could not exist on bones as old as what they thought they dated them originaly. i find it interesting as all that lot are a total bunch of atheist, so it's not about christians v atheist but about old unproven science v modern science with proven research. enjoy.
The irony is strong in this post. If not, read articles from Berlinsky and many others.
On top of that they discovered soft tissues on the bones of a T-rex, which completely throw away the theory of the age of the dinosaurs. soft tissues could not exist on bones as old as what they thought they dated them originaly. i find it interesting as all that lot are a total bunch of atheist, so it's not about christians v atheist but about old unproven science v modern science with proven research. enjoy.
Edited by E34-3.2 on Sunday 25th February 00:36
Have you done any googling?
Yes the soft tissue find was impressive but in no way did it fall into question the age of the dinosaur. It has raised some interesting ideas about chemical preservation but disproving evolution?
MiniMan64 said:
Me too. Your explanation, not just some vague comments about go and see for yourself.
The mechanisms of evolution are not fully understood but the fact it happens is not debated in the scientific community.
It did not happen the way Darwin made most of the people believe. Evolution as we learned at school is completely wrong as proven by these guys. As you mentioned evolution happen but not at all the way we all believed for years. The mechanisms of evolution are not fully understood but the fact it happens is not debated in the scientific community.
MiniMan64 said:
The irony is strong in this post.
Have you done any googling?
Yes the soft tissue find was impressive but in no way did it fall into question the age of the dinosaur. It has raised some interesting ideas about chemical preservation but disproving evolution?
Yes, impressive and yes it question the age of dinosaurs. Does it disprove evolution? No, but it disprove Darwin's theory and how long it took for us to be humans. It doesn't mean evolution did not happen, it means it happen very differently than what we were thinking. Have you done any googling?
Yes the soft tissue find was impressive but in no way did it fall into question the age of the dinosaur. It has raised some interesting ideas about chemical preservation but disproving evolution?
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff