Block, SkipCaptcha, Automoderated users, edit
574
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mLine 94:
Line 94: − :::::::::::Exactly, Andy. Never mind that you never proved it. Your assumptions aren't evidence. You'll dismiss any counterexamples, so why did you ask for them? It's a rhetorical game that you will eventually win with censorship. [[User:BradB|BradB]] 11:45, 18 August 2011 (EDT)
Talk:Counterexamples to Evolution (view source)
Revision as of 17:47, August 18, 2011
, 17:47, August 18, 2011Undo revision 902823 by BradB (talk) Trolling
::::::::: Atheists like Stephen Hawking, David Attenborough and, more recently, Brian Cox go to great pains to extol the beauty and rhythm of the universe and nature. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 22:08, 17 August 2011 (EDT)
::::::::: Atheists like Stephen Hawking, David Attenborough and, more recently, Brian Cox go to great pains to extol the beauty and rhythm of the universe and nature. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 22:08, 17 August 2011 (EDT)
::::::::::I disagree that the existence of beauty in nature is incompatible with the theory of evolution. Many evolutionists have written about the role of beautiful plumage in birds and how evolution could produce this beauty. I think some have even proposed that we evolved to find the world beautiful because those who thought it ugly were more prone to depression and less likely to survive. We all know they're wrong, but their argument is valid if you only allow naturalistic explanations, which is what their whole model is based on. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 22:36, 17 August 2011 (EDT)
::::::::::I disagree that the existence of beauty in nature is incompatible with the theory of evolution. Many evolutionists have written about the role of beautiful plumage in birds and how evolution could produce this beauty. I think some have even proposed that we evolved to find the world beautiful because those who thought it ugly were more prone to depression and less likely to survive. We all know they're wrong, but their argument is valid if you only allow naturalistic explanations, which is what their whole model is based on. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 22:36, 17 August 2011 (EDT)
== float like a butterfly and sting like a creationist bee ==
== float like a butterfly and sting like a creationist bee ==