Hitler killed 6 million Jews & he was a Christian. Does that mean all Christians are Killers & Terrorists?


  • @whoever lololol. I almost thought you were serious at first but after that it was really funny


  • is it ? lol , would explain please !



  • @alwaysstranger .. and you really support some drunk made gibberish that you descended from the apes or your distance ancestors are apes .... biggest laughable joke by drunk darwin. you could try talking about other evolutionary theories but dude, Human evoution is purely nonsensical.

    By the way i will be glad to hear you out, just for fairness in my criticism, so please, i will kindly ask, how is Human evolution theory logical, rational and makes one "scientific"?


  • @sheapard @sheapard it doesn't make one "scientific" but if someone willfully ignores the theory and doesn't try to understand it because he has a bias of religion over science then the person is deluded and not being scientific in anyway. I didn't ask you to tell me to teach you evolution, i asked you to tell me what might disprove evolution since you asked me to teach you it, watch these videos:

    (How We Are Still Evolving Today)

    (The Evidence For Evolution)

    (How our bodies are super imperfect in ways that can only be explained by evolutionary science)

    And then tell me what you think disproves evolution and I'll respond with A. If you won't watch the videos I'm sending you then I'll answer with a moment in one of these videos where the answer is explained B. If the question is not answered in one of these videos then I'll give my own answer for a Wikipedia link or something

    (things that you may not understand about evolution and will try to use to disprove it)

    P.S. calling me and darwin drunk does not disprove evolution

    And by the way humans didn't evolve from monkeys, no evolutionary scientist ever said that, it's a myth, we have a common ancestor with monkeys who's not a monkey but an ape and which lived about 50 million years ago. You're scientific ignorance is outstanding

    And by the way this is how i feel that this conversation will go

    And if I'm right then I'm going to be happy to tell you that you're a lost cause l and I'll stop talking to you forever


  • @alwaysstranger
    am really not in the mood of some whatever sitcom you've piled up with flexible story-telling to โ€˜explainโ€™ observations contrary to evolutionary theory.

    just discuss briefly to me what is indeed the naturalistic origin of life and its diversity, cos in it lies several unanswerable question.

    How did life originate? evolution or by Intelligent designer
    How did the DNA code originate?
    How did new biochemical pathways, which involve multiple enzymes working together in sequence, originate?
    How did multi-cellular life originate?
    How did sex originate?
    How did blind chemistry create mind/ intelligence, meaning, altruism and morality?
    Why is natural selection, a principle recognized by creationists, taught as โ€˜evolutionโ€™, as if it explains the origin of the diversity of life?
    How do โ€˜living fossilsโ€™ remain unchanged over supposed hundreds of millions of years ?

    Except you want tell me it all happened because of probability , chance, randomness without any Intelligent designer..

    hopefully , you don't give me another evolution sitcoms


  • @sheapard said in Hitler killed 6 million Jews & he was a Christian. Does that mean all Christians are Killers & Terrorists?:

    @alwaysstranger
    am really not in the mood of some whatever sitcom you've piled up with flexible story-telling to โ€˜explainโ€™ observations contrary to evolutionary theory.

    You know you can just leave right. I'm not obliged to give you a biology course

    just discuss briefly to me what is indeed the naturalistic origin of life and its diversity, cos in it lies several unanswerable question.

    Ok

    How did life originate? evolution or by Intelligent designer

    Even though the origin of life has NOTHING to do with evolution

    Here's a documentary and a couple of videos to explain the most probable solutions to the question:

    How did the DNA code originate?

    WTF does this even have to do with evolution

    How did new biochemical pathways, which involve multiple enzymes working together in sequence, originate?

    WTF does this even have to do with evolution

    How did multi-cellular life originate?

    from single-cellular life that grew

    How did s*x originate?

    Because for genes to survive they have to reproduce

    And it's not s*x it's s e x

    How did blind chemistry create mind/ intelligence, meaning, altruism and morality?

    Intelligence happened when brains started developing linguistics, using tools...

    Meaning is subjective and not objective but it's created in the mind to help animals make sense of the world

    Using tools is common between a lot of animals and it started because it's useful for survival and efficiency

    Why is natural selection, a principle recognized by creationists, taught as โ€˜evolutionโ€™, as if it explains the origin of the diversity of life?

    You didn't watch any of the videos that i sent you and if you say that you did then you're either lying or you just don't understand English videos

    How do โ€˜living fossilsโ€™ remain unchanged over supposed hundreds of millions of years ?

    They do change a lot but the ones that remain intact and not super damaged remain that way because of natural preservation

    Except you want tell me it all happened because of probability , chance, randomness without any Intelligent designer..

    It did

    hopefully , you don't give me another evolution sitcoms

    Do you have any other questions


  • @alwaysstranger , You're really pro in beating around the bush.. Go read more on Human evolution, its obvious all what you have are some observatory sitcoms for evolution while ignoring fundamental of what its actually postulating. .


  • @sheapard what is it actually postulating then? How am i beating around the bush?


  • @sheapard so you don't believe in evolution because i don't understand what it's actually postulating, is that the reason?


  • @sheapard i think we should end this conversation because nothing is going to change your opinion on anything. In the words of Penn Jillette:


  • @alwaysstranger ,
    We do see changes within species, but we do not see any changes into other species. And, as mentioned, we see no evidence of gradual change in the fossil record either.

    Natural selection is based on circular reasoning: the fittest are those who survive, and those who survive are deemed fittest.
    "Survival of the fittest" is a conversational way to describe natural selection, but a more technical description speaks of differential rates of survival and reproduction. That is, rather than labeling species as more or less fit, one can describe how many offspring they are likely to leave under given circumstances.The key is that adaptive fitness can be defined without reference to survival: large beaks are better adapted for crushing seeds, irrespective of whether that trait has survival value under the circumstances.

    i spoke about chance : Mathematically, it is inconceivable that anything as complex as a protein, let alone a living cell or a human, could spring up by chance.
    Chance plays a part in evolution (for example, in the random mutations that can give rise to new traits), but evolution does not depend on chance to create organisms, proteins or other entities. Quite the opposite: natural selection, the principal known mechanism of evolution, harnesses nonrandom change by preserving "desirable" (adaptive) features and eliminating "undesirable" (non-adaptive) ones. As long as the forces of selection stay constant, natural selection can push evolution in one direction and produce sophisticated structures in surprisingly short times.

    i hate to continue, but serious there's a kind of intellectual gap as seen from your supposedly sitcoms with regards to discussing Human evolution. because there are some important criteria that supports evolution , but taking these criteria to a micro-level, it fails to uphold its consistency to the claim its trying to support


  • @alwaysstranger you've got a major intellectual gap and just relying on the surface part of Evolution postulates, but when faced to its micro-level, you tend to be shutoff and bring irrelevancies for sake of argument..
    Whatever dude, Human evolution is still nonsensical and that doesn't makes someone unscientific .


  • @sheapard you didn't watch anything i sent you. You aren't even listening to me. Most of what you said is answered in the videos i sent you. I don't care anymore because I'm not going to waste my time giving you the same answer in different formats (text, video, picture...)


  • @alwaysstranger : yeah, you don't need to care much when the videos r irrelevant nd strolling out of the crux of what's been questioned. go fill up intellectually bro, there is a major gap and it's quite obvious.. it's of no significance to continue on such disparity


  • @sheapard hahaha. So you're just using the old "you aren't going to do it because you know you're going to lose". You know I'm stopping to talk to you because i feel like I'm talking to a mentally challenged person


  • @sheapard this is the last time i answer you because you aren't even listening but here we go :

    @sheapard said in Hitler killed 6 million Jews & he was a Christian. Does that mean all Christians are Killers & Terrorists?:

    @alwaysstranger ,
    ย  We do see changes within species, but we do not see any changes into other species.

    WRONG. And this is evidence that you watched 0 of the videos i sent you.

    Here is one of the many observed species turning into another:

    And, as mentioned, we see no evidence of gradual change in the fossil record either.

    WRONG. All fossil records similar or not can fit in a branch shape to show the evolution of species into other species over millions of years

    Natural selection is based on circular reasoning: the fittest are those who survive, and those who survive are deemed fittest.
    "Survival of the fittest" is a conversational way to describe natural selection, but a more technical description speaks of differential rates of survival and reproduction.
    That is, rather than labeling species as more or less fit, one can describe how many offspring they are likely to leave under given circumstances.The key is that adaptive fitness can be defined without reference to survival: large beaks are better adapted for crushing seeds, irrespective of whether that trait has survival value under the circumstances.

    Here's the explanation in one of the videos you didn't watch

    Go to 5:45

    http://chatrooms.talkwithstranger.com/topic/1840/hitler-killed-6-million-jews-he-was-a-christian-does-that-mean-all-christians-are-killers-terrorists/157

    i spoke about chance : Mathematically, it is inconceivable that anything as complex as a protein, let alone a living cell or a human, could spring up by chance.

    No its not. Even if it was 1 in a 100 billion/planet (it's a lot lower than that) it would happen at least 1 time since there are 100 billion planets in our galaxy and it would probably happen a lot more times if you take in consideration that there are about 2 trillion other galaxies onlt in the observable universe

    And by the way scientists already know 1st how to create simple proteins in a lab 2nd how the conditions on planet earth should've been so that they could create protein

    Chance plays a part in evolution (for example, in the random mutations that can give rise to new traits), but evolution does not depend on chance to create organisms, proteins or other entities. Quite the opposite: natural selection, the principal known mechanism of evolution, harnesses nonrandom change by preserving "desirable" (adaptive) features and eliminating "undesirable" (non-adaptive) ones. As long as the forces of selection stay constant, natural selection can push evolution in one direction and produce sophisticated structures in surprisingly short times.
    natural selection, the principal known mechanism of evolution, harnesses nonrandom change by preserving "desirable" (adaptive) features and eliminating "undesirable" (non-adaptive) ones.
    As long as the forces of selection stay constant, natural selection can push evolution in one direction and produce sophisticated structures in surprisingly short times.

    OMG, why the f**k didn't you watch any of the videos i sent you.

    1st evolution is the non-random selection of random variation

    2nd error is that forces of selection change a lot and almost never stay constant for more than a couple million years and also most animals usually travel from place to place

    3rd you are wrong by saying short periods of time unless by short periods of time you mean millions of years in which case you're right

    Here's an explanation of how natural selection works:

    Dude. This is the last time i respond to you because 1st you aren't watching any videos i send you 2nd you don't care if what you believe is true or not, you want to believe what you want to believe because that's what you want to believe 3rd you're a lost cause

    So as a final message here are a couple of fun videos for you:

    Please go watch bleach while enjoying a cold glass of bleach


  • This post is deleted!

  • so someone who is religion wise the same as someone else is part to blame for the other's actions. Sounds soo logical -_-


  • Hell no lol you're making a huge generalization out of a huge group of people just because one such individual was a shitty person,thats similar to the idea of rascism sexism etc.