Movie talks about evolution

fukken sience pros aka retards who know nuthin, nowumsayin my television brotherss?

Probably doesn't mention race either…. when it comes to race everyone is suddenly a creationist.

The full title of darwin's book is
it's a vague taxonomical proposition debunked repeatedly over the last century yet still thriving as a materialist religion. Just like the bible or quran it's a book used to rationalize various and sundry forms of repugnant behavior. Skip to 35:05 for Berlinski.

...

...

is this thread about the 2001 movie Evolution?

news.bbc.co.uk/earth/hi/earth_news/newsid_9365000/9365567.stm

good on you for mentioning the whole title, i fear however that it will have the opposite effect that you intended in these here hallowed halls

...

Didn't Darwin go back on evolution, at least to some degree later on?

Also, atheists have a creator, its a dice roll, a coin toss. Randomness is their creator and god.

I don't know if he went back on it due to public pressure or something.

Ackshually…

There's a misunderstanding in what a "law" and a "theory" are as understood by normies/modern education. A "law" is an extremely simple statement, ie "gravity makes things fall" (the law of gravity) or "for every action there is an equal or opposite reaction" (laws of motion). A law has no subspecifications about what that means or what it leads to, a law just is.

A theory on the other hand ties laws and/or ideas to explain why things are the way they are. A theory can be explained and supported with innumerable amounts of evidence and can be considered true, but it will never be "upgraded" to a law because the two are fundamentally different things.

t. autist

Weeding out the unfit, leading to Chambers in the gene pool is now considered "Random".

Also, that quote is working from a flawed premise. What he is describing is that as you approach the things that are not known by man, or that we lack the Dumbarton to understand, the more likely you are to ascribe it to the divine. In 200 years, nobody will say that quantum mechanics are a sign of the divine, or something that will make you believe in good. At least not any more than relativity is today.

As said

Evolution does not work solely on "randomness."

You need random variation. Let's assume that there's an environment that favors taller humans, without variation in height it is impossible for selection pressures to favor taller individuals, if taller individuals do exist in an environment with selection pressures favoring height, they will be more reproductively fit and pass on more offspring who will be more likely to survive and pass on their own offspring.

Evolution is defined as a change in allele frequency between generations, so it is true that some form of evolution (e.g. gene mutation to produce a new allele) happens due to "randomness", but if that new allele is very deleterious to reproductive fitness it will not last in the long run.

No.

Your definition of "god" is as wide as your mother's pussy.

Prove it.

When saying random, I was referring to the Big Bang. Should have mentioned that as evolution is the topic of the thread.

Even then, the Big Band is something from nothing. Even then 2.0, the theory is from a Catholic physicist and it certainly ties into "let there be light".

I don't have to accept the Big Bang Theory to think that theism is an entirely insufficient explanation. Saying "I don't know" is, for me, vastly preferable to saying "I'll willingly believe in this explanation I don't have evidence for."

...

...