DUDE SCIENCE LMAO

Does Dr. Hovind argue against Darwinism by saying it implies negroids would have a heritable IQ gap with whites if evolution applied to humans? Because if so, that's a really cucky way to oppose evolution, unless you're only doing it to force your opponent to do ridiculous special pleading against race realism while at the same time pretending to be consistent in their belief that natural selection has been the primary driver of evolution.

...

He doesn't racebait in any of the debates I've watched and breddy sure I've seen them all. He mostly just chips away at the lies used to hold the theory together then rubs salt in the wounds, good shit if you never watched one. His talk at Berkeley is great too.

How is the theory bullshit? Evolution, defined as a change in allele frequency between generations, necessarily exists and is happening constantly. Natural selection, combined with other forms of selection (e.g. sexual selection), and random chance/genetic drift, determine which alleles are successfully passed on. Individuals with exceptionally deleterious alleles will be generally unable to pass them on, individuals with a genotype which sets them up to be below average in fitness will be less likely to have many successful offspring, individuals that are more reproductively fit will see the frequency of their alleles increase over time.

Adding to this, do you think God put the fossil record on Earth to test your faith? Do you think he invented bones which appear to have undergone millions of years of radioactive decay with regards to Carbon-14?

I could argue the world was invented last Thursday. All your memories before last Thursday were put there by God. All signs of aging that suggest the Earth is far older than a week are false, Hadrian's wall was invented last Thursday to look as if it was thousands of years old. This is the same principle you use when you deny the validity of radiocarbon dating.

If race is a social construct then how the fuck can we tell different races apart?

Scientifically, if race is a social construct why isn't sex also? If he thinks humans cannot be different because of their race why would they act different because of their gender? Science my ass.

Social construct theory is postmodernist bullshit with various definitions, depending on how you define it, all of taxonomy is "a social construct" so saying that polar bears and brown bears are distinct subspecies, well hey, "subspecies" is just a social construct. The details of it are really stupid, when people bring that shit up, just bring up the hard facts of racial differences and say "call 'race' whatever you want, a social construct or not, clearly there are innate biological differences between the broad categories we can easily delineate just by looking at you, no genetic test necessary, but genetic tests will verify the obvious"
(see "Of 3,636 subjects of varying race/ethnicity, only 5 (0.14%) showed genetic cluster membership different from their self-identified race/ethnicity.")

That's why the links my dude, easier for you to watch and make refutations than me writing 1,000 words on what he can say in 2 minutes. Long story short nobody disputes so called "micro evolution" except for the fact that no new information is ever gained only reshuffled or lost. Also organic "evolution" is only one of many, all dependent on each other and all equally counter-intuitive and faith based.

Great thing about hovind is he always stresses how he knows he's religious but the people he's debating never do. He argues science from a bible literalist perspective but that's incidental, Berlinski is good too and he's a jew born agnostic.

Except mutations are a thing.

Name a beneficial mutation.

Point mutations in bacteria producing resistance to antibiotics.

Bill Nye is an actor. He was on a sketch comedy show called Almost Live in the 90s.

DUDE MONKEYS ARE DINOSAURS LMAO

And HERE WE GO. Notice how you just went passed humans, animals, plant life and even your beloved fossil record to go straight to a specious experiment with bacteria. Again, nobody disputes "micro evolution". If you take humans and put them in different environments they will change over time, the ones in colder climates will get shorter extremities and narrower eyes but genetically speaking they are and always will be human. They will not "evolve" into polar bears, they will at no point cease being human or have non-human offspring. Your bacteria are a case of information loss/reshuffling, the similiar failed argument with humans is that the sickle cell can be viewed as a beneficial mutation since it prevents malaria in africans, which is like saying if you cut your foot off you can prevent toejam.

Gee, I wonder why the theory is more provable with an organism that has a new generation every 30 mins versus one that has one every quarter century. That's a really tough one.

There's nothing misleading about providing specific proof to a specific question about beneficial mutations emerging in an organism.

>They will not "evolve" into polar bears, they will at no point cease being human or have non-human offspring.
This claim is so absolute that it denies that a reproductively isolated group of humans could, after 10 billion years, be distinct enough from today's humans to be considered a distinct species that is unable to reproduce with modern humans. That is a ludicrous claim, and simply objectively wrong. If you reproductively isolated a population of humans for 200,000 years and put them in a controlled environment with a strong selection pressure for:
-Low-intelligence. The brain is an extremely expensive organ in terms of calories, put this isolated group of humans in an environment where each individual is specifically granted a small ration that can't be shared/stolen and higher intelligence/larger brain size will only hurt their reproductive success. Limited water supplies will also favor a smaller brain.
-Body hair. Put them in an environment with little to no material for clothing that is cold enough to favor the hairy without killing most individuals outright, and prevent sexual selection disfavoring hair
And you're going to wind up with short, hairy, extremely stupid humanoids that aren't even good at swinging from trees because there was no selection pressure for them to do so, it would just be a waste of their limited calories. Such a group could easily become a distinct subspecies given enough tens of thousands of years in total reproductive isolation. Would it be ethical to run such an experiment, no, but it's obviously possible.

A spontaneous mutation is creating new information.
Are you retarded? Because this is an analogy that would only be considered relevant by a retard. Toejam doesn't kill you, malaria does. Having a deleterious trait that prevents a deadly malady is different than cutting off a vital body part to prevent a minor malady.

a distinct species* incapable of interbreeding with humans

Wat?

It's not scientific if you can't test it, your assertions are 100% faith based and your god of the gaps is time. The entire point of the bacteria experiment was trying to find a "scientific" example of beneficial mutation, which it is not. If you put butterflys in a controlled environment of pure white and their wings turn pale, then you put them back in the forest the "benefit" of that mutation is subjective, isn't it? And in any case no new information has been gained. Again though you'll fall back on your time/god to explain how these things totally make sense if you just go back 4 billion years ago.

You can test it. It just wouldn't be ethical to do so.

Putting statements in quotes isn't an argument.

The benefit isn't "subjective", it's specific to a certain environment. There's no "subjectivity" to the fact that tall individuals are more fit in an environment where the exclusive method of acquiring food is picking fruit that is 6 to 10 feet off the ground.

Epicanthic folds were the result of a mutation, new information.

You have provided no justification for your absolutely insane absolutist claim that a reproductively isolated group of humans could never become a distinct species after 200,000 years, 10 million years, 10 billion years, 1 trillion years, or any length of time. This claim is so obviously fucking stupid, at this point there's no point trying to convince you to stop being a retarded nigger, the only thing left to do is gloat about how your love for a kike on a stick is making you steadfastly stick to claims which are so ridiculously impossible. I can't emphasize enough how fucking stupid it is to claim that it is necessarily impossible for an isolated population of humans to accumulate enough genetic differences as to be unable to reproduce with modern humans. You have refused to walk back the claim that a population of humans in complete reproductive isolation could accumulate enough genetic changes (whether a result of genetic drift, natural selection, sexual selection, etc.) to be unable to reproductive fertile offspring with modern humans. If you are actually this stupid, and this isn't a "le ebin trole look how fucking retarded I am", please do the world a favor and get chemically sterilized. Nigger.

ok I guess, if that helps you

Of course it is. Maybe the fruit wants to wind up in giraffe fertilizer instead of zebra so it has to be higher up. Maybe giraffes only developed their taste for that fruit because it was up high where other animals couldn't get it. The point you're avoiding with the butterfly analogy is that just like with the bacteria once you put them back in "normal" conditions you have a loss of fitness followed by rapid extinction.

And look how you double down with "IF you could just live for 200,000 years with a control group of humans" (not any blind faith there, no sirree) and then go straight for the comfy strawman of "haha you believe in jesus." No, I don't believe in jesus since unlike you I don't use tautological reasoning to reinforce my faith in dogmatic religion. It definitely says something though that when cornered in an argument atheists always have to assume that the one disagreeing with them is just as intellectually dishonest.

dude netflix is dogshit le may oh

Are you just pretending or are you really this retarded?

listverse.com/2014/12/29/10-amazing-powers-from-rare-genetic-mutations/
bigthink.com/daylight-atheism/evolution-is-still-happening-beneficial-mutations-in-humans
ratiochristi.org/uah/blog/post/examples-of-beneficial-mutations-in-humans/2011
editthis.info/sciphi/List_of_Beneficial_Mutations_in_Humans
gate.net/~rwms/EvoHumBenMutations.html

Exactly shitlord

Nigger did you just google "beneficial mutations" and link the top 5 results? And you still have the self unawareness to call me retarded. Wew lad. Just looking at your first link from "listverse" how about that! The third entry is the sickle cell example I gave here

Yup except for making you anemic and in horrible pain it sure is beneficial. Did you know that people born without arms can't get handcuffed? Beneficial mutation! The others on the list are of course other information losses that happen to have some bright sides but A for effort google sleuthing nonetheless sparky.

Everything this man says is 100% fact.

The earth is not even 200,000 years old! Everybody knows this, do you know your great great grandfather? No! So you have faith that he existed, there is no clear proof he did. So you don't. Also carbon dating only works if you're studying carbon, bones are not carbon they are mostly calcium and thus this throws fossils out the window.

If the earth is that old, where did all the dinosaurs go? If earth is that old, why didn't dogs evolve from dinosaurs? If the earth is that old, then what about the moon where does the moon come from?

I'll tell you where, God, blessing be upon her.

Science is literally a religion

...

They'll bring back anything

Eh, as a kid I always preferred Beakman's World. The skits were more entertaining and it had more stuff that you could try at home. I haven't seen it since then, though. So I have no idea how well it holds up.

Science Court was pretty good too.

Because I slam dunked your argument?

aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/god.html

aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/science.html

Look just read this, it'll explain everything and refutes your claim.

i.imgur.com/8JZMiQK.jpg

Man they'll buy any old shit won't they?

I know, it explains it clear as day but nooo they refuse to accept her grace.

...

Posting this for lurkers, Berlinski starts at 35:30 with a good primer for his book

vedicilluminations.com/downloads/Intelligent-Design/the-devils-delusion-atheism-and-its-scientific-pretensions-david-berlinski.pdf

This is your brain on cuckstianity.

you're a fucking dumbass holy shit.

Fuck off. This meme magic shit has gone to far. It does not exist. Every time I go into a thread on Holla Forums it's spammed with "MEME MAGIC BRO", "REPEATING DIGITS", and "PRAISE KEK". Shut the fuck up. None of that stuff is real and the fact that you would compare it to science makes you even more pathetic than creationists, if that's possible.

Memes are real.

Nigger were you comatose during the presidential election? We memed Trump into office. He literally baneposted in his inauguration speech.

lighten up dude, I bet you hate Jenny too

That's what happens when anons meme unresponsibly.
We started ironically but eventually the ledditor flood from r/the_donald latched on and thought we were serious.

The same is going to happen with the "prequels are good" meme if this unresponsible use of memery doesn't stop.

Reddit's new series. Bazinga is FINISHED

Calm thyself, heretic.

But Revenge of the sith is unironically my favourite Space Skirmishes

gee I wonder which one I should believe

yeah dude, yeah bro, lighten up
i mean every thread doesn't belong to you bro. if I want to post the same pepe reaction images in every thread it's my choice, my board, my choice, know what I'm saying bro? so what if it's Holla Forums tier? so what if I'm not contributing anything to the actual discussion? reaction images are just as valid as you contributions bro.
8/pol/ is just as garbage as 4/pol/
2014 was the last good year for imageboards smdh fucking normalfags

chill bro lmfao its just a joke lighten up

...

same

You need jenny in your life

Yes I did. That's how easy it is to refute your bullshit claims. And the claim that "there can be no beneficial mutation without information loss" is one such claim that creationist retards try to make. Which is of course nonsense (like most of their other claims). First of all you would have to prove that all gene duplications followed by point mutations are always harmful to the spreading of the genome (good luck with that). Then (according to information theory) adding random noise culled by the environment actually decreases entropy. Here are some links that show the increase of genetic information :
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15177683?dopt=Abstract
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11675603?dopt=Abstract
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15130825?dopt=Abstract
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15785850?dopt=Abstract
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12868612?dopt=Abstract
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?cmd=Link&LinkName=pubmed_pubmed&from_uid=14634634

All shitposting aside, why are you not using talkorigins?

Shill Nye the Commie Guy.

nytimes.com/2010/07/02/science/02tibet.html

How silly do you have to be to believe this?

It's not entirely their fault. They were indoctrinated at a young age and brainwashing is hard to kick for the weak-willed.

Sometimes I do. It's just that that site is such a red flag for creationists, that I also try to use different sources.

This. I went to Zoos in my entire life and not once did i see one of the monkeys evolve.

Stephen "One man Reich" Crowder did a thing once

Color me not surprised.

Next you'll be telling me that niggers aren't really dark skinned, they just look that way because you're racist…

...

...

...

Someone should photoshop that picture to say something like "BILL IS BLACKED"

reminder to stop using the word gender
it was coined into mainstream use by a disgusting pedophile who used kids to carry out his sick experiments.
webm related

pepe is a gay frog

Is Bill like a pope in the cult of scientism or is he more like a TV-evangelist?

Memes had nothing to do with it. Everyone could tell he was going to win the presidency when he started running, since he was the only candidate anyone actually liked.

And of course the memelords are also christcucks. I always knew you faggots were twin sides of the same coin.

Holy shit you really were comatose during the election.

Samefag

...

t. einstein worshipping cuck

...

And you retards just throw around Hovind's "lectures" hoping to disprove something. Either react to my post or shut up.

Do you even know what you posted? Boils down to this sentence
This is old news and has exactly nothing to do with proving or disproving darwinism. There exists genetic code - literal codified information - from which can be determined an ever increasing amount of phylogenetic patterns. Like reverse engineering a harddrive and over time being able to distinguish between DATs and EXEs yet here you are copypasting under the assumption this somehow proves an undirected process of beneficial mutation through natural selection. It's the same with cosmic evolution, you have blind faith in muh big bang despite the fact it violates boyles law, the second law of thermodynamics, law of conservation of angular momentum etc since black science man said it on tv so it must be true. Your appeal is to ignorance and authority, if it makes you feel any better I'll concede you're probably part ape.

Sad!

Will Shill Lie the Cuckold Goy ever stop coasting on nostalgia and fucking go away? It was kind of cool when he first showed his face again after being out of the public eye for a decade and a half, but when he preaching all of this Reddit-styled, leftist propaganda disguised as "science" along with Neil deGrasse Tyson, enough was enough.

Nye saying shit like "climate change deniers should be jailed" is pretty similar to imprisoning people for questioning the Holohoax.

Has anyone ever stopped coasting on nostalgia?

Of course you are ignoring the fact, that there are statistical methods to determine if a phylogeny is an objective genealogical tree or not (it's also written in the abstract which method they used). So your analogy with hard drive is laughable. But the important fact is that gene duplications correlate with adaptive changes so that refutes the bullshit micro/macro distinction that creationists like to make, and also shows that there is an increase of information not loss.

Wew, lots of laws to violate. Is that also from the Hovind lectures? What a renaissance man this Hovind guy must be. Big Bang disproved, what to do?
blog.case.edu/singham/2010/03/31/big_bang_for_beginners14_does_the_big_bang_theory_violate_the_second_law_of_thermodynamics
preposterousuniverse.com/blog/2010/02/22/energy-is-not-conserved/

Do you ever just listen to your heart? Hear that whisper? Its God

Not just whisper, it's a loud roar. And it tells me to kill all the Christians, Jews, and sandniggers.

There are statistical methods for anything, care to be more specific? And please don't just google a few keywords and post the top result. Also
This coming from the same group who still push the idea of ontegeny recapitulating phylogeny even though it's been debunked for 150 years. Objective doesn't mean what you think it means.

Oh look you chose one of my examples and googled it. And of course dark matter is mentioned right away in the first paragraph, sure is reddit around here.

lol kent hovind you are joking.

creationist chistcucks are the greatest cows.

See (again)

Not a christian but nice job projecting (again) your faith in a dogmatic religion.

How did the first organism have complex systems like digestion, respiration, reproduction, etc.? How did such and organism manage to evolve into both plants and animals? Why would animals even be a beneficial evolution when plants can live without using energy to move?

Sure. Anything can be classified subjectively in a hierarchical nested structure in multiple ways, but not everything can be classified in multiple ways in a structure that conforms to Markov processes. And we can distinguish between subjective, and objective phylogenies using methods like maximum parsimony, maximum likelihood, or various distance methods.

I don't know what people you're talking about, but nobody today seriously pushes the recapitulation theory.

What are you babbling about? In the link to address one of your examples (all of them are shit and similar tbh, so one is enough), there is no mention of dark anything. The second one you didn't mention explicitly, but I put it there anyway. Maybe you should do more googling yourself instead of listening to Hovind and his ilk.

wrong

You obviously skipped this post

and the part about forward looking memory and push down storage automata. Doubt you'll read his book either.

Then why is the haeckel chart still being pushed in schools and media

Funny you keep dismissing him as a silly christcuck rube yet you haven't challenged a single one of his points. Guess it's below your intellectual superiority level to listen to a fellow true believer like him.

...

Nobody will bother answering this, because they can't. They will just change the subject.

Because they were designed that way. How? Why? When? Sorry heretic but out religion means you never get to find out.

Nice bait samefag.

Fire digests wood, breathes oxygen and reproduces to make a forest fire.
Science=1, Shitposter=0

Also, advertisement does not count as magic

We know from fossils that the first prokaryotic cells were around 3.5 billion years ago. Oxygen levels in rocks suddenly started rising 2.3 billion years ago, although photosynthetic life was probably common around 2.6 billion years ago. livescience.com/39938-earth-had-oxygen-earlier.html

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kimberella#Description
558 million years old

"Surprisingly, priapulids form the gut like humans, fish, frogs, starfish and sea urchins -and all of them even use the same genes. It does not mean that these penis worms are now closely related to humans. Instead the fact that different animals share a common way of forming the gut suggests that the embryological origins of the human intestine and how it develops are much older than previously thought – most likely over 500 million years, when the first bilaterally symmetric animals appeared on Earth" remarks Hejnol."
sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/10/121026084350.htm
Our sharing a common method of developing a digestive tract with an organism this old strongly suggests a common ancestor.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sponge
We have well preserved sponge fossils from 580 million years ago, though they may be significantly older than that.
"Most sponges work rather like chimneys: they take in water at the bottom and eject it from the osculum ("little mouth") at the top. Since ambient currents are faster at the top, the suction effect that they produce by Bernoulli's principle does some of the work for free. Sponges can control the water flow by various combinations of wholly or partially closing the osculum and ostia (the intake pores) and varying the beat of the flagella, and may shut it down if there is a lot of sand or silt in the water.[15]"
Here's an organism that doesn't have a genuine reproductive system, at least not as you would commonly think of one, but does have a digestive system. Also, most sponges use sexual reproduction.
The first jawless fish appeared in the late Cambrian period.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambrian
Immediate predecessors of fish were probably
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myllokunmingia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haikouichthys
An obvious question at this point would be where exactly do you think your magical flying spaghetti monster came in and "directed" evolution. Do you think he used his infinite power to force roundworms to develop a 3-segmented digestive tract? Do you think that after 2 billion years he decided "that's enough time for single-celled prokaryotes and eukaryotes, now we need some stuff with a digestive system!11!!!11" Oh, right, creationism isn't an actual attempt to provide answers, it's just "insert miracle to explain some topic of inquiry which isn't completely settled." Do you have any answers on how or why your flying spaghetti monster controlled evolution? Is it somehow implausible that sponges could arise from single-celled organisms after billions of years, yet plausible that after billions of years the aforementioned flying spaghetti monster decided it was really important to magically poof some sponges into existence?

scientificamerican.com/article/how-first-plant-evolved/

Congratulations on showing you don't know jack shit about biology. I'm just going to say the word "niche" and hope that you've got an IQ above 60 and you can put 2+2 together and figure out. Here's an additional hint if you can't rub your few brain cells together fast enough to figure it out: you don't need to maximize energy efficiency to fill a new niche.

Wew lad.

Not an argument. Go worship your kike on a stick and keep pretending that "magical sky wizard did it" is an answer to something that science does a better job of explaining.

WELL YA SAW IT HERE FIRST FOLKS, LOOKS LIKE THE ATHEISTS GOT BTFO BY MOLYNEUX AND CREW

Come back AH NEXT TIME!

...

Francis Bacon was a fag.

You throw around numbers like 840 million years, 558 million years without a shred of self awareness in your own delusion. Wouldn't you include some kind of context for them unless they were simply regurgitated articles of faith? To which, as a brainwashed zombie wanting desperately to fit in with normalfag trash, you'll reply with another tautology geology tells us how old the fossils are
Based on where they find the fossils
Based on the fossils they find. Your lot are also quick to let people assume muh billions of years is based on radiocarbon dating when even *theoretically* it only works within a window of a few thousand years, not to mention leaving out radioactive dating evidence like polonium halos in granite since it goes against the narrative of your divine book. Even if I was a christcuck I'd still be orders of magnitude above you in the intellectual honesty department.

hey religitards, if you're "god" is so powerful why did he allowed the Holocaust to happen?

Not an argument.

And radiometric dating. Potassium-40 has a half-life of 1.25 billion years.

Potassium has a half life of 1.25 billion years?

That's BANANAS!!

Yep you fedoras sure get creative to fill your time god of the gaps.

Except I didn't, nigger. If you use radiometric dating for the rock where the fossil is found, throw in inductive reasoning, oh wow, you've reached a conclusion. It's not hard, nigger, also, when are you going to explain this:
Oh, right, you can't, your flying spaghetti monster did a miracle, you won't explain when, why, or how, and you have no intention of doing so.

I can explain it all, Millions of years ago you were a monkey and god was there, and he was a monkey, and you were both monkeys but then he changed his mind - God is like that, he likes to change his mind - then we were people, and he founded America. So in America we fought the Nephilim who would later be africans but that's a whole other thing, and then there was this woman who stole an apple. Also? Masons

Wrong, Kek did it.

Give me one example of radiometric dating being accurate and I'll give you ten examples of when it was proven unreliable.
Just go troll /christian/ and get it out of your system, I'll even grant you their religious beliefs are slightly sillier than yours.

Okay, if I do, does that mean you'll address the details I asked you to provide in ? Or is providing details to your non-answer impossible?

sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0012821X98002283
"A multielement geochronologic study of the Great Dyke, Zimbabwe: significance of the robust and reset ages"
"The Sm–Nd method has yielded a combined mineral/whole-rock isochron of 2586±16 Ma"
sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301926801002157
"Precise U–Pb mineral ages, Rb–Sr and Sm–Nd systematics for the Great Dyke, Zimbabwe—constraints on late Archean events in the Zimbabwe craton and Limpopo belt"
"U–Pb dating of zircon and rutile from bronzitites of the P1 pyroxenite layer of the Great Dyke precisely constrains the crystallization age of this part of the intrusion to 2575.4±0.7 Ma"

wew

Of what? That post was pure assumptive goalpost shifting
Inductive reasoning indeed, it's all inductive with you. Deductive reasoning would lead you to a place with more questions than answers so fuck that, just begin with a theory that makes you feel good then start heaping inductive logic on it
and on and on until you're living in a fantasy world of make believe, a spiritual and cognitive sewer of empty relativism which you still have the temerity to call science. Just another r/atheist sheep bleating the gospel of conformity, hope you're at least gaining something from it irl. If it's the regret of overpaying for an "education" sorry to say you're never getting that 100,000 bux back.

You're such a stupid nigger, holy shit, you'd fit right in with actual Zimbabweans.
From the first link:
"a Department of Geological Sciences, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1063, USA
b Department of Geology and Applied Geology, University of Natal, Durban 4041, South Africa
c Department of Terrestrial Magnetism, Carnegie Institution of Washington, 5241 Broad Branch Rd., "
Again, I know you're a dumb nigger, so you probably think all those institutions are located in Zimbabwe.

I didn't shift any goalposts you nigger I was asking you to provide details you have no capacity to provide because your whole argument is "goddiidit"

Is not how you draw conclusions from empirical evidence.

Radiometric dating, "The oldest rocks on Earth, found in western Greenland, have been dated by four independent radiometric dating methods at 3.7-3.8 billion years"
geomaps.wr.usgs.gov/parks/gtime/ageofearth.html

scientificamerican.com/article/how-do-scientists-determi/

science.howstuffworks.com/question224.htm

Asking to prove a negative with strawmen is goalpost shifting, dipshit.

Except like any typical fedora wearing retard you conflate "empirical evidence" with "theory that backs up my theory." Just like a christcuck.

Look I can google and paste too
cs.unc.edu/~plaisted/ce/dating2.html

They start with the Darwinian assumption of billions of years, try to plug it into spectronomy and, of course, fail. You should really try reading the stuff you link first.

If you understood it you'd know that for millennia sailors using sextants and plane trigonometry have been able to measure the sun as being roughly 30 miles across and no more than a few thousand miles away. But that kind of data - along with spherical geometry disproving curvature of the earth - that is testable, repeatable and wholly scientific doesn't suit your superstitious pretensions. Stay faithful to your long ago debunked, cousin fucking prophet Darwin though, at least you're not mormon though amirite?
:^)

No, nigger, I was asking you to provide details about when you thought your specific version of the magical sky wizard intervened and why, I didn't limit it to Christianity, pracice your reading comprehension you nigger

No, you literally can't use deductive reasoning to draw conclusions from empirical evidence, that's not how deductive reasoning works you dumb nigger, and that was my point.

The specific computer model they were using isn't completely accurate, I guess the Earth was invented last Thursday!

KEK, HE'S A FLAT EARTHER TOO
TOP FUCKING KEK
amazon.com/dia-Professional-Weather-Balloon-600g/dp/B004RK2RAU/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1486729119&sr=8-2&keywords=high altitude balloon
One of these balloons, get any high altitude balloon, can reach ~90,000 feet.
Hook as many Go Pros or other cameras to it as you want. Launch one, and wow, you'll be able to see the curvature, you can also try taking one to southern New Zealand and getting a glimpse of the "edge of the Earth" which you fucking retards tend to believe is Antarctica. I'm sure you think that some evil Satanists will intercept the pictures and photoshop them before they reach you, though.

Also, the moon would cast a cylindrical shadow during eclipses if it was a disk that wasn't perfectly oriented, do you think it's flat, too?

You can also observe satellites in the sky. Occam's razor says they're actually in space.

Sun as spotlight on a flat disk doesn't work either. See pic related. You would be able to see the light.

Also, the idea that everyone that has been in space is in on a grand conspiracy is a theory fit for a nigger as stupid as you are.

Mesas are the stumps of giant crystal trees and Xenu harvests souls from volcanoes.

Better question is why you repeatedly assert that the only alternative to darwin is believing in a flying space dragon or whatever. Doesn't exactly take a psychologist to figure out.

No, dipshit, deductive reasoning (ie eliminating all other possibilities) is how you arrive at empirical scientific (small s) evidence, which is why you don't have any. Dunce.

Notice how you spherecucks have started skipping your original steps. Boats over the horizon? Circumnavigation? NASA? All btfo in your face so many times you've given up on them, now you start with an assertion
that is not only 10,000' below where nasa priests claim the curvature is visible but one of the original flat earth proofs: balloons at that height all reveal a flat line that rises to eye level as altitude is gained (impossible on a ball) along with hot spots confirming the sun isn't any 93 million miles away. Since you love the herd mentality so much anyway go with the rest of the spherecucks and start with eclipses from now on.

Flying space dragon? I'm using that is a derogatory pseudonym for an intelligent designer, not a personal God.

No, you fucking nigger, deductive reasoning is knowledge that is true by definition, it has nothing to do with collecting and drawing inferences from data about reality.

Actually your explanation for that is bullshit, according to your theory you should be able to see a boat hundreds if not thousands of miles away, as long as you have a good enough telescope.
Yeah, you can fly a plane in a straight line for thousands of miles and not fall off, amazing.
Yeah, your conspiratardery pretending that every single organization that has sent a satellite into space being a part of one grand conspiracy is fucking stupid. Any conspiracy which requires thousands of people to be completely silent for decades is bullshit.

You mean obvious falsehoods
youtu.be/95NDkABAsSk?t=4m38s
youtu.be/Hz1ipDYpAgQ?t=4m55s
youtu.be/ZCAnLxRvNNc?t=3m37s
youtu.be/bDoh8zQDT38?t=1m38s

Ignore embed related, it's for lurkers

Which is fine UNLESS they're based on false assumptions (jesus actually existed/earth is a ball) which can only lead to more inferences (masturbation is a sin/earth must go around the sun) until finally you're just another dumbfuck people are going to be laughing about in a thousand years (transubstantiation is a thing/muh nasa moonlanding).

No, as usual you are wrong. According to laws of perspective this is true however the atmosphere - aka moisture in the air - will eventually obfuscate. This is demonstrable in being able to observe distant objects clearer in dry weather and being unable to see a few feet in front of you during fog conditions. Link related (again for lurkers, pls ignore)
youtu.be/R5CxK_yYIr8

A straight line according to a compass pointing towards magnetic north, dummy. Also you hear a lot about east/west circumnavigation but never about anyone ever attempting it north/south. Should be possible on a ball, really makes you think.

What's stupid is that pretenders like JAXA fake it ever worse than NASA and can't even put out a short "spacewalk" vid without bubbles being visible. Also as per usual you, the spherecuck, brought up ""conspiracy"" not me.
youtu.be/5e-RnKAN9qY

You're now confirmed retard, jew or literally bill nye. That's obviously a fish-eye lense unless you genuinely believe earth flips repeatedly from concave to convex. Protip: lying to yourself is empirical evidence of being religious.

Laws of perspective + your assumption of flat Earth.

Okay, so go to a dry desert with a great telescope and get me an image of a large but not exceptionally tall object 40-50 miles away (e.g. a bus), with the bus at the same altitude as the telescope (within 10-20 or so feet). Should be possible if the Earth is flat.

So why don't you niggers fly towards Antarctica, fly a plane from New Zealand, is the US government shooting down any nigger trying to fly south? Is there a long list of noble niggers who tried to redpill us about the mesas being the roots of crystal trees and the Earth being flat that got shot down trying to go to Antarctica?

The idea that tens, if not hundreds of thousands of people in organizations with divergent interests that often don't share the same language, religion, nationality, etc. are all in on a grand conspiracy to hide muh flat urf is, in fact, a retarded conspiracy theory.

Doesn't happen in 2nd or 4th video but yeah if they used a fish eye lens that's going to distort the image.

Laws of perspective + your assumption of flat Earth.

Okay, so go to a dry desert with a great telescope and get me an image of a large but not exceptionally tall object 40-50 miles away (e.g. a bus), with the bus at the same altitude as the telescope (within 10-20 or so feet). Should be possible if the Earth is flat.

So why don't you niggers fly towards Antarctica, fly a plane from New Zealand, is the US government shooting down any nigger trying to fly south? Is there a long list of noble niggers who tried to redpill us about the mesas being the roots of crystal trees and the Earth being flat that got shot down trying to go to Antarctica?

The idea that tens, if not hundreds of thousands of people in organizations with divergent interests that often don't share the same language, religion, nationality, etc. are all in on a grand conspiracy to hide muh flat urf is, in fact, a retarded conspiracy theory.

Doesn't happen in 2nd or 4th video but yeah if they used a fish eye lens that's going to distort the image.

then why are black snouted, why are blacks so tall, why are the ir limbs so long and why the dicks be huge?!

I dont know if earth is round or flat or if space is real or not.

But why, WHY the fuck do they use those stupid ass lens? they look like shit and just limit's your vision.

Christians say Imagination is made by Demons from hell, is that true? I think it is.

Kek implants (almost) every child with an imagination in a womb so they can better perpetuate memes.

Wew you're really going all out. Just going to let that one sit there.

Why not an ocean since water always finds its level? Some islands can be seen from over 100 miles away in the right weather conditions. And not mirages since they would appear upside down.

The UN (whose official emblem is a FE/AE map) has been enforcing a military blockade of antarctica for almost 60 years now. Yes. See Antarctica Treaty

You believe earth is a spinning ball so are you in on the conspiracy? Just like with the flying tomato dragon shit you seem very focused on attributing arguments to me I'm not making.

Christians in my experience tend to be more full of shit than even atheists. If one is talking to you put your hand over your wallet.

Wow, congratulations on lacking reading comprehension.
Your statement doesn't make sense unless you assume flat Earth.

[citation needed]

They're not going to shoot down a civilian plane if you try. Why don't you flat earth retards crowdfund a plane and try it. Fly high and put a camera on the nose, you should be able to get close to the "edge". Also, if your conception of the Earth is correct, Antarctica should have a fucking colossal coast line, you should be able to get pretty far before they stop you.
So you're a flat Earther but you don't think all the satellite images of Earth are faked?
OF FUCKING COURSE you have to believe a retarded conspiracy about all images from space being faked in order to be a flat Earther. It's like a Muslim saying "omg you're attributing a belief that Muhammad was God's prophet to me even though I didn't say that", being Muslim implies that belief in the same way that omg all photos of Earth are faked is necessarily implied by being a retard that thinks the Earth is flat.

BTFO as usual

No, you claim without proof

No, it doesn't make sense to you because you assume earth is a ball. If I assume the earth is a ball roughly 25,000 miles in circumference then observing an island from 100 miles - or for that matter the Statue of Liberty from 60 miles or chicago from 50 miles when they should be thousands of feet below the horizon - demonstrates that assumption to be wrong.

See link in my last post, also pics related.
youtu.be/vW8B9AmGlFg
flatearth.tk/strong-evidence-of-the-flat-earth-oahu-visible-from-kauai-90-miles-away/

Why wouldn't they? What would be the point of an international military effort to keep people out otherwise?

Some are fake, some are just from balloons and or drones.
breitbart.com/california/2015/09/14/google-balloon-crashes-in-socal-neighborhood/amp/
google.com/amp/www.recode.net/platform/amp/2016/12/18/13998900/facebooks-drone-crash-aquila-arizona-structural-failure

Link related
youtu.be/4p_0bnICtDc
can also provide links of nasa engineers claiming the van allen radiation belt can't be crossed, how "images" aren't the same as "pictures" etc. Even neil armstrong made sure to go on record before he died stating that he was merely inspiring people who should look beyond truth's protective layers. It's no more a conspiracy than WWE or the catholic church.

underrated post tbh

first comment:
"The highest elevation on Oahu is 4000 feet. That would place the horizon about 80 miles away from that peek. If you were about 200 feet above sea level in Kauai, the horizon would be over 18 miles away.

80+18=98 miles

Google earth shows that the distance from the coast of Kauai to the peaks in the Oahu is 90 miles.

Of course you would see Oahu from Kauai. The amount that you will see will depend on atmospheric conditions. However, in all the images you provided, Oahu is partially obscured.

There is a clear line of sight from Kauai to The Island of Hawaii, why can't you see that? Because it's obscured by the curvature of the Earth.

Once again, another flat Earth video that doesn't understand the geometry of a sphere."

>youtu.be/4p_0bnICtDc
Admitting to using composites of individual images from space, which should be obvious they can't take a picture of every inch at the same time, is different from saying "lol we don't actually have satellites taking pictures."

...

not an argument

...

...

...

What do you mean by horizon? Do you mean vanishing point or do you mean the line after which earth curves downward? If the latter you might want to check out the bedford level experiment or any of dozens of such tests done in the last few years with p900s. Also nice job ignoring the chicago "mirage".

Holy shit critical thinking, hope that didn't hurt you. See there you just unwittingly made an argument for why it's not a conspiracy. That guy just shoops earth images for nasa, he might assume what he gets is from satellites or he might not even care. Maybe the guys who took pictures from greenland and claimed it was mars genuinely believed there was a rover on a planet millions of miles away so didn't feel like they were "faking" it as much as paying homage to a great achievement. The one thing you can never know objectively or empirically is what goes on in the minds of other people, which is why I tend to avoid the subject.

I also have videos.
stupidconspiracies.org/misc/Toronto_across_lake_Ontario_from_Olcott.gif
youtube.com/watch?v=MoK2BKj7QYk
No citation was given.

Except the guy is working from actual satellite photos of the Earth. He's not trying to find proof of the curvature of the Earth, he's trying to get an accurate map of the color of the Earth's surface.

Gif showing perspective at work. If it were due to a curve, then the building would be leaning.
Amazing argument.

He's working with high altitude shots that are claimed as satellite photos, and stitching them together in order to make an image of the ball earth.

Watch the video. Are you going to blithely disregard all evidence that the Earth has curvature with "perspective"?

I disregard erroneous claims that twist evidence to suit your beliefs. Yes perspective causes this effect, it is demonstrable, unlike your curvature.

Please kill yourself you stupid nigger.

Insults don't prove shit, faggot.

visitcleveleys.co.uk/about/views-across-water/seeing-isle-of-man.php

Convenient the curvature only makes distant objects dip below the horizon instead of changing in angle whatsoever like it should.

ITT

Who are you going to trust? Your teacher or a beaver?

...

BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL
BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL
BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL

Fake and I'm surprised you waited that long to post it. Reminds me of that 3 hour vid of the boat going below the horizon where they hope people don't notice the water level going up as the camera drops. Unfortunately for you these are proofs anybody can test for themselves.

Of course he is. They're called satellite pictures so, duh. Satelites that were conceived by arthur c clarke, a sci-fi writer. Satellites that stay fixed in geosynchronous orbit except when they don't. Satellites that give reception anywhere in the world except when you're too far from a terrestrial tower. Satellites that are equipped with rockets but often don't have any fuel tanks. Satellites that have been launched to an altitude sweet spot where gravity doesn't effect them any more - except it does too - and where the thermosphere would supposedly melt them except it doesn't. Couldn't be a drone like the ones facebook is launching to bring internet to the third world (why not just use satellites lmao?) and couldn't be from the kind of high altitude balloons google uses for their maps. Naw, just like the blue marbles are real pics of the earth except they're not.

Just trying to seek the Truth here, but what do they gain for making the earth a sphere?

NASA - a DOD alphabet agency - gets 20 billion a year and just like any government/church entity in history gets to serve as the middleman between lowly plebs and the heavens above. Ask yourself who's easier to control: intelligent thinkers aware they occupy the center of the universe or religious acolytes convinced they're monkeys on a tiny speck of insignificant rock within a massive empty and eternal void.

All of the ones in the second picture do in fact have minute differences. The green ones in particular aren't anything alike, nor are the purple ones, and the red one does have certain small differences in it, though it does look similar it is in no way copy/pasted. The yellow one has huge differences in the middle bands of clouds too, only the bottom basic shape is similar and even then it's not *that* similar.

In the fourth picture the small yellow circles aren't alike except for a basic shape either, if you enlarge it further it's significantly different, particularly in the small spec of cloud inside of the larger cloud. The two red squares do look rather similar but off to the right hand portion of the square there is clearly a very large difference between them and the upper right portion isn't similar either.

The green ones really don't look similar at all and are all very clearly different. The blue ones don't have even a vaguely similar bottom right corner and are basically just a similar upper shape but it's also not identical at all and is mostly just similar from the small pattern of dots in it.

The only one that actually looks copy/pasted is the purple.

t. Spot The Differences Expert/Autist

The first one…?
Cause of hubris?

Notice how they always present a perfect sphere too, never an oblate spheroid or pear shaped earth. Also never, ever any stars since they would be near impossible to fake.

Jesus, you should all just shut up. If you haven't read a single astrophysics paper in your life, abstain yourself. If you haven't read a single paper on geology, radiological dating of fossils, etc., don't talk. Not because of some fuhrer shit, but because you should realise you're just being stupid.
If you're going to go full creationist on that bitch, fine, but first read up on what the other people say.
And no, a blog is not a paper, they're mostly pretty pdfs made in LaTeX you can find in ArXiv and specialized journals.
And for the scientifist(s), this goes too. Quoting 558 million as the amount of years just because, even if correct, if you take it from a blog doesn't count. Yes, it's easier. No, it doesn't help your point. At the very least, read the sources on the blogpost. Elsewise you deserve to get piked instead of just ridiculed.
Also, you guys will take a nice surprise, papers are surprisingly okay to read if you're into the thing.
Also, don't pretend to LARP as a geologist, etc. You are not one. I'm not one either but I don't pretend to be.

...

Go back to Holla Forums you filthy comic reader

Holla Forums logic everyone.

trumpism is all "feels before facts", what did you expect?

See post related here, dumbass

Pathetic appeal to ignorance is pathetic
blah blah blah so nothing can ever be known since nobody is qualified enough to know anything. Exact same relativistic tactic used by kikes
OY VEY SO YOU'RE A CREMATION EXPERT NOW BUBBELAH??
There's something called "common sense" you equivocating fuck. Common as in able to be agreed upon using basic logic and reasoning that overlaps social classes and academic disciplines. But I suppose critical thought is beneath contempt in a superior mind such as yours amirite. Go home faggot.
>>>/reddit/

Bill Nye isn't even a scientist, he studied engineering and only has a bachelor's degree in it.

By the way, that flat Earther ITT is just a troll, he posts on Holla Forums a lot and a he clearly just shitposts, yet people take him seriously for some fucking reason.

Btw Holla Forums is significantly higher in flat earther percentage than it was a year ago. Was an antarctica thread a few weeks ago I didn't even post in since anons were doing fine redpilling spherecucks themselves.

btw, propaganda are the scinece blogs and really smart science meme guys. Actual science is propagandaless, you can't fake the truth. At least not for long.
Plus, flat earth is shit. True earth has a toroid shape with the sun at it's center.

...

...

Actually the "prequels are good" meme is a great case, it is a study of the reality of memes themselves. "Prequels are dogshit" is an ancient tier meme in meme time, with the Phantom Menace getting a ton of negative reaction in the earlier days of the Internet. Now that many things have changed and time has gone on and the Internet has gone on (muh time is a flat circle) the meme has replaced with the prequels are good to counter the new Force Awakens popular culture. Memes in this way reflect and simultaneously create values, and through values create reality. Therefore Meme Magic

...

Aliens probably exist, but it's unlikely they're advanced.
They'd likely just be a simple planet of primitive creatures, like Earth before we existed.

Don't feed the troll.

It's unlikely YOU'RE advanced!

This is perfectly explainable considering Holla Forums's affinity for conspiracy theories and being contrarian to the point of diehard belief.

oh shit

Yeah not everyone's brain turns off with buzzwords but nice try anyway chaim.

Friendly reminder that Bill Nye isn't even a scientist and his body of work consists of a low budget TV show teaching grade school science concepts with cheesy editing.. Oh, and that one time he debated a retard about creationism.

That user is a fag, the earth is clearly hollow.

I think global warming is real, but my biggest hate against Bill Nye is that I heard he was anti nuclear. Which is beyond fucking retarded considering he only has a mechanical engineering bachelor's degree but yet he's promoting all this other bullshit that he has no say in? How does a mechanical engineering a expert in global warming if anything. Or GMOs? Etc and if he really is anti nuclear well fuck him because he is fighting his own beliefs es about global warming by being anti nuclear.

Ugh, did it have to be a fucking talk show? I would have watched it, Bill.

Literally telling people they don't know shit and shouldn't talk about a subject if they haven't read up on the "official" science propaganda. That isn't science. Science isn't owned by establishments. When people point out impossibilities within a theory or even law, the fact that they are going against the establishment is not a mark against them. For that matter reading the official science papers and peer reviewed journals is done by many flat earthers, who go on to pick the very claims printed in that propaganda apart. You just disregard that, because again it is going against the established order. You worship modern scientific consensus, and no doubt believe every bullshit claim squeezed out of the distended anus that is academia.

tl;dr you are an ignorant faggot.

BILL! BILL! BILL!

Holla Forums can't into humor and falls flat like always. Back to virtue signaling with you, and don't forget to kneel to the god of sodomy.

Because you've been taught the differences between "races". Put it like this, the average american will look at a bunch of asian people and say their race is "asian", while a chinese or japanese person would start calling out the different "races" based on facial features they've been taught to recognize that the average american hasn't. If you went to china and showed them a picture of a korean and said they were the same "race" you'd probably get decked in the face. It seems silly to us but in asia it's a huge fucking deal.

Sex is binary, XY or XX. "Race" is a mix of thousands of variations of genes.

Even among race realists (polyps, stormfags, etc.) there is debate on what a "race" is. Hell stormfront even has a stickied thread telling outsiders to not ask what "white" is or they'll be banned because not even the white supremacists fucking know. Some consider a broad white race good enough, some don't consider the slavs part of it or being a "lower" white subrace or whatever. That's the point of calling it a social construct, no matter how deep or broad you go there is always disagreement. American blacks are closer to whites (due to interbreeding over hundreds of years) than those who've lived in africa since man evolved, yet some want to send them "back" to africa. Case in point, Obama is half white half black, yet he's the first "black" president, not the first mulatto president. "Race" is much more than pure genetics, it's a combination of genetics, heritage, nationality, culture, and attitude.

Sex is binary but it's about ovaries versus testicles, not chromosome composition. You can have one or the other without being XY or XX.

I agree 100%, there is literally no biological, historical, coherent or any other differences between the races. We're all basically one thing.

Underrated post

Louis plz stahp

the whole milk controversy (MILK IS WAYCIST) alone proves that race is NOT a social costruct

And yeah if race is a social construct, why different skull shapes, why genetic differences, hell, if race is "only skin deep" its a big difference because skin is the largest human organ

LOL BLACKS ARE ONLY COMMITING MSOT OF TEH CRIMES BECUZ OF GLOBAL WARMING!

30 years later and it's still hilarious, watching cuckservatives try to grasp science, logic, and basic historical facts.

not a meme, merely a fact

Multiculturalism propaganda

wakeup-world.com/2013/12/16/dna-evidence-debunks-the-out-of-africa-theory-of-human-evolution/

atlanteangardens.blogspot.com/2014/05/out-of-africa-theory-officially-debunked.html

You're wasting your time user. They don't understand or care about anything that doesn't come from the electric jew.

I don't know which Holla Forumsarity you are but I will find you and I will suck your dick till you die

Why would it matter? Who even cares? You seems like you spend a lot of time angry at MSM idpol.

SHILL NYE BTFO

Unless you're a creationist or believe that white people are aliens it literally doesn't fucking matter, we're all Homos, we evolved from the same recent species.

I'd like to see you try… :'^)

science rules

BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL! BILL!

t minus seven seconds

SHILL NYE THE CUCKOLD GUY

but lel go Go worship your kike on a stick! I'm retarded duoh..
user I…

You have no evidence. Piltdown man and dozens of others - including "Lucy" which was taken from separate bones found miles apart, of a chimp and a human - have all been exposed as frauds. Pushing fake evidence to support a book written a long time ago, hmm what does that remind you of.

...

The Dinosaurs died off because they were gay if you must know. also Lucy is not evidence, it is a movie

isn't this borderline dishonest without telling people the context?
smithsonian claims there is a 1.2% percent difference between humans and chimps: humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/genetics
just a random source that is generally considered credible
so we're 98.8% the same as chimpanzees.
0.1%/1.2% = 0.001/0.012 = 1/12
that means humans are 1/12th the difference between humans and chimpanzees from eachother on average

Yes it fucking does shlomo, it's not just that people are different, they are completely different races. Meaning that they have irreconciliable differences that make it absolutely impossible for them to be held to the same standards.

A pitbull will never be as trustworthy, smart and loyal as a golden retriever, just as reciprocally a golden retriever will never be instinctually akin to be as violent and savage as a pitbull. Same happens with the human races, or are you gonna suggest that aboriginal aussies, with IQ's far lower than Harambe's are going to build a spaceshuttle anytime soon. Typical tricks merchant.

...

As I said, all Dinosaurs are gay and there is theory that the Tyrannosaurus Rex is a trannysaurus rex

True time is actually of a spherical topology, shame that we live constrained by our physicality (yes, it'd behave as 2-manifold, but due to atoms being binded in a fixed "orbit" we can't observe it as more than a 1-dimensional thing. That's also the reason why we seem to always move forwards, only)

It's a toroid, stupid.

clearly its a hollow torus

if it weren't for the flat earthers and the space shuttle we'd have probably made some of these by now

mechanical engineering applies physics and materials science