ignore him

DD doesn't have an answer and you'll see him eject from the conversation because he can't

answer the question

yup

been there serveral times

he doesnt let people ask questions, instead he screams in the mic

If he can't talk over someone or answer questions... he pulls the ejection handle... because heaven forbid he fails at performing the act of being an intelligent person

wtf r they debating?

Not an answer to Jmeslier's question

Why are the odds 1:20?

Pull that ejection handle, @Darth Dawkins ... we'll know it's because you can't answer the question he's asking

of course he is

*EJECT, EJECT, EJECT*!!!!!

@somerussianguy redpill me on how bundy and uranium deal r linked

oosh

wow

*uniform distribution?* why assume that?

no answer

of course he's muted

^

yup

darth is so fucking entertaining

of course @Queef Madagascar

my daily dose of autism

still no explanation for assuming uniform distribution?

just checking

"Right?" ... no

the issue darth is talking about right now

https://science.howstuffworks.com/life/evolution/evolution9.htm

is explained here

and further pages on

@Foxy @Manny @sargen @Jvstin

@tard wrangler

okay

Imagine that you create a very large cage and put a group of mice into it. You let the mice live and breed in this cage freely, without disturbance. If you were to come back after five years and look into this cage, you would find mice. Five years of breeding would cause no change in the mice in that cage -- they would not evolve in any noticeable way. You could leave the cage alone for a hundred years and look in again and what you would find in the cage is mice. After several hundred years, you would look into the cage and find not 15 new species, but mice.

The point is that evolution in general is an extremely slow process. When two mice breed, the offspring is a mouse. When that offspring breeds, its offspring is a mouse. When that offspring breeds... And the process continues. Point mutations do not change this fact in any significant way over the short haul.

on page 10

becasue they dont need to evolve if they are properly fed, and their envrionment stayed consistent

DD has to assume the laws of logic *before* he comes to his worldview

Before the law of identity: God = God & Not God
After the law of identity: God = God

'm just going to point something out really quickly @Foxy something that may be useful to acknowledge in this discussion that people almost never remember to acknowledge.

the currently typical stance and assumption taken by evolutionary biologists on evolution (and actually historically the typical stance) is that there were likely multiple independant origin point of biogenesis. not single. multiple seperate ones is the assumed event. the "single common ancestor" criticisms are at least partial red herrings because they don't actually apply to the typical assumed origin event. the actually typical assumption within the field is one of multiple origin points that of course converged but do not all go back to a single ancestor. its not the standard among evolutionary biologists to assume there was one biogenesis and <@320281143763271710>🎃 should probably acknowledge that at least a bit before making some of his statements and make appropriate alterations.

@Manny no that's wrong. you don't have to acknowledge that. he's throwing out another red herring as far as the laws being required for evolution thing.