info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Devolution
3 views
Skip to first unread message
Kendall K. Down
Nov 23, 2021, 12:20:06 AM11/23/21
to
The other night we watched a YouTube video advertised as "the hidden
village where people walk on all fours". It turned out to be four young
Turkish people - not a whole village - and they were the product of an
incestuous marriage (as advocated by Islam).
There was some evolutionist professor excitedly telling us how these
four provided insight into how we changed from monkeys walking on all
fours to humans with an upright stance, and how the unfortunate four
were a wonderful example of "devolution" as opposed to "evolution".
Towards the end of the film, however, the presence of Western
film-makers attracted the attention of the authorities, who, being
Muslims and therefore resistant to evolutionary clap-trap, simply issued
the four with walking frames.
Astonishingly, all four took to them like ducks to water. One of the
girls actually remarked that now she could walk upright, perhaps she
could find a husband! Even the one male, who was quite clearly mentally
handicapped, soon learned to walk upright and without the walking frame.
So much for evolution in reverse.
Did you know that if you were born blind, you were a shining
demonstration of reversion to your shellfish ancestors? (Not sure what
needing to wear glasses is a demonstration of, but no doubt some
evolutionist will turn up soon to tell us. Did T-Rex wear specs?)
The film closes with a somewhat disconsolate professor insisting that
even so, the situation provides "insights" into evolution.
Rather like drowning men clutching at straws, evolutionists are so
desperate to find support for their irrational theory that they will
grab at anything. A day or so later it was reported that the much
trumpeted "missing link" between lizards and snakes, has now turned out
to be an aquatic lizard after all. neither missing nor a link.
Bah.
God bless,
Kendall K. Down
village where people walk on all fours". It turned out to be four young
Turkish people - not a whole village - and they were the product of an
incestuous marriage (as advocated by Islam).
There was some evolutionist professor excitedly telling us how these
four provided insight into how we changed from monkeys walking on all
fours to humans with an upright stance, and how the unfortunate four
were a wonderful example of "devolution" as opposed to "evolution".
Towards the end of the film, however, the presence of Western
film-makers attracted the attention of the authorities, who, being
Muslims and therefore resistant to evolutionary clap-trap, simply issued
the four with walking frames.
Astonishingly, all four took to them like ducks to water. One of the
girls actually remarked that now she could walk upright, perhaps she
could find a husband! Even the one male, who was quite clearly mentally
handicapped, soon learned to walk upright and without the walking frame.
So much for evolution in reverse.
Did you know that if you were born blind, you were a shining
demonstration of reversion to your shellfish ancestors? (Not sure what
needing to wear glasses is a demonstration of, but no doubt some
evolutionist will turn up soon to tell us. Did T-Rex wear specs?)
The film closes with a somewhat disconsolate professor insisting that
even so, the situation provides "insights" into evolution.
Rather like drowning men clutching at straws, evolutionists are so
desperate to find support for their irrational theory that they will
grab at anything. A day or so later it was reported that the much
trumpeted "missing link" between lizards and snakes, has now turned out
to be an aquatic lizard after all. neither missing nor a link.
Bah.
God bless,
Kendall K. Down
Jason
Nov 23, 2021, 3:50:23 PM11/23/21
to
On Tue, 23 Nov 2021 05:19:49 +0000, Kendall K. Down wrote:
> The other night we watched a YouTube video advertised as "the hidden
> village where people walk on all fours". It turned out to be four young
> Turkish people - not a whole village - and they were the product of an
> incestuous marriage (as advocated by Islam).
I didn't look this up in detail, other than here, so not sure what you
> The other night we watched a YouTube video advertised as "the hidden
> village where people walk on all fours". It turned out to be four young
> Turkish people - not a whole village - and they were the product of an
> incestuous marriage (as advocated by Islam).
are referring to when you say "advocated by Islam". The Islamic list
doesn't seem too different from the Christian one:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incest#Islamic
> There was some evolutionist professor excitedly telling us how these
> four provided insight into how we changed from monkeys walking on all
> fours to humans with an upright stance, and how the unfortunate four
> were a wonderful example of "devolution" as opposed to "evolution".
setting, as the timescales involved would be much too short. I
personally don't see how genetic changes (defects) can be called in a few
generations 'devolution' any more than they could be called 'evolution'.
[snipped stuff about walking frames as I wasn't sure of the point. I
think I was agreeing with you in my previous paragraph?]
Kendall K. Down
Nov 23, 2021, 4:40:06 PM11/23/21
to
On 23/11/2021 16:47, Jason wrote:
> I didn't look this up in detail, other than here, so not sure what you
> are referring to when you say "advocated by Islam". The Islamic list
> doesn't seem too different from the Christian one:
The marriage of first cousins is advocated or even enforced in places
> I didn't look this up in detail, other than here, so not sure what you
> are referring to when you say "advocated by Islam". The Islamic list
> doesn't seem too different from the Christian one:
like Pakistan and Afghanistan (and, apparently, in Turkey).
> I would agree with you that it's bonkers to talk of "devolution" in this
> setting, as the timescales involved would be much too short. I
> personally don't see how genetic changes (defects) can be called in a few
> generations 'devolution' any more than they could be called 'evolution'.
conclusion that evolution must be true, because here you have an example
of "devolution".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GlNQzjii1c
Jason
Nov 24, 2021, 3:41:19 PM11/24/21
to
On Tue, 23 Nov 2021 21:30:21 +0000, Kendall K. Down wrote:
> On 23/11/2021 16:47, Jason wrote:
>
>> I didn't look this up in detail, other than here, so not sure what you
>> are referring to when you say "advocated by Islam". The Islamic list
>> doesn't seem too different from the Christian one:
>
> The marriage of first cousins is advocated or even enforced in places
> like Pakistan and Afghanistan (and, apparently, in Turkey).
Is it? I'm ignorant of that. As far as I know, marriage of first
> On 23/11/2021 16:47, Jason wrote:
>
>> I didn't look this up in detail, other than here, so not sure what you
>> are referring to when you say "advocated by Islam". The Islamic list
>> doesn't seem too different from the Christian one:
>
> The marriage of first cousins is advocated or even enforced in places
> like Pakistan and Afghanistan (and, apparently, in Turkey).
cousins is not a 'banned relationship' in the Bible nor in the Book of
Common Prayer. IIRC some of the well-known Biblical characters (Jacob?)
married cousins.
>> I would agree with you that it's bonkers to talk of "devolution" in
>> this setting, as the timescales involved would be much too short. I
>> personally don't see how genetic changes (defects) can be called in a
>> few generations 'devolution' any more than they could be called
>> 'evolution'.
>
> Quite so - but the gullible will have listened to him and come to the
> conclusion that evolution must be true, because here you have an example
> of "devolution".
speaker, on whatever subject you care to name.....
Kendall K. Down
Nov 24, 2021, 3:50:07 PM11/24/21
to
On 24/11/2021 17:16, Jason wrote:
>> The marriage of first cousins is advocated or even enforced in places
>> like Pakistan and Afghanistan (and, apparently, in Turkey).
> Is it? I'm ignorant of that. As far as I know, marriage of first
> cousins is not a 'banned relationship' in the Bible nor in the Book of
> Common Prayer. IIRC some of the well-known Biblical characters (Jacob?)
> married cousins.
It is - and is a recognised cause of handicapped children being born to
>> The marriage of first cousins is advocated or even enforced in places
>> like Pakistan and Afghanistan (and, apparently, in Turkey).
> Is it? I'm ignorant of that. As far as I know, marriage of first
> cousins is not a 'banned relationship' in the Bible nor in the Book of
> Common Prayer. IIRC some of the well-known Biblical characters (Jacob?)
> married cousins.
Pakistani parents here in Britain.
You are right that cousin marriage was not banned in Bible times, but it
is banned by legislation in the West generally (and, I think, by the
church). As the human race has degenerated, it is no longer safe for
such close relations to marry.
>> Quite so - but the gullible will have listened to him and come to the
>> conclusion that evolution must be true, because here you have an example
>> of "devolution".
> I take your point. There will always be someone ready to listen to any
> speaker, on whatever subject you care to name.....
series called "Planet", voiced by David Attenborough. The episode we
watched this evening was "Jungle" and the mellifluous David explained
that New Guinea is such a hotbed of diversity because of its topography
- steep sided valleys (cue picture of picturesque ravine) which
prevented animals crossing over and breeding with one another.
He then gave us an example of this topographical diversity - birds of
paradise. It is, of course, a well known fact that birds cannot cross
steep-sided valleys ...
Do these people ever actually listen to themselves and the rubbish they
spout?
0 new messages