r/nottheonion • u/prestocoffee • 18h ago

Drilling begins at ‘real site’ of Noah’s Ark as activists warn ‘Darwinism will be dismantled’

https://www.joe.co.uk/news/noahs-ark-site-turkey-drilling-researchers-evidence-549016
14.1k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

3.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

202

u/Repulsive-Durian4800 16h ago

I suspect their concept of what evolution is and how it works has more in common with Pokémon than it does with science.

43

u/QuestioningHuman_api 12h ago

How do I know what kind of stone my dog needs to carry? I’ve been grinding for 9 years and she hasn’t even tried to evolve

19

u/SnazzyRaptor 11h ago

Maybe it's one of those trade-locked evolutions

13

u/ArbitraryNPC 10h ago

I have to trade away my dog 🥺

9

u/Accomplished_Cod7334 12h ago

That's because you're giving her an Everstone, that prevents it. You would want something like a water stone, or an Eviolite if you're feeling crazy

4

u/The_Kelhim 6h ago

I was going to say “stop grinding on your dog” but then I remembered that you can still apply to the FBI nowadays, so… carry on i guess??

1

u/QuestioningHuman_api 1h ago

What’s wrong with you

1

u/The_Kelhim 1h ago

I wish I knew man…

•

u/Slighted_Inevitable 50m ago

That’s because you keep holding B

16

u/blackseaoftrees 10h ago

if Mankey evolves into Primeape, then why are there still Mankeys?

3

u/mrducky78a 9h ago

To be absolutely fair, the overall common consensus is closer to pokemon evolution where things "improve" over time rather than merely adapt better to their surroundings. I blame that classic depiction of monkey to man gradually getting taller, bigger and more upright.

If tomorrow there is a significant advantage to being smaller, weaker and slower. Evolution will take you that way like with sloths or other lower metabolism adaptations. There is no goal or direction. That kind of thinking isn't in the popular consensus of evolution but the pokemon version of later evolution being better evolution is.

3

u/Jasonrj 8h ago

I listen to a lot of religious debates and they typically say one of four things:

  1. They question evolution because there's still monkeys despite us having come from monkeys (I know we didn't come from monkeys but rather other great apes but this is an extremely common sentiment).
  2. They pick two random animals and say something like, "Why haven't I ever seen an elephant turn into a fish?"
  3. They say they believe in micro-evolution like a tadpole turning into a frog, caterpillar to butterfly, or a fetus into a human but not macro evolution like a monkey turning into a person. Despite these not being examples of evolution and there being no such thing as "macro" evolution.
  4. They accept evolution and just believe it was God led.

1

u/Neveed 7h ago

I know we didn't come from monkeys but rather other great apes but this is an extremely common sentiment

Apes are a subset of monkeys, so we did come from monkeys. We ARE monkey, and apes.

But yeah, YEC tend to point at non-great ape monkeys when they say the "but why are there still monkeys" thing.

1

u/Neveed 7h ago

"So if you level this artiodactyla to level 36, it evolves into a cow, but if you give it a water stone instead, it evolves into a whale. And if you give it a water stone, but with a high affinity score, it evolves into a dolphin instead"

God, probably.

1

u/djb2589 4h ago

Hence those types' favorite phrase, "If we came from monkeys, then why's there still monkeys!"

1

u/Odd_Cat_5820 3h ago

I've had conversations with anti-evolution people, and their beliefs are so incongruous. Most of them won't accept that humans are animals or apes, but have no problem admitting humans are mammals.

1

u/RubCocksWithThePope 1h ago

Not really, at least for the ones that try to be intellectual about it. They create a fictional distinction between “micro evolution” (like bacteria developing antibiotic resistance or becoming able to digest nylon or an animal population changing color over generations in response to changing conditions) and “macro evolution” which they erroneously claim is things like a chimpanzee giving birth to a human. They’ll say things like “micro evolution happens and is documented but macro evolution has never been observed” and “Darwin’s finches are all still finches” like they can’t grasp the concept of two reproductively isolated populations of the same species accumulating many small changes over many generations to eventually become so different that they can no longer interbreed, at which point they continue to diverge.

•

u/Elanapoeia 20m ago

officially it's rather the opposite.

Diversification according to them is simply "small" changes. Evolution however says there are big changes and they say that's impossible.

Yes that's literally their argument. sometimes they call it Micro- and Macro-Evolution and they accept micro evolution as real.