Just a Shot Away said:
Charlie Sheen never explicitly said he enjoys having sex.
I see, so what you are admitting now is
they never actually said that. Okay, seems we are making some progress at least.
That you consider yourself a scientist is hilarious - given a lack of willingness to listen to any other side of an argument. That's far more in line with an indoctrinated christian, my friend.
Your problem is you have made a few leaps of faith in your thinking, which goes like:
1) You believe in the theory of evolution - that's good, most of us here do.
2) You decide that looks are not important, therefore evolution would have made it not important.
3) You therefore declare that Charles Darwin agrees with you on everything you say
4) You therefore determine that, since he is a nobel price winner, all nobel prize winners agree with you!
5) You assume that since Darwin and all nobel prize winners are on your side, you need only communicate facts without backing it up. After all, its just the truth, right?
Sadly, your line of thinking breaks down at almost every single level:
1 -> 2) Though looks may not help with survival day to day, they do indicate a level of health as well as being from a decent gene pool. Those that can not regulate their own weight would be less likely to survive and be less attractive, likewise those who suffer from disabilities that make their faces lose their symmetry (as zekko pointed out earlier).
You should also wonder why girls do find guys attractive at all, if it should have been bred away generations ago. Even if its not the main thing, that a girl has the capability to say A is more attractive than B implies that evolution kept that ability there.
2 -> 3) Darwins theory is all about survival of the fittest, and appearance may or may not be an important part of that. Unless you can show otherwise, I'm not sure Darwin ever got into an argument about just how important looks are. No evidence that he agrees with you whatsoever, hence your logic fails at this step too.
3 -> 4) This is obviously just a nonsensical conclusion. Just as nonsensical as coming onto a message board and saying that 72 nobel prize winners are all agreeing with you. With no proof, or evidence. As usual.
4 -> 5) As you wont go back previous steps and look at your own (terrible) deductive logic, people just assume you are autistic and have mental issues.
Or in short: You speak complete nonsense without being able to backup anything you say. I've never seen anyone quite so dominated on an internet forum before.