Arguing Against Parmenides

Parmenides main two points are in rationalistic belief and the idea that nothing in nature really changes. I would say to the rationalistic view that the senses can be meaningful. In order have a thought about something you often have perceived something with your sense to have had the thought. Even Parmenides must have trusted his senses on some level, to claim the nature he saw had no change. As for this supposed lack of change we know much more of the Earth's past than we did in Parmenides time. We now know of fossils, past ecosystems, and climates. There is also the fact that 99 percent of all species that have ever lived are extinct. That's a fundamentally large change in nature.