It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Slicky1313
The person that replied right before me about how all the evidence points toward evolution. ill have to disagree, id say the evidence points toward the world being created.
now, if its created as in God spoke and there it was is how I belive, or others, if God spoke and let earth slowly evolve, that still means that God had to have set in fourth the notion to evolving, and it couldnt have of occured by complete accident, but rather God.
I still dont see any evidence of billions of fossils of ape/human mix out there folks, which theoretically it would have took more than trillions of half ape guys to have lived before the full man would have come out
how do we really no the world is billions of years old, where the proof of that?
Originally posted by Slicky1313
well, not really I dont think. but mutation or error, whatever it is, its a very vauge sense and still doesnt explain how it could lead to a different species. and the "or" u put in their... just like I could say "everyone is God, or they are human" when in reality there would only be one God, hence basically the first statment isnt even correct, but as long as the second one is with an OR it makes the whole thing correct. but weather those things are true, doesnt really matter, and it depends on what an "error" is. we dont full understand the brain or human body, and what may look like an "error" may not be an "error" or "mutation" at all. and yeah, it is annoying when people asks why their are apes around if they evolved, because theoretically IF apes evolved (which I doubt they did) they wouldnt ALL have evolved at the exact same time, it would have been one ape, then another, at different times. so the real question should be, why arent they in their half ape/man stages now if they did evolve??!
Originally posted by Slicky1313
well, not really I dont think. but mutation or error, whatever it is, its a very vauge sense and still doesnt explain how it could lead to a different species.
Originally posted by Slicky1313
all my life in school, in science class. "we came from apes" "The big bang" but yet, after all this drilling in of knowledge, I find a very much amount of evidence and facts, and find evolution lacking scientific facts, as well as common sense, and is 99.9% fairy tale and .1% facts.
I couldprobably find more evidence for why Santa Claus has a secret laboratory in the north pole and thats where all the presents comes from on Christmas than of Evolution.
I have looked into Carbon 14 dating
, and this is what the science books say is used to date dino's back millions of years.
they took a shell from a snail still alive and carbon dated it and found the shell was 26K years old, even though it wasnt actually that old.
Ive heard reports of dinosaur bones being carbon dated and coming out to be only 26K years old, when evolution states all dinos become extinct 65M years ago.
Another article in a scientifc magazine did samples on Volcanic rock just formed from the Hawaiian Islands a few hundred years ago and it came back millions of years old. obviously, Carbon 14 dating isnt entirely correct,
But enough of Carbon dating,
they say we came from monkeys, but that is scientifically impossible.
No one can argue with that, DNA reconstruction wasnt nown untill the man in 1980's developed the DNA trace and won a Nobel Peace Prize for it.
and just for a simple celled organsim its self to pop up from the "soup" that was eternal in the universe, the figures are so astronomically high.
The chances of evolution happening all together is a number so high, if you could write a few billion zeros a second, it would take you a few million years to complete the number.
And if we evolved from an ape like type animal, why isnt it still evolving now?
and the pairs needed for a DNA replication, (just a single cell in DNA, which we have BILLIONS of cells mad from DNA) in a medium advanced animal, is about 2 corect pairs in a 1 with 260 zero's folowing it. and thats not even the chances of DNA replication happening, but only the pairs of DNA in a medium sized animal in a single cell, which has billions of them. so a monkey is more advanced, but billions of cells and a genetic mutation needed in the monkey/ape whatever we evolved from the chances of that happening are out of this world.
it would take a VERY long time for this to happen obviously.
And just as we have different X and Y Chronosomes in our bodys than monkeys, if humans were to have a kid with an extra or short chronosome, the kid would be mental, or a defict in his body, he would be worse off than his parents, not better as evolution states in our evolving.
You have failed to mention a single thing that is either improbably or immposible.
Just about everything evolution is scientifically impossible to happen,
sinc in order for soemthing to be declared scientifically impossible the chances have to be 1 in a 1 with 40 zero's following it.
DNA is just one aspect of why evolution doesnt make sense,
but rather a fairy tale. evolution is not a science, but a theory and will never be proven right.
in order to be a science, a theory has to be observed,
and evolution was never observed,
If we evolved from our ape ancestors, ther should be literally thousands of fossils since the chances of anything evolving from an ape to human is so slim, millions and billions (and even more) of half ape/man fossils should be here,
but yet all I see is a crushed head that is "reconstructed" to look like an ape/man, and when the DNA comes back not even proving it really is half ape/man, but rather in my oppinion a "big foot prank" and desperate drive toward proving evolution, when their is none.
show me da proof, gentle men,
this is a theory untill proven
Darwin himself said he made the whole thing up and repented on his death bed and became a christian.
show me the evidence guys,
I dont see any
EDITED: By the Society for the Advocation of Paragraph Employment
[edit on 26-11-2004 by Gazrok]
tsuribito
Creationism on the other hand is the other theory that we have
What scientists actually do all day is trying to prove that our current theory of evolution is false.
jukyu
I believe what Darwin did was renounce his theory on his deathbed because it was being taken out of context as it is today and he felt it better to denounce it then allow it to be his work in the state it had become
jukyu
It doesn't completely invalidate the Darwin /deathbed recanting thing though
slicky1313
well a numerous amount of sources, including hard core aithest sites of how Darwin took back his theory of evolution. and of course he made it up
"well, ill be darned, this DNA sample says we all came from a single celled organism"
u dont think he just guess what happened when some big explosion in the matter or soup happened, flying everywhere.
I dont get it yo, dont think u no what yer talking about there. all a flu shot is the virus u dont want being injected into your body so the body knows what its up against, it doesnt go into a big mutation like changing its chronosomes in reproduction or DNA reconstrucytion
but Darwin also founded the basis of how the universe was made
but mutation or error, whatever it is, its a very vauge sense and still doesnt explain how it could lead to a different species
it depends on what an "error" is. we dont full understand the brain or human body, and what may look like an "error" may not be an "error" or "mutation" at al
so the real question should be, why arent they in their half ape/man stages now if they did evolve??!
id say the evidence points toward the world being created.
which theoretically it would have took more than trillions of half ape guys to have lived before the full man would have come out
I see a workd of art in the universe that was created, not by pure chance
and evolution is accepted so people dont have to suck up to da facts that they can never be their own God
"my, it evolved from the scrap metal in the junk pile from the fire in just a thousand years" but rather it was placed there by people who were there thousands of years ago
so how do we really no the world is billions of years old
it will always be proven wrong in some form of fashion since no one really knows what happened.
Originally posted by TPL
Religion and Evolution can work together, after all couldn't God have set evolution in motion.
[edit on 26-11-2004 by TPL]
Originally posted by Slicky1313
well, not really I dont think. but mutation or error, whatever it is, its a very vauge sense and still doesnt explain how it could lead to a different species. and the "or" u put in their... just like I could say "everyone is God, or they are human" when in reality there would only be one God, hence basically the first statment isnt even correct, but as long as the second one is with an OR it makes the whole thing correct. but weather those things are true, doesnt really matter, and it depends on what an "error" is. we dont full understand the brain or human body, and what may look like an "error" may not be an "error" or "mutation" at all. and yeah, it is annoying when people asks why their are apes around if they evolved, because theoretically IF apes evolved (which I doubt they did) they wouldnt ALL have evolved at the exact same time, it would have been one ape, then another, at different times. so the real question should be, why arent they in their half ape/man stages now if they did evolve??!
Originally posted by StarBreather
evolution is mathematically impossible. Period.
When the evolution hypothesis was devised, they didn't know about DNA. If you change a letter, most chances are the organism becomes non-viable.
Plus, you didn't contradict my points.
So to go from viable species A to viable species B, you need to go through non-viable intermediaries.
What we find (what we have proof of) is that "evolution" actually selects for stability, not for change. The case of viruses doesn't contradict this, because: 1, viruses are not so complex as large organisms and 2, viruses are built to withstand larger degrees of change.
Where does the information come from? Information in the universe can only be created by consciousness.
An ecosystem may seem like a series of self-reproducing automatons, but who put them there?
Evolution is most certainly not mathematically immpossible. THere is nothing 'immpossible' of natural selection acting upon variation to result in speciation and adaptation.
Actually most changes to DNA are entirely neutral. Then come 'bad' mutations and only then below that come 'good' mutations. So what? So good mutations are rare. What does that matter?
He certianly did contradict your point that the vast majority of mutations are harmful.
No, you don't, that was the entire gist of Darwin's idea. You can go from a dinosaur to a bird in little steps, not by having some freak of nature squirming about with no function.
Viruses and bacteria and 'normal' populations of animals undergo evolution, the frequencies of their alleles vary from generation to generation, and that selection acts upon this variation. Sometimes stabilization is selected for, other times adaptations are selected for.
Since when? Please demonstrate that the sort of 'informatio' in DNA proteins, crystals and minerals can only come from intelligence.
Thats what is so great about natural selection. It explains why there are ecosystems. The different organisms interact with one another, populations diversity, species evovlve and co-adapt and new niches form while populations are 'selected' to 'enter' those new niches. Without evolution one has to say that all these things were 'created' because of some divine plan, because of the benevolence of the creator, as they used to say. Darwin himself noted this idea, and thought it strange that the 'benevolent' creator woudl make wasps that immobilize catepillars and impregnate them with their own larvae, which hatch in the still living wasp and devour it from the inside out. Natural Selection shows that there need be no benevolent reasons for any of this.
Originally posted by Slicky1313
I disagree, in evolution, it IS acceptable to kill the weaker. we are just animals that are more complex. nuthin wrong with a lion in Africa killing a gazelle, no matter what the Lion wants to kill it for, just as that, in evolution it would be ok to kill the weaker species of a human. Darwin's own words, of how he was weak, therefore he must die. now that doesnt mean u should go around killing everyone weaker than you, but it would be ok to kill a person in evolution cause their weaker. well, not in Christianity is it ok to kill someone without a good cause, such as death penalty.
Originally posted by Slicky1313
all my life in school, in science class. "we came from apes" "The big bang" but yet, after all this drilling in of knowledge, I find a very much amount of evidence and facts, and find evolution lacking scientific facts, as well as common sense, and is 99.9% fairy tale and .1% facts. [edit on 26-11-2004 by Gazrok]