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.

 

Two pics from Oilantaytambo that 100% defy evolution

page: 15
39
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 22 2014 @ 12:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Quadrivium

And the tree in my garden could be growing due to cell division or magic. Thing is, we have an overwhelming amount of evidence for the former and none for the latter so what's your point exactly?




posted on May, 22 2014 @ 12:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Aprch

I do think that is the pattern. Its almost a certainty that we will one day destroy our civilization or it will be destroyed by some natural variable outside our control. It is almsot a certainty that some people will survive.

They wont be able to continue where we leave off. They will have to start from scratch.

If they are anything like us, and I think you do get what you see, they will place their civilization at the zenith of human progress and evolution...LOL

Then the future Smithsonian will lose our bones and artifacts to preserve the reputations of future heads of academia and organized thought....its all a laughable pattern of nonsense.

I think if we continue to have our abilities progress beyond our ability to cope with them that we will undoubtedly end our selves eventually. This pattern of progress before thought and responsible consideration is just too prolific to deny.

Then the future transhumanised hominids will ask why they have apparently selected genes and enhanced traits compared to their "primitive" ancestors.

I just hope trolls are subjected to corporal punishment in the future so they can at least talk without mental masterbation bothering them on the side lines from rabid fools behind a screen and keyboard.

Funny world.



posted on May, 22 2014 @ 12:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Quadrivium

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Quadrivium
a reply to: Krazysh0t
Yet we could also say that humans share 50% of their DNA with bananas because of a common Designer.
The same language was used to Create all living things.



I never said that a creator couldn't exist. I'm agnostic. But if a creator exists, it probably used evolution to develop life.

I never said that you said a Creator couldn't exist

I was giving you an alternative to why humans and bananas share 50 percent of their DNA.
You were trying to make a case for macro evolution.


I would think there would be less evidence for an intelligent designer who created two things, say a banana tree and a human and had 50% of the DNA be similar. It would make more sense for the designer to create those things independently and if they shared any similar DNA it would be complete coincidence. That is why a creator using evolution to build upon life makes more sense.



posted on May, 22 2014 @ 01:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: Quadrivium

And the tree in my garden could be growing due to cell division or magic. Thing is, we have an overwhelming amount of evidence for the former and none for the latter so what's your point exactly?

Are you trying to be funny or just silly?
Of course the former is true.
What is your point "exactly"?



posted on May, 22 2014 @ 01:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t
We are probably not that far apart in our lines of thinking.
I see it more as we were Created and given the ability to adapt.
I know that Maco evolution is just evolution over a loooooooooonge period of time.
I just don't see how the amount of diversity we see today could have come about by a single organism, no matter the amount of time.
We have had an abundance of diversity for millions of years.
Look at the fossil record, it pretty much goes from zero to sixty in 1 second. What I mean is that if we look back far enough we see simple organisms then suddenly many different types of organisms.
Some call it the Cambrian Explosion, I call it part of Creation.



posted on May, 22 2014 @ 01:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Quadrivium
a reply to: Krazysh0t
We are probably not that far apart in our lines of thinking.
I see it more as we were Created and given the ability to adapt.
I know that Maco evolution is just evolution over a loooooooooonge period of time.
I just don't see how the amount of diversity we see today could have come about by a single organism, no matter the amount of time.
We have had an abundance of diversity for millions of years.
Look at the fossil record, it pretty much goes from zero to sixty in 1 second. What I mean is that if we look back far enough we see simple organisms then suddenly many different types of organisms.
Some call it the Cambrian Explosion, I call it part of Creation.



Much of the diversity happened through bottlenecks after mass extinction periods. Here is a link to read and help understand what I am talking about.

What comes after mass extinctions?


Mass extinctions, like the one that killed the non-bird dinosaurs, leave behind a host of empty niches — unoccupied ecological real estate. Species with a "good enough" set of traits can take advantage of these resources — so, for example, the extinction of one species of leaf-litter-dwelling scavenger could allow some other species to take advantage of lucrative scavenging opportunities in leaf-litter. Over the course of many generations, natural selection will act on these species, allowing them to take better advantage of available resources. As lineages invade different niches and become isolated from one another, they split, regenerating some of the diversity that was wiped out by the mass extinction. The upshot of all these processes is that mass extinctions tend to be followed by periods of rapid diversification and adaptive radiation. Of course, the best known example of this occurred 65 million years ago when mammals began to diversify into the niches formerly occupied by dinosaurs.


Please read the whole article, it does get sciencey, but that is where the evidence is for the claims being made.



posted on May, 22 2014 @ 03:44 PM
link   
a reply to: randyvs

This has absolutely nothing to do with evolution. Thanks for playing, though.



posted on May, 22 2014 @ 03:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Barcs

I realise that Barcs. It doesn't have to have anything
to do with evolution, to defy evolution.

Everyone just gets so upset.

edit on Rpm52214v522014u20 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 22 2014 @ 03:48 PM
link   

I just don't see how the amount of diversity we see today could have come about by a single organism, no matter the amount of time.

Why not?


We have had an abundance of diversity for millions of years.

I don't see where you're going with this.


Look at the fossil record, it pretty much goes from zero to sixty in 1 second.

HUGE exaggeration considering the Cambrian explosion was something like 20 million years long, but yeah it went from 0 to 60 in 1 second.


What I mean is that if we look back far enough we see simple organisms then suddenly many different types of organisms.
Some call it the Cambrian Explosion, I call it part of Creation.

If 20 million years counts as "suddenly" to you, then I honestly don't know what to say. I mean how many of your lifetimes is 20 million years?
edit on 22-5-2014 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 22 2014 @ 03:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Quadrivium

I'm employing exactly the same logic as you. Do you find it funny or silly? I find it both myself.



posted on May, 22 2014 @ 04:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: Barcs

I realise that Barcs. It doesn't have to have anything
to do with evolution, to defy evolution.

Everyone just gets so upset.


Well, if you realize that then why do you keep defending the position that it does???



posted on May, 22 2014 @ 04:06 PM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm






I'd answer you but you'd prolly just call me an ass or
resort to something else all stupid like that.
edit on Rpm52214v06201400000044 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 22 2014 @ 04:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: mOjOm






I'd answer you but you'd prolly just call me an ass or
resort to something else all stupid like that.


Well, what can I say. I call them as I see them.

Don't try and play the Saint here either Randy. Although in doing so it would follow your pattern of being intellectually dishonest. The fact that you try comparing me to "A blonde putting lipstick on her forehead" because I proved your bunk theory wrong, does make you an Ass in my opinion. That hasn't changed and I in no way desire to take it back either.

Especially when you now say such things as:

"I realise that Barcs. It doesn't have to have anything
to do with evolution, to defy evolution."

and

"You're right I don't understand evoloution."

Now, with that being said why don't you answer the question above???



posted on May, 22 2014 @ 04:24 PM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

Play the saint.





"A blonde putting lipstick on her forehead"


That's just all your imagination. I made no comparison.

Check the wording.

It relates to you making up my mind. Not that I'd like to
change your insufficient way of mastering thought.
And by that example it leaves no room to wonder why
you first say you understand. Then you don't?
And you accuse me of being intellectually dishonest?
What a joke.

Oh and I didn't say you're a joke either.

edit on Rpm52214v312014u21 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 22 2014 @ 04:25 PM
link   
I did not read whole thread, sorry too hard on this tablet. But, I do believe I understand what he is trying to say. Many of you get hung up in your mind about the flood. First, there is evidence around the world of ancient flood events.

Next, if you really want to understand and tie in the bible you have to go back to the original Greek and Hebrew. This offers much more insight and changes what you think a verse maybe saying.

So the world may not be what we were thinking it is. Also, stop thinking globally in terms of man and ancient civilization. When you do that you understand that the world to those see writing ancient script was very small. For them a flood event could easily destroy the world as they knew it to be.

As for flood events, they are mentioned in every ancient text and religious writings from everywhere in the world. To deny they took place would just be foolish.

The OP is attempting to say that we are discovering formations in rock in and around things that can be dated. What this does mean and prove is that evolution could not have happened the way some believe and across the time frame that some believe.

He is correct in this assumption and many scientists and geographers are beginning to come around to this line of thinking. Many, including people here, will simply attack what they don't yet understand. Hey, nothing knew. They jailed people and often killed them for true beliefs such as the earth is round and revolves around the sun.

Some people will never understand what we are attempting to say...... Ever....

All will be revealed one day...

The Bot



posted on May, 22 2014 @ 04:33 PM
link   
a reply to: randyvs

Whatever the exact wording was, the implication is the same.

Stop sidestepping the question. It's a straight forward question and should take no effort by you to answer it, so why keep avoiding it by sniveling about something that was said pages ago and which you instigated in the first place. Do you need me to say I'm sorry and give you hug and a cookie before we can move on or something???

The question lies at the core of not only your argument but your integrity included, which I think is very important.

Again:
You admit your theory has nothing to do with Evolution and that you don't understand Evolution. So why do you continue to try and support that your theory defies Evolution???
edit on 22-5-2014 by mOjOm because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 22 2014 @ 04:42 PM
link   
a reply to: dlbott

I sit here and laugh at these people who come into
a thread and first attack. Then complain cause they
can't get me to take them seriously. They haven't got
the first clue about politeness, manners, or even
the correct salutations. Not to mention how to
begin a conversation. You don't insult people
and expect to get anything from them. Not where
I come from.

Atrocious behavior right here on ATS.



posted on May, 22 2014 @ 04:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: dlbott

I sit here and laugh at these people who come into
a thread and first attack. Then complain cause they
can't get me to take them seriously. They haven't got
the first clue about politeness, manners, or even
the correct salutations. Not to mention how to
begin a conversation. You don't insult people
and expect to get anything from them. Not where
I come from.

Atrocious behavior right here on ATS.



I never insulted you at all, and I wasn't able to get a direct response in plain english from you either. Infact, I tried to be very accommodating and sympathetic, but that too, had no effect.



posted on May, 22 2014 @ 04:52 PM
link   
a reply to: DeadSeraph

Show me an example of this sympathy that I would regard
as worthless anyway. Not that you were insulting but I tried
more than three times to explain.



edit on Rpm52214v532014u57 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 22 2014 @ 04:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: DeadSeraph

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: Phantom423




Admittedly, this entire technique is merely scientific speculation.


And a person would have to be out their skull just to postulate
such a speculation. Let alone attempt it! But I'm the one who
doesn't understand? I understand BS perfectly when I read it
and hear it.


It would be really cool if you just explained why an advanced culture in pre-history disproves evolution. That's all I'm saying. I'm not even saying you need to tell us all you believe in evolution (because I don't even believe in evolution as far as the origin of life is concerned, because it CAN'T explain it).

Please just tell me why an ancient culture which built advanced things around 10000 bc or earlier means evolution couldn't have happened. That's all I'm asking. I'm genuinely trying to understand your thought process here (and I think a lot of others are too). It's a Genuine desire to understand how you came to this conclusion. Maybe you are feeling attacked right now, I don't know. But it would be nice if you just used plain english to tell me why you have drawn the conclusion you have.


Right there ^

I know threads like these can be tough. You are pretty much getting it from all sides. But I really do just want to better understand your thought process, and I haven't really seen you explain anywhere in the thread how you drew the conclusion you presented in your OP and thread title. It really isn't an attack on my part.

Edit to add:

If you tried to explain, I must have missed it. Maybe you could try to rephrase it so I can better understand? All I am really asking is why you feel that an ancient structure built in pre-history indicates that evolution never happened, as opposed to our current historical timelines just being pushed back further in history?

edit on 22-5-2014 by DeadSeraph because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
39
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join