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.

 

Evolutionists, where are all the bodies?

page: 6
16
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 15 2014 @ 03:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Murgatroid

Oh my, mitochondrial eve is not the eve from the bible...

Wikipedia link


Mitochondrial Eve is named after mitochondria and the biblical Eve. Unlike her biblical namesake, she was not the only living human female of her time. However, her female contemporaries, except her mother, failed to produce a direct unbroken female line to any living woman in the present day.



Analogous to the Mitochondrial Eve is the Y-chromosomal Adam, the member of Homo sapiens sapiens from whom all living humans are descended patrilineally. The inherited DNA in the male case is his nuclear Y chromosome rather than the mtDNA. Mitochondrial Eve and Y-chromosomal Adam need not have lived at the same time.




posted on Sep, 15 2014 @ 10:36 AM
link   
a reply to: Elton

George Soros pwned & operated...

Why so gullible?


It is a propaganda outlet dominated by people who want to radically transform our existence. Who Controls Wikipedia?

And yes, Soros officially owns Wikipedia. Please read for yourself.

George Soros owns snopes.com

Originally posted by aBlueRAY
From a psychoanalytical point of view, I have to assume deep in your heart you know Wikipedia would be the number one piece of propaganda available online for the masses.



posted on Sep, 15 2014 @ 10:49 AM
link   
a reply to: itsallgonenow


Weird logic id say the two are not related. As far as graves the number one reason id say is time bodies decompose and the grave sites are lost. People all the time end up discovering grave sites only a couple of hundred years old usually when digging for construction. Older than that you probably wouldnt even recognize it to be graves unless preservation conditions were perfect. Like sometimes people show up in a bog and murder investigations are started only to discover they died hundreds of years ago.



posted on Sep, 15 2014 @ 02:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Murgatroid
a reply to: Elton

George Soros pwned & operated...

Why so gullible?


It is a propaganda outlet dominated by people who want to radically transform our existence. Who Controls Wikipedia?

And yes, Soros officially owns Wikipedia. Please read for yourself.

George Soros owns snopes.com

Originally posted by aBlueRAY
From a psychoanalytical point of view, I have to assume deep in your heart you know Wikipedia would be the number one piece of propaganda available online for the masses.




Soros doesn't own the peer reviewed journal Nature not does he own Science Daily. Will those count as sources or are they invalid for icing peer reviewed data?


When the overall population size does not change (as is likely to have happened for long periods of human history), men have, on average, just one son. In this case, evolutionary theory predicts that for any given man there is a high probability that his paternal line will eventually come to an end. All of his male descendants will then have inherited Y chromosomes from other men. In fact, it is highly probable that at some point in the past, all men except one possessed Y chromosomes that by now are extinct. All men living now, then, would have a Y chromosome descended from that one man — identified as Y-chromosome Adam. (

The biblical reference is a bit of a misnomer because this Adam was by no means the only man alive at his time.) Similarly, the theory predicts that all mitochondrial genomes today should be traceable to a single woman, a 'mitochondrial Eve'.

Whereas the Y chromosome is passed from father to son, mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) is passed from mother to daughter and son.


www.nature.com...


www.sciencedaily.com...



posted on Sep, 15 2014 @ 02:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Murgatroid

It's not logic, it's fact. Like evolution. So I would have to guess that your problem is with fact based reality. That level of illogic is the result of massive amounts of cognitive dissonance. Denying reality in favor of bronze age tradition is not remotely logical so it's rather amusing to see the irony of this.



posted on Sep, 15 2014 @ 02:56 PM
link   
I notice that the OP hasn't been present since page 1. So was this thread a drive by to incite the people who understand that evolution is true in the ancient civilizations forum? That's odd...



posted on Sep, 15 2014 @ 03:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: bitsforbytes
a reply to: itsallgonenow

well if the primitives used just plain rocks to bury their dead then how will you distinguish which ones were used for a burial?

Ok, so rocks were piled up over the body then the body decomposes completely after 50-80 years and then an earthquake happens moves all the rocks, the burial site is unrecognizable. More over, another set of people come move the rocks because look they are all piled up already conveniently enough. Remember even if we are dealing with just 6000 years, bodies do decompose faster then I assume you thought they did.

Look I am not saying that the earth is only 6000 years old nor am I saying it is 14235349053453490 years old, life on earth doesn't make a mess when it dies everything is transformed nothing lasts forever. Nothing new under the sun.


We can only find some of the bodies because they became fossilized. Sendimentary rocks incorporated the bodies into rocks and made a copy of them. Some other bodies whomever where protected from eviriomental changes and bacteriae underground.

We can discover the age of Earth thanks to Uranium 235 which has a life-time of 4.5 billion years unlike Carbon-14 which only has 25,000 years.



posted on Sep, 15 2014 @ 03:23 PM
link   
a reply to: borntowatch

So you're not going to take me up on my offer of giving you access to an expert in the field to answer each and every question you have regarding this topic? People who actually want to learn would jump at the chance. You have shown your true colours and have no interest at all in discovering new knowledge, instead you seek to, very poorly, incite doubt.



posted on Sep, 15 2014 @ 03:26 PM
link   
a reply to: MonkeyFishFrog

Have you not seen the threads he's authored on this subject? If you were familiar with his writings on ATS at all, you'd know that his mind is one of the most closed you could meet on this subject (despite him saying that it isn't).

This one should be pretty illuminating on how open minded he is towards this subject:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
edit on 15-9-2014 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 15 2014 @ 03:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Murgatroid

originally posted by: thedeadtruth
The Bible is not a historically accurate book of the entire history of the entire planet earth.

Evidence?

I'm guessing you have none.

FYI, history is nothing but lies...


Virtually every place, person, custom, and event depicted in the Bible has been shown to have been grounded in history. And nearly every single archaeological artefact, from Noah to Abraham, from Moses to Christ, is evidenced by the Bible and dated to a time preceding Islam. www.facebook.com...


You actually referenced "Islam World Control" on Facebook as a source?

Wow...



posted on Sep, 15 2014 @ 06:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: MonkeyFishFrog
a reply to: borntowatch

So you're not going to take me up on my offer of giving you access to an expert in the field to answer each and every question you have regarding this topic? People who actually want to learn would jump at the chance. You have shown your true colours and have no interest at all in discovering new knowledge, instead you seek to, very poorly, incite doubt.


You know, I don't have a large problem with people wallowing in stoopid. As long as they don't have enough juice to actually affect my life, who cares? An ignorant underclass leaves more employment opportunities for my kids...who aren't hampered by the confines of bronze-age Middle Eastern folk tales. While the Bible Thumpers may not accept evolution as science... that choice is in itself pretty Darwinian.

And I say that as one who does try to educate.



posted on Sep, 15 2014 @ 06:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Answer

If you want to discredit the theory of evolution, you might want to use better sources than young earth creationist propaganda. Pat Buchanan... really?

Here's a simple question for those who don't believe in evolution/natural selection: Where did all the various dog breeds come from?


Are you serious.
Seriously, are you so arrogant you think you get to choose who we believe, who we form our young earth creation ideas from.
You might want to use better sources than the science, grant serving scientists that you quote. I would rather listen to a genuine believer than a secular evangelical propagandist scientist any day
You dont get to set who creationists choose to listen to.
If you cant answer the questions that are raised by the pat Buchanans, run along, dont dictate your invalid authority over anyone.

Dogs have one common ancestor, probably the wolf.
I hope this silly question has a point



posted on Sep, 15 2014 @ 07:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: MonkeyFishFrog
a reply to: borntowatch

So you're not going to take me up on my offer of giving you access to an expert in the field to answer each and every question you have regarding this topic? People who actually want to learn would jump at the chance. You have shown your true colours and have no interest at all in discovering new knowledge, instead you seek to, very poorly, incite doubt.


Forgive me Monkeyfish,
I hadnt noticed that I had been offered anything.
An expert in the field to answer any question, each and every question regarding this topic.

That sounds to good to be true.
I would be honoured, humbled. I am sure this person has a life and to take the time to listen, reason and respond, is actually very genuine of them.
Never mind the opportunity's you have so clearly listed, that would benefit me.

Thank you for the offer.



posted on Sep, 15 2014 @ 07:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: Answer

originally posted by: borntowatch

Very reasoned and well responded post, congratulations on a solid effort.

Sadly and no disrespect I think you have missed the mark.
I am not asking you to win me over, sell your evolution package to me, convert me.

All I was trying to explain is that I accept you believe in evolution, I accept other Christians believe in evolution, have no problems with their choice.
So why cant you accept, with the reasons afore mentioned, I cant accept evolution.

Why is it such a poison to you and others, why the hatred for creation and choice?


Now you're playing victim?

Evidence was presented which has been ignored. I don't think anyone tried to convert you... merely convince you that evidence exists. I simply asked what would constitute "evidence" in order to satisfactorily answer the original question.

I happen to believe in creation but it starts at the very beginning and ends there. I believe that the clock was wound and natural processes took over to get us where we are today. I believe that scientists do their best to explain how we got to the present nature of things but the story is constantly changing as new discoveries are made. This is where I have a problem with creationists... the story isn't up for discussion. Every religion has its own creation story and they are all simplistic fairy tales with no evidence to back them up.


No
What is wrong with your head, why are you so self important, why do you see yourself as so important.

I disagree strongly

Any evidence that science finds is made to fit the evolution picture.
Evolution has already been decided, now its just a matter of piecing the puzzle. That is stupid, thats not science.
Deny stupidity.



posted on Sep, 15 2014 @ 07:13 PM
link   
The stones that marked the graves were probably repurposed after a couple of generations. They were build into walls of homes or buildings. Many bodies were burned and others were buried at sea. others were buried and enough microbes were present to break them down. We don't find many bones from the big wars of two thousand years ago let alone five thousand years ago. Even steel axes and swords would be indistinguishable, they would be a rock now made of iron oxide. Brass could survive better, but smelted copper oxidizes pretty easily unless it has a certain structure.



posted on Sep, 15 2014 @ 07:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Answer
You edited the heck out of your post while I was typing a reply...

Clearly you don't want answers and explanations. If you genuinely wanted answers and explanations, you would do some real research instead of stirring the pot in an internet forum. Before you edited your post, you basically admitted that you would never be convinced that evolution is a real process so... why are you here? Are you simply poking the beehive with a stick so you can whine about getting stung?



Yes I did "edit the heck" out of that post.

I would have preferred you asked me for a reason as to my actions, rather than making assumptions.

At the time I had a few pages open on ats and believed I was replying in another thread that I had authored on a similar subject.
I posted the reply here, thinking I was on that thread. It would have been marginally off topic and irrelevant to the lack of bodies here .

Yes a subject where I have often stated as clearly as a watch face that the evidence foe evolution is in my opinion baseless.

That UNLESS better evidence arises or a better explanation is given, I will never believe in evolution

Now please understand the word UNLESS, that means that the evidence you cherish, I dismiss and new evidence needs to be found.
Fortunately science is still searching, so all is not lost.

So makes me wonder, why is science still searching

I hope that explains my edit and is acceptable, sorry for my error.
edit on b2014Mon, 15 Sep 2014 19:21:47 -050093020141pm302014-09-15T19:21:47-05:00 by borntowatch because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 15 2014 @ 07:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: MonkeyFishFrog
a reply to: borntowatch

How about Math? You trust Math right?

Okay... Dinosaurs first appeared on Earth around 250 million years ago. They went extinct 65 million years ago.

250,000,000 - 65,000,000 = 185,000,000

185 MILLION years roaming, eating, breeding, dying on this Earth. That is an incredible amount of time to leave bodies behind.

Now semi-modern humans have been around for 200,000 years. Closest to our current species we shall say.

200,000/185,000,000 = 0.0010810810810811

Humans have roamed this Earth 0.001% of the time dinosaurs did.

And yet you still question why there are, according to you, more dinosaur bones than human remains?

Coal, petroleum and natural gas are fossil fuels. It isn't a cute name. It represents what it is. Some fossils decompose into these forms and we burn 'em up for our cars and houses. There goes some of the fossil evidence you want right there.


Thanks MonkeyFish
I hadnt realised I was addressing you as the person making the offer.
I appreciate the opportunity.

If I may we can start here at this very question, well around here.

Maths? Hate it with a passion, trusted it many times with my life.

See here maths isnt my issue.
Its your geological time scale, its based on a nearly two hundred year old theory that is not seen in nature, has no evidence and hasnt been updated...ever.

Maths is a true, pure science, the geo time scale, not so much

Can you defend and then justify the geological time scale so I might even consider believing it has some relevance to maths.

Sincerely, thanks for your time



posted on Sep, 15 2014 @ 08:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: MonkeyFishFrog

Have you not seen the threads he's authored on this subject? If you were familiar with his writings on ATS at all, you'd know that his mind is one of the most closed you could meet on this subject (despite him saying that it isn't).

This one should be pretty illuminating on how open minded he is towards this subject:
www.abovetopsecret.com...


You know your problem KS, you have a closed mind

I have a legitimate conundrum, maybe not to you. So you say my view, understanding is irrelevant and thats fine.
Its not irrelevant to me.

All I hear is someone not addressing the issue, sidestepping and making up reasons to sidestep.

Me I would hear the problem, understand the issue and then explain why I choose to think alternately.

Biological evolution is the final link in the chain (possibly a spiritual evolution), if it is not to you, if it doesnt make sense why comment.
Is this an exercise in pride, authority, do you feel power in belittling me, make you a bigger person?
It makes me see the opposite, also makes me think you have a closed and little mind

The universe evolved, the elements, the planets then us.
take out any one of those movements and its all redundant

But no, I have to obey you, submit myself to your reasoning with out explanation. Who is the child?



posted on Sep, 15 2014 @ 10:11 PM
link   
a reply to: itsallgonenow

You're aware burning bodies is also a very common funerary practice, and probably took place as early as fire being used by humans and their ancestors right to cook as well as provide heat and protection....



posted on Sep, 15 2014 @ 11:43 PM
link   
a reply to: borntowatch

You're mistaking the geological timescale principal of stratification which is the study of sediment deposits to determine age with radiometric dating, the actual method of determining the age of the Earth and fossils. There are radioactive isotopes that decay in steady and consistent rates over time. Physicists and chemists are able to measure the amount of an element present in a sample to see how old it is.

You live in Western Australia. Are you familiar with Jack Hills? Jack Hills is home to the oldest known rocks and crystals on Earth. They've dated them to be 4.3 billion years old.

I've even had the opportunity to hold a sample.




top topics



 
16
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join