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.

 

What is the evidence for evolution?

page: 2
12
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 9 2014 @ 08:24 AM
link   
a reply to: peter vlar

The question is: What is the evidence for evolution?

My answer, if you go back and check my first post, is: Involution.

I stated my answer in one word. I am trying to confirm the OP with the evidence. If you take away the vortex, or circling around a center (Volution), then you have NO evolution. The very word volution comprises the entire body of evidence of seeking, finding and adaptation. As I stated, the evidence is clear. Is it possible you have not listened?




posted on Nov, 9 2014 @ 11:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: darkbake

originally posted by: TzarChasm
a reply to: AlephBet

wrong forum dude. and quit fishing for thread hits, people avoid your stuff for a reason.


Ouch I missed the Origins and Creationism forum this might have made for better discussion there. Although the video is seriously good - I wanted to share it with you guys.


...what?



posted on Nov, 9 2014 @ 11:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: AlephBet
a reply to: peter vlar

The question is: What is the evidence for evolution?

My answer, if you go back and check my first post, is: Involution.

I stated my answer in one word. I am trying to confirm the OP with the evidence. If you take away the vortex, or circling around a center (Volution), then you have NO evolution. The very word volution comprises the entire body of evidence of seeking, finding and adaptation. As I stated, the evidence is clear. Is it possible you have not listened?



its been evolution vs god for quite a while and now that evolution is gaining ground people are deciding to plant seeds so when pure creationism goes south they still have some ground to stand on by finding a compromise. but the end solution is still the same: god exists because gaps in scientific understanding. that is why you are here and the point myself and others are attempting to make is Darkbake is trying to have a discussion based in the same caliber of science as is exhibited in the video. we are trying not to sacrifice that. and you are just blowing it aside in your rush to plug your personal theories which just use the topic as a stepping stone to a discussion that has nothing to do with the topic. which is evolution. not hebrew or scripture.
edit on 9-11-2014 by TzarChasm because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 12:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: AlephBet
a reply to: peter vlar

Volution is fact. All things spin by a ratio of 1:1.618. Flush a toilet and prove it to yourself. You cannot evolve without revolving. Last time I checked, the planet is revolving; revolving around the sun, which is revolving; revolving in a galaxy, with the galaxy moving.


LMAO! What part of evolution involves rotating or turning over? I asked this in your last thread and got no answer.

Why are you ignoring the Moby Dick codes? Are you afraid of The Truth?


Last I checked, this is a forum for debating creation vs. evolution. Creation wins every time.


Evolution vs creationism is a false dilemma. There is no debate whatsoever. Creationism is a guess and Evolution is a fact. Pretty simple.


The question is: What is the evidence for evolution?

My answer, if you go back and check my first post, is: Involution.


Nope. Involution is not a fact any moreso than the word "rotation" , "acceleration" or "running" is a fact. Yes they happen. No they don't explain everything. Involution has absolutely nothing to do with evolution. There is no part of genetic mutations or natural selection that involves turning over or turning around or rotating. Sorry.

edit on 10-11-2014 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 04:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Barcs

You would not have evolution of species apart from a rotating Earth around a central sun with seasons. You would not have the rotation of the sun apart from the central sun of the galaxy. The order of the cosmos is synchronized for life to exist. It all hangs on volution, or rotating about a center. When sheep develop a coat, it is by volution. When birds migrate, volution. When fish circle from breading ground to feeding ground, volution. When your ear turns from center down your jaw line, volution at a ratio of 1:1.618. Nautilus shell - volution. Brocolli - volution. Toilet flushing - volution. Shape of a spinning galaxy - volution. Shape of the Earth - volution.

In Latin, e is the prefix standing for out of. Eovlution is out of Volution. Name one thing that science claims as evolved that has not spun out of the whirlwind.

You can have something coming out of e of the spin without involution into the vortex. Consciousness (Spirit) is involution into matter from letters (information) and Word (chains and sequences of information animating matter. Consciousness is not matter. They are dimensional and relative to each other. Consciousness is non-local. For Spirit to animate matter, the must be a catalyst.

Face it. We are designed by a back end we cannot see. The front end screams of design and governance by law. Just like the server behind the computer screen you are viewing, information is collapsed from storage to your view. Consciousness collapses the wave function. It's the most basic fact of physics. Lower spatial dimensions imply the higher dimensions that cast us down from above.




edit on 10-11-2014 by AlephBet because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 11:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: AlephBet
a reply to: Barcs

You would not have evolution of species apart from a rotating Earth around a central sun with seasons. You would not have the rotation of the sun apart from the central sun of the galaxy. The order of the cosmos is synchronized for life to exist. It all hangs on volution, or rotating about a center. When sheep develop a coat, it is by volution. When birds migrate, volution. When fish circle from breading ground to feeding ground, volution. When your ear turns from center down your jaw line, volution at a ratio of 1:1.618. Nautilus shell - volution. Brocolli - volution. Toilet flushing - volution. Shape of a spinning galaxy - volution. Shape of the Earth - volution.


You just don't seem to grasp that your use of "volution" is not in line with its actual definition. Its a noun and describes a formation or object, generally used in relation to architecture. You are using it in an extremely liberal context to mean whatever it is you like.


In Latin, e is the prefix standing for out of. Eovlution is out of Volution. Name one thing that science claims as evolved that has not spun out of the whirlwind.


Except that, as we discussed rather in depth in your other thread, volution is not the root word of Evolution. You can't just ignore legitimate etymology to create your own and then redefine the science based on that. Its rather dishonest and ignorant.


You can have something coming out of e of the spin without involution into the vortex. Consciousness (Spirit) is involution into matter from letters (information) and Word (chains and sequences of information animating matter. Consciousness is not matter. They are dimensional and relative to each other. Consciousness is non-local. For Spirit to animate matter, the must be a catalyst.


Yet despite all your bluster, bravado and bastardization of etymology you have yet to demonstrate your catalyst. Its as if you're treading a fine line between using the god of the gaps argument while not wanting to say so specifically to avoid getting called out on it.


Face it. We are designed by a back end we cannot see. The front end screams of design and governance by law. Just like the server behind the computer screen you are viewing, information is collapsed from storage to your view. Consciousness collapses the wave function. It's the most basic fact of physics. Lower spatial dimensions imply the higher dimensions that cast us down from above.


Creating a false corollary isn't equitable with demonstrating an iota of causation. Until that happens all you've got is a pile of foofy words and a desire to reconcile your faith with the reality of science.
edit on 10-11-2014 by peter vlar because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 11 2014 @ 03:32 PM
link   
a reply to: peter vlar

Or, you could actually check the etymology to see that I am correct.

"Evolution - early 17th century: from Latin evolutio(n-) ‘unrolling,’ from the verb evolvere (see evolve). Early senses related to physical movement, first recorded in describing a tactical “wheeling” maneuver in the realignment of troops or ships. Current senses stem from a notion of “opening out” and “unfolding,” giving rise to a general sense of ‘development.’"

If you can't see the significance to the Golden Ratio, I can't help you. The connections I make are consistent with both etymology and the mathematics behind phi.




posted on Nov, 11 2014 @ 04:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: AlephBet
a reply to: Barcs

You would not have evolution of species apart from a rotating Earth around a central sun with seasons. You would not have the rotation of the sun apart from the central sun of the galaxy. The order of the cosmos is synchronized for life to exist. It all hangs on volution, or rotating about a center. When sheep develop a coat, it is by volution. When birds migrate, volution. When fish circle from breading ground to feeding ground, volution. When your ear turns from center down your jaw line, volution at a ratio of 1:1.618. Nautilus shell - volution. Brocolli - volution. Toilet flushing - volution. Shape of a spinning galaxy - volution. Shape of the Earth - volution.


Um, you said that involution is the key to evolution. Not a single thing you wrote is about evolution. We know that things rotate around others in the universe. That doesn't have anything to do with evolution. You couldn't have evolution without life, sure. You couldn't have evolution without space. Does that make space the key to evolution? Stars? Planets? Both are required for evolution to take place therefor space, stars, planets and life are the keys to evolution, right? No they aren't. They are factors that make the universe the way it is. Evolution itself does not rotate or turn over. You are wrong and are using irrelevant factors to make your conclusion.


In Latin, e is the prefix standing for out of. Eovlution is out of Volution. Name one thing that science claims as evolved that has not spun out of the whirlwind.

Everything? Nothing is "spun out of the whirlwind". What on earth are you even saying by that? Try making the point directly instead of using metaphors.
edit on 11-11-2014 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 11 2014 @ 06:38 PM
link   
a reply to: AlephBet

And that's fine. I'm not actually looking for help. I'll stick with the fossil record, Geological record and all the knowledge that has been gleaned from unlocking DNA the last decade and a half and you can keep your golden ratio and ever expanding and changing version of how evolution works. Just for posterities sake though -


1620s, "an opening of what was rolled up," from Latin evolutionem (nominative evolutio) "unrolling (of a book)," noun of action from past participle stem of evolvere "to unroll" (see evolve). Used in medicine, mathematics, and general writing in various senses including "growth to maturity and development of an individual living thing" (1660s). Modern use in biology, of species, first attested 1832 in works of Scottish geologist Charles Lyell. Charles Darwin used the word in print once only, in the closing paragraph of "The Origin of Species" (1859), and preferred descent with modification, in part because evolution already had been used in the discarded 18c. homunculus theory of embryological development (first proposed under this name by Bonnet, 1762) and in part because it carried a sense of "progress" not present in Darwin's idea. But Victorian belief in progress prevailed (and the advantages of brevity), and Herbert Spencer and other biologists after Darwin popularized evolution.


Not exactly the same root as Volution and not remotely tied to INvolution.



posted on Nov, 11 2014 @ 06:41 PM
link   
The problem is that there is no other theory that replaces evolution. Have at it. Creationism doesn't work if I don't believe in your religion. That's the problem.



posted on Nov, 11 2014 @ 06:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Barcs



We know that things rotate around others in the universe. That doesn't have anything to do with evolution. You couldn't have evolution without life, sure. You couldn't have evolution without space. Does that make space the key to evolution? Stars? Planets?


Regarding the video I posted, are you even listening to your words? The golden ratio is in ALL things. It's a signature of the one principle of volution that defines what we are as a species. On top of this, you have countless sacred texts that then tell you just how this relates to the flower of life--the oldest symbols across the entire globe. Evidence is not a hard thing to find. Watch the video, then answer your questions for yourself. Let me restate it the way you should have wrote it.

We know that all things rotate around others in the universe. It has everything to do with evolution. You couldn't have evolution without involution, since consciousness cannot possibly be located in the spatial or temporal dimensions. Current science tells you this. You couldn't have evolution without Space and Time being the fabric for the involution of consciousness. Stars and planets are the catalyst for this process, not the consciousness itself.

Better stated, DNA comprises letters that must have a catalyst to then express the catalyst into form. Information is at the heart of the process. Father (Aleph Bet) places letters into the Mother (Water - Aleph [Strong] Mem [Water]). When you have letters in a Mother / Mater / Matrix, then you create a Son (Bet [house] Nun [seed]. The Hebrew tells you the process of how the Aleph Bet (ALPHABET) enters the Cup (MOTHER) to make the Bread (Loaf of Seed).

It then goes on to tell you its a hologram of information and light.

John 1

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome[a] it.

Letters (Aleph Bet) make Word (BET NUN). The Catalyst is Water. Carbon has (6 protons, 6 electrons and 6 neutrons) and is the Mark of Mankind. The beast is here to be overcome by our higher natures.

Revelation 13

18 This calls for wisdom. Let the person who has insight calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man.[e - or of mankind] That number is 666.

Carbon, DNA, Volution and the Holographic nature of our reality. What more do you need? In every case, God was there first with the information.

Does matter create consciousness, or does Word (information) program our reality? You know the answer from science. What keeps you from seeing it in the image that was there first?




edit on 11-11-2014 by AlephBet because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 11 2014 @ 06:49 PM
link   
a reply to: TzarChasm

The Evolution vs God thing is for small minded, unenlightened spastics.. Tell me, what part of evolution burst this universe into existence from a zero point and no known explanation apart from the Big Bang theory which is just a theory btw?

Is Evolution only the explaining of life forms? If so once again it cannot compare to the Non-life that created everything in and outside this existence. And for this existence to be created in the first place, there must be soething outside of it also.
edit on 11-11-2014 by EaglesFan because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 11 2014 @ 06:55 PM
link   
a reply to: EaglesFan

Gravity is just a theory too bud. For more information on the word Theory see my signature. I am just wondering though, who told you the universe started from a zero point?


Anyway, I have made a mental note for the future when writing threads. One should not post thread titles in the form of a question unless one is actually asking a question because some cannot understand it wasn't really a question.



posted on Nov, 11 2014 @ 07:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Grimpachi

Well I tend to believe that God (Whether God has life or not) Created everything in and outside of this existence.. So if that is my belief, then how can evolution even compare when evolution is just another creation of God himself?



posted on Nov, 11 2014 @ 07:13 PM
link   
a reply to: EaglesFan

You can believe whatever you wish that doesn't bother me at all the thing is if you are going to try and place your beliefs on equal ground as scientific theories you should be prepared to be challenged. In which case you should at the very least know what you are talking about unfortunately it doesn't look as if you do.


Just a theory...universe coming from zero point type of responses are dead giveaways that you don't know what your talking about.

BTW god is just a theory. The layman type of definition theory.

edit on 11-11-2014 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 11 2014 @ 07:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Grimpachi

I don't put much merit into evolution because it was originally based off lies, false findings and a man who pretty much conceded that his theory was bunk and could probably be never proven..

Oh and if God is a theory, then you probably wouldn't exist

edit on 11-11-2014 by EaglesFan because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 11 2014 @ 07:21 PM
link   
a reply to: EaglesFan

Thats cool. As I said you can believe what you want just know that beliefs and facts don't always match up.

Just wondering though what your take on the video was?




Oh and if God is a theory, then you probably wouldn't exist


It is more likely that without man gods wouldn't exist. Believe what you want though.
edit on 11-11-2014 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 11 2014 @ 07:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Grimpachi

The video is very interesting... But I think there is more to this issue than simply animals mutating and becoming something else over time.. I agree that all species are somehow related, we all share the planet when it comes down to it but I do not discount some sort of intervention from above either which could alter our DNA.. But it's one of those mysteries that we will never know unless it presents itself right before our eyes. I guess faith is the word.



posted on Nov, 11 2014 @ 07:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: amazing
The problem is that there is no other theory that replaces evolution. Have at it. Creationism doesn't work if I don't believe in your religion. That's the problem.


No. It's your problem. God named himself the Father, or Aleph Bet (Abba). Letters program life. DNA comprises letters formatting matter. Matter has no means to create something that is non local to it. Entanglement is a quantum function and cannot reside exclusively at the temporal / spatial dimension. The Dirac Relativistic Quantum Wave Equation would deny your contention that matter acts alone to create higher dimensions to itself. It is absurd to suggest that evolution exists apart from involution of consciousness from a higher dimension. Consciousness is a quantum entanglement to matter. No theory has ever been able to show otherwise. On the other hand, the Bible tells you the process.

The reason you won't hear a biologists, quantum physicist or information theory specialist say otherwise is because the deny Spirit exists. They further tell you that consciousness (Spirit) is non-local, but this has nothing to do with matter creating conscious intelligence.

I will agree that no theory replaces evolution in that it is the result and not the cause. What is observed has a quantum cause that cannot be observed, but only implied. What is implied is parallel to the metaphor provided by the Bible, the Tao De Ching and many other scriptures.

Tao

Tao (The Way) that can be spoken of is not the Constant Tao’
The name that can be named is not a Constant Name.
Nameless, is the origin of Heaven and Earth;
The named is the Mother of all things.
Thus, the constant void enables one to observe the true essence.
The constant being enables one to see the outward manifestations.
These two come paired from the same origin.
But when the essence is manifested,
It has a different name.
This same origin is called “The Profound Mystery.”
As profound the mystery as It can be,
It is the Gate to the essence of all life.

Information (Word) from Letters manifest. The Profound Mystery is quantum nature of the two that come paired from the same origin (Mother Female / Father Male). The essence is programming of letters into a catalyst. Light shines on the information. This is the definition of a hologram steaming from another dimension.

Created Image, both Male and Female.

Genesis 1:27

So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.

Who? Elohim and Ruach Elohim. Father and Mother (Spirit/Consciousness). How? Involution. Why? Evolution. Why the hologram? Simulation for necessity and invention.

Hebrews 9

23 It was necessary, then, for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these sacrifices, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24 For Christ did not enter a sanctuary made with human hands that was only a copy of the true one; he entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God’s presence.

We are the image (hologram) of the entangled dimensions above (Heaven). Again, the Dirac Equation suggests this as a proof of matter and anti-matter colliding as the event horizon of our existence. The Kore Kosmou from Egypt tells us that the purpose of creation is to Seek, Find and Adapt. Just as evolution suggests and the very intent of a simulation in a hologram, run by a quantum computer.

Seek, Find and Adaptation. The ongoing quantum computation.


edit on 11-11-2014 by AlephBet because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 11 2014 @ 07:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: EaglesFan
a reply to: Grimpachi

I don't put much merit into evolution because it was originally based off lies, false findings and a man who pretty much conceded that his theory was bunk and could probably be never proven..

Oh and if God is a theory, then you probably wouldn't exist


Could you demonstrate what lies and false finding evolution is based upon? And could you provide a citation that Darwin(I'm assuming that is who you are referencing despite the fact he neither coined to term evolution nor was he the first to postulate evolutionary theory, just he first o supply evidence and write extensively on the subject) conceded that evolutionary theory was bunk and improvable?

that doesn't even touch on the fact that modern evolutionary synthesis has moved so far beyond what Darwin initially postulated or the insurmountable evidence both in the fossil record and through what is known about evolution of many species as a result of decoding DNA and the massive leaps that genetic studies have taken the last 15 years or so...



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join