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.

 

Evolution is a farce: Evidence

page: 3
27
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 19 2014 @ 11:01 AM
link   
a reply to: hounddoghowlie

Is it not also possible that he was playing up the esoteric aspects and mockery of Christianity for the financial backers who put him in power as well as his associates who helped to keep him there ? 2 sides to every coin and as there is copious evidence for both sides it would be brash and a bit foolish to discount either possibility.




posted on Nov, 19 2014 @ 11:01 AM
link   
a reply to: TechUnique

I'd rather not watch two hours of fallacies that try to poke holes in evolution that have all been disproved MANY times on this website. For one, just because you poke a hole in evolution doesn't mean you've discredited the theory. And two, evolution isn't a religion.



posted on Nov, 19 2014 @ 12:14 PM
link   
I remember when I just lapped it all up as well. You guys don't believe anything else that they try to ram down your throats. Why believe the one thing that matters the MOST. The meaning of life.

Think about that.



posted on Nov, 19 2014 @ 12:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: TechUnique
I remember when I just lapped it all up as well. You guys don't believe anything else that they try to ram down your throats. Why believe the one thing that matters the MOST. The meaning of life.

Think about that.


believing in god is not worth my sanity. apparently you felt otherwise.



posted on Nov, 19 2014 @ 12:46 PM
link   
a reply to: TechUnique

I have to question if you are actually wanting to discuss anything here, or if you were just wanting to make an outrageous claim before punting it over to YouTube to clean up? Because 2 hours of YouTube videos is a hell of a hurdle to put between the reader, and a conversation.

So, without any explanation of what the videos are representing I will assume that the premise here is that evolution is a bunch of hooey because someone believes that humans coexisted with dinosaurs? If so....it is wrong.

FWIW, I believe humans coexisted with some dinosaurs in our ancient past. I also can see genetic drift and ascertain the fundamentals of evolution are correct.



posted on Nov, 19 2014 @ 12:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: TechUnique
I remember when I just lapped it all up as well. You guys don't believe anything else that they try to ram down your throats. Why believe the one thing that matters the MOST. The meaning of life.

Think about that.


Wow from that statement one may ascertain that you have answered one of mans greatest questions.

So would you be so kind as to tell the rest of us what you believe the meaning of life is and how you uncovered such information?

I could guess what you will say but it is better if you speak for yourself.



posted on Nov, 19 2014 @ 01:07 PM
link   
a reply to: TechUnique

Oh boy, talk about a load of dingoes kidneys! What you have there is zero evidence that evolution is a farce. Indeed what you have there is actually some (three) videos that don't prove anything. So sadly you can not claim that this proves anything.

I respect your right to not believe evolution, just as I have the right to not be a young earth creationist. But we really need to approach these things on a logical level. This falls short. Using a cryptid thats not been identified as evidence is not evidence. Its a cryptid, its clearly not been captured, clearly photographed, or indeed seen by people of good standing regularly.



posted on Nov, 19 2014 @ 01:12 PM
link   
a reply to: TechUnique

OOo that was rather early to play the "shift the uprights while the other team is lining up a kick" ploy.



posted on Nov, 19 2014 @ 01:18 PM
link   
a reply to: TechUnique

Translation: You don't actually have any substance to back up what you are saying in the OP and just wanted to proselytize. Of course that is obvious when you let Youtube be your "evidence" and reasoning instead of your own words and own research.
edit on 19-11-2014 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2014 @ 01:19 PM
link   
Evolution, what puzzles me is that we have liver, gall bladder, appendix, all the other squishy items inside, if we did not have them to start with, which I presume we did not need them, why 'evolve' them?



posted on Nov, 19 2014 @ 01:24 PM
link   
a reply to: pikestaff

There is no answer to "why" we evolve anything. We just evolve it and if it is beneficial to helping us survive, we pass it along to our children.

The better question is this. If life were intelligently designed, why do we have wisdom teeth when they don't fit in our mouths, we don't need them, and they just cause us hardship when we get into our twenties (usually resulting in surgery to have them removed)?



posted on Nov, 19 2014 @ 01:42 PM
link   
a reply to: pikestaff

Because there aren't selective pressures to lose vestigial organs. Yet. As Krazysh0t points out, if anything this is a strike against creationism. Why would god create humans with vestigial organs?
edit on 19-11-2014 by GetHyped because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2014 @ 02:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

You seem to recite many of your religions verses very often. Also in your post you claim that science is fact and all the evidence is solid yet you then admit it is theories. I sense much confusion in your belief system.

Nice edit job to change your words and take away what i responded to.

edit on 19-11-2014 by deadeyedick because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2014 @ 02:10 PM
link   
a reply to: deadeyedick

Where have I said that science is fact? I've said many times that nothing is definitively proven; I've even said that to you before. So don't put words in my mouth.

I never use the fallacy "it's just a theory" that is a Creationist tactic. I understand the difference between a scientific theory and the layman theory.

To be honest, your entire post to me has nothing to do with what I said originally to the OP. Where exactly are you getting these things I've said?



posted on Nov, 19 2014 @ 02:23 PM
link   
a reply to: deadeyedick

It's like you're trying for a full house in scientific illiteracy. Empirical evidence is "religious verses"? Confusing the layman and scientific definitions of fact and theory? Calling evidence-based empirical models a "belief system"? Really...



posted on Nov, 19 2014 @ 02:30 PM
link   
a reply to: GetHyped

There is no such thing as empirical evidence. It is just what it takes for many to believ an ever changing religion. What will all of your so called empire of science look like in a hundren yrs compared to today. You can get a glimpse of the changes in the religion by just looking back 100yrs.



posted on Nov, 19 2014 @ 02:31 PM
link   
a reply to: GetHyped

right? I often wondered, if God created us in his image, or something, does he poop? Where does it go? Is he proud owner of an outhouse, or does he poop inside our! universe?



posted on Nov, 19 2014 @ 02:39 PM
link   
a reply to: deadeyedick

Just because you don't know what it [empirical/objective evidence] is, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Subjective vs. Objective Evidence


Evidence can be of two types: Subjective and Objective. Subjective evidence is the testimony of what happened based on the statements of a witness, or Subject. The quality of the subjective evidence depends upon the honesty of the witness, and their ability to perceive reality. Unfortunately, subjective views are often inconsistent and biased. People may see what they want to see, or what they expect to see. Often, witnesses of the same traffic accident will report contradictory stories. People also may lie.

Subjective evidence should only be used to elaborate upon Objective evidence. "Subjective evidence" is not evidence at all, and can never stand alone, without Objective evidence. "Subjective evidence" is a contradiction of terms, which has somehow become part of our vocabulary. It is only the report of what some person or Subject has allegedly seen, heard, touched, tasted, or smelled. It is relying on someone else's senses, and truthfulness in reporting what was sensed.. The judge and jury is totally dependent upon the reliability of the Subject, in the absence of any Object of perception in the Court room.

Objective evidence is truly deserving of the word "evidence." Objective evidence does not lie. The interpretation of Objective evidence may vary, and that is the purpose of a court room discussion - What can we infer from the objects. Objects are the objects of perception, things that can be seen, heard, touched, tasted, or smelled. They include videos, pictures, fingerprints, DNA, foot prints, tire tracks, tape recordings, phone calls, physical objects, liquids, and gases. Recently, objective evidence can include electronic information, such as emails or files on a computer.

Objective evidence does not change, as long as it is not tampered with. It is what it is. It is unbiased. It has no motives. It has no feelings. It does not care what the outcome of the court trial is. It simply speaks the truth.


The Bible is subjective evidence. The evidence that Modern Evolutionary Synthesis is built on is objective. Yes, there is a difference. No, you aren't in the right by pretending there isn't one.



posted on Nov, 19 2014 @ 02:57 PM
link   
Well it looks as though the OP has abandoned yet another thread. I am sure he will pop up with another video of stupidity like a hit and run driver. It is like playing whack a mole putting these threads down.

It seems to me the YEC have run out of material or they are just plain lazy because I haven't seen a single good argument from them in a long time that supports a young earth. It is like they are not even trying hell the second video didn't even present anything it was just some deluded preacher talking. Was that even supposed to be evidence? If so what exactly was it supposed to be evidence of?

Just imagine if they actually found evidence against evolution. That would be a good conversation.



posted on Nov, 19 2014 @ 03:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Grimpachi

"evidence of intelligent influence" and "inarguable proof that this one specific god is the architect of all of existence" are two different things.



new topics

top topics



 
27
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join