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.
Same genetically...
Just 100 times as big and anatomically different…
That's not how genetics work.
This is not how scientific theories work. There is nothing higher up in the chain of understanding than a scientific theory. They don't turn into anything else.
50 foot porpoises, alligators and sharks are adapted to their environment, not evolved to it. They are the same genetically today as they were then. Just a lot bigger and called "Dinosaurs".
originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: GetHyped
They certainly do. Scientific 'fact'.
Which so far, in the case of evolution, is illusory.
Otherwise it would be proven.
But the fossil record is incomplete,
the DNA is missing, the species links,
ongoing evolution (man bear pig),
the video, eyewitness reports, all as fanciful as religion about it.
Thats where my opinion ends…
This a contradiction. They are not the same genetically as dinosaurs, yet you claim this is "adaption" and not "evolution"? That doesn't map any sense.
originally posted by: intrptr
originally posted by: iterationzero
a reply to: intrptr
Species adapt to changing environments. not the other way round.
I don't think I said anything to the contrary.
Adaptation as opposed to evolution was more my point.
50 foot porpoises, alligators and sharks are adapted to their environment, not evolved to it. They are the same genetically today as they were then. Just a lot bigger and called "Dinosaurs".
originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Krazysh0t
Evolution is a Scientific Theory so you can see how your above statement makes you look silly.
You just looked even sillier connecting the two words, science and theory… whatever, dude.
They aren't dinosaurs for one thing. Also, adapting to the environment is evolving. It doesn't matter if you like the term or not.
originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Krazysh0t
Evolution is a Scientific Theory so you can see how your above statement makes you look silly.
You just looked even sillier connecting the two words, science and theory… whatever, dude.
I've already posted up the definition of the term 'scientific theory'. No matter how hard you try and ignore it, a scientific theory is not the same as a layman theory.
originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: GetHyped
I've already posted up the definition of the term 'scientific theory'. No matter how hard you try and ignore it, a scientific theory is not the same as a layman theory.
A theory is theory is a theory.
Good thing, too. Imagine if science outright claimed evolution as a fact…
but then "evolutionists" aren't really "scientists" are they?
and thats why they always cage it as the "theory of evolution", despite what many extrapolate that into.
originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: GetHyped
I've already posted up the definition of the term 'scientific theory'. No matter how hard you try and ignore it, a scientific theory is not the same as a layman theory.
A theory is theory is a theory.
Good thing, too. Imagine if science outright claimed evolution as a fact… but then "evolutionists" aren't really "scientists" are they?
and thats why they always cage it as the "theory of evolution", despite what many extrapolate that into.
WTF are you even talking about? attacking science. oooooh i must be very very very bad. attacking science. how exactly does one do that?
originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: stormbringer1701
Your wrong this is still positive to negative charge. But thanks to physics we realize there was a negative charge were we didn't think there was. In the future before you attack science may pay off to open up a book and learn about it first.