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.

 

Can someone show me evidence of speciation, from one kind to another

page: 4
12
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 14 2015 @ 11:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: UB2120
a reply to: borntowatch

There is a book titled The Urantia Book and in it has what I consider the most plausible and consistent account of the establishment of life on our planet, which is said to be named Urantia.



Thats gorgeous, so cool, but I am asking for scientific evidence, not assumption and plausibility

Not to be rude, just want answers is all




posted on Mar, 14 2015 @ 11:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
You ask for evidence and when it's presented you refuse to accept it. Not just once, but multiple times. Why make a thread if you refuse to accept the evidence? You knew you wouldn't accept it to begin with.


I have yet to see any, just comments like yours stating I will deny the evidence

Step up with the evidence and shut me up or find another thread to garner stars in



posted on Mar, 14 2015 @ 11:42 AM
link   
quoting OP from page one of this thread...

I didnt want to debate it, I wanted to discuss it.
i dont believe it so the onus is on those who have the evidence to prove it, to prove it.

You have 4 articles that I am not interested in reading as I stated earlier.
Find the important points, copy paste link.

Is that to difficult?
-end quote

here is the problem

the OP doesn't BELIEVE IT.

the OP is under the mistaken assumption (likely from religious training) that FACTS can be BELIEVED IN.

SCIENCE does not believe things AT ALL

science is a progressive additive discipline which involves public reproduction of successful tests.

in this way real FACTS can be discovered and shared.

attacking the process because it is out of line with YOUR BELIEF is actually really primitive reactionary defense based ego terror.

let your terror go, accept the world for what it is.

YOUR GOD COULD STILL HAVE MADE IT THIS WAY

SCIENCE CANNOT TALK ABOUT YOUR GOD AT ALL. (so no threat, see?)

asking us to set aside the vigorous tradition of science because YOU DONT UNDERSTAND IT (which you admit on page one) is a waste of all of our time.

i think that sc0rch asked you earlier for proof of the creator?

id LOVE to hear your thoughts on that.

meanwhile in all seriousness the VERY FIRST RESPONSE to this thread was literally everything that you asked for.

AND YOU REFUSED TO READ IT!

then you quoted from it and claimed A that it was NOT what you asked for, and then B that you cannot understand it..

edited out a negative type religious comment. sry, ill try to be more polite
edit on 14-3-2015 by uwascallywabbit because: spelling and politeness



posted on Mar, 14 2015 @ 11:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: Prezbo369


Can someone show me evidence of speciation, from one kind to another


Typical creationist, pretending to ask a scientific question with biblical terms.


Typical Prezbo making invalid comments about nothing of substance when asked to substantiate his/her beliefs

Please find another thread if those comments are all you have to offer.

this isnt about faith, its about scientific evidence.

Find another playground if you have nothing valid to offer to substantiate your beliefs.

I want scientific evidence, not a whingeing complainer about religious beliefs



posted on Mar, 14 2015 @ 11:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: borntowatch

originally posted by: amazing
a reply to: borntowatch

You said you don't believe it.

So what do you believe. How did modern humans come to be? Where did we come from then?



I am asking for evidence, not assumption, I have an assumption that I am happy to forego if I can see valid evidenc for.

What I believe is irrelevant if the evidence is valid.......back to you


The reason I ask is that evolution and all of the supporting theories and science, seem to be the best we have. Shouldn't continue down this road until we have a better theory? I'm willing to forego my belief in this science if you can give me something better. Not trying to derail the thread, but In my opinion you can't 'debunk' or 'tear down' one theory without something to take it's place. Yeah? No?



posted on Mar, 14 2015 @ 11:48 AM
link   
I am not trying to debunk or tear down your theory, just asking that it be proven (that will tear down and debunk it)

This isnt about religion, its about proving the science of the theory
edit on b2015Sat, 14 Mar 2015 11:54:18 -050033120156am312015-03-14T11:54:18-05:00 by borntowatch because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 14 2015 @ 11:55 AM
link   
a reply to: borntowatch

Well, people have already provided links for you to go away and read, but you've just dismissed them out of hand. The evidence for evolution and speciation exists, in great quantities, but it would appear you're simply not interested.

You can take a horse to water, but you cannot make it drink.

It is up to you whether you drink or not


I strongly suggest you embark on some extensive reading on evolution and see the evidence for it. It seems nothing I or anyone else say's will sway your opinion.



posted on Mar, 14 2015 @ 11:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: borntowatch

originally posted by: amazing
a reply to: borntowatch

You said you don't believe it.

So what do you believe. How did modern humans come to be? Where did we come from then?



I am asking for evidence, not assumption, I have an assumption that I am happy to forego if I can see valid evidenc for.

What I believe is irrelevant if the evidence is valid.......back to you


well said

and for the record i hate this type of thread ... i oughta know better,

but you guys are getting MUCH better at your side of this

science is additive and weve only been at it for real for a coupla hundred years.

and look what we already got.

it will threaten a few old fashioned ideas the more "real stuff" is known.
that "real stuff" is gonna replace the myth that weve been rolling with for x thousand years.

in most cases this is going to be ok, in some cases this will threaten cultural foundations.


i think that this argument really revolves around the defense by any means of a treasured cultural foundation.



posted on Mar, 14 2015 @ 12:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: borntowatch
this isnt about faith, its about scientific evidence.

I want scientific evidence, not a whingeing complainer about religious beliefs


Typical Borntowatch, dishonest to the last.....

There's been thread after thread filled with links to evidence for all aspects of evolution, but you refuse to acknowledge them time after time....

This entire pathetic saga is based entirely on faith, your faith for your chosen superstitions sky fairy. You produce nothing whatsoever to show that your faith has any basis and nothing whatsoever that would even slightly discredit the theory of evolution. You're doggy paddling against a tide of facts, evidence and reason and your magical beliefs wont keep you afloat.

When history looks back on such minor issues, it wont look kindly on creationists.



posted on Mar, 14 2015 @ 12:44 PM
link   
a reply to: borntowatch

Your parameters for what you consider evidence are unreasonable and unrealistic. It would require millions of years of unbroken fossil records to show the evolution of one species into another, we don't have that and you you know it yet you still demand it.

What we do have is fossil records that point toward evolution being a real process, yet you will not accept it as evidence because you require unrealistic things.

So I ask again, why ask the question and set unrealistic parameters when you know you wouldn't accept anything less than those unrealistic parameters?

You require no evidence for biblical absurdities but require all the evidence in the world for a widely accepted theory about how we came to be. That's called irony.



posted on Mar, 14 2015 @ 01:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: borntowatch
Hi all
Can someone show me evidence of speciation, from one kind to another

No assumption, guesses or theory, hard evidence



One interesting point is DNA. Life closest to us like the Chimp has 98%+ the DNA we have. There is a reason we experiment on mice, they are cheap, breed fast and more importantly have 88% of our DNA. even a fruit fly has 47% and a grape vine has 24%.

The conclusion here is at some point in the past, millions or billions of years ago, we had a common ancestor.

You can also look at chromosomes and the main difference between Humans and Chimps is they have 24 pairs and we have 23 pairs, so even if are DNA is very close the slight difference in chromosomes really changes things up quite a bit. At some point 6 to 8 million years ago the species that became human and all other humanoids from our past had a fusion of chromosome 2 and that took us off in a much different direction than what we see with the ape and monkey evolutionary paths.



When we look at chimpanzee and bonobo they are about 99.6% DNA and it is estimated they have been separated about 2 million years. I'm talking physical separation, like a big ass river separation. One side breeds separately from the other and we start to see a divergent in DNA. Both though have 24 chromosome pairs so are still extremely similar.

With Down Syndrome instead of 46 total chromosomes they have one extra chromosome 21 for a total of 47. When we look at all Down Syndrome cases they all have the same physical features, around 50 IQ as an adult and all have common abnormalities. If that extra 21 was not a negative evolutionary trait they would be much different to a normal 23 pair human with a few million years of separation for divergent in the DNA too.


edit on 14-3-2015 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 14 2015 @ 01:35 PM
link   
this is a bait thread. op does not actually want to see anything except an opportunity to sneer at evidence s/he doesnt understand.

captain obvious out.



posted on Mar, 14 2015 @ 01:39 PM
link   


It is not productive to engage the type of arrogance/ignorance on display here. This ridiculous crap is just a rehash of the same non-working ideas we've seen before from this borntowatch.
At some point, I can see that it is entertainment at borntowatch expense getting eaten alive and all. But when it gets to that point, perhaps it is just too cruel to be take it much further.
edit on fSaturday154131f411001 by flyingfish because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 14 2015 @ 02:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Blackmarketeer

Your links are not what he is after. You show a bird changing, but still a bird.

He is after evidence of a bird becoming .. not a bird.


That's easy...its a bird as it flies toward my car while I'm driving 70 mph down the highway.

It's not a bird after it splatters on my windshield.

Seen the same thing with a Deer. First, it was a Deer crossing the road, then...it was roadkill when it was hit by an 18 Wheeler.

Science is easy, really.



posted on Mar, 14 2015 @ 03:00 PM
link   
a reply to: borntowatch

There has been studies of a land dwelling wolf type species that evolved into whales.

www.independent.co.uk...

To be honest I never heard this type species change before (and I'm must thank the OP for asking the question so I could investigate) but it seems there are still biological traits that can be compared between the now aquatic dwellers of the deep and it's land based cousins.

A thought just popped up, would man's best friend be an example of what you are looking for? Certain breeds of dogs no longer resemble the image we have of( think of a poodle or a terrier ) wolf they once we're, I know this is through mankind's intervention and not natural evolution, but there has been a change never the less.

edit on 14-3-2015 by thepitpony because: (no reason given)

edit on 14-3-2015 by thepitpony because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 14 2015 @ 03:28 PM
link   
a reply to: borntowatch


What precisely do you mean when asking for evidence one species changing into another "kind"? Its a little comfusing because you seem to take great umbrage when other posters bring up religion in the thread becsuse you want a scientific answer yet you use a term that is strictly biblical and has no use or basis in a scientific
discussion, debate or study. If you could clarify what youre looking for when using the biblical "kimd" ss the basis for your seemingly scientific inquiry it would be much easier to address the question. Thanks in advance.



posted on Mar, 14 2015 @ 04:40 PM
link   
a reply to: borntowatch




I am asking for evidence, not assumption, I have an assumption that I am happy to forego if I can see valid evidenc for.


How about we cut to the chase?......whats your assumption?

Then maybe we can have a proper discussion.



posted on Mar, 14 2015 @ 06:06 PM
link   
a reply to: borntowatch

Define "kind" in a clear and objective way.



posted on Mar, 14 2015 @ 06:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Blackmarketeer

Your links are not what he is after. You show a bird changing, but still a bird.

He is after evidence of a bird becoming .. not a bird.


Really? So you want to contend that all birds across the planet are all one species? Do you have any idea how a species is defined?



posted on Mar, 14 2015 @ 07:00 PM
link   
I find the irony very funny, a creationist asks for "evidence and not assumptions".

Here we have a person that bases his whole life on the assumption that the bible is the word of god, but then when it comes to science... "show me 100% undeniable proof or i wont believe it!!"
edit on 14-3-2015 by danielsil18 because: (no reason given)



new topics




 
12
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join