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: 5
12
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 14 2015 @ 07:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: sn0rch
I'll give you solid undeniable hard observable factual evidence of speciation when you give me solid undeniable hard observable factual evidence of god.

Annnnnd Go.


I think that was the point the OP was trying to make. Both are a best guess by believers. Evolution is exactly that, a best guess made up of many scientific theories, some or all of which could be proven wrong in the future.




posted on Mar, 14 2015 @ 07:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: danielsil18
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!!"


No its not irony Daniel because evidence is what proves science, the foundation of evolution must be evidence and it cant be taken based on faith
If I am to accept evolution as a scientific truth then it must be more than assumption

As far as I am concerned without proof you are the one basing your life on the assumption that scientists have it right, that is hypocrisy beyond belief.



posted on Mar, 14 2015 @ 07:28 PM
link   
When faced with the inadequacy of Darwinian evolution, you'd think these highly-evolved scientific-minded people would have more to say than 'God is dum and u r dum...n stuff! I gotz links to pruve it!

The Church has lost its claim to the Most Brains Washed In One Generation trophy. The institution of modern science now has the most blind followers, all of whom are absolutely certain of their righteousness.

The pure science of the Enlightenment era has been perverted by personal bias and political agendas. Newton is surely shaking his head at all of us.



posted on Mar, 14 2015 @ 07:40 PM
link   
a reply to: borntowatch




If I am to accept evolution as a scientific truth then it must be more than assumption


But your beliefs are based on an assumtion.....you said so earlier......so you accept your own beliefs on an assumption?.......how does that work then?
edit on 14/3/2015 by Argyll because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 14 2015 @ 07:42 PM
link   
a reply to: borntowatch

If you do not accept evolution as the most probable theory of how we, as life forms, have come to be dominate species on this planet then fair play to you Sir as I would like to dis cuss ( in a civil manner) what your counter argument or proof against this theory is. There is a solid argument backed up by fossilised evidence that is accepted by science and the church www.washingtonpost.com...

I am not trolling, just hoping for the provision of the facts that you hold as a strong argument against the current theory.



posted on Mar, 14 2015 @ 07:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: OpenMindedRealist
When faced with the inadequacy of Darwinian evolution, you'd think these highly-evolved scientific-minded people would have more to say than 'God is dum and u r dum...n stuff! I gotz links to pruve it!

The Church has lost its claim to the Most Brains Washed In One Generation trophy. The institution of modern science now has the most blind followers, all of whom are absolutely certain of their righteousness.

The pure science of the Enlightenment era has been perverted by personal bias and political agendas. Newton is surely shaking his head at all of us.


What I struggle with is the depth of faith evolutionists show in science and the demand others must accept the same faith in evolution they show.
Another interesting issue is how they have to pervert a question regarding evidence re evolution into a religious fight to create strawmen of so many varieties.
and finally I am of the opinion many evolutionists dont know what they believe and why because they cant explain it in simple terms, all they can do is point out a link they cant themselves understand.



posted on Mar, 14 2015 @ 07:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: Argyll
a reply to: borntowatch




If I am to accept evolution as a scientific truth then it must be more than assumption


But your beliefs are based on an assumtion.....you said so earlier......so you accept your own beliefs on an assumption?.......how does that work then?


Well lets just call it my default position that I am willing to change if evidence should arise to change my opinion.
Just like evolution is your default position.

Does that help

Would you change your default position if alternate evidence arose?



posted on Mar, 14 2015 @ 07:52 PM
link   
a reply to: borntowatch

Sorry you might have missed my post, but I am open for a discussion on alternative theories. Could you please state what they are so we can talk about them.
edit on 14-3-2015 by thepitpony because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 14 2015 @ 07:56 PM
link   
a reply to: thepitpony

You do not sound like a troll to me, kind sir.

Your point is valid, but my answer is simple: Does the scientific method dictate that we cling to flawed theory until a better theory is put forward?



posted on Mar, 14 2015 @ 07:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: thepitpony
a reply to: borntowatch

If you do not accept evolution as the most probable theory of how we, as life forms, have come to be dominate species on this planet then fair play to you Sir as I would like to dis cuss ( in a civil manner) what your counter argument or proof against this theory is.


As you can see by this thread my counter argument is the lack of evidence. Something I think we have established in this thread



originally posted by: thepitpony
a reply to: borntowatch
There is a solid argument

There is a solid argument based on assumption and best guess scenario and statistics?
Go read the links posted on the first page.
I dont think its that solid


originally posted by: thepitpony
a reply to: borntowatch
backed up by fossilised evidence that is accepted by science and the church www.washingtonpost.com...


Accepted by all science,?
I have read scientists who have poo pooed evolution and the evidence, secular evolution believing scientists, many of them. They accept it because its all they have got not because of the evidence
As for the church, by definition I am the church, believers are the church and while many believers accept evolution many do not. Your position is assuming catholicism represents Christianity?


originally posted by: thepitpony
a reply to: borntowatch

I am not trolling, just hoping for the provision of the facts that you hold as a strong argument against the current theory.


My strong argument would fold in an instant if valid evidence were to wash away my ignorances, so far

and no I dont classify a person asking question a troll, ask away.



posted on Mar, 14 2015 @ 08:06 PM
link   
a reply to: borntowatch

I draw some of the same conclusions about the mentality of staunch evolutionists.

'But Darwinian evolution is the only explanation for life on our planet! It MUST be correct because nobody has a better answer! Many don't seem to realize...that's the same argument creationists made up until Darwin came along. Just switch 'Darwinian evolution' with 'God.'

The blind fanaticism seen in this thread is the same brand we would see if we stepped in a time machine and went back to the 14th century. Instead of blindly following the church, today we have people blindly following the latest study by some 30 year old with a PhD.



posted on Mar, 14 2015 @ 08:11 PM
link   
a reply to: borntowatch

As you have stated you don't hold with the current theory of evolution, and that is fair enough, but the point I would like to make for my beliefs is that the current theory is the best we have and has supporting evidence to bolster it claims. What are the alternative theories you are proposing to replace this and is there any evidence to support the claims ?

The mention of the church accepting evolution wasn't mentioned to cause umbrage, I just wanted to show that some quarters of religion are now accepting that the current theory holds (in their opinion ). So I would like to step away from any further discussion on the that point I made and discuss what you would like to replace the current theory.



posted on Mar, 14 2015 @ 08:16 PM
link   
borntowatch is waiting for someone to show evidence of a bird species turning into a dog species, apparently. Nothing short of that will do!



posted on Mar, 14 2015 @ 08:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Blackmarketeer

I did post a link where there was evidence of of a wolf type animal turning into a whale ( not like a transformer by the way) but it wasn't commented on so I went for a cup of tea.

www.independent.co.uk...



posted on Mar, 14 2015 @ 08:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: OpenMindedRealist
a reply to: borntowatch
'But Darwinian evolution is the only explanation for life on our planet! It MUST be correct because nobody has a better answer! Many don't seem to realize...that's the same argument creationists made up until Darwin came along. Just switch 'Darwinian evolution' with 'God.'


Yea except the Creationist version was a complete guess based on exactly zero evidence. Evolution actually HAS evidence for it. There are tons of it. Just because you don't want to look at it doesn't make it invalid or not there.



posted on Mar, 14 2015 @ 08:36 PM
link   
a reply to: borntowatch




Well lets just call it my default position that I am willing to change if evidence should arise to change my opinion.


But you haven't said what your position is!.....what are your assumptions?

Creation vs Evolution...what do you assume?......and do you have any evidence of your assumptions?



posted on Mar, 14 2015 @ 08:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: OpenMindedRealist
a reply to: borntowatch

I draw some of the same conclusions about the mentality of staunch evolutionists.

'But Darwinian evolution is the only explanation for life on our planet! It MUST be correct because nobody has a better answer! Many don't seem to realize...that's the same argument creationists made up until Darwin came along. Just switch 'Darwinian evolution' with 'God.'

The blind fanaticism seen in this thread is the same brand we would see if we stepped in a time machine and went back to the 14th century. Instead of blindly following the church, today we have people blindly following the latest study by some 30 year old with a PhD.


Anyone who is still ranting about "Darwinian Evolution" is stuck in a time warp from the WW2 era. Today, we deal with the Modern Evolutionary Synthesis. It's a pretty simple concept that as we learn more and discover new things that we have to add the new data to the theory or toss out things that no longer work. There is no blind fanaticism, only an understanding of how the science behind it actually works vs. people who can't be bothered to grasp the basics of it.



posted on Mar, 14 2015 @ 08:55 PM
link   
a reply to: OpenMindedRealist

The theory to me holds because it has supporting evidence and is backed by the scientific community. At this time it is the strongest theory we have and until there is a better one ,that has undergone testing and has supporting evidence, then what do we have to replace it?

All theories are only that until proven, but it is a strong argument that so far has not been disproved or given a decent counter theory argument against it. It is fair enough if you do disagree against this theory but there is never a decent discussion on the subject without it turning into a religious debate.



posted on Mar, 14 2015 @ 09:19 PM
link   
Brontowatch is a master baiter.

He is baiting everybody into falling for his poorly hidden agenda and that is to stir up ill feeling between the camps .

I called it on page 3 and he didnt dispute my assessment of him.
He should be barred from starting threads until he learns to kerb his bigotry.




edit on 14-3-2015 by Gideon70 because: (no reason given)

edit on 14-3-2015 by Gideon70 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 15 2015 @ 01:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: Blackmarketeer
Evolution: Watching Speciation Occur | Observations
Goes into several instances of speciation and hybrid-speciation.

Observed Evolutionary Events

Scrub jays evolving/speciating?
This Jay Is Evolving in a Very, Very Weird Way

Some more scholarly fare:



ROTFLMAO...." Yet the two varieties of island scrub jay (they haven’t technically speciated—yet) live on the same tiny island. "

"It’s probably a good idea to take a moment and talk about what exactly a species is. The problem is, it’s hard to say. "

I simply do not understand how someone can cite theories and WAG's as science.



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join