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.

 

Is There Evidence for Evolution? Show it to us.

page: 30
20
<< 27  28  29    31  32  33 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 27 2015 @ 04:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: LadyFae
I am reading all this but I am learning nothing.


That would explain the rest of your post:


If we evolved from monkeys; then why are there still monkeys that never evolved over thousands of years.....


Oh dear, deary me!

1) We didn't "evolve from monkeys".

2) "If Americans came from Europe, why are there still Europeans?"


How many monkey species are there?


260.


Has anyone seen a man come from any of these animals? They only produce monkey's.


No, because that would be utterly ridiculous and evolution says no such thing.

Seriously, as far as inept creationist arguments go, this is by FAR one of the most ignorant I've ever read on here. And that's saying a lot!




Not trying to be rude but isn't proof someone actually seeing this process happen and documenting without a doult.



Not trying to be rude but you would be wise to at least understand the very concepts you (ineptly) attack.


Another keen creationist mind swings and misses. Facepalm.
edit on 27-8-2015 by GetHyped because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 27 2015 @ 04:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: Murgatroid

originally posted by: Barcs
So are you ever going to address the evidence...

The only evidence I've seen is evidence of fraud.

When academics themselves refer to Darwinism as myth, the discussion no longer is about evidence, it's about credibility.

There comes a point when credibility is completely lost after so many lies have been exposed.


Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me...

"Today our duty is to destroy the myth of evolution... ~ Pierre-Paul Grassé (professor of zoology at the University of Clermont-Ferrand)

Evolution is positively anti-science. Science deals with things that are testable, observable, and demonstrable and evolution has none of those qualities. To call evolution "science" is to confuse fairy tales with facts. True, evolution has been mixed with science for the last thirty years, but that does not mean that it is the same as science. Beer is often advertised during sporting events but the two subjects have no logical connection, and evolution has no more to do with science than beer has to do with sports.

Cult of Evolutionism


Still waiting for 156,000+ research articles supporting Creationism. We'll make it easy for you - find 12 (that's a dozen).



posted on Aug, 27 2015 @ 04:02 PM
link   


OMG here we go again. Can't you people do your own research? Why don't you read through this board? All the answers are there.

Another [face plant]



I have read through all 18 pages..yet still nothing.. I am trying to understand...

If I do not know ask........



posted on Aug, 27 2015 @ 04:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: LadyFae
I am reading all this but I am learning nothing.

If we evolved from monkeys; then why are there still monkeys that never evolved over thousands of years..... How many monkey species are there? Has anyone seen a man come from any of these animals? They only produce monkey's.

Not trying to be rude but isn't proof someone actually seeing this process happen and documenting without a doult.



And since you're learning nothing, how about starting at the links contained in this post:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

You wouldn't overlook them intentionally, would you??




posted on Aug, 27 2015 @ 04:03 PM
link   
a reply to: LadyFae


Then read up on evolution instead:

evolution.berkeley.edu...
en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Aug, 27 2015 @ 05:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: LadyFae


Then read up on evolution instead:

evolution.berkeley.edu...
en.wikipedia.org...


We know the theorized mechanism of evolution. Can you explain to us creationism? It seems only fair to know both sides of the argument.



posted on Aug, 27 2015 @ 05:49 PM
link   
a reply to: cooperton

Given LadyFae's statements in this thread, I can confidently say she has no clue about evolution.

Given your comments in this thread (and previous threads), I can say the same about you.



posted on Aug, 27 2015 @ 07:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Murgatroid

where in my post did I say I believed in either religion or evolution ?

you said I did not me



posted on Aug, 27 2015 @ 07:43 PM
link   
originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: cooperton

GetHyped: Given LadyFae's statements in this thread, I can confidently say she has no clue about evolution.
Given your comments in this thread (and previous threads), I can say the same about you.

Evolution doesn't describe the 'activation' or how the body is animated exactly (consciousness comes later). What powered the body at birth to become a 'live action figure' and upon death that same energy to vacate and leave that body a dead 'inaction figure'. Evolution does not speak of an external force that becomes an internal energy form that is at work here. I doubt its an invisible 20 horse power mechanical motor.
edit on 27-8-2015 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 27 2015 @ 10:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: sapien82
where in my post did I say I believed in either religion or evolution ?

Here perhaps?


originally posted by: sapien82
what about evolution of organs for example the eye ! ...the evidence of the evolution of the optical cavity, the optical nerves, that evidence is available everywhere and recorded by science...


Still confused? reread my post...



posted on Aug, 28 2015 @ 12:16 AM
link   
Because evolution happens on such a massive interlinked but a slow enough pace you need to think in 100,000 year terms.

It is not surprising you cant get it. Don't Christians believe the whole universe / world is only 6000 years old ?


Just face it. The Bible is a book about the relationship between God and Man. Set in a relatively small location and time period. It was never meant to be a complete history of our planet or zoological textbook. Which is why it fails to mention so much about what was even happening around the world at the time it was even written.

The whole thing only got screwed up when fraudulent "experts" stated adding in their own bits.

Epic fail.



posted on Aug, 28 2015 @ 12:35 AM
link   
Another thing to add....... You do know Jesus considered the Old Testament to be highly corrupted and full of , hence his wish to have it re-written.

The sins he was trying to wipe covered the bastardization on the Old Testament. He not once preached the stuff you are purporting to be the only truth.



posted on Aug, 28 2015 @ 01:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: thedeadtruth
Because evolution happens on such a massive interlinked but a slow enough pace you need to think in 100,000 year terms.

It is not surprising you cant get it.


Can you even recount your past day? let alone the past 100,000 years?



You do know Jesus considered the Old Testament to be highly corrupted and full of , hence his wish to have it re-written.


Although he rebukes some of the teachings, he endorses many concepts such as the male-female creation union in Mark 10:8. Implicating that the Genesis story is true in his perspective.



posted on Aug, 28 2015 @ 02:06 AM
link   
(a) Can you even recount your past day? let alone the past 100,000 years?

Yes I can recount my entire life. But only my life. And I have left evidence of myself being here.

If you can not recount your past day. Maybe that explains a lot.


(b) Jesus stated no such thing. And made it quite clear the Old Testament was corrupted by frauds.

You see you cant have it both ways. You either believe it is all true. Or it is all BS. You don't get to cherry pick the bits from the Old Test you want to believe. Or you make a mockery of his teachings and death.



posted on Aug, 28 2015 @ 09:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: thedeadtruth

(b) Jesus stated no such thing. And made it quite clear the Old Testament was corrupted by frauds.



You see, this is the problem, most of the people who bash Christianity and creationism don't even know what it says:

" And Jesus answering said to them, `Did ye not read, that He who made [them], from the beginning a male and a female made them, and said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and cleave to his wife, and they shall be -- the two -- for one flesh? so that they are no more two, but one flesh; what therefore God did join together, let no man put asunder.'" Mthw 19:4-6

A direct reference to creation. Also see the first chapter of Luke for the lineage from Adam to Jesus.

If you don't know creationism then don't bash it, just like someone who doesn't know evolution shouldn't bash it

So I ask the question again, can any one of you evolutionists explain to me creationism? You expect us creationists to know how evolution is theorized to work, which I do, so you should know how creationism was proposed to happened if you are going to argue against it.



posted on Aug, 28 2015 @ 09:08 AM
link   
a reply to: LadyFae

Ok, let's try nicely....

Humans did not come out of monkeys, but both - humans and today primates share the same ancestors. By watching human tree, you can see how we are related with our close relatives. Genetics later just confirmed this, and you can read about this research for example here:

Comparing the human and chimpanzee genomes: Searching for needles in a haystack

See, it was previously believed that our DNA is only ~2% different from chimps, but new research points that it is more like 4%. It also points at time frame for common ancestor for chimps and us. Read it, don't worry, it will not blow your head up...




Ajit Varki1 and Tasha K. Altheide

Glycobiology Research and Training Center, Departments of Medicine and Cellular & Molecular Medicine, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, California 92093, USA


Abstract

The chimpanzee genome sequence is a long-awaited milestone, providing opportunities to explore primate evolution and genetic contributions to human physiology and disease. Humans and chimpanzees shared a common ancestor ∼5-7 million years ago (Mya). The difference between the two genomes is actually not ∼1%, but ∼4%—comprising ∼35 million single nucleotide differences and ∼90 Mb of insertions and deletions. The challenge is to identify the many evolutionarily, physiologically, and biomedically important differences scattered throughout these genomes while integrating these data with emerging knowledge about the corresponding “phenomes” and the relevant environmental influences. It is logical to tackle the genetic aspects via both genome-wide analyses and candidate gene studies. Genome-wide surveys could eliminate the majority of genomic sequence differences from consideration, while simultaneously identifying potential targets of opportunity. Meanwhile, candidate gene approaches can be based on such genomic surveys, on genes that may contribute to known differences in phenotypes or disease incidence/severity, or on mutations in the human population that impact unique aspects of the human condition. These two approaches will intersect at many levels and should be considered complementary. We also cite some known genetic differences between humans and great apes, realizing that these likely represent only the tip of the iceberg.

Humans (Homo sapiens) and chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) last shared a common ancestor ∼5-7 million years ago (Mya) (Chen and Li 2001; Brunet et al. 2002). What makes humans different from their closest evolutionary relatives, and how, why, and when did these changes occur? These are fascinating questions, and a major challenge is to explain how genomic differences contributed to this process (Goodman 1999; Gagneux and Varki 2001; Klein and Takahata 2002; Carroll 2003; Olson and Varki 2003; Enard and Pääbo 2004; Gagneux 2004; Ruvolo 2004; Goodman et al. 2005; Li and Saunders 2005; McConkey and Varki 2005). Most genome projects focus on elucidating the sequence and structure of a species' genome and then identifying conserved functionally important genes and genomic elements. The finished human genome (International Human Genome Sequencing Consortium 2004) provides such a catalog of genomic features that ultimately interact with the environment to determine our biology, physiology, and disease susceptibility. Completion of the draft chimpanzee genome sequence (The Chimpanzee Sequencing and Analysis Consortium 2005) provides a genome-wide comparative catalog that can be used to identify genes or genomic regions underlying the many features that distinguish humans and chimpanzees.



posted on Aug, 28 2015 @ 09:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: SuperFrog
a reply to: LadyFae

Ok, let's try nicely....

Humans did not come out of monkeys, but both - humans and today primates share the same ancestors. By watching human tree, you can see how we are related with our close relatives. Genetics later just confirmed this, and you can read about this research for example here:

Comparing the human and chimpanzee genomes: Searching for needles in a haystack

See, it was previously believed that our DNA is only ~2% different from chimps, but new research points that it is more like 4%. It also points at time frame for common ancestor for chimps and us. Read it, don't worry, it will not blow your head up...




Genetic similarity by phenotypically similar organisms should be no surprise. This does not in any way prove evolution. An intelligently designed genetic code would intuitively have such an arrangement.



posted on Aug, 28 2015 @ 09:11 AM
link   
a reply to: cooperton

I take it you don't believe in paternity tests, then?



posted on Aug, 28 2015 @ 09:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: cooperton
Genetic similarity by phenotypically similar organisms should be no surprise. This does not in any way prove evolution. An intelligently designed genetic code would intuitively have such an arrangement.


Are you sure??

Why then we have fossils of extinct life forms, including many humanoids???

Unsuccessful design not mentioned in your magic book, or just further proof that evolution is happening??



posted on Aug, 28 2015 @ 09:49 AM
link   
a reply to: cooperton

Thats an easy one:

Creationism is like.. well, there was this designer-god. And anything natural you see right now around you was designed be it.
If you can't explain something, it must be because some super-duper-god made it and you are just too dumb to understand it.


Well, thats at least the usual way of creationists to explain the errors of evolution. What specific term of creationism did you want to be explained?

Edit: oh, and you can't predict anything, because there are no correlations between cause and effect in natural things. Anything might happen, as the almighty-allknowing goddie might decide to give humans a third eye tomorrow. Meh, why not?
edit on 28 8 2015 by ManFromEurope because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
20
<< 27  28  29    31  32  33 >>

log in

join