It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: sn0rch
I look at the evidence for evolution, and I accept it.
originally posted by: soulpowertothendegree
Every single organism is created, then evolves then improves itself thereby evolving some more.
snOrch: The great white sharks are a highly efficient killing machine that has evolved in it's environment to the point where it requires little adaptation to survive. Mutation does not happen for no reason. It helps life adapt to it's environment. Once it's adapted, unless changes occur to affect it's environment, it wont need to evolve. Apart from this, you do know there are 400 known species of shark?
400 genetic variants... so, again, given the environment, we see adaptations.
Adaptations lead from an aquatic lifeform, eventually coping to live outside of water during droughts, leading to the formation of rudimentary lungs, leading to limbs that not only are used to swim, but also on land, which leads to adaptations for land, and less and less requirement for water, which leads to a land based life form, far removed from the fish that millions of years prior lived entirely in water.
There we see more and more adaptation over time.. that fish, that amphibian, that 4 legged mammal, and so on.
Land is a hostile environment.
originally posted by: vethumanbeing
Nope. The nature of our DNA (you must understand what a miracle this is) is not happenstance/accidental. This could never have evolved naturally.
Oak trees die off as soul groups and are at the bottom tier of base awareness; just above rocks/mineral elements.
There was a hand in all of this and it was not natural selection. Lucy was found; a 3.2 million years ago breathing relic then; and was not near being as 'evolved' as the Neanderthal or the next being Cro-Magnum. The swiftness of the progression cannot be evolution.
Why did the Simians (living beside us) not evolve at the same pace as a different branch of hominids?
We as modern humans shouldn't EXIST AT ALL for another 10 million years.
You don't see the beauty of the human body; how it functions. It is a universe self contained that is so perfect in function and it actually has consciousness; and knows what it is and understands a higher being has to exist to have created this perfection. Coded DNA strands are so complicated as not to be accidental happenstance. The beauty of this human form/function suggests a higher thought/creator being exists.
originally posted by: radarloveguy
If evolution was real , and man evolved
from monkeys , .... why are there still monkeys ?
shouldn't they have all evolved into people ?
and all those ameobas , shouldn't they be dolphins by now ?
originally posted by: Parthin96
...there is a crapload of scientific evidence for evolution, and you know it.
This shows that mainstream science is based on lies and false theories. The mainstream scientists, all hold on to Darwins theory because they really don't have a clue where everything came from. As they say, "ignorance is bliss" and there's a lot of blissful imbeciles in the scientific community! There isn't one single shred of evidence to support evolution. We have mountains of, cheap scientific thrash theories on the subject but not one single piece of evidence.
originally posted by: vethumanbeing
a reply to: mOjOm
You cannot offer the alternative either. Proof that a creator does not exist.