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.

 

"The origin of species"

page: 17
10
<< 14  15  16   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 6 2016 @ 05:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Ghost147

In my opinion the "Nature did it crowd" are ignoring reality

You are like a pet with a chew toy, I can not understand your capacity to think yourself and your own opinion so superior to all others
You are a fundamentalist

You can not see the lack of real scientific answers
You can not see the faults in your faith
If you do see (abiogenesis), find them then you just say " we will find a natural explanation"
That's faith in nature

You are no different to those you call ignorant, you just think nature/science is wonderful instead




posted on Mar, 6 2016 @ 11:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: Ghost147

In my opinion the "Nature did it crowd" are ignoring reality

You are like a pet with a chew toy, I can not understand your capacity to think yourself and your own opinion so superior to all others
You are a fundamentalist

You can not see the lack of real scientific answers
You can not see the faults in your faith
If you do see (abiogenesis), find them then you just say " we will find a natural explanation"
That's faith in nature

You are no different to those you call ignorant, you just think nature/science is wonderful instead



Well done!



posted on Mar, 6 2016 @ 11:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman

Can I just try something




In my opinion the "God did it crowd" are ignoring reality

You are like a pet with a chew toy, I can not understand your capacity to think yourself and your own opinion so superior to all others
You are a fundamentalist

You can not see the lack of real scientific answers
You can not see the faults in your faith
If you do see (abiogenesis), find them then you just say " we will find a religious explanation"
That's faith in God

You are no different to those you call ignorant, you just think God/religion is wonderful instead



What makes you any different?

It's a war of ideologies, and you've only chosen a side.
edit on 6-3-2016 by PhotonEffect because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 7 2016 @ 01:09 AM
link   
a reply to: PhotonEffect

Actually PE that was my point.
The other crowd are saying that about us but in reality are no different in their own views

I see a difference, I actually get why they believe what they believe, it's almost logical in my opinion, flawed but logical
That and they don't have a choice, they are all in on this hand and they can't afford to blink

If evolution came up with some serious evidence, real proof, I stand to lose nothing but my belief in 6 day creation.
I can be a theistic evolutionist
I can turn from my faith.
I can worship nature
I can become an evolution (non biological and biological) troll

If Evolutionists fail then they face God, they can't handle that though, won't even consider it

There is a big difference

Imagine if evolution as a science fell, how stupid would all these people look, the whole scientific community would be answerable



posted on Mar, 7 2016 @ 03:50 AM
link   
a reply to: wisvol



This describes a stupid troll. Unless you mean troll in a Tolkien capacity, in which case I stand corrected. Not offended though, still reading your posts and hoping for some more arguments beyond description of my ignorance, that would patch it perhaps?


It also describes someone with the inability to grasp basic biology.
Which is what was intended.
Interpret my words how ever way you like,doesn't change that fact.

If you actually want to learn something read some of the other posts. They've been better at addressing your points and questions. Or go to your local library and pick up a few books on evolutionary biology. But if you've done all that already,I can't help you. It's completely up to you.

Here's a LINK to an introduction lecture on human behavioral biology by Robert Sapolsky from Stanford. Wonderful professor,this course isn't entirely irrelevant to evolutionary biology. However it should give you greater insight into the mechanisms of biology applied in other areas.. I recommend you watch the other lectures in sequential order. Fascinating stuff,this is the guy(and course btw) that essentially quelled my belief in the supernatural phenomena that is intelligent design.

I hope you learn something new.


edit on 3am31America/Chicago3103America/Chicagoam353 by NateTheAnimator because: edit to add



posted on Mar, 7 2016 @ 04:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: Ghost147

In my opinion the "Nature did it crowd" are ignoring reality

You are like a pet with a chew toy, I can not understand your capacity to think yourself and your own opinion so superior to all others
You are a fundamentalist

You can not see the lack of real scientific answers
You can not see the faults in your faith
If you do see (abiogenesis), find them then you just say " we will find a natural explanation"
That's faith in nature

You are no different to those you call ignorant, you just think nature/science is wonderful instead



thats willful ignorance. if you say nature isnt evidence then you have to explain why supernatural is evidence.

if i say nature is evident, anyone can confirm this, right now. but if you say supernature is evident, youd just have to take it on faith. there is a world of difference.

as far as i know abiogenesis is simple life coming from the building blocks of life that isnt by definition life. there are experiments we have done that proves this is possible. and even if i grant that abiogenesis is false and cant explain how life can begin, it doesnt give a shred of credibility to any other hypothesis. this is called the equovication fallacy.
edit on 7-3-2016 by vjr1113 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 7 2016 @ 04:14 AM
link   
a reply to: vjr1113


Evolution has no evidence
There are no valid fossils in nature

We don't have transitionals, animals evolving into different animals

We see no evidence of evolution

Nature does not provide the evidence, anywhere

Remember the experiments of generational evolution, they evolved a virus into a virus, a fruit fly into a fruit fly, nothing, no results at all. Maybe a dietary result, a capacity to change diets

I undeerstand it can be said that we are evolving as we exist, well the evidence for that is not evident, humanity is becomming sicker and weaker, more susceptible to illness and the environment
We are de-evolving if anything

The simple fact is that evolution teaches we have a common ancestor, dust and water or what ever your imagination can slot into the beginnings

Nature does not provide a solution, your argument is invalid

Our common ancestors are irrelevant without abiogenesis, evolution fails because it can't get from dirt and water, it can't get of the ground

Ignorance? Faith in nature creating is your belief.



edit on 7-3-2016 by Raggedyman because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 7 2016 @ 09:51 AM
link   
You guys are on a role today!


originally posted by: Raggedyman
Evolution has no evidence


Blatant lie.


There are no valid fossils in nature


Blatant lie.


We don't have transitionals, animals evolving into different animals


Blatant lie.


We see no evidence of evolution


Blatant lie.


Nature does not provide the evidence, anywhere


Blatant lie.


Remember the experiments of generational evolution, they evolved a virus into a virus, a fruit fly into a fruit fly, nothing, no results at all. Maybe a dietary result, a capacity to change diets


Blatant stupidity that shows complete ignorance of the concepts being talked about.


I undeerstand it can be said that we are evolving as we exist, well the evidence for that is not evident, humanity is becomming sicker and weaker, more susceptible to illness and the environment
We are de-evolving if anything


Blatant lies.


The simple fact is that evolution teaches we have a common ancestor, dust and water or what ever your imagination can slot into the beginnings


Blatant straw man.


Nature does not provide a solution, your argument is invalid


Blatant lie.


Our common ancestors are irrelevant without abiogenesis, evolution fails because it can't get from dirt and water, it can't get of the ground


Blatant lie.


Ignorance? Faith in nature creating is your belief.


Blatant lie.

Anybody still not sure if this guy's a troll? These are all things that have already been discussed, and rather than talk about them, this person just lies about them and repeats the lies ad nauseum. You wonder why nobody takes religious folk seriously. You do more harm to your cause than good.

I find it hard to believe that even religious folks are this dumb. It's blatant trolling, that's it. I'd put money on Raggedyman being an atheist trying to defame religious folk by making them look bad. It's the only explanation that makes sense. Nobody actually makes a post like that and thinks they made valid logical points.
edit on 3 7 16 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 7 2016 @ 09:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Barcs

We'll show some hard, solid evidence for evolution
Not viruses turning not viruses or fruit fly turning into fruit fly

You seem really angry Barcs



I can wait



posted on Mar, 7 2016 @ 10:33 AM
link   
a reply to: Barcs




I find it hard to believe that even religious folks are this dumb. It's blatant trolling, that's it. I'd put money on Raggedyman being an atheist trying to defame religious folk by making them look bad. It's the only explanation that makes sense. Nobody actually makes a post like that and thinks they made valid logical points.


WOW! That's a "thread worthy" thought! It makes perfect sense! I never noticed the logic in that tactic before, but you're right, these people really do give the impression that traditional religionists are argumentative, ignorant and myopic! It seems these kinds of posters don't even understand the religious dogma that they are trying to protect, let alone the science they're trying to refute.



posted on Mar, 26 2016 @ 10:52 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

You mean the way Donald Trump is a stalking-horse for the Democratic Party?



posted on Apr, 12 2016 @ 02:52 PM
link   
a reply to: peter vlar

Okay, please prove this theory and make it a law.



posted on Apr, 12 2016 @ 02:59 PM
link   
a reply to: luciferslight

And yet another demonstration of your scientific illiteracy. There isn't a hierarchy in science which places Scientific Laws above Scientific Theories. A scientific Law explains Why a natural phenomena occurs where a Scientific Theory describes How a process occurs. Biological Evolution is a fact. Modern Evolutionary Synthesis serves to explain the mechanisms that drive evolution and how they work. Gravity is a Scientific Theory as well. Do you believe that Gravity is false as well? While we are at it, please provide an iota of evidence that supports your twaddle statements regarding the majority of crania being forgeries. That's your claim, not mine. It's interesting that you opted to make an ignorant demonstration as opposed to supporting your fallacious statements that I was replying to. You said it, put your money where your mouth is.



posted on Apr, 12 2016 @ 10:55 PM
link   
a reply to: luciferslight

Out of curiosity, and perchance I missed this. What is your background with science? It does not have to be formal education in a science. Just an actual education?

I ask, because I am totally and utterly appalled at people who argue at the faults of science, who do not understand what it is, what it does, and how things work.

So as has been pointed out, you seem to think there is a heiracy of things that goes, hypothesis, theory, law.

When in actuality:
Scientific Law: This is a statement of fact meant to explain, in concise terms, an action or set of actions. It is generally accepted to be true and universal, and can sometimes be expressed in terms of a mathematical equation. They explain what will occur in a given circumstance.

Scientific Theory: A theory is an explanation of a set of related observations or events based upon proven hypotheses and verified multiple times by detached groups of researchers. They explain facts and, sometimes, laws.

A law governs a single action, whereas a theory explains an entire group of related phenomena.



posted on Apr, 14 2016 @ 12:06 PM
link   
a reply to: peter vlar

(Okay.. Find me a real bone made by nature itself in which you can hold with your hand, find me and tell me that is proof. Then show me one ape that is still evolving from itself, half way into becoming a complete human. Other than that, it isn't true.

Darwinism is nothing but a racist radical idea of apes becoming human. It's impossible for a human to evolve from apes. Do you see any species of apes that have a civilized community?

Or do you see a gaint gap between man and ape? This "theory" isn't provable with fraud bones. Especially if you have a gap. Why hold this as true without question? You believe humans evolved through apes, when we were engineered by another specice. Please find me a human that has full ancestor blood of the bonobos. If you do, you win. That would be proof without a gap.)

- this is what I would've said.. But # it. You win



posted on Apr, 14 2016 @ 12:24 PM
link   
a reply to: luciferslight

You are arguing from the point that apes turned into humans, that just isn't true so it is understandable why you have a hard time with the theory. We share a common ancestor, we are not apes that evolved to humans.

The fossil record is out there, or do you think those are all faked?



posted on Apr, 14 2016 @ 01:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: luciferslight
a reply to: peter vlar

(Okay.. Find me a real bone made by nature itself in which you can hold with your hand, find me and tell me that is proof.


Should I take that as "No, I can't defend my earlier insistence that all crania are forgeries"?


Then show me one ape that is still evolving from itself, half way into becoming a complete human. Other than that, it isn't true.


And here we get to the crux of your problem, you don't actually have a clue what Modern Evolutionary Synthesis states let alone the lineage of hominids. Well Done! Homo Sapiens Sapiens shares a COMMON ANCESTOR with the other great apes( Gorillas, Chimpanzee, Bobobo and Orangutan). For the record though, all apes are still evolving. This is why we have Chimpanzee on one side of a river and Bonobo on the other side of it.


Darwinism is nothing but a racist radical idea of apes becoming human. It's impossible for a human to evolve from apes.



Again, nobody says that humans evolved from apes. We ARE apes and share common ancestry with the others.


Do you see any species of apes that have a civilized community?



Yes, Bonobos. Far more civilized than HSS


Or do you see a gaint gap between man and ape?


Genetically, no. Morphologically, slight differences but still minor.


This "theory" isn't provable with fraud bones. Especially if you have a gap.


And we're back to fraudulent bones that you still have demonstrated no evidence for and a new strawman, "The Gap". What exactly is this gap you keep referencing?


Why hold this as true without question?


Now you're making further assumption regarding how I approach scientific data.


You believe humans evolved through apes, when we were engineered by another specice.


That's not what I believe at all. Please support with evidence that we were created by another species.


Please find me a human that has full ancestor blood of the bonobos. If you do, you win. That would be proof without a gap.)


Actually, if I were able to do that, it would disprove MES not support it. Because MES, nor Anthropology states that we are descended from Bonobos.


- this is what I would've said.. But # it. You win


No need to be crude just because you make unsubstantiated claims, fail to support those claims and then demonstrate an abhorrent lack of comprehension regarding the science involved.



posted on Apr, 20 2016 @ 03:58 PM
link   
a reply to: peter vlar


Should I take that as "No, I can't defend my earlier insistence that all crania are forgeries"?

Why Darwinism if False

And here we get to the crux of your problem, you don't actually have a clue what Modern Evolutionary Synthesis states let alone the lineage of hominids. Well Done! Homo Sapiens Sapiens shares a COMMON ANCESTOR with the other great apes( Gorillas, Chimpanzee, Bobobo and Orangutan). For the record though, all apes are still evolving. This is why we have Chimpanzee on one side of a river and Bonobo on the other side of it.

Number 2 should answer this problem

Again, nobody says that humans evolved from apes. We ARE apes and share common ancestry with the others.

We are fully apes by BLooD you're right..

Yes, Bonobos. Far more civilized than HSS

Well then, you're inferior to Bonobos as well I am.

Genetically, no. Morphologically, slight differences but still minor.

You said our genes came from apes.. why refute it saying no? Morphological and genetically are the same. You are saying both aren't the same. How can metamorphoses occur without mutations in genes

And we're back to fraudulent bones that you still have demonstrated no evidence for and a new strawman, "The Gap". What exactly is this gap you keep referencing?

The Gap

Now you're making further assumption regarding how I approach scientific data.

I assume you studied this for some time? Went out to look for the bones yourself, logged it in your data book, and kept going until you found something. Internet research is not the same as exploring it for yourself (I included).

That's not what I believe at all. Please support with evidence that we were created by another species.

For one, disease. Not everyone can catch the same disease. if all were the same apes, monkeys, gorillas, we would've all been dead. One disease would wide out the entire apes, monkeys, etc. Two, blood type. Sure we might have90-95% blood from the apes, but explain how the other animal blood types are in us also? This was no mistake, if it were we'd see it and be dead. again we'd share the same blood thus contracting the same disease which would kill us all.

Actually, if I were able to do that, it would disprove MES not support it. Because MES, nor Anthropology states that we are descended from Bonobos.

yet you support evolution. why? because it would discredit your scientific frauds?
here let me twist your words to find my favor, because im an asshole like that.


"Again, nobody says that humans evolved from apes. We ARE apes and share common ancestry with the others. For the record though, all apes are still evolving. Genetically, no. Morphologically, slight differences but still minor. Actually, if I were able to do that, it would disprove MES not support it. Because MES, nor Anthropology states that we are descended from Bonobos. No need to be crude just because you make unsubstantiated claims, fail to support those claims and then demonstrate an abhorrent lack of comprehension regarding the science involved."

There, you see how in a summary it states you support evolution? then refuse to believe it even exist, because... "Actually, if I were able to do that, it would disprove MES not support it. Because MES, nor Anthropology states that we are descended from Bonobos."... by this, it would make sense. Find bones that look like us, but forget the rest of the body parts which could hint clues, as to what we are really made of. Not how we look liked back then.
Then again... non of it makes sense in the sense of evolving. there shouldn't be any missing link as we have apes.. to humans. in between that "gap" we should have found that "morphing" humaniod walking and breathing, not in bones.

but then.. what if we humans were evolving with the help of our spirit jumping from body to body in order to morph?



posted on Apr, 20 2016 @ 04:15 PM
link   
a reply to: luciferslight

Do you get that the only "Darwinism" these days is in a social sense? It would be like assuming Babbages methods for "computers" are still accurate as to how computers work. They were a great early attempt. Shame things move on. Thus Darwin had some great ideas, but he had no idea about DNA, let alone what it did (guess what it was the middle of the 20th century before we had PROOF of that).

I am also going to add, these "Darwinists" you name have a title. It is Scientist. We don't choose which theory to believe. Hypotheses sure, we might argue that, but once a theory is postulated and evidence found that supports it more than that which refutes it(and it has for evolution, we have over whelming evidence). You can not choose to not believe gravity, thermodynamics or kinetics, and then have it "go away". It still happens. Just like evolution does.




top topics



 
10
<< 14  15  16   >>

log in

join