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.

 

Man didn't evolve from fish or monkeys

page: 8
13
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 8 2016 @ 08:26 PM
link   
a reply to: TerryDon79

Yes TD that's awesome, I didn't know all that wonderful, so religion teaches that humanity came from dust. Common attribution sounds like confirmation of a common designer

Now they are faiths, is science a faith
I am discussing science, not religion, different topic altogether, they are not the same

Or are they, belief in science and evolution in some instances are as you have pointed out

Big Bang the non organic ancestor, the religion of science





posted on Mar, 8 2016 @ 08:29 PM
link   
a reply to: peter vlar

whats repeatable observable and testable about evolution



posted on Mar, 8 2016 @ 08:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: TerryDon79

Yes TD that's awesome, I didn't know all that wonderful, so religion teaches that humanity came from dust. Common attribution sounds like confirmation of a common designer

Now they are faiths, is science a faith
I am discussing science, not religion, different topic altogether, they are not the same

Or are they, belief in science and evolution in some instances are as you have pointed out

Big Bang the non organic ancestor, the religion of science



How can the big bang be a common ancestor?
The big bang didn't create life on Earth.
The big bang CAN'T create life on Earth as Earth wasn't around yet.

You're argument (or lack thereof) is flawed by your lack of understanding.



posted on Mar, 8 2016 @ 08:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman

I don't think YOU understand neighbour, YOU don't get to define what something is, that is done by consensus between qualified individuals. Thus, when someone is politely telling you to go try another discipline, they are doing so because that is based on established conventions. IF this does not suit you? Tough. Society functions due to conventions.

Lets illustrate this some more.

by definition, the distance between the Sun and the earthy is one (1) Astronomical Unit (AU). For this species, that is a unit of measurement. Similarly a Kilometer, Kilogram, etc are all defined (and measured with precision). You do not have to agree, but then again life is going to suck for you



posted on Mar, 8 2016 @ 08:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman

Do you understand what Genomics is? That is where to begin with answering this. If you don't you will not like the answer neighbour.



posted on Mar, 8 2016 @ 09:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: mOjOm

Mojo
Please understand this
You don't get to define what I want answers to, what I need to be explained

Go play in a thread where your opinion is more valid than mine. I choose what I need a satisfactory answer to quell my doubts, you dont



I'm not giving you my opinion jerk off. If you want answers to questions about "Origins" you should be looking at Cosmology not Evolution. If not Cosmology then try Abiogenesis, Biology, or maybe even Chemistry. But not Evolution because Evolution isn't the study of Origins. It's the study of changes from things already existing.

FYI, I don't give a god damn what you do or don't want me to comment on either. I'll say what I want, when I want and in whatever thread I want regardless of how you feel about it. So now that we have that straight you can take that attitude and shove it.



posted on Mar, 8 2016 @ 10:16 PM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

So you say

But hey, that's your opinion and I don't accept it

Too bad isn't it

Chin up



posted on Mar, 9 2016 @ 05:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Phantom423

Then you've obviously never compared the genetic codes of primates and man. A "pattern" is a similar shape; a "similarity" is self explanatory. But an authentic copy of code - base pair by base pair - 3D conformation and crystalline lattice - this all points to common ancestry.



This also could be due to genetic code from a common source - a Creator. Patterns, similarities, or copy and pastes present in the coding still prove neither side of the argument. When I code, I copy and paste frequently for efficiency's sake; it's intuitive and reasonable.


In the creation model It's supposed that all animals are based off some aspect of the human - hence the congruent genetic codes.




As I said, it doesn't matter where it came from or who did it, if anyone. The process is the same. Science is about discovery and evidence. There's no evidence for a "who". But there is evidence for a "how". Evolution is about process - how things happen.

If there is a "who", that's fine. But until the hard evidence shows up, we work with what we have.


edit on 9-3-2016 by Phantom423 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 9 2016 @ 07:19 AM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman


I havnt seen any evidence

Nice one.

Now explain why the ‘evidence’ you’ve been shown isn’t evidence.

You should be able to do that, surely? Because if you can’t, one is reluctantly compelled to decide that you are lying.



posted on Mar, 9 2016 @ 08:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: mOjOm

So you say

But hey, that's your opinion and I don't accept it

Too bad isn't it

Chin up



Thats really all this thread amounts to. You think its funny to watch people try to change your mind. Not enough to do with your time?



posted on Mar, 9 2016 @ 08:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Astyanax

What evidence, flys and viruses?

Work with what you havnt



posted on Mar, 9 2016 @ 08:14 AM
link   
a reply to: TzarChasm

No TC
Just can't stand liars

Bash away but the onus of proof is not on me

It's not funny, it's like watching soldiers in ww1 walking into gunfire



posted on Mar, 9 2016 @ 08:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Phantom423

Awesome phantom, so far pissing in the wind, where is the evidence



posted on Mar, 9 2016 @ 08:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: Astyanax

What evidence, flys and viruses?

Work with what you havnt


Im going to post this for the second time, and i know you've seen this already.

evolutions is natural selection over generations produced by genetic mutation and most importantly, and dont forget this, environmental conditions.

there was no, giraffes all of a sudden, or polar bears, or penguins or blind fish. the precursors of those families went thru generations of survival of the fittest in order to adapt to their environment in order to survive. brown bears in the polar regions died off because they couldn't survive and white bears thrived because they had the genetic advantage to survive.

if you cant understand this, then either you dont care about evidence, or you are unable to comprehend science, or are just trolling. dozens and dozens of pages worth of biological evidence and explanations and what do we get out of you?

science is faith. you sir, are a troll and i dont believe you are honest anymore.
edit on 9-3-2016 by vjr1113 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 9 2016 @ 08:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: vjr1113
if you cant understand this, then either you dont care about evidence, or you are unable to comprehend science, or are just trolling. dozens and dozens of pages worth of biological evidence and explanations and what do we get out of you

Of course Raggedy understands all of this. This isn't about evolution or God, it's just a trolling exercise to see how many people he could aggravate in one thread. And I have to give it to him, all by himself he's managed to accomplish this. Look at how many folks have come in here trying to "convince" him of science, and all he has to do is say "nope you're wrong", and people fly off the handle like Raggedy just took a swat at the bee hive... what fun!

I think it's best to just let this thread die the death it deserved back on page 1. There's nothing to be learned here...



posted on Mar, 9 2016 @ 08:40 AM
link   
a reply to: vjr1113

and I will reply to the same silly post for how many times I don't care to remember

You sir, I don't care your opinion

I am not going to post a link, I ignore irrelevant dribble, I expect you do as well

We disagree, climb that mountain

Troll, funny you are in a thread arguing with my pov

Check that mirror



posted on Mar, 9 2016 @ 08:44 AM
link   
a reply to: PhotonEffect

PE, you are trolling my thread

Just walk away

What you can't?
What's wrong with you, bee in the bonnet

I asked for evidence and what

Sweet nothing

Good little follower, get a star or two
Yay you



posted on Mar, 9 2016 @ 09:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman

ok you choose to ignore evidence then. realize you are posting on a forum built upon the phrase Deny Ignorance. a phrase i have championed for many years now. you want to post here? get ready to be ridiculed for choosing ignorance. you dont get to post pseudoscience, then claim science is faith, then say dont ridicule me.

you want to believe in nonsense? fine. keep it to yourself. you want to post it in public? expect people to point out your flaws.



posted on Mar, 9 2016 @ 09:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: TzarChasm

No TC
Just can't stand liars

Bash away but the onus of proof is not on me

It's not funny, it's like watching soldiers in ww1 walking into gunfire


So you say

But hey, that's your opinion and I don't accept it

Too bad isn't it

Chin up


edit on 9-3-2016 by TzarChasm because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 9 2016 @ 11:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: Barcs

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: Barcs

I havnt seen any evidence


The evidence is all around you.

Like literally in this thread.

The talk origins site listed 29 individual pieces of evidence in favor of common descent. You have addressed zero of it. This is the sad reality. If you can't do it, then there is no reason to think you aren't a troll. Your biased rants do not prove anything other than your failure to understand basic concepts in science.


I did with the first sentence of the intro

"A theory based on assumption"

You go read it


You failed to address a single part of the evidence, only semantics about a single word on the first page before any evidence is presented. Epic fail and total avoidance of the evidence.

You just proved yourself a troll. No need to argue anything further.




top topics



 
13
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join