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.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

No time for Evolution?

page: 6
1
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 04:50 PM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

Wow! So much wrongness in such a short post lol.




posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 04:51 PM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic




So if Evolution must have life, then the Origin of that Life that's changing overtime is more important than Evolution.

Yeah. It would be nice to know the origin of life. But it's not necessary to understanding evolution.

Nor is it necessary to know where flour comes from in order to bake a cake.


(I figured I might as well join the repeating oneself bandwagon. Seems to be the thing to do here.)


edit on 9/17/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 04:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Barcs

This is just silly!

You said EVOLUTION REQUIRES LIFE!

If evolution requires life then the Origins of Life are paramount because it's life that will be evolving overtime.

My car requires an engin to run, the process of me going to the store and going to visit a friend is determined and depends on the Origin of the Engine. If you're a Scientist, you want to know the Origin of the Engine and all of it's parts because that's more important than what happens with the engine when it reaches the environment.



posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 05:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: neoholographic




So if Evolution must have life, then the Origin of that Life that's changing overtime is more important than Evolution.

Yeah. It would be nice to know the origin of life. But it's not necessary to understanding evolution.

Nor is it necessary to know where flour comes from in order to bake a cake.


(I figured I might as well join the repeating oneself bandwagon. Seems to be the thing to do here.)



WHAT???

Who said it was neccessary to understanding evolution? You can understand the process of evolution all day but like he said EVOLUTION MUST HAVE LIFE, so without the origin of life you just have a process that occurs but that process tells you nothing about what's evolving overtime and that's what's important.



posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 05:02 PM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

Really?!

That would mean we would need to know the origins of gravity to understand how a plane can fly. Guess what? It makes no difference. We know gravity is there. We know it EXISTS. That's all we need to know.

Same as evolution. All we need to know is that there is life. We don't need to know how it started to understand evolution.
edit on 1792016 by TerryDon79 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 05:03 PM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

Can you explain how not knowing the origins of life renders our understanding of genetics change sorted by natural selection as the explanation for biodiversity invalid?



posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 05:04 PM
link   
a reply to: GetHyped

What's this, the fifth time you've asked? I'm not surprised he hasn't answered it. All he's focused on is "evolution needs life!!!!111one!!11!!"



posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 05:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: neoholographic

Really?!

That would mean we would need to know the origins of gravity to understand how a plane can fly. Guess what? It makes no difference. We know gravity is there. We know it EXISTS. That's all we need to know.

Same as evolution. All we need to know is that there is life. We don't need to know how it started to understand evolution.



You can't be serious!!

Tell that to Einstein or all the Scientist looking into Quantum Gravity. To a Scientist, Origin matters. You can know about ggravity and the plane all day in 9th grade science class but at places like MIT or the Max Planck Institute, they want to know the origins because the origins are what matters.



posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 05:06 PM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

You just repeated the same nonsense from earlier in the thread. Origin of life= chemistry. Evolution = biology. They aren't even part of the same field. To suggest they are the same or have overlapping mechanisms is flat out wrong. I know you don't like it, but that's the way it is, regardless of your opinion.

The only reason you defer to the origin of life every time evolution comes up is because you have NO ARGUMENT against any evidence that backs evolution. Your beef is with abiogenesis, so just say abiogenesis instead of trolling to get reactions out of people that understand the science. Linking abiogenesis to evolution has no basis or justification, unless you have evidence to provide that shows overlapping mechanisms. It's like linking cell theory to special relativity.

You can't use the lack of understanding of abiogenesis to argue against evolution. It simply doesn't work. Otherwise you have to deny gravity as well, since we don't know the origin as mentioned above.
edit on 9 17 16 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 05:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: neoholographic

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: neoholographic




So if Evolution must have life, then the Origin of that Life that's changing overtime is more important than Evolution.

Yeah. It would be nice to know the origin of life. But it's not necessary to understanding evolution.

Nor is it necessary to know where flour comes from in order to bake a cake.


(I figured I might as well join the repeating oneself bandwagon. Seems to be the thing to do here.)


so without the origin of life you just have a process that occurs but that process tells you nothing about what's evolving overtime and that's what's important.


You see that bit I've quoted? The answer to that would be LIFE. That's what's evolving over time.



posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 05:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: neoholographic

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: neoholographic

Really?!

That would mean we would need to know the origins of gravity to understand how a plane can fly. Guess what? It makes no difference. We know gravity is there. We know it EXISTS. That's all we need to know.

Same as evolution. All we need to know is that there is life. We don't need to know how it started to understand evolution.



You can't be serious!!

Tell that to Einstein or all the Scientist looking into Quantum Gravity. To a Scientist, Origin matters. You can know about ggravity and the plane all day in 9th grade science class but at places like MIT or the Max Planck Institute, they want to know the origins because the origins are what matters.


It only matters if that's what's being studied or explored. Evolution DOESN'T address the origin of life as it's about what happens to life AFTER life came into existence.
edit on 1792016 by TerryDon79 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 05:09 PM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

Can you explain how not knowing the origins of life renders our understanding of genetics change sorted by natural selection as the explanation for biodiversity invalid?



posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 05:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: neoholographic

Can you explain how not knowing the origins of life renders our understanding of genetics change sorted by natural selection as the explanation for biodiversity invalid?


Asked and answered. You can understand something all day but without knowing the Origins your understanding is incomplete. This is why Scientist are looking into Inflation, String Theory, Quantum Gravity and more. It's not enough to have an understanding without knowing the Origins. That's Science.



posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 05:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: neoholographic

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: neoholographic

Can you explain how not knowing the origins of life renders our understanding of genetics change sorted by natural selection as the explanation for biodiversity invalid?


Asked and answered. You can understand something all day but without knowing the Origins your understanding is incomplete. This is why Scientist are looking into Inflation, String Theory, Quantum Gravity and more. It's not enough to have an understanding without knowing the Origins. That's Science.


That's completely false.

I know how a wheel works on my car and bike. I don't know where it originally came from.

I also know that walls keep wind and rain out and they keep the ceiling up, but I don't know where they originally came from.



posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 05:16 PM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

You want to talk about how science works but can't see the flaws in your own argument.

Ironic.



posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 05:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Barcs

Again you said:

EVOLUTION REQUIRES LIFE

The other guy said

EVOLUTION MUST HAVE LIFE

You can't separate Evolution from the Origin of the very life that will be evolving overtime. That's just doesn't make sense.

Evolution tells you how life evolved overtime.

The Origin of Life tells how and why life evolved overtime in this way.

You can't have Evolution without the Origin of Life.

You can understand how a game of Poker is played but to understand how and why it's played this way you have to learn the Origins. To a Scientist Origins are very important.



posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 05:23 PM
link   
a reply to: [post=21258595]neoholographic[/post

You haven't answered the question in the slightest. Well, maybe in your mind you have, and that would explain a lot.

Try again:

Can you explain how not knowing the origins of life renders our understanding of genetics change sorted by natural selection as the explanation for biodiversity invalid?



posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 05:25 PM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

Wrong, again.

Evolution needs life. That's it. Nothing more. The origins of life is about how life came to be, it has nothing to do with evolution apart from there must be life for evolution to be a thing.



posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 05:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: neoholographic

Wrong, again.

Evolution needs life. That's it. Nothing more. The origins of life is about how life came to be, it has nothing to do with evolution apart from there must be life for evolution to be a thing.


What???

It's like saying the Origins of Life has nothing to do with Sam apart from the Origins of Life explains how Same came to be!!!

LOL!!
edit on 17-9-2016 by neoholographic because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 05:41 PM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

I'm guessing it's futile trying to explain how science works to someone who either doesn't want to know or who doesn't have the capacity to learn.

You enjoy your false assumptions of what science is. All you're doing is making yourself look foolish.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join