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.

 

Can you prove evolution wrong? -- Part 2

page: 17
11
<< 14  15  16    18  19 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 18 2018 @ 10:01 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

So are you going to even look at the evidence that was posted, or just continue to spew more ignorance based on straw mans?

Every point I presented was flat out ignored in favor of religious rhetoric. Please try being a little honest. It goes a long way. If you have no argument against the lactose tolerance mutation or evidence, then just admit it instead of deflecting and changing the subject. Address my counterpoints or give up the silly religious crusade against evolution. It is clear that you don't even have an argument, you just emotionally hate evolution so you are ranting about it. Pretty obvious.


edit on 2 18 18 by Barcs because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 18 2018 @ 03:21 PM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

Anecdotal stories are not evidence. Also do you know why hte Cheddar man is so called? Your pun is barely worth acknowledging.

It returns to the fact, you do not understand evolution.



posted on Feb, 18 2018 @ 03:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: ARM1968

Where are all the intermediate stage things? The not quite elephants, the not quite lions etc. Where are the things becoming other things? Why have crocs pretty much remained as they are for so long?

I actually believe in evolution. I just don’t think we understand it.


My question, precisely. We supposedly evolved from transitional ancesters like Kenyanthropus and Austrolopithecus. Why are we no longer evolving. Some portion of man should be changing or have we finally become perfect?

I do believe that adaption can be vast and transforming and I have seen marvelous examples of adaption in the life span of one plant, but that's as far as it goes. One species does not evolve into another and there are no examples of that happening now.

We are created at some level by intentional conciousness. I do not know the details of this, but I would love to find out.



posted on Feb, 18 2018 @ 04:39 PM
link   
a reply to: pointessa

Sigh

Once more with feeling.

Each new generation is different than the last. You don't get discrete "transitional stages" where you see half this and half that (or similar percentages). SO every set of remains is a "transitional st age"



posted on Feb, 24 2018 @ 08:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: Noinden
a reply to: pointessa

Sigh

Once more with feeling.

Each new generation is different than the last. You don't get discrete "transitional stages" where you see half this and half that (or similar percentages). SO every set of remains is a "transitional st age"


A million generations of insects have passed along, with the same insects today. I'm hoping to see ants evolve into a new beetle species, but it's not a reality.

A species cannot change into another species. Not in millions, billions, or trillions of years from now, nor did any species change into another species before now.

The ancient Egyptians loved house-cats, many thousands of years ago. I'm shocked to see how my own little animals have an almost uncanny resemblance to ancient Egyptian cats!!

After thousands of years, and countless cat generations, they're still house-cats.



What we have seen over human history is the actual, valid evidence that evolution is a fallacy. A pure fantasy tale.


What you see are extinct species, which once lived, and later, they all were gone.

THIS has been proven over the years...

The dodo bird, and other species, existed years back, and later, were extinct.

Dodo birds did not evolve into another species. They were always dodo birds, and are now an extinct species. The End.



posted on Feb, 24 2018 @ 09:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: pointessa

originally posted by: ARM1968

Where are all the intermediate stage things? The not quite elephants, the not quite lions etc. Where are the things becoming other things? Why have crocs pretty much remained as they are for so long?

I actually believe in evolution. I just don’t think we understand it.


My question, precisely. We supposedly evolved from transitional ancesters like Kenyanthropus and Austrolopithecus. Why are we no longer evolving. Some portion of man should be changing or have we finally become perfect?

I do believe that adaption can be vast and transforming and I have seen marvelous examples of adaption in the life span of one plant, but that's as far as it goes. One species does not evolve into another and there are no examples of that happening now.

We are created at some level by intentional conciousness. I do not know the details of this, but I would love to find out.


It's pure mind manipulation, nothing more.


Okay, now, boys and girls - all of us should be very thankful to our ancient ancestors, who were apes, and we wouldn't exist today if they didn't evolve into humans!

What I remember most of all about my early grade school - that the world is round. We always knew this, because there was always a globe on every teacher's desk. And they showed us how it once was thought the Earth was flat! Isn't that dumb, children? Not smart people, like you are so much smarter than they were.

The teachers told us sailors all feared falling off the edge of the Earth, and that they believed horrible sea monsters lived out there, too!

It was from their ignorance of the world, as nobody knew diddly squat, back then.

They showed us drawings of the sea monsters, and falling off the edge of the world, and everyone laughed at the utter idiocy!



And nobody wonders why children laugh at people who say earth is, indeed, flat. Not round at all.



posted on Feb, 24 2018 @ 12:08 PM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

Still dodging the evidence I see. Again, speciation has been achieved in a lab. What do you have to say about this or the direct observable mutations I mentioned?

This is why religion is a mental illness. Just ignore all evidence and refuse to do any research whatsoever on the subject, just deny it in favor of ancient texts. Come on, bro. Make a real argument.
edit on 2 24 18 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 25 2018 @ 04:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: Barcs
a reply to: turbonium1

Still dodging the evidence I see. Again, speciation has been achieved in a lab. What do you have to say about this or the direct observable mutations I mentioned?

This is why religion is a mental illness. Just ignore all evidence and refuse to do any research whatsoever on the subject, just deny it in favor of ancient texts. Come on, bro. Make a real argument.


Tampering with genetic codes of different species in a lab. It's like saying Dr. Frankenstein would have proven evolution is true, because he created an entirely new species - Monster-Man!


A genetic mix of cat and rabbit DNA created a 'cabbit'. And tiger and lion mix created 'ligers'.

A cabbit was not a new species. A species reproduces. A cabbit cannot reproduce, since it was NEVER a species to begin with.

Evolution is the theory that thinks any extinct species evolved into other species, millions of years ago.

Why would they have any clue what happened millions of years ago, is because they are 'experts'. And 'experts' know what happened millions of years ago, so move along folks!


I'm sure they'd have found the Dodo Bird an ancestor that evolved into other bird species, too. But the Dodo Bird was alive a couple centuries ago, and we saw it become an extinct species.


Every other extinct species they find have evolved into other species. None of the species we knew, before they became extinct, had evolved into anything else, though.

I'm sure Dodo Birds will have 'evolved' into other bird species, in another billion years or so!



posted on Feb, 25 2018 @ 10:22 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

So instead of answering my inquiries you just repeat the same rhetoric from before. It's pretty sad the level of delusion involved in blatantly ignoring any and all evidence just to continue this fake crusade against science.



posted on Feb, 25 2018 @ 10:22 AM
link   
Double
edit on 2 25 18 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 25 2018 @ 03:37 PM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

How do you know the same insects are around today, to a million generations back?

Lets look at the Genus Homo you would be hard pressed to tell the difference (at first glance) between Homo neanderthalensis and Homo sapiens. Indeed you might find more variation inside Homo sapiens than without.Homo neanderthalensis were a distinct species (the genetics shows this) yet we breed with them (as any one who is not sub Saharan African will show if tested and compared), along with another species (the Denisovians).

You've not actually looked at speciation have you? You would rather repeat pulpit dogma, than hard facts.

So no not the end.

Your ignorance is your handicap.



posted on Feb, 25 2018 @ 03:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Barcs

Its also been seen in nature. Convenient that these creationist types ignore that and lab evidence ...



posted on Feb, 25 2018 @ 05:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Noinden

a reply to: Barcs

Its pure entertainment gentlemen...

Let him ramble... he only reinforces the idea that flat earthers are in fact morons

I love it




posted on Feb, 26 2018 @ 06:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: Barcs
a reply to: turbonium1

Still dodging the evidence I see. Again, speciation has been achieved in a lab. What do you have to say about this or the direct observable mutations I mentioned?

This is why religion is a mental illness. Just ignore all evidence and refuse to do any research whatsoever on the subject, just deny it in favor of ancient texts. Come on, bro. Make a real argument.


Tampering with genetic codes of different species in a lab. It's like saying Dr. Frankenstein would have proven evolution is true, because he created an entirely new species - Monster-Man!


A genetic mix of cat and rabbit DNA created a 'cabbit'. And tiger and lion mix created 'ligers'.

A cabbit was not a new species. A species reproduces. A cabbit cannot reproduce, since it was NEVER a species to begin with.

Evolution is the theory that thinks any extinct species evolved into other species, millions of years ago.

Why would they have any clue what happened millions of years ago, is because they are 'experts'. And 'experts' know what happened millions of years ago, so move along folks!


I'm sure they'd have found the Dodo Bird an ancestor that evolved into other bird species, too. But the Dodo Bird was alive a couple centuries ago, and we saw it become an extinct species.


Every other extinct species they find have evolved into other species. None of the species we knew, before they became extinct, had evolved into anything else, though.

I'm sure Dodo Birds will have 'evolved' into other bird species, in another billion years or so!


You can breed a wolf with a dog and a horse with a zebra because they are genetically cousins, in a really big family tree descending over hundreds of millions of years. Cats and rabbits are not cousins and so they can't be cross bred. It's hard to keep track of what species changes where and how that fits into the frame of evolution since we are talking about a process that takes millions of years to truly observe. But millions of years leaves behind a lot of evidence that diligent minds can use to paint a picture. Every link goes somewhere. Of course it helps if you actually understand the theory of evolution to begin with. "monkeys turn into people if you wait around long enough" is not what the theory says.
edit on 26-2-2018 by TzarChasm because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 27 2018 @ 09:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: Barcs
a reply to: turbonium1

Still dodging the evidence I see. Again, speciation has been achieved in a lab. What do you have to say about this or the direct observable mutations I mentioned?

This is why religion is a mental illness. Just ignore all evidence and refuse to do any research whatsoever on the subject, just deny it in favor of ancient texts. Come on, bro. Make a real argument.


Tampering with genetic codes of different species in a lab. It's like saying Dr. Frankenstein would have proven evolution is true, because he created an entirely new species - Monster-Man!


Which genetic codes were tampered with, in which labs by which groups? It should be an easy enough task to cite that information. Otherwise you're just throwing spaghetti at the wall and hoping that some of it sticks.



A genetic mix of cat and rabbit DNA created a 'cabbit'. And tiger and lion mix created 'ligers'.

A cabbit was not a new species. A species reproduces. A cabbit cannot reproduce, since it was NEVER a species to begin with.


You do know that a "Cabbit" exists only in fiction don't you? They're each from a completely separate and distinct genus and family. Cats are from the Family Felidae and the Order Carnivora whereas rabbits are from the Family Leporidae and the Order Lagomorpha. One is a carnivore and the other an herbivore. Aside from both being mammals, you can't get much farther separated than cats and rabbits as their Last Common Ancestor is estimated to have been roughly 90 million years ago. There are no Cabbits outside of fiction. Primarily Anime from what I've seen. So you have actually made one correct statement in this whole thread... That Cabbits can't reproduce because they were never a species is entirely correct.

Lions and tigers however are quite closely related, both carnivores and while no longer true due to human encroachment into their ecological niches, there was a lot of overlap where lions and tigers had the opportunity to meet one another in their natural habitats. And they still didn't mate in nature.

As you seem to rule out any possible mechanism for the introduction or evolution of a new species why don't you give us some insight into your hypothesis for where the genetic diversity on Earth originates. To harbor this degree of umbrage towards the MES, you must have an alternate hypothesis that you wish to test against the scientific method. Or am I giving you too much credit?


Evolution is the theory that thinks any extinct species evolved into other species, millions of years ago.


And this post is the post in which you very clearly demonstrate that despite your utter contempt for the Modern Evolutionary Synthesis, you don't understand the most basic aspects of what falls under the scope of the theory on any level whatsoever.

Please... Feel free to provide a citation that supports your commentary if you are able. I a, always happy to be proven wrong and using that as a learning exercise.

I'll give you a quick hint though... Nowhere is it stated in any scientific literature that all extinct species have evolved into other species. I've never heard anyone make this claim in a classroom, in a lab, at a conference or even in casual conversation.

Only here on ATS do I see people make inane claims based on their own lack of knowledge and comprehension of the various scientific disciplines involved in studying the evolution of biological life on Earth. There are countless evolutionary dead ends. Our own Genus, Homo, is filled with many examples from Homo Naledi to Homo Antecessor to Homo Floresiensis. They all lived contemporaneously with, in some cases, 6 or more different species within our genus depending on their geographical location and Eco-niche. Nobody claims that they went extinct because they evolved into a new species of hominid. Just like Neanderthal and Denisovans didn't evolve into some magical new hominid, they all simply went extinct.


Why would they have any clue what happened millions of years ago, is because they are 'experts'. And 'experts' know what happened millions of years ago, so move along folks!


Condescension based on a platform of ignorance (whether that ignorance is willful or simply a result of circumstance is still on the table) is pretty pathetic. Particularly when other posters in this thread have used specific information and citations to support their positions and you have yet to engage in anything resembling a debate if the facts and resort to simpleton tactics as a distraction from the clear fact that you don't understand biology period let alone evolutionary biology.

I have no issue with people who have a different view of the world or of science. But anyone who willingly enters into a debate or discussion of a subject that they don't know the first thing about simply baffles me. Whether you agree with or appreciate an opposing view, it would behoove a person to learn everything they can about the opposing position prior to engaging in a public debate or discourse. It's the first step in Debating 101... Learn your opponents position as well as you know your own if you want to properly engage in a discourse on the topic. You haven't engaged in even the most basic due diligence here and it becomes more glaringly obvious with each subsequent post you author.

Just because you chose not to educate yourself and learn some basic scientific principles doesn't mean that others haven't put in the work, hours and effort into understanding things that you scoff at and dismiss with a wave of your hand, a wry smile and a dry chortle like a carnival barker. Nobody claims to know every single variable that affected the Earth. But some of us do know a thing or 2


I'm sure they'd have found the Dodo Bird an ancestor that evolved into other bird species, too. But the Dodo Bird was alive a couple centuries ago, and we saw it become an extinct species.


And?



Every other extinct species they find have evolved into other species. None of the species we knew, before they became extinct, had evolved into anything else, though.


Would you care to attempt to support this fools good with something resembling a citation? Or perhaps you could just admit that you don't have a clue because concepts like education and learning aren't something you place much value in and nothing will ever change with regards to your willingness to comprehend that which you so loathe?

Disagreeing with or disputing the science behind the MES is one thing. To do so from such an under informed platform however provides nothing more than a shovel to continue digging that hole you've buried yourself in


I'm sure Dodo Birds will have 'evolved' into other bird species, in another billion years or so!


It really doesn't bother you in the least that you trudge through your own waist deep fecal tissue because it's easier than learning about the science you so publicly deride, does it? With every new post you make on this or related and similar topics, you do nothing to support your own non sequitur of a thought process and everything possible to demonstrate how little you actually know, let alone comprehend, about biological evolution.



posted on Feb, 28 2018 @ 04:51 PM
link   
a reply to: peter vlar

Sadly he (assuming, could be wrong) seems to think that any animal studied was genetically engineered



posted on Feb, 28 2018 @ 05:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Noinden



If nothing else, it’s an interesting look into the dire failings of education coupled with zero drive to engage in due diligence. It is rather frustrating though to attempt to engage in a civil dialogue with someone who has never attempted to learn the bare bones, most basic aspects of the science they believe to be so flawed and faulty. If you don’t understand the basics of biology or the MES, is there any reason that I should I take their opinions seriously? Not that I can see because there’s no discussion to be had if the other end of the debate hasn’t got a clue.



posted on Feb, 28 2018 @ 05:13 PM
link   
a reply to: peter vlar

TV science is to blame here in someways. I repeatedly find people that think you can get a total genome sequence (including sample prep) in a few hours. Or that you can Mass Spec a ceramic (to get a C14 date ....).

How science is presented to the populace is as if it is Magic. It produces wonders, in an instant. I mean according to cracked we will be growing meat in the lab for the masses in a few years.... when in reality, we are growing meant (sans texture, taste etc) for testing.

So its education (in a big way) but its also the fact that real science is boring to the masses. I mean no one is going to want to watch me run cinematographic purification to make analytical standards, they probably assume my API's (Active Pharmaceutical intermediates) come out of the reactor, ready to take, and I (a Chemist/Biochemist) will know how to dose them with it ....

So when it comes to Genetics, there are people who are positive we are cloning humans. You know ignore the fact even if we could, we've yet got a way to grow them outside of another human.

OR

They assume we can reliably edit the entire genome, and create new species, at will ... also we can resurrect dinosaurs from amber trapped mosquitoes



posted on Mar, 1 2018 @ 08:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: Noinden
a reply to: turbonium1

Learn some biology. Mammals all loose the ability to tolerate lactose as the grow up. Humans evolved the ability to tolerate it. However this is not universal. Why? Because it's the newer trait.



I've always liked cheese, but I've always hated milk.

Perhaps my ancestors were early 'Cheddar-Man', millions of years ago! Gouda-Man was enemy, who all died in battles. Thus, an evolution of the superior Cheddar-species.

I realize your post is meant to be a joke, but it seems you are confused as to what (or maybe I should say "who") Cheddar Man is.

Cheddar Man is not a type of early human ancestor or species of early primate that lived millions of years ago. No, Cheddar Man was one individual human who lived only about 9000 years ago, and whose remains were found in a cave. He was a modern human, with physiological traits identical to us. So in that respect, your ancestors WERE the same as Cheddar Man's ancestors (you are the same species).

If Cheddar Man were alive today and raised in our society, he would most likely be indistinguishable from most other people who you might meet walking around the street or one of your co-workers.

edit on 2018/3/1 by Box of Rain because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 3 2018 @ 04:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: peter vlar

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: Barcs
a reply to: turbonium1

Still dodging the evidence I see. Again, speciation has been achieved in a lab. What do you have to say about this or the direct observable mutations I mentioned?

This is why religion is a mental illness. Just ignore all evidence and refuse to do any research whatsoever on the subject, just deny it in favor of ancient texts. Come on, bro. Make a real argument.


Tampering with genetic codes of different species in a lab. It's like saying Dr. Frankenstein would have proven evolution is true, because he created an entirely new species - Monster-Man!


Which genetic codes were tampered with, in which labs by which groups? It should be an easy enough task to cite that information. Otherwise you're just throwing spaghetti at the wall and hoping that some of it sticks.



A genetic mix of cat and rabbit DNA created a 'cabbit'. And tiger and lion mix created 'ligers'.

A cabbit was not a new species. A species reproduces. A cabbit cannot reproduce, since it was NEVER a species to begin with.


You do know that a "Cabbit" exists only in fiction don't you? They're each from a completely separate and distinct genus and family. Cats are from the Family Felidae and the Order Carnivora whereas rabbits are from the Family Leporidae and the Order Lagomorpha. One is a carnivore and the other an herbivore. Aside from both being mammals, you can't get much farther separated than cats and rabbits as their Last Common Ancestor is estimated to have been roughly 90 million years ago. There are no Cabbits outside of fiction. Primarily Anime from what I've seen. So you have actually made one correct statement in this whole thread... That Cabbits can't reproduce because they were never a species is entirely correct.

Lions and tigers however are quite closely related, both carnivores and while no longer true due to human encroachment into their ecological niches, there was a lot of overlap where lions and tigers had the opportunity to meet one another in their natural habitats. And they still didn't mate in nature.

As you seem to rule out any possible mechanism for the introduction or evolution of a new species why don't you give us some insight into your hypothesis for where the genetic diversity on Earth originates. To harbor this degree of umbrage towards the MES, you must have an alternate hypothesis that you wish to test against the scientific method. Or am I giving you too much credit?


Evolution is the theory that thinks any extinct species evolved into other species, millions of years ago.


And this post is the post in which you very clearly demonstrate that despite your utter contempt for the Modern Evolutionary Synthesis, you don't understand the most basic aspects of what falls under the scope of the theory on any level whatsoever.

Please... Feel free to provide a citation that supports your commentary if you are able. I a, always happy to be proven wrong and using that as a learning exercise.

I'll give you a quick hint though... Nowhere is it stated in any scientific literature that all extinct species have evolved into other species. I've never heard anyone make this claim in a classroom, in a lab, at a conference or even in casual conversation.

Only here on ATS do I see people make inane claims based on their own lack of knowledge and comprehension of the various scientific disciplines involved in studying the evolution of biological life on Earth. There are countless evolutionary dead ends. Our own Genus, Homo, is filled with many examples from Homo Naledi to Homo Antecessor to Homo Floresiensis. They all lived contemporaneously with, in some cases, 6 or more different species within our genus depending on their geographical location and Eco-niche. Nobody claims that they went extinct because they evolved into a new species of hominid. Just like Neanderthal and Denisovans didn't evolve into some magical new hominid, they all simply went extinct.


No, they are all extinct species. Same as Dodo birds are an extinct species.

None are 'evolutionary dead ends' or whatever.


Could you please explain, in detail, how a species might evolve into another species?

Two humans have children. Human children.
Every generation of human born afterwards are still human.


Where does it start to evolve humans into another species?


If you want to believe your ancestors were not human, go ahead.

Humanoid species once existed, and became extinct. Nothing more.


Human beings have always been human beings. Nothing else.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 14  15  16    18  19 >>

log in

join