Can you prove evolution wrong? -- Part 2

a reply to: turbonium1

Can you explain why we have neanderthal dna in us?.

originally posted by: testingtesting
a reply to: turbonium1

So still no actual proof just opinion?.

The proof is thousands of years of time which have never evolved one single species, or even indicated such a thing.

When you have anything more than your unsupported opinion that evolution is valid in any way, please let me know!

a reply to: turbonium1

But they have I have told you one species that has turned into aanother species but have ignored the fact.

originally posted by: testingtesting
a reply to: turbonium1

Can you explain why we have neanderthal dna in us?.

Since all life has similar genetics, in varying degrees.

Humans and insects have common genes, in fact.

It doesn't mean we evolved from fruit flies, or neanderthals, or anything else.

a reply to: turbonium1

Plenty of threads with the proof in this thread it is up to you to disprove it.

originally posted by: testingtesting
a reply to: turbonium1

Again just your own opinion got any proof like the thread asks?.
Or any proof for your own version of getting here?.
Did you check out the American goat beard? shows a specie evolving into another.

This is merely cross-breeding within a species, which creates another type of the same species.

Like two types of dogs create a cross-breed.

Same as the 'new species' of birds are not another species, just a new type, within the same species.


It is not evolution.

a reply to: turbonium1

No it isn't they bred the flower and by the end of it the flower could not reproduce with the original flower but only flower of its own new specie thus creating a new species of flower.

a reply to: turbonium1

Also again I care not about opinion show me facts. Disprove evolution.

Over five thousand years have passed, while humans, apes, lizards, cats, dogs, and turtles... are still humans, apes, lizards, etc.

Apparently evolution is not working yet.

So 5000 years of nothing.

How long should we expect to wait before evolution comes around, shaping every single species on Earth into other species?


I thought evolution happened all the time, with all species, which is obviously not the case.

a reply to: turbonium1

Oh look more ill informed opinion.
Facts please or you are just making it up.
In fact don't bother you obviously don't even underst and the basic understandings of evolution.
I'm surprised you have not said "well it is a theory after all".

originally posted by: testingtesting
a reply to: turbonium1

No it isn't they bred the flower and by the end of it the flower could not reproduce with the original flower but only flower of its own new specie thus creating a new species of flower.

This flower wasn't evolved into another species, it was a genetically engineered form of the original flower, nothing else.

To say evolution of ancient apes, and/or Neanderthals, ever became humans, is simply absurd

This would suggest humans are always evolving into another species, and that's ridiculous.

originally posted by: testingtesting
a reply to: turbonium1

Oh look more ill informed opinion.
Facts please or you are just making it up.
In fact don't bother you obviously don't even underst and the basic understandings of evolution.
I'm surprised you have not said "well it is a theory after all".

If you believe that humans evolved from apes, go right ahead with that theory.

I'd like to see apes evolve into humans too, but that's never going to happen.

a reply to: turbonium1

Again that post just shows you don't understand the basics...we didn't evolve from apes we share a common ancestor with the other great apes.
Why not actually attempt to understand it before attempting to disprove it eh?.

a reply to: turbonium1

Sorry but you are wrong it is now classed as a new species.
Now for the final time are you going to back up anything you have said or is it still just opinion? or I'm not bothering got better things to do.

originally posted by: rnaa
a reply to: Phantom423

Rh factor

I don't see anything there about different 'races'.

The Biology Project: Blood Types Tutorial

Nor do I see anything there about it either. In fact, this indicates that Rh+ and Rh- can appear in the same family, which means that it can't be much of a 'racial marker' if children of the same parents could end up in different 'races'.

There just isn't much research to do here to figure out that it is a load of old bollocks.

Yes, I know you're right. But it is an interesting phenomenon. I found this article from Smithsonian magazine, 2012. Seems that it is a mystery why we have different blood types. I think it probably has something to do with the immune system and how resistance to disease develops. Thanks for chiming in. Here's the article:


The Mystery of Human Blood Types
The ABO blood group evolved at least 20 million years ago, but scientists still don’t understand the purpose of blood types

Everyone’s heard of the A, B, AB and O blood types. When you get a blood transfusion, doctors have to make sure a donor’s blood type is compatible with the recipient’s blood, otherwise the recipient can die. The ABO blood group, as the blood types are collectively known, are ancient. Humans and all other apes share this trait, inheriting these blood types from a common ancestor at least 20 million years ago and maybe even earlier, claims a new study published online today in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. But why humans and apes have these blood types is still a scientific mystery. Read more: www.smithsonianmag.com... Give the gift of Smithsonian magazine for only $12! http://(link tracking not allowed)/1cGUiGv Follow us: @SmithsonianMag on Twitter

www.smithsonianmag.com...

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye
a reply to: Phantom423For more on the Anunnaki and IgIg

After years of tenuous and hard work for the Anunnaki, the Igigi rebelled against their masters. It is sad that they ‘set fire to their tools and surrounded Enlil’s great house by night’ forcing the ancient Anunnaki to find another source of labor.

This is why the ancient Anunnaki replaced the Igigi, after genetically engineering ancient humans creating a greater workforce.

Many authors suggest that the human ‘slave race’ was created after the ancient Anunnaki genetically modified their genes and that of early humans nearly 500,000 years ago.

www.ancient-code.com...

ADDED: Translated, Anunnaki are the root race RH-, who created the igig or Sons of God RH-, and the igig created the Sons of man, or RH+

Thanks for the link. I don't think science could determine whether anyone that long ago had the RH- blood type unless they had a soft tissue sample from bone. It is possible, of course, but I haven't found anything in the literature about ancient Sumerian blood types.

I do think there's a lot more to be learned about the ancient Sumerians. The Epic of Gilgamesh and other ancient texts speak of these deities. And as I mentioned before, I've seen the artifacts in the Istanbul museum and other museums in the Middle East which are quite amazing. I don't discount anything until the hard evidence shows up. Always hard to determine what's real and what's "reworked".

Another interesting fact - during the Iraq war an entire library of texts was uncovered in southern Iraq - some 10,000 +. Not sure what the status is of those texts today, but I know that they attempted to protect the site from war damage. I have to look that up.

The Anunnaki (also transcribed as Anunaki, Anunna, Ananaki, and other variations) are a group of deities that appear in the mythological traditions of the ancient Sumerians, Akkadians, Assyrians, and Babylonians.[4] Descriptions of how many Anunnaki there were and what role they fulfilled are inconsistent and often contradictory. In the earliest Sumerian writings about them, which come from the Post-Akkadian period, the Anunnaki are the most powerful deities in the pantheon, descendants of An, the god of the heavens, and their primary function is to decree the fates of humanity.

originally posted by: turbonium1
Evolution ignores the fact every species on Earth has never evolved over thousands of years.


The species have only adapted within any specific environment, over time. No species evolved into another species - this theory is utter nonsense.


Name one species that has evolved into another species, if possible.


After thousands of years, humans are still humans, cows are still cows, giraffes are still giraffes, and every other species is unchanged, as well.

The evolutionist would suggest all species have evolved from all sorts of other species, which happens over millions of years, very gradually, with many other stages to evolve into an entirely new species.


No species has even indicated any of this. Over thousands of years, with countless distinct species on Earth, not a single one shows anything of evolving into another form, or species


This proves 'evolution' is simply garbage.

I don't think you understand the definition of "species" and what speciation is:

SPECIES: A biological species is a group of organisms that can reproduce with one another in nature and produce fertile offspring. Species are characterized by the fact that they are reproductively isolated from other groups, which means that the organisms in one species are incapable of reproducing with organisms in another species. The term species can also be defined as the most basic category in the system of taxonomy. Taxonomy is a scientific system that classifies organisms into categories based on their biological characteristics. Species can also be defined based on a shared evolutionary history and ancestry. This method of defining species is called phylogenetics, which is the study of the evolutionary relationships among organisms. The evolutionary process by which a new species comes into being is called speciation.

Adaptation plays a role in speciation, but speciation defines a new group of organisms whose genetic profile is different than the original organism. As such, they cannot mate and mix. They are now two distinct groups.

a reply to: Phantom423

Thanks for the link.

You are very, very welcome.

I don't think science could determine whether anyone that long ago had the RH- blood type unless they had a soft tissue sample from bone. It is possible, of course, but I haven't found anything in the literature about ancient Sumerian blood types.

Recently soft tissue was recovered from a dinosaur, so anything is possible..

I do think there's a lot more to be learned about the ancient Sumerians.

I couldn't agree more!

I make an observation and am immediately chastised because there are no "Research papers" that have been "Peer Reviewed". And in order for "anyone" to consider my observation, it must be validated by the "church of present day
PRP". The bishops and pop of this religion must accept my observation as fitting in with their own view of reality.

I don't discount anything until the hard evidence shows up. Always hard to determine what's real and what's "reworked".

Your not going to go far, in that religion, with a open mind. You must discount things, observations that do not cut the muster of "PRP". Sarcasm intended. And by the way, thank you for your honesty and open mindedness.

First the observation. I observed there are enough differences between RH+ and RH- physical, emotional, and mental, to actually classify them separately. Yes, as separate species due primarily to the established scientific fact, of their timelines. The age of RH+ is give or take 200,000 years, and the RH- to 30,000 to 35,000. This, is not "Made Up".

And as you have pointed out from above

scientists still don’t understand the purpose of blood types

It is a area that demands further "Investigation"! Not out of hand rejection by either religious pole! Neither one are capable of answering these questions due to their inherent, closed minded, bias.

a reply to: turbonium1

Actually it goes way beyond absurd and ridiculous.

It's a deliberate fabrication which us the primary reason why I no longer believe a word that comes from the MSM or academia.

"Primitive Man never existed, and there never was a Stone Age. They are nothing more than deceptive interpretations of (Neanderthal Findings) by Evolutionist." THE NEPHILIM WERE MORE "INTELLIGENT" THAN HUMANS. So the Word "Primitive" is an Understatement. The Size of their Brains Reveal they were Super-Intelligent The Stone Age Deception

By the way, Neanderthals were not emerging primitives. That’s fiction. They had a skull capacity larger than that of modern man. Classic descriptions of so-called Neanderthal man were based in large part on the skeletal remains of a man suffering from severe osteoarthritis. He had degenerated. In fact, there are folk who would pass for Neanderthals, alive today. Aliens The Deadly Secret (Page 347)

Dr. Jack Cuozzo shows how many Neanderthal fossils have been tampered with to support the theory of evolution. One of the many fraudulent things that people have done to the Neanderthal skulls is to reconstruct the lower jaw in a forward protruding position. This is based on the preconceived notion, that Neanderthal was dimwitted, and ape-ish. The jaw is purposely manipulated to look this way in reconstruction’s, because that is how some ape jaws are aligned.

Of the thousands of people who have seen Neanderthal skulls in a museum, I wonder how many of them knew the jaw had been altered? Dr. Cuozzo adds: "The exact same thing happened with the famous La Chapelle-aux-Saints skull and jaws" The La Quina V skull has also been altered. Now look to see what somebody did to the chin. They cut it off to make it look more like an apes chin. They then smoothed it all out with a plastic material.

Neanderthals: Caveman or Human?
Neanderthal fraud discovered by Dr. Jack Cuozzo

"About every few years they come out with the new missing link, only to find out the link is either another species or a fraud. And this happens over, and over, and over, and almost no one ever questions this, and joe public just believes what ever the news media tells them." What part of Evolution is a lie?

Neanderthal man cannot possibly be a missing link."These Neanderthals are just perfectly normal humans that are living to a really great age." See, before the Flood came, the people lived to be 900. But after the Flood, life spans dropped off to 400, and then 200, and then 100; but that's still a long time to live. And it's a simple fact the bones of your eyebrow ridge never stop growing. Jack Cuozzo

Professor Reiner Protsch was invited to date the famous skull, which he later pronounced to be the vital missing link between Neanderthals and modern humans. He dated the skull at 36,000 years old, allowing it to fall neatly into the evolutionists’ timeline between Neanderthals and modern man. For evolutionists, it was too good to be true. And indeed, it was. On February 18, 2005, Protsch was forced to retire in disgrace after a Frankfurt University panel ruled he had “fabricated data and plagiarized the work of his colleagues” Once believed to be a world-renowned expert on carbon dating, Protsch’s entire professional career is now being questioned. The university noted: “The commission finds that Prof. Protsch has forged and manipulated scientific facts over the past 30 years”. Neanderthal (another deliberate fraud)

a reply to: Murgatroid

Great sources dude.....