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.

 

What bugs me about the theory of evolution

page: 11
16
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 29 2019 @ 04:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Barcs

If that doesn't fit your claim of intellectual dishonesty then I don't know what will.




posted on Jun, 29 2019 @ 04:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gargoyle91
a reply to: Barcs

Awnser me this if we evolved from apes , Why are there still apes amongst us


Because all of today’s extant great apes (gorilla, orangutan, chimpanzee , bonobo and Us) have all descended from a Common Ancestor. We didn’t evolve from any of the other extant apes. We are all descended from Miocene apes. I could certainly go into a breakdown of when these divergences occurred and how genetic evidence supports what has been found in the geological record (fossil remains, lithics etc...) or how with ever our increasing knowledge of genetics and newer techniques to extract DNA from ancient remains, we can calculate mutation rates in organisms to calculate and look back in time to determine (within a known margin of error) when speciation has occurred. A recent example
Of this comes from a site in Atapuerca Spain called Sima de los Huesos. Or in English, pit of bones. And how those remains along with comparisons to Neanderthal, Denisovan and H. Sapiens, they were able to provide corroborating evidence that supported the earlier hypothesis that H. Heidelbergensis, (who lived in Easy Africa, Europe and parts of Western and northern Asia )was the direct precursor to both Us in Africa and Neanderthal in Europe. So we do indeed have evidence of speciation within our own Genus between 700 Ka and 300 Ka before present.



some of them just unlucky


In some way nstances no, Miocene apes were unlucky and as environment changed in their ecological niches and they lost food sources which led to the extinction issue f most European Apes and possible back migration back to North Africa in others. Though the latter is a possible hypothesis as we aren’t able to obtain any genetic material from remains that old


or the species we evolved from just vanishised for the convince of science ?


I don’t think there’s anything convenient for Anthropology or Paleontology in having an incomplete fossil record. I guess that it’s a good think that digging isn’t our only tool available to provide answers.


It makes no sense .


Which part makes no sense to you? I’m sure I’ll be castigated for the attempt, but if you can explain what doesn’t make sense, I would be willing to attempt to provide an appropriate answer.



posted on Jun, 29 2019 @ 04:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Barcs

You talk about understanding while we are talking about the theory of evolution.



posted on Jun, 29 2019 @ 04:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Out6of9Balance
a reply to: Barcs

You talk about understanding while we are talking about the theory of evolution.


I missed that part. All I caught was the verbal diarrhea. You made a point somewhere?


originally posted by: Out6of9Balance
a reply to: Barcs

If that doesn't fit your claim of intellectual dishonesty then I don't know what will.


LOL! Please demonstrate that.

Everything you type sounds like a fart to me, it's that incoherent. Not an insult, a fact.

edit on 6 29 19 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 29 2019 @ 04:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Barcs

Just keep on pretending it's all nothing.

Have a nice life.



posted on Jun, 29 2019 @ 04:53 PM
link   
a reply to: peter vlar

I really appreciate your intelligence in the matter , I'm not a creationist but if you look at evolution being fact it would mean every species no matter Insect , plant or animal would have originated from the same instance whether it was primordial mud or spark of light , Just how could that one "whatever" contain that much information ?
edit on 6/29/2019 by Gargoyle91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 29 2019 @ 05:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Barcs

You really don't need to react offended now.

Your theory makes no sense at all. Why do you even want to promote something you have no evidence of?

Like yourself, everybody else won't understand the theory of evolution. It's that simple.
edit on 29-6-2019 by Out6of9Balance because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 29 2019 @ 05:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: Out6of9Balance
a reply to: Barcs

Your theory makes no sense at all. Why do you even want to promote something you have no evidence of?


How would you know if the Modern Evolutionary Synthesis makes sense or not, let alone know anything at all regarding the vast body of evidence supporting the facts of evolution when you have made it very clear that purposely engaging in willful ignorance because you refuse to read anything that discusses evolutionary biology?


Like yourself, everybody else won't understand the theory of evolution. It's that simple.


The only thing simple here, is your approach to science. The degree of ignorance you perpetuate and your refusal to educate yourself so that you at least understand what you’re arguing against is the epitome of intellectual dishonesty. How can one have such loathing for a scientific discipline when you don’t know the first thing about it except that in our mind it’s stupid or ‘just a Theory’.

If you’re running around under the “it’s just a theory” so it can’t be real, do you dispute that gravity is an actual force? Because gravity is just a theory. How about cell theory? Do you dispute that our bodies are made up of individual cells? In science, a Scientific Theory is an explanation of the facts. Without facts, you can’t meet the threshold of being a Scientific Theory. If you want to dispute or disagree, you’re certainly within your rights. But it’s ludi to do so when you don’t have an understanding of the most basic aspects of science period, let alone evolution



posted on Jun, 29 2019 @ 07:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gargoyle91
a reply to: peter vlar

I really appreciate your intelligence in the matter , I'm not a creationist but if you look at evolution being fact it would mean every species no matter Insect , plant or animal would have originated from the same instance whether it was primordial mud or spark of light , Just how could that one "whatever" contain that much information ?



Its a fair and pertinent question. The simplified answer is that whatever the first single celled life was like on earth, the atmosphere above and everything on the surface would have been completely unrecognizable to us today, but no... from day one it’s highly unlikely that DNA was able to code for the multitude of life, it’s wildly disparate morphologies, etc.... The ecological niches that aided in the organisms adaptation is as crucial as mutations are. But before I digress totally off topic, the initial from which all life today can trace it’s origins, would very likely not have “that much information” from the onset.

What it did have, was DNA that is incredibly malleable in response to outside and environmental stimulus. Furthermore, it’s really important to note that gene expression is a very critical aspect of genetics. For example, humane and chimpanzees are the closest related surviving members of our family. With such high genetic affinity, some people seem to think that we should look more or act more like our cousins. 2 organisms, especially when they’re closely related, can share a lot of the same genes but the way those genes express themselves can lead to a huge differentiation in morphological characteristics.

But to touch more on the crux of your question, when cells divide and replicate, so does out DNA. This is where transcription errors come into play. When DNA copies itself, it doesn’t always do so without errors. The vast majority of these transcription errors are neutral with no effect on the organism. A very small percentage are advantageous and
another very small percentage can be negative and lead to the expiration of the organisms. or an example we see often today, benign or malignant tumors. That’s an extreme example of course but it’s one that’s easier to visualize.

It’s the mutations that add new information so it’s not really fair to compare today’s Genetics to the genetics of early, single celled organisms when there’s billions of years of mutations between the first life and life today.



posted on Jun, 30 2019 @ 12:14 AM
link   
a reply to: peter vlar

What a load of high sounding nonsense again. Please show any ability to reason if you have some.



posted on Jun, 30 2019 @ 08:39 AM
link   
DP
edit on 6 30 19 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 30 2019 @ 08:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: Out6of9Balance
a reply to: peter vlar

What a load of high sounding nonsense again. Please show any ability to reason if you have some.


media.giphy.com...

Peter is the most reasonable guy on here and he is extremely knowledgeable on evolution. Poopooing it away as "high sounding nonsense" proves beyond a shadow of a doubt you don't care about the facts. Evidence was given to you multiple times and you ignored it and repeated the claim that there is no evidence. Peter explained it very eloquently and blindly dismissed it. That's as dishonest as it gets.

I fully admit I am a dick when it comes to arguing against creationists, but it changes zilch about the evidence and reasons why evolution is considered consensus in academia. I am a dick because I can only hear the same ignorant lies and misunderstandings about evolution so many times from the same people, despite already being refuted dozens of times. Creationists have proved that they have no interest in evidence or facts, and aren't even willing to learn about what they vehemently opposed. No intellectual honesty means no reason for me to take em seriously. Don't like it? I don't care. I will continue to be a dick to intellectually dishonest people.


edit on 6 30 19 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 30 2019 @ 11:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Barcs

What does this evidence benefit my life?



posted on Jun, 30 2019 @ 03:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Out6of9Balance

I assume you mean 'how' not 'what'.

Understanding evolution has benifited you in the fields of medicine, pharmaceuticals, ancestry, etc. How has creationist dogma helped anyone?



posted on Jun, 30 2019 @ 03:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Barcs

Lets be honest a lot of us started out on here as reasonable individuals, and discarded that when we confirmed that the others side was not interested in engaging honestly.



posted on Jun, 30 2019 @ 03:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Noinden

Any evidence of your claims?



posted on Jun, 30 2019 @ 04:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Out6of9Balance

Sure, I'm not going to link to many the Peer reviewed papers as they are generally pay to view. As a Scientist I have access.

HERE is a summary, and another oh and a Peeer reviewed one. I suggest you also look at the emerging disipline of Bioinformatics, I hold one of my degrees in this.



posted on Jun, 30 2019 @ 04:49 PM
link   
It's not just one common ancestor and just one evolution tree. There are several evolution trees with several common ancestors, that have no connection to one another
edit on 30-6-2019 by Ove38 because: text fix



posted on Jun, 30 2019 @ 05:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Noinden

Creationist dogma shapes my reality and teaches me how to deal with this world.



posted on Jun, 30 2019 @ 05:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Out6of9Balance

Hows that going for you then? Because I've posted evidence that the knowledge of evolution has had a positive impact. I'm a deeply reverent polytheist, and working in science does not make me any less so.



new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join