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.

 

The 2 Creatures That Could Deny Evolution !

page: 11
20
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 8 2019 @ 08:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Quadrivium

You miss it every time. Your little group of Zealots, make it about religion. Every time you say "Evolution is my religion" or "science is faith based". You forget a couple of the scientists on here actually hold a spiritual path, as well as their day job.

So no, there you go, missing the point.

Again.

Slan leat. I hope your Ulster is good.




posted on Aug, 8 2019 @ 08:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Noinden

Lol you are as lost as last years Easter egg.
You ramble on about things no one has mentioned.
I guess it all boils down to this statement:


I read everything I post as evidence neighbour.

Maybe......just maybe, you do not need to do that.
Everything you post is NOT evidence. Why would you read it as such?

ETA:
No one thinks you are Atheistic, you are CONSTANTLY talking about your religion or attacking someone elses.
edit on 8-8-2019 by Quadrivium because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 8 2019 @ 08:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Blue_Jay33

It’s cute how you refuse to acknowledge that you made a claim that can’t be substantiated and all you did was copy and paste someone else’s words without proper attribution so not only are you a liar, but you’re a thief as well when you steal intellectual property. You can cast all the smoke screens you want... you’re initial claim was wrong and either it was plagiarized or you straight up lied just to foolishly add weight to your already sinking ship. Which is it?



posted on Aug, 8 2019 @ 08:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Quadrivium

I am constantly posting about my faith. Because your little g roup of friends, are constantly calling my religion science.


Not to mention the little conversation you have else where (loose lips sink ships after all)



posted on Aug, 8 2019 @ 09:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: peter vlar
a reply to: Blue_Jay33

It’s cute how you refuse to acknowledge that you made a claim that can’t be substantiated and all you did was copy and paste someone else’s words without proper attribution so not only are you a liar, but you’re a thief as well when you steal intellectual property. You can cast all the smoke screens you want... you’re initial claim was wrong and either it was plagiarized or you straight up lied just to foolishly add weight to your already sinking ship. Which is it?



Taxonomy - the organizing of creatures into groups - is a human-made system that is based off speculation with a touch of homology. Remember, the entire field of taxonomy assumes evolution is true, and works backwards from there. It is backwards science.


the only stupid argument was when you claimed that they haven’t changed in 400 Ma


I'll ask it in your taxonomical language... did it change into something outside of the Coelecanth order? No. So it's still a coelecanth. The same coelecanth that was thought to be extinct for millions of years until it was found alive. Evolution just makes it up as they go along, always assuming it must be true, and never considering the implications of empirical findings.
edit on 8-8-2019 by cooperton because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2019 @ 12:12 AM
link   
a reply to: cooperton

Your words:



Taxonomy - the organizing of creatures into groups - is a human-made system that is based off speculation with a touch of homology. Remember, the entire field of taxonomy assumes evolution is true, and works backwards from there. It is backwards science.


The words of the ancient Hebrews (as told to them by the even more ancient Babylonians)...


Genesis 2:19 (NIV): Now the Lord God had formed out of the ground all the wild animals and all the birds in the sky. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. 20 So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds in the sky and all the wild animals.



Genesis 2:19 (KJV): And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.



Genesis 2:19 (ESV): Now out of the ground the Lord God had formed every beast of the field and every bird of the heavens and brought them to the man to see what he would call them. And whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name.



Genesis 2:19 (USCCB ):So the LORD God formed out of the ground all the wild animals and all the birds of the air, and he brought them to the man to see what he would call them; whatever the man called each living creature was then its name.


Those different translations from the SECOND explanation of the supernatural creation hypothesis all say the same thing: the second Commandment that God gave to mankind (after "do not eat of the "Tree of Knowledge - you are to remain ignorant") was "you are to establish the Science of Taxonomy".

So my question why do you despise God so much that you would spit on this Commandment that is obviously so important that it was literally the second thing It said to Adam?



posted on Aug, 9 2019 @ 12:51 AM
link   
a reply to: cooperton



I'll ask it in your taxonomical language... did it change into something outside of the Coelecanth order? No. So it's still a coelecanth. The same coelecanth that was thought to be extinct for millions of years until it was found alive. Evolution just makes it up as they go along, always assuming it must be true, and never considering the implications of empirical findings.


I ask you to consider:


  • In the kingdome of amusements, 'games' is a phylum.
  • Dice Games are a 'class' of games
  • Card games are a 'class' of games
  • Ball games are a 'class' of games
  • Bat and Ball games are a 'family' of Ball games that also use a bat to move a ball
  • Rounders, Baseball, Cricket, Softball are examples of 'Species' of bat and ball games
  • Net and ball games is a family of ball games that use a net for a goal
  • Basketball, Netball, Volleyball are examples of species of net and ball games
  • Football is a species of games that use the foot to move the ball.
  • Soccer, Gridiron, Rugby Union, Rugby League, Australian Rules are species of football games


(I left out a couple of taxonomic layers, by the way).

Now the "Science of Sports History" (that I just invented) would have you believe that Rugby League "evolved" from Rugby Union that in turn "evolved" from Soccer. Now that claim is well documented, so we can be quite sure that 99% of "Sports History Scientists" would agree with it.

So my questions to you are:


  1. is soccer a football game or a netball game?
  2. if its true that all Rugby games descended from Soccer, then why is there still Soccer?
  3. if its true that all Rugby games descended from Soccer, what happened to the net?
  4. how can Australian Rules be considered a football game if it evolved from older games invented by Australian aboriginal natives on the other side of the planet from "real" football games like soccer?



posted on Aug, 9 2019 @ 12:59 AM
link   
a reply to: cooperton

Or perhaps an even simpler question:

We know that "Phoenix" and "Tucson" are "cities" in the State of "Arizona".

Is it therefore correct to describe "Arizona" as a "City"?

Tucson was a City before the USA was an independent country (officially designated by the King of Spain in 1775 and implemented in 1776 by the installation of the civilian Mayor). Tucson is still a City in 2019. Does that mean it hasn't 'evolved' in all that time?



posted on Aug, 9 2019 @ 02:05 AM
link   
a reply to: peter vlar


all you did was copy and paste someone else’s words without proper attribution so not only are you a liar, but you’re a thief as well when you steal intellectual property.


Nope the OP was all me, I just looked up a bit of history on the two animals which I already new about anyways just a refresher for a new thread. I forget who mentioned the other fish earlier in the thread it had already come up anyways.

You evolutionists are all the same, as soon as you lose the argument you slander the poster, it's been in done in virtually every thread in the origins forum. Tired of the hamster wheel of stupidity this last month from you guys, we aren't getting anywhere, I just won't respond to insults moving forward....have fun but be careful you don't go to far, I know how to use the ALERT button.



posted on Aug, 9 2019 @ 02:08 AM
link   
if it's not broke, don't fix it.



posted on Aug, 9 2019 @ 02:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blue_Jay33
a reply to: peter vlar


all you did was copy and paste someone else’s words without proper attribution so not only are you a liar, but you’re a thief as well when you steal intellectual property.

Mother f
Nope the OP was all me, I just looked up a bit of history on the two animals which I already new about anyways just a refresher for a new thread. I forget who mentioned the other fish earlier in the thread it had already come up anyways.



So you’re saying that you actually did some version of research and yet still came away with faulty information. I guess that makes you a liar then and not a lousy researcher.


You evolutionists are all the


If I had made an ignorant blanket statement bout “all you Christians” I would be pilloried yet somehow those same actions arent just acceptable, they’re applauded. Your hypocrisy never ceases to amaze me.



as soon as you lose the argument you slander the poster, it's been in done in virtually every thread in the origins forum.


No, I took issue with your shoddy research and unsupportable statements that you made as if they were fact yet aren’t supported by anything outside of your imagination. And instead of addressing your glaring errors regarding Coelocanth, you, as always, move the goal posts and then play martyr while levying baseless accusations at those who point out your errors.



Tired of the hamster wheel of stupidity this last month from you guys, we aren't getting anywhere, I just won't respond to insults moving forward....have fun but be careful you don't go to far, I know how to use the ALERT button.




Then by all means, use the alert button if you feel so slandered. You’re not going to see me reaching for the tissues over your melodramatic response to your own screwups.



posted on Aug, 9 2019 @ 07:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Noinden
a reply to: Quadrivium

I am constantly posting about my faith. Because your little g roup of friends, are constantly calling my religion science.

Ah, you see this is where your thinking is skewed.
It is a simple matter: YOUR religion is your science but true science is not your religion.



Not to mention the little conversation you have else where (loose lips sink ships after all)

What has that got to do with this thread? You talk about Faith and religion, here, enough for all of us.



posted on Aug, 9 2019 @ 09:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: peter vlar
a reply to: Blue_Jay33

It’s cute how you refuse to acknowledge that you made a claim that can’t be substantiated and all you did was copy and paste someone else’s words without proper attribution so not only are you a liar, but you’re a thief as well when you steal intellectual property. You can cast all the smoke screens you want... you’re initial claim was wrong and either it was plagiarized or you straight up lied just to foolishly add weight to your already sinking ship. Which is it?



Taxonomy - the organizing of creatures into groups - is a human-made system that is based off speculation with a touch of homology.


This entire tirade of a reply, every word that you’ve typed, is literal bull s#. It STILL doesn’t address the issue. You (and Bluejay as well) will do anything possible to distract from your nonstop goal post movement campaign as long as you don’t have to address the inconvenience of being flat out wrong regarding Coelacanths evolution since the End Cretaceous extinction event. But please... don’t let me interfere with your incredibly promising lecture on taxonomy



Remember, the entire field of taxonomy assumes evolution is true, and works backwards from there. It is backwards science.


Do you make this crap up as you go? Or did Darwin manage to sail the Beagle through a time tunnel back to Ancient Greece where he lectured Aristotle on his thoughts pertaining to evolutionary biology before returning to the 19th century via another time tunnel so that he could wait a couple of decades before publishing?

See, Aristotle came up with the earliest recorded system of taxonomy after visiting the Isle of Lesbos. I’m certainly not trying to claim that On the Origin Of Species had yes impact on classification based on evolutionary relationships but again, you’re trying to make it look as though nobody had considered taxonomy or classification systems prior to Darwin publishing OtOoS when taxonomic systems had been used and refined for over 2000 years before Charles Darwin was born from Aristotle to Thomas Aquinas and lesser known (in the modern world) scholars like Procopius and Timotheos ofGaza and that just gets us to the Middle Ages. Should we get into the more extensive list from the Renaissance into the modern Era? Perhaps you want to discuss Linnaean taxonomy which was a thing before Darwin ever set foot on the Beagle.


I'll ask it in your taxonomical language... did it change into something outside of the Coelecanth order? No.


Thank you for showing the class that you don’t understand taxonomy. The above question is the same as asking if Chimpanzee and Bonobo are still primates despite having speculated from one another over 1 Ma.






So it's still a coelecanth. The same coelecanth that was thought to be extinct for millions of years until it was found alive.


As it doesn’t appear that explaining taxonomy to you would be anything short of a complete waste of my time, I won’t bother. The Latimeria genus, the genus that the 2 extant members of this order are a part of, is not the same coelacanth that was thought to be extinct for 60 Ma.

Let’s put this out there one last time for our erstwhile readers... Latimeria Chulumnae (the Indian Ocean variety found in the waters off of S. Africa and the West coast of Madagascar) And Latimeria Menadoensis (they live near Indonesia)
are NOT the same species or Genus thought to have gone extinct between 50 and 70 Ma. Are you following along yet?

I’ll try to make it a little simpler. There were multiple Genus of Coelacanth and each of those many Genus had multiple species. For comparison, today there is only one extant species of the genus Homo, only 2 extant species of the Genus Pan, likewise for the Genus Gorilla. Just 100 Ka there were a half dozen or more species of Homo roaming the globe. Oh wait... I forgot that in your world, evolution doesn’t happen and every single dating technique is a fraud because the super secret cabal Of Paleontologist’s and Anthropologists hell bent on keeping the world ignorant of its true origins controls every scientist across the globe through our compact with the Vatican. Now the Clintons will murder me in a park and accidentally put the gun in my right hand to let everyone know the truth about not messing with the plan to keep the sheep asleep at the wheel. I’m left handed so that’s the signal that I let too many secrets slip when my body is discovered. Because as crazy as that scenario sounds, you’re more likely to believe that than anything smelling of science and tainted with evolutionismasticuoercalifagilistic-ness to the max.



Evolution just makes it up as they go along, always assuming it must be true, and never considering the implications of empirical findings.



Thank you. It’s always good to start the weekend off with a hearty laugh! That you can type those words and actually believe them after reading your own ousting history... it’s some next level cognitive dissonance to call out an entire segment of the population for something you do nearly every time you log into ATS.



posted on Aug, 10 2019 @ 08:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: peter vlar
regarding Coelacanths evolution since the End Cretaceous extinction event


What's the empirical evidence supporting this knowledge?

"Do you make this crap up as you go?"

Seriously, show me real empirical observations and explain why you or anyone else can make such a bold claim about knowing what happened to an organism 65 million years ago.


See, Aristotle came up with the earliest recorded system of taxonomy after visiting the Isle of Lesbos.

originally posted by: rnaa
"you are to establish the Science of Taxonomy".


It's not taxonomy in general I am ridiculing, it is evolutionary taxonomy. But even more so, Pete acts as if those evolutionary classifications are dogma, and scornfully attacks Blue Jay for an issue of semantics. And as per usual, hides behind the semantics to avoid addressing the blatant error in evolutionary theory that Blue Jay was addressing. Typical.



There were multiple Genus of Coelacanth and each of those many Genus had multiple species.


As I said before, all Coelacanths are in the Order of "Coelacanth". So even in your perverted taxonomy, it is still a coelacanth.



posted on Aug, 10 2019 @ 10:43 AM
link   
a reply to: Mach2

It's not... is it..... But if both sides require some sort of miracle... Be it who created God.... or who created the Big Bang.... then I don't think anyone should be looking down on the other and calling them primitive.



posted on Aug, 10 2019 @ 11:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: TEOTWAWKIAIFF
a reply to: Gothmog

One day, Ted (Theodore) Logan (ain’t that Wolverine’s name??) looked over at Bill S. Preston, Esq., (ain’t he the fifth Beatle??) and said with a locked jaw, “I can’t quit you...”

And that is the rest of the story!





Well according to the scriptures of the "Wholly Book of the Beatles", it is written that in fact George Martin is considered the 5th Beatle, due to his great influence of production, in their recording sessions.
Of course scholar Beatleogians argue this fact, as both Stu Sutcliffe and Pete Best were part of the "Early" Beatles, prior to the ascension of Ringo to the quartet.
Billy "the Black Fella Yankee" Preston, was simply employed as a session piano player on the last couple of Wholly albums.

Ted "Wolverine" Logan is from another dimension, hence the use of the time machine.

So it has been passed down in BeatleMania Lore.....and forever more it shall remain.....Let it be...





posted on Aug, 13 2019 @ 09:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Gothmog

Hold my beer.

So the Wyld Stallyns need to get something cool for their children's' show and tell day.
Suddenly Rufus appears out of nowhere and is like: "Peace be on to you, dudes, if we don't find something hip for your kids, the future will be ruined". They all climb into the US Tardis and for a most excellent adventure and drop into 200 million years ago. Ted catches a most bodacious Croc and Bill nabs a sturgeon with his epic beard. Guys travel all the way back for an epic show and tell but ultimately lose as Death was attending the same class as their children (because he can) and he brought Hitler to show and tell. Bummed out, guys return and drop off their trophies back to nature, BUT they did not realize that instead 200 million years they only traveled back 200,000 years and both the crock and sturgeon were pregnant. Rufus was busy visiting his ancestor, George so he did not notice.

Remember to be excellent to each other!
edit on 21America/ChicagoTue, 13 Aug 2019 21:51:55 -0500000000pm2019-08-13T21:51:55-05:0031512019-08-13T21:51:55-05:00 by Heruactic because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 14 2019 @ 02:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: peter vlar
regarding Coelacanths evolution since the End Cretaceous extinction event


What's the empirical evidence supporting this knowledge?

"Do you make this crap up as you go?"

Seriously, show me real empirical observations and explain why you or anyone else can make such a bold claim about knowing what happened to an organism 65 million years ago.


See, Aristotle came up with the earliest recorded system of taxonomy after visiting the Isle of Lesbos.

originally posted by: rnaa
"you are to establish the Science of Taxonomy".


It's not taxonomy in general I am ridiculing, it is evolutionary taxonomy. But even more so, Pete acts as if those evolutionary classifications are dogma, and scornfully attacks Blue Jay for an issue of semantics. And as per usual, hides behind the semantics to avoid addressing the blatant error in evolutionary theory that Blue Jay was addressing. Typical.



There were multiple Genus of Coelacanth and each of those many Genus had multiple species.


As I said before, all Coelacanths are in the Order of "Coelacanth". So even in your perverted taxonomy, it is still a coelacanth.




Stop playing games. You know as well as I do that Bluejay doesn’t know the difference between animals,order or sub genus and was putting forth the Coelacanth as though it was a specific species of fish, which it is not. And that said species had not changed in over 60 Ma. Which is again false. It’s not my job to debunk their idiotic claims. It’s on them to prove they’ve got a clue and support their own position. Unless of course, you’re operating both accounts? That would explain a lot.



posted on Aug, 14 2019 @ 02:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: peter vlar

Stop playing games. You know as well as I do that Bluejay doesn’t know the difference between animals,order or sub genus and was putting forth the Coelacanth as though it was a specific species of fish, which it is not. And that said species had not changed in over 60 Ma. Which is again false. It’s not my job to debunk their idiotic claims. It’s on them to prove they’ve got a clue and support their own position. Unless of course, you’re operating both accounts? That would explain a lot.


Regardless of whether he knew it or not, it's still a Coelacanth. Organisms don't evolve, they remain within specific boundaries. You quoted the Greek philosophers elsewhere, and Plato was keen on this idea. An organism can go to various extremes, big, small, wide, thin, various colors, and morphological nuances, but the population of the organism can never extend outside of its essence. That's exactly what we see in the scientific literature. No evolving, just quickly reversible adaptations.



posted on Aug, 14 2019 @ 06:26 PM
link   
This paragraph explains precisely that you don’t know what evolution by natural selection means.

For example, small vulnerable and very tasty mammal with lots of predators lives in burrows in the savannah. A stronger tail evolves that allows small mammal to stand on hind legs to spot danger earlier for longer. Longer rear legs evolve to stand taller and spot danger further away. Bigger eyes evolve and, so on, etc. The evolution of a species is underway.

It does not mean small vulnerable and very tasty mammal with lots of predators lives in burrows in the savannah. Small mammal gives birth to lion. Small mammal is now a cat and is king of the savannah.

You may not understand it, but most of the people in the world do. At some point you and the half dozen people who still believe in creation are going to ask yourselves if you’ve wasted quite a lot of your years arguing against the most logical expression of nature there can ever be; to survive better.




top topics



 
20
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join