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.

 

Evolution, It's only a theory

page: 61
65
<< 58  59  60    62  63  64 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 12:08 PM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 


You can look at it standing on your head if you wish. Some people have to look around their hemorrhoids. Others can't see the forest for the trees. (Have I taken any homilies you wanted to use?)




posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 12:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gawdzilla
reply to post by DohBama
 


Evolution is no longer a theory. The evidence for evolution is overwhelming. (Well, if you don't live in the Bronze Age, anyway.) Evolution is certainly good for debunking creation myths.


You dont know the difference between evolution and creations.

Just like creationist dont see the equality between creations and evolution. your in the same pool as they are.

You believe everything you read. And you eat it raw without thinking. Because what you read is your knowledge. You have just picked a side to stick to that's all you have done. Just like a evolutionist and the creationists have done.

I dont believe in everything i read. And i dont use everything i read to tell everyone that this is what i know. Because its not what i know but what i read. My conclusions are my own not somebody else's.



[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]



posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 12:20 PM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 


"You dont know the difference between evolution and creations. "

On what do you base that? I don't believe some Great Sky Fairy created everything. Nor would I care if it did.



posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 12:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gawdzilla
reply to post by spy66
 


"You dont know the difference between evolution and creations. "

On what do you base that? I don't believe some Great Sky Fairy created everything. Nor would I care if it did.


You just confirmed my knowledge of you lol. You just confirmed that you need others to do the thinking for you. And your waiting for new news to come out so you can grow some kind of knowledge.



posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 12:34 PM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 


Again, what do you base that on? The Nehner-nehner-nehner Theory of Creation, perhaps? Or have you just dug yourself into a hole you can't get out of.

I have a dozen books on evolution here, perhaps Prothero would be a good read for you. Or Kenneth Miller? How about Jerry A. Coyne or Michael Shermer?



posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 12:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gawdzilla
reply to post by spy66
 


Again, what do you base that on? The Nehner-nehner-nehner Theory of Creation, perhaps? Or have you just dug yourself into a hole you can't get out of.

I have a dozen books on evolution here, perhaps Prothero would be a good read for you. Or Kenneth Miller? How about Jerry A. Coyne or Michael Shermer?


I don't reject evolution at all. I never have. But i do have questions about it still. But i bet you dont.

If you read my posts you can see i mention time and changes a lot. That falls within evolution dont it?

I never say that things just pop up done and ready out of nowhere.

Evolution is based on changes in matter over time. Just like matter and energy also changes all the time.



posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 12:52 PM
link   
Can i ask you a question. In what stage of evolution did time appear?

Does your books tell you anything about that?



posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 01:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gawdzilla
reply to post by DohBama
 


Evolution is no longer a theory. The evidence for evolution is overwhelming. (Well, if you don't live in the Bronze Age, anyway.) Evolution is certainly good for debunking creation myths.


It will always be a theory .

Typical Godless evolutionist, can't give an opinion without making some smart aleck comment about bronze age opinions being so silly yet buys into the utter conjecture of silly sciences still having to resort to cartoons and animations of a theory they cling to illustrating their imagination of how life began well before what we know and have observed as a FACT written about in that bronze age book called Genesis.

Where I come from, science lke that is called

Science Fiction

Yet what spyguy has been trying to teach you people isn't just the ramblings of philosophy, many ancient archaeological discoveries once thought to be myths have unearthed evidence that man has always had our higher intelligence and was NOT something that evolved. Many scientist still have a hard time reconciling these discoveries because they just don't fit the model.

Heavy jaw boned sloped foreheaded reconstructed and utter fallacious skulls of neanderthal men whose only real fossil part is a tooth from a pig that are cerated by artisans for us to start accepting transitional ideas of modern man, fit the model.

Yet when science gets more data of our closest relative the chimp, we discover we are NOT as closely related as once believed, so much so that calling us primates would be a stretch

.

24/08/2006
"Scientists believe they have found a key gene that helped the human brain evolve from our chimp-like ancestors. In just a few million years, one area of the human genome seems to have evolved about 70 times faster than the rest of our genetic code. It appears to have a role in a rapid tripling of the size of the brain's crucial cerebral cortex, according to an article published Thursday in the journal Nature. Study co-author David Haussler, director of the Center for Biomolecular Science and Engineering at the University of California, Santa Cruz, said his team found strong but still circumstantial evidence that a certain gene, called HAR1F, may provide an important answer to the question: `What makes humans brainier than other primates?' Human brains are triple the size of chimp brains. Looking at 49 areas that have changed the most between the human and chimpanzee genomes, Haussler zeroed in on an area with `a very dramatic change in a relatively short period of time.' That one gene didn't exist until 300 million years ago and is present only in mammals and birds, not fish or animals without backbones. But then it didn't change much at all. There are only two differences in that one gene between a chimp and a chicken, Haussler said. But there are 18 differences in that one gene between human and chimp and they all seemed to occur in the development of man, he said. Andrew Clark, a Cornell University professor molecular biology who was not part of Haussler's team, said that if true, the change in genes would be fastest and most dramatic in humans and would be `terrifically exciting.' However, the gene changed so fast that Clark said that he has a hard time believing it unless something unusual happened in a mutation. It's not part of normal evolution, he said. ....

The scientists still don't know specifically what the gene does. But they know that this same gene turns on in human fetuses at seven weeks after conception.(Borenstein, S., "Scientists Find Brain Evolution Gene," ABC News/Associated Press, August 16, 2006)





CHIMP GENE GAP GROWS: Using a new measure of genetic similarity--the number of copies of genes that two species have in common--researchers report that chimps and humans share only 94 percent of their genes, not the 98 to 99 percent frequently cited.
By Aaron Logan, from www.lightmatter.net...
A lot more genes may separate humans from their chimp relatives than earlier studies let on. Researchers studying changes in the number of copies of genes in the two species found that their mix of genes is only 94 percent identical. The 6 percent difference is considerably larger than the commonly cited figure of 1.5 percent.

The new finding supports the idea that evolution may have given humans new genes with new functions that don't exist in chimps, something researchers had not recognized until recently. The older value of 1.5 percent is a measure of the difference between equivalent genes in humans and chimps, like a difference in the spelling of the same word in two similar languages. Based on that figure, experts proposed that humans and chimps have essentially the same genes, but differed in when and where the genes turn on and off.

The new research takes into account the possibility for multiple copies of genes and that the number of copies can differ between species, even though the gene itself is the same or nearly so. "You have to pay attention to more than just the genes that are shared," says geneticist Matthew Hahn of Indiana University, Bloomington, lead author of the new report. Researchers believe that additional copies of the same gene allow evolution to experiment, so to speak, finding new functions for old genes.

Hahn and his colleagues set out to study these gains and losses in gene number over the millennia by examining the genomes of humans, chimps, mice, rats and dogs. They looked at 110,000 genes that fall into 9,990 different families of similar genes.

The size of a gene family differed between species in 5,622 cases, or 56 percent of all the families. These size changes are so frequent in the evolutionary history of mammals that genes might as well be going through a revolving door, the researchers write in a paper published in a new online journal, PLoS ONE.

In humans and chimps, which have about 22,000 genes each, the group found 1,418 duplicates that one or the other does not possess. For example, humans have 15 members of a family of brain genes linked to autism, called the centaurin-gamma family, whereas chimps have six, for a difference of nine gene copies.

The group estimated that humans have acquired 689 new gene duplicates and lost 86 since diverging from our common ancestor with chimps six million years ago. Similarly, they reckoned that chimps have lost 729 gene copies that humans still have.


[edit on 10-4-2009 by Aermacchi]



posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 01:58 PM
link   
Many of the problems we see being taught as pure propaganda are the musings and mutterings of atheist Dick Dawkins whose ideas have always been fueled by his utter bigotry of religious people giving rise to many of the most idiotic talking points to support this theory and many other books by equally hateful of Christianity like those written by Christopher Bitchens, whose vodka mumbling vitriolic diatribe may sound cool when making fun of fundies while the attempt to always use the most extreme examples of the most ignorant Christian may for those in his cult seem the defacto genus Christian, it is nothing short of hitchens own stupidity and ignorant bigotry and anyone swallowing such bile as a borrowed excuse to vomit their own as we have seen here is proof of the pathetic products our current Government State public school system has "graduated" as our future.

These people have been spoon fed fallacious ideas about science passed off as fact while seeing attacks on religion as cool.

The results have been nothing but bad and I doubt seriously we can ever go back when the same generation brainwashed is the one thinking they are so damn right they actually believe they see evolution all around.

Once thought to be what was commonly known as the "missing link" is now an everyday occurance with these imbeciles of science, that now, every damn fossil formed is a "transitional" fossil when the very idea of such a thing would have us looking at fossils of humans looking NOTHING like us and all the time. In fact one of the most obvious selection pressures we would have been seeing such as an extra hand and arm or eskimos,s with fur have never happened yet they have been in there region since the dawn of time.

The only thing that has changed is our morality and this new religion of atheism may argue all they want that they "do the right thing because it's the right thing to do". Another talking point that may sound cool in a debate about which has more in the prison population atheist's or christians but when we look at it from a sociological study, morality is much more than just statistics. It proves evolution doesn't exist by natural selection unless we consider advancing civilization in a trade off of the politically correct barbarism of the current liberal moron over the moral proofs once believed now beseiged as a genetic memeplex virus that people like sam harris attributes to a genetic desire to fly planes into buildings and must therfore be removed. Never mind the politics of oil and a arab people having got fed up with us. Never mind a President who claims God used him to lead us into a war why calling us whacked out Christians behind their backs. This will still be pinned on Religion as the aweful evil of our time.

The road that takes us however is anything BUT better.


The culture war waged by America’s liberal elite has taken our society far down the road to perdition. But it is not too late to turn back.



The battle for the soul of America has reached a pivotal point. The tattered shreds of what remains of Christian civilization are under assault as never before, yet who is willing to stand in the breach against the attacking barbarian hordes? Certainly not those who now pose as our political, moral, and spiritual leaders. The ongoing public and shameful lynching of Senator Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) is painful enough evidence of that.

For daring to speak against the militant homosexual lobby’s perverse agenda and growing power, Senator Santorum has been subjected to a relentless barrage of hate and vitriol. It was to be expected that the most vehement voices of the Lavender Left would go on the attack. Ditto for the usual suspects among the liberal-left media and the Clintonite Democrats. But that combined chorus could not have kept its ridiculous refrain going for more than one news cycle except for the deafening sounds of silence from those who claim to defend morality and family values. The leadership of the Republican Party and many of the so-called social conservative leaders have bailed out at one of the most crucial junctures in the culture war. They have either sinned by silence or aided and abetted the attackers by offering "defenses" of Santorum that are so lame they do more harm than good.

What did the senator say that was so earth-shatteringly provocative? In an April 22nd interview with the Associated Press concerning the U.S. Supreme Court’s review of a Texas law against sodomy, the Republican lawmaker noted that "we have laws in states, like the one at the Supreme Court right now," and that these laws "were there for a purpose." Senator Santorum went on to remark: "And if the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything. Does that undermine the fabric of our society? I would argue yes, it does."

That is the offensive statement that launched a thousand screaming headlines and ranting diatribes! To listen to the squeals of outrage from the perversity apologists, one would think that the senator had endorsed the murder of Matthew Shepard or called for rounding up and executing all homosexuals. What is so remarkable about the present flap is that Senator Santorum is being pilloried and flayed for a statement so eminently reasonable and universally accepted only a generation ago.

Even a decade ago, most politicians — even liberal Democrats — would have rushed to agree with Santorum’s defense of mom-and-apple-pie morality. Elected officials choosing to side with the sodomites would have been on the defensive. Relatively few would have openly disagreed with the view of homosexuality expressed in Sir William Blackstone’s famous Commentaries on the Laws of England (1765). Blackstone, who greatly influenced the American Founding Fathers and who is still reverently quoted in court decisions, described sodomy as the "infamous crime against nature … the very mention of which is a disgrace." It is, said Blackstone, a gross crime condemned "by the voice of nature and of reason, and the express law of God."

Today this "infamous crime" is being enshrined as a right, and champions of law and morality are in danger of being prosecuted for "hate crimes." How is it possible for such a radical sea change to have taken place virtually overnight?




posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 02:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Aermacchi
 



I can agree a lot to this theory. I do think we are related to monkeys. But we have never been a chimp. Chimps are chimps and will always be chimps. Evolution so far can't prove that a chimp has changes even a bit since we started to study them. We can only find relations. But that dosent prove anything. It only creates a theory.



A specie is like any other dimension. Because it is a dimension on this Earth.

But the dimensions are made up by two totally different mathematical equations.

The equation for a human might have the same matter as the equation for a chimp because we share common grounds like Earth. But the power or symbols that makes up the equation is totally different. Creating a totally different dimension.

Now this is hard to grasp for some one who dont know what math or a dimension is. Things has to add up to have a function.

To put this in a easy way. A human can only produce an other human. Because a human has to evolve inside an other human. You can only use the equation set for humans to produce a human. There is no other way to produce a different human. Mutations is a poor way of trying to escape. The fact is that you inherit what gets passed on but you will still be a human with inherited mutations. The mutations you inherit can make you stronger, weaker ,taller , smaller blond, dark, red and so on. The same goes for your eye collor. And when your borne you have to adjust to the enviroment you pop into if you like it or not.







[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]

[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]



posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 02:14 PM
link   
The Bronze age Book or historical record of the future it so accurately details is dead on in this area of our present and many calling it flat earth for its use of the word "circle" have no knowledge of euclidian geometry that the word circle used in the context of its desciption of the world hung on "nothing" is at a time when such ideas were inconceivable.

That we see them ignore the facts that at that time how anyone could say this was true but they don't desire truth they desire to bastardize the meaning of circle as a flat plane when that is but one contextual definition used under a category of geometrics under the word circle. Where they ignored spere and globe because that would make the scipture accurate and, well, we just can't have fundies being right about such things now can we. In spite of many correcting this group cult of godless evolutionists suggesting they give the benefit of the doubt to where it belongs and rightfully so, they choose to continue using it in attacks against creationists to fortify the current idea that they are the "science" community and we are the blind faithfull .

The Bible had even said that TOO would be the theme of the day and said though they claim to be wise they are but fools and God allows them to be lost in their delusions where they are now writing books calling God the delusion. I mean what does a house have to fall on their heads before they understand? The Bible says they never will.

Most of the people I talk to here are merely x generation zombies without a heartbeat and when they question the concept of the human body havng a soul,,, for them I fear, it is the only thing,,

I can agree with



posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 02:24 PM
link   
I bet they are googling like mad now to try and counter argue all this and i haven't used it once yet lol



posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 02:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by spy66



I can agree a lot to this theory. I do think we are related to monkeys. But we have never been a chimp. Chimps are chimps and will always be chimps. Evolution so far can't prove that a chimp has changes even a bit since we started to study them. We can only find relations. But that dosent prove anything. It only creates a theory.



A specie is like any other dimension. Because it is a dimension on this Earth.

But the dimensions are made up by two totally different mathematical equations.

The equation for a human might have the same matter as the equation for a chimp because we share common grounds like Earth. But the power or symbols that makes up the equation is totally different. Creating a totally different dimension.

Now this is hard to grasp for some one who dont know what math or a dimension is. Things has to add up to have a function.

To put this in a easy way. A human can only produce an other human. Because a human has to evolve inside an other human. You can only use the equation set for humans to produce a human. There is no other way to produce a different human. Mutations is a poor way of trying to escape. The fact is that you inherit what gets passed on but you will still be a human with inherited mutations. The mutations you inherit can make you stronger or weaker to the environment you are exposed to and that's about it.







[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]


I have read many of your posts spy and I find them interestingly in alignment with what genesis says about "pre man" and small changes the creator makes to the man he makes in his image having some tweak if you will where all the difference was made. This some postulate to be the merging of a chromosome the one Ken Miller says proves evolution but the phony Christian doesn't even consider the fact that it may not have been a mutation at all. It may very well have been done ON PURPOSE

As bad as I am at math I understand infinity conceptually and believe it.

God is such a concept and when you were talking about the problem we have or the predicament of giving God a name. Even THAT is mentioned in the Bible. It's scary stuff the more I read and (understand it) the more I am convinced the more faith I can have in it that isn't blind but the truth seen with spiritual insight


[edit on 10-4-2009 by Aermacchi]



posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 02:56 PM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 


So how does the Great Sky Fairy fit into all of this, then? At some point you either say, "And then a miracle occurs" or you don't. Which way do you go?



posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 02:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Aermacchi
 


"I have read many of your posts spy and I find them interestingly in alignment with what genesis says about "pre man" and small changes the creator makes to the man he makes in his image having some tweak if you will where all the difference was made. This some postulate to be the merging of a chromosome the one Ken Miller says proves evolution but the phony Christian doesn't even consider the fact that it may not have been a mutation at all. It may very well have been done ON PURPOSE"

When I ask you for your evidence in support of that all I'm going to hear is echoes, right? But, please, do tell how the Great Sky Fairy works in mysterious ways. Like changing that chromosome.



posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 03:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gawdzilla
reply to post by spy66
 


So how does the Great Sky Fairy fit into all of this, then? At some point you either say, "And then a miracle occurs" or you don't. Which way do you go?


I dont know where you get the sky fairy from. But i guess you must be wired differently so its ok. Call it a bad mutation if you like its not your fault your borne with it.

I dont talk about a tooth fairy at all. I talk about dimensions, changes and time.





[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]



posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 03:09 PM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 


Dodging the question, I see. Very honest of you. You claim SOMETHING mystical is in charge? Or don't you have the courage to stand up for your convictions? And, for the umpteenth time, what proof do you have?



posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 03:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Gawdzilla
 



I dont talk about a tooth fairy at all. I talk about dimensions, changes and time. Its called reality.

Where do you fit in?



posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 03:17 PM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 


Still dodging. Do you think some mystical being is in charge of the whole shooting match? If so, why do you think that?



posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 03:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gawdzilla
reply to post by Aermacchi
 


"I have read many of your posts spy and I find them interestingly in alignment with what genesis says about "pre man" and small changes the creator makes to the man he makes in his image having some tweak if you will where all the difference was made. This some postulate to be the merging of a chromosome the one Ken Miller says proves evolution but the phony Christian doesn't even consider the fact that it may not have been a mutation at all. It may very well have been done ON PURPOSE"

When I ask you for your evidence in support of that all I'm going to hear is echoes, right? But, please, do tell how the Great Sky Fairy works in mysterious ways. Like changing that chromosome.


No all you have to do is open your books and read them.



new topics

top topics



 
65
<< 58  59  60    62  63  64 >>

log in

join