It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Evolution - Lies in the Textbooks

page: 3
<< 1  2   >>

log in


posted on Aug, 30 2009 @ 08:24 AM

Originally posted by BetweenMyths
Lies in the textbooks - If you want to get straight into the science with loads of interesting info, then i suggest you jump straight to 15mins 15secs on this video.

Did you know that the geological column was devised before carbon dating, rubidium dating or other methods used for dating rocks. Fossils were placed in time periods such as Cretaceous, Jurassic, Triassic etc. The dates of these time periods were just pulled out of thin air.

If you want to have a serious discussion on ATS you need to provide proof. And real proof, not a blogticle.

Eminent evolutionary scientists admit that there is no evidence for evolution in the fossil record - see quotes and other info in the video.

Again, real proof is needed. Not some wackadoo on a youtube video. youtube is never evidence. There should be a disclaimer that it is entertainment purposes only. Unless an official comes out and verifies it.

See how a boot, a hat and even a pickle in a jar have become petrified (stonelike) in days, months or years - not millions of years - just years. Wood can become petrified in days.

See how kids are being lied to in an effort to perpetuate the myth of evolution.

This process of petrifying is not to be confused with petrification wherein the constituent molecules of the original object are replaced (and not merely overlaid) with molecules of stone or mineral.

I don't think it is the textbooks doing the lying.

This thing with the petrifying well is perfect proof that creationists grab onto whatever information they can and go "SEE!" the scientists are wrong! And you end up looking bad.

Because long ago scientists already figured out the secrets of the petrifying well. Creationists REALLY need to do actual homework before spewing out information as fact.

In the science community, if your gonna claim something you better be able to back it up. Even then, you will have peers who will discredit it, debate it, and turn it on its head.

So by the time something comes to public, it has been deeply scrutinized adn debated, unless the media gets a hold of it first.

Darwin waited 20 years to release his discoveries. Being a religious man himself, he felt that that releasing this information would be like admitting to murder. And it had something to do with his wife's belief.

To be put into such a predictament. To be a scientist to discover something that totallly goes against your beliefs. But you can't keep it to yourself.

And to hold that in, debating with yourself for 20 years before deciding to release the information. If he chose to never release it at all, I wonder how long we would of waited?

Darwin is a prime example of someone who had to mix faith and science.

I was watching a show of a dinosaur found not to long ago that actually had fossilized organs. (someone will know what I am talking about) but I can't remember what it was called.
One of the head researchers was a priest. Sitting there collar and all. not only is he is priest but a very reputable paleontologist. He was like a kid on christmas exploring this dinosaur. He had no trouble admitting it was millions upon millions of years old.

I would love to sit down and have a beer with that guy. His brain has to be so much fun.

posted on Aug, 30 2009 @ 04:24 PM

Originally posted by demongoat

no worries

as long as theres no, "this proves science is useless, since its a fraud!!" like the same silliness with piltdown man

Don't worry, I've heard that nonsense before and you won't hear me repeating it. Came down to "These ones were frauds therefore THEY'RE ALL FRAUDS!"
Talk about jumping to conclusions

posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 12:17 PM

Originally posted by nomorecruelty

Darwin has been debunked over and over and over.

This guy's claims will never go away though.

Darwin may not be exactly right about eveything he said, but he laid the foundation for the study of Evolution. His ideas were a great leap in the understanding of Biology.

Originally posted by nomorecruelty
It's all the atheists have for a defense.

I'm glad you think you're funny. What I find funny is that you are saying that anyone who acknowledges evolution as fact is an atheist, and that atheists have to prove their lack of belief.

Atheism =/= Acknowledging evolution

Originally posted by nomorecruelty
Dna, in all of its complexity, puts evolution in the ground.

And Science actually proves this. Check out the complexity involving dna.

Darwin didn't have access to this info when he was out and about - or he never would have caused such a stir.

Link says nothing about evolution. Instead it just tells us that DNA is more complex than originally thought.

Originally posted by nomorecruelty
God made you, me, us - everything around us.

I.e. If the big bang is true, who lit the fuse?

If you're going to make such a huge statement like that, at least give us some evidence.

I.E. if your god exists, where did he come from? If he is infinite and does not have a point of origin, then why can't the same be applied to the universe (matter and energy)?

posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 01:13 PM
reply to post by Ace High

I really don't get the debate over evolution. You can't prove or disprove it. I accept it as a theory. One of many
yes, and i agree, one of many dreamed up from the mind of man.
meant only to decieve that whom is willing to be decieved. just compare the detailed work of the bible to the "theory" of evolution. the bible wins
historically, morally, infomativly, discriptivly, collectivly, in clearity,
even in weight, even as a novel and a best seller.i don't believe i 've
even covered it. so i'll stop w/ hands down. God leaves nothing undone!

posted on Sep, 4 2009 @ 01:17 PM
reply to post by PieKeeper

It's hopeless, Mr. Pie, trying to pound common sense into the bloke. YOu made a valiant effort, however futile.

Religious-based dogmatic superstition and ignorance will ALWAYS trump rationality and observable, repeatable, demonstrable FACTS. In their
tiny minds, I mean.....

By "tiny minds" I of course mean the ignorant goons who peddle the stupidity. They prey on people's inherent wish to "believe", and therefore are able to twist the science, and find ways to make it appear ridiculous, by catering to the lack of scientific accumen of most people.

The 'DNA' argument for a "creator" is a prime example. It is a fallacious "argument" --- the implication made by the 'creationists' is thus: "DNA is too complex to have sprung up out of nothing, so therefore it HAD to have been designed and/or created".


As in everything, DNA didn't just "spring up" out of nowhere! It came to be in the current state we see today over the course of BILLIONS of years.

And, it didn't just come to be in a vacuum, in the absence of other influences! All of life is basically just chemistry. Nothing magical, or supernatural about it.

The Human body is one of the most imperfect organisms on Earth. The ONLY thing that keeps us from extinction is the fact that we evolved intelligence that is greater than other animals, and that took a very long time. many failures along the way...that is how Nature operates. Time. Sex. Multiple generations. More sex (before you get titillated, sex is referring to the mixing of genetics, and the viability of a particular species that reproduces in that manner).

Some species reproduce asexually. They survive, in a niche...but most are very susceptible to environmental changes, if the changes are too great to allow adaptation.

The ONLY question that arises, in referring to Humans, is our "awareness". And that is likely a happy accident, result of so many neurons developing a certain critical number of connections, as our brains changed. Our brains were stimulated, probably in a struggle to survive, against far stronger and very dangerous predators and lethal conditions. The development of continued bi-pedalism meant that our hands were free, and became a sort of tool, further stimulating brain growth and development.

Surviving proto-Humans passed on the traits OF being a survivor, and each generation meant more learning, better and faster thinking, and then more offspring...etc. This takes a LOT of time. That is such a basic misunderstanding of the "creationists", they simply refuse to acknowledge it, stick their heads back into the sand (or their "bible") and continue to live in ignorance.

Sad. Very sad.

top topics
<< 1  2   >>

log in