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.

 

Debunk evolution once and for all

page: 27
13
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 06:11 PM
link   
reply to post by hippomchippo
 


Ohh GOSH, I know for a fact that everything evolves, there is nothing which doesn't evolve, go through my threads, watch how my thoughts evolve.

I never denied that fact, this thread is discussion based, just like all of my thread, I'm here to discuss and learn new stuff, but as usual I hate arrogants who think they know it all and just slap their know it all comment in my face to make themselves feel smart or something


Just kidding, as I said, I've learned much, even though I continue questioning doesn't mean nothing has sunk inside my brain




posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 06:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by oozyism
reply to post by hippomchippo
 


Ohh GOSH, I know for a fact that everything evolves, there is nothing which doesn't evolve, go through my threads, watch how my thoughts evolve.

I never denied that fact, this thread is discussion based, just like all of my thread, I'm here to discuss and learn new stuff, but as usual I hate arrogants who think they know it all and just slap their know it all comment in my face to make themselves feel smart or something


Just kidding, as I said, I've learned much, even though I continue questioning doesn't mean nothing has sunk inside my brain

Thank you!

This thread is hardly discussion based if the title is "Debunk evolution once and for all" That seems rather provocative, no?

Darwins theory of evolution is very well built though, and would take some serious scientific study to prove wrong, as it's held up quite well in the last 100 years.

In all likelihood, most of our scientific theories are going to be revised, I'm sure within 100 or 200 years a new theory of gravity will pop up which improves upon Einsteins theory.

Questioning theories is something intelligent people do, but questioning established facts just to be provocative isn't something intelligent people do, it's usually something that people with almost zero knowledge in the subject try to do.

[edit on 30-8-2010 by hippomchippo]



posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 06:15 PM
link   
reply to post by hippomchippo
 


Do you think there would be 27 pages worth of discussion without that title .. Sometimes you have to keep it smart to get what you want.. I learned much from Matrex is well, he has some very similar ideas to mine..



posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 06:19 PM
link   
reply to post by hippomchippo
 



Uh, ok.
Got any evidence?


Yes You... and the Knowledge is both "IN" you as well as being "Outside" of you...

If you won't know yourself you are in Poverty....


And how would this disprove evolution?


It doesn't but will perhaps define what is "Evolving"...

a. The MIND.
b. The Program referring to the Species, (Biological Robotics and Environment i.e. this little Universe)

You see you are pleading for the species to be Alive and the only reality...

This may be because you are a little nervous about examining your own Mind (Not your "Thoughts", which is the decoded version of the Species.)???

More than 90% are this way which is also normal in this experience...


The mind doesn't produce reality, the mind interprets reality..


Prove it....

You only know the "Inner" Mind and Not your "Outer" Mind you are a "Partition" of... But this is Normal...


Something tells me you've been watching what the bleep do we know.


Your imagination is running away with you.... LOL..

No seriously I haven't....
I don't need to...

[edit on 30-8-2010 by The Matrix Traveller]



posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 06:34 PM
link   
reply to post by oozyism
 





only micro evolution has been observed


Wrong. Speciation has been observed. Speciation is the definition of Macro-evolution, it is one species evolving into another. The difference between Micro and Macro evolution is only a matter of time. Want to know how Macro-Evolution works and how we know it takes place? Well you admit we observe micro-evolution, these are slight variances in genetics over the course of only a few generations. Every generation is slightly different than the last. Now fast-forward 1 million years and those slight differences have added up, now its an entirely different species, or even several species if there were multiple populations isolated from each other in very different environments.



You claim that belief has evidence backing it up


My acceptance of Evolution is a belief that has evidence backing it up, yes.

Your belief in God, using Atoms and the entire Universe as evidence, does not have evidence backing you up, at least not in the academic sense. You just arbitrarily call those things evidence. In truth they are no more evidence of God than of the Flying Spaghetti Monster or Steve the Giant Space Penguin of any other supernatural explanation or being someone can make up.

The Universe is evidence of one thing that we can determine with some degree of certainty - The Universe.



but I can say your evidence is stupid, and my evidence is logical


I have no doubt that you can claim anything you want. But I and the others in this thread have shown that your evidence isn't logical and have given you the evidence for Evolution for you to look at. Therefore if you claim our evidence is stupid you are not rejecting it for sound reasons but for your own personal belief. A belief that is not evidence based and ignores evidence to the contrary, remember, is one based on Faith.



You might not take everything around you as evidence of GOD but many do, who is right?


It is impossible to debate when one side bases their beliefs on Faith and poor reasoning because even if you show them the evidence that they are wrong they ignore and repeat fallacious nonsense like: BUT ATOMS ARE EVIDENCE OF GOD CAUSE THEY EXIST AND STUFF.

Let me put it this way, what if I claimed that atoms are evidence that there is absolutely NO GOD? That would be a pretty stupid thing to say wouldn't it? After all what does the existence of atoms have to do whether or not a supernatural being exists? Couldn't a supernatural being exist WITHOUT atoms just as much as it could WITH them? Atoms are proof of atoms, not proof for or against God. It would sound silly if I made the argument that way and it sounds silly when you make it the other way.



Here is a question, do you believe in dark matter/energy?


Yes, to an extent. Scientists observed a discrepancy in the total mass of the Universe and the mass of Galaxies. They dubbed the matter that was creating the excess mass Dark Matter because it was undetectable and yet its effect was present. However I'm happy to admit I don't know for sure whether they exist or not as they have not been directly detected.



did this just accidently come to existence?


I don't know. As I said before I am perfectly fine not knowing how the Universe came into existence. You are also assuming here that no-gravity is the default of the Universe when Gravity may well have existed forever.

Sure I'd like to get to the bottom of the mystery but I'm not going to start making up supernatural beings in order to fill the gaps in my knowledge.



I'm not gonna lock myself in a box and look at the world through a close minded and meaningless binoculars with absolutely no purpose


Good, neither am I. But I think we'd have very different ideas of what meaningless means. To me the musings of faith are fairly meaningless. Gods and goddesses, ghouls and ghosts, all lot's of fun when it comes to fiction (or perhaps even late night speculation when you're with friends and had far too much to drink) BUT in reality they're pretty meaningless. I find a lot of people on this site who aren't open minded at all...

You see I'm open-minded, to the evidence. Presented with evidence of a God I'd convert pretty quickly. I follow where actual evidence leads. But all this talk about taking atoms as evidence of God... well that's simply NOT evidence of any such thing.




I guess it was by chance that we gained the genetics to look for GOD right


I'm not sure what you're talking about.

A) Evolution is not by chance

and

B) There is no genetics to look for God, at least none that I'm aware of. Perhaps you are referring to the fact that human culture typically contains religion. You'll find that Gods are not created by seeking them but more often than not are made by finding elements of nature that are unexplained and anthropomorphizing them.



We have to ask ourselves these questions.


Questions are fine. Mysteries are fine. But we must not be closed-minded or else we will be shut off from new evidence as it arises. This is why fundamentalist religion is such a bad thing, it ignores evidence in favor or myth and dogma.

[edit on 30-8-2010 by Titen-Sxull]



posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 06:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by oozyism


The same way I explain those claiming to be cured by priests screaming at them some sort of prayers.

Get it?



No.

I'm afraid I do not.



posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 07:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by oozyism
reply to post by hippomchippo
 


You're repeating the same theory, which is a theory backed by circumstantial evidence, not hardcore evidence which is exactly why they call it a theory.

You don't get what scientific theory comprises of?



I have learned much, I'm trying to see if you are willing to learn or are you a Darwin worshipper.


Well, given that we have observed instances of speciation in nature...I'm not why you can't accept that speciation is a fact


Anyway, I'm out of this thread...no point in discussing with what seems to be an evangelist without a proper understanding of science an unwillingness to understand the difference between strong and no/weak evidence, and his supporter who approaches the whole thing from a "but what is reality" standpoint similar to that Matrix movie. The "what is reality" thing is an interesting PHILOSOPHICAL discussion...but doesn't really add any scientific knowledge or findings.



[edit on 30-8-2010 by MrXYZ]



posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 07:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by oozyism
reply to post by hippomchippo
 


everything evolves.. 6 types of evolution, only one has been observed therefore is hard science, the rest is theory and belief based..


FALSE. This is a Kent Hovind argument. The theory of evolution is about the diversity of life on planet earth. Nothing more, nothing less. The other theories you speak of fall under big bang, abiogenesis, gravity, etc. THEY ARE NOT EVOLUTION. Macro evolution and micro evolution are both part of evolution. Macro is just micro evolution on a large scale. Small changes over a long period of time become big change.



I can't force you to understand it, you have no sense of imagination and can't examine theories from different point of view, from different scenarios etc.. If you can't do that then why are even bothered trying to discuss something which has been formed fundamentally through imagination and then slowly build up and add evidence on top.. I don't think you will get it..


You are making stuff up and using wild speculation to justify your argument. Saying that robots made by man would believe evolution, is beyond absurd. That's just a guess which depends on thousands of different factors.

[edit on 30-8-2010 by Barcs]



posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 07:52 PM
link   
I will admit that I fell for this little ATS prank myself but I see posters much smarter than me carrying on in this complete waste of time when the OP is just playing you all for suckers.



Originally posted by oozyism
This is an imaginary scenario so don't think about possibility, imagination is what you need to truly understand what I'm talking about..




Yep, that aout sums this thread up right there. If you cannot just make up the same things the OP made up, you are wrong. So please, stop trying to have a rational discussion, use your imagination and just make things up. Robots will soon be having sex and making new robots without human intervention or the supply of raw materials and this will obviously be proof of god. Just hit your . before logging onto ATS from now and this stuff makes perfect sense.



posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 08:06 PM
link   
Ok, last post


Watch the following...ALL OF IT! And if you're seriously coming back after that still stating that "evolution can be debunked"...well...you're 100% irrational and a logical discussion is clearly not possible with you.

I finally found a boilerplate post to all anti-evolution threads



The 13 Foundational Falsehoods of Creationism (By AronRa)

(A Logical Argument)


































posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 08:15 PM
link   
Haha. This is pure comedy. OP makes an absurdly simplified statement that has nothing to do with evolution, then gets thoroughly debunked. OP changes the subject and gets debunked again. OP makes an absurdly simplified.... etc etc.

Just to answer a few questions for my own enjoyment and to hopefully spread some knowledge to others:


is there something which doesn't evolve? thats what I wana know..

Yes. My watch does not evolve. If I took my watch and locked it away for 100,000 years, it would not change a single bit. It may collect dust or begin to decompose, but it does NOT evolve. There are no mutations that happen in the watch to help it adapter to its environment as it's an inanimate object. No inanimate object evolves. Things may change over time, but in the scientific sense, it does not.


If animal A is at timeline 1 and animal B is at timeline 2, does that mean animal B didn't exist in timeline 1?? Do you get what I mean? If animal B supposedly evolved from animal A, and animal B also exist in time line 1, then blablbalbalba.. The evidence is to dull and soft, it is not hard evidence, as I said before, you can also conclude that all the animals were brought to earth.

What does this even mean? Fossils are dated to certain time periods and they are all consistent with the type of life found. There are no humans or mammals mixed in with dinosaur fossil layers, there are no dodo birds mixed in with pterodactyls. Hell, there's no cretaceous period dinosaurs mixed in with Triassic fossils. They are perfectly consistent EVERY TIME and prove that life has evolved slowly over time, and it definitely didn't all just appear at once. There hasn't been a single out of place fossil. If your robots were smart they'd come to the same conclusion, and they'd realize that man made the robots, since they suddenly appeared and didn't gradually change from man to robot. Either that or the transitional fossils just haven't been found, but that's highly unlikely and if you studied the DNA and physical features of the robots they would be unlike any creature to ever walk the earth.


Not long ago it was a fact that the sun doesn't rotate
You get what I mean right??
Arrogant people will always fall in the same trap, I don't know who built that trap but it is a damn fine one, perfectly made for us..

Science EVOLVES and changes based on new information. It doesn't mean that it's wrong. Darwin wasn't wrong, but the theory of evolution has changed and evolved immensely since we began studying genetics. Before genetics we only had the fossil record which pointed to evolution. Genetics confirms what was suspected by the fossil record.

And when was that ever a scientific fact? Back when the church controlled science and told them what they could and could not say? People might not have been aware of the sun's rotation, but I don't recall anyone ever claiming it absolutely did not. Science does not focus on what is NOT. It focuses on what IS.


I never denied that fact, this thread is discussion based, just like all of my thread, I'm here to discuss and learn new stuff, but as usual I hate arrogants who think they know it all and just slap their know it all comment in my face to make themselves feel smart or something

You keep mentioning arrogance. Answer me this. Who is more arrogant?

A. The person who admits he doesn't know all the answers, but goes by what has been studied and proven.

B. The person who refuses to believe what has been studied and proven and makes up his or her own theory. They refuse to budge from the position, even though it has absolutely no evidence whatsoever to back it up and contradictory evidence has been found.

I think the answer is obvious.

You say it's all about knowledge right? The knowledge is out there and in this thread. Watch all those above videos and you might learn something.

It's been fun! Let me know if you actually get around to debunking the theory, because I'd be very interesting in that.


[edit on 30-8-2010 by Barcs]



posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 08:42 PM
link   
I personally do NOT question whether "Evolution" is a Fact or Not.....

The FACT still remains....
Something produced this little Universe and Species which interacts with it...

If this was Not the case, we would Not exist.



So the Question still remains...

WHAT is evolving ???

a. The species (Biological Robotics)

Or...
b. What has produced the "Species"...

Why does the "human species" Flee from this Question...

At the end of the Day is the Species itself Alive ???
Or is LIFE (the "Real YOU" experiencing the "Species" and "Environment" the "Species" interacts with...

This does NOT involve any religious content at all....

This only involves what you are....



posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 08:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Matrix Traveller
The FACT still remains....
Something produced this little Universe and Species which interacts with it...

If this was Not the case, we would Not exist.


That's a fact? Can you prove that something created the universe? Why can't the universe be eternal?

I plead the fifth on what caused the universe because it's impossible to study and I have no clue how it happened.

[edit on 30-8-2010 by Barcs]



posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 09:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Barcs
 


Questions....

Eternal ???
Perhaps....
Especially if all is retained in a "Static format" and we are merely accessing information stored in a Static Construct, then yes it could very well represent eternity...

Remember this experience appears to be dynamic...

Perhaps Collectively "We", that is the "Partitions" of LIFE produced what you call the universe ???
And have entered the experience We Created Collectively ???

Are we searching for "the Self" i.e. LIFE ???
Sounds bizarre I know, but truth is often stranger than fiction....

I mean what is it all for then ???

Any thoughts???

[edit on 30-8-2010 by The Matrix Traveller]



posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 12:43 AM
link   
Atheists are an embarrassment to ATS, for someone to not test possibility shows their backward attitude, not much different than the religious people they blame as being the root of all evil


That being said, there is a reason why all of you have a right to respond to the OP in ATS, if you are that stupid not to realize this is a discussion, that discussion evolve, the same subject we have been discussing this whole time lol..

Unlike Atheists I don't have a locked and fixed belief of the world, I understand that within time, and within advancements new discoveries will change, create and destroy theories. That is the only fact we have on the table.

It was only couple of decades ago that people like you took the "sun not rotating on its axis" as an undisputed fact, the same way you take evolution as fact. Yeah Darwin was a prophet and he could not be wrong, that is why he had a massive beard right? The Darwinian religion has began, and you guys are the followers, kinda embarrassing..

Now all of that being said, the discussion has evolved from debunking evolution, to finding out what drives evolution. Some claim it is conscious, for example human beings evolving in to nations, a nation is a system just like a human being/robot. So we human beings did evolve in to something new and yet we don't see it??

Constitution is used in development and functioning of all nations, similar to DNA, nations continually becoming more complex and change to survive (hence survival of the fittest), that creates new species of nations. So is it conscious?

L

[edit on 31-8-2010 by oozyism]



posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 12:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 





No.

I'm afraid I do not.


It is called belief..

They believe they got cured due to prayer blablabla you get what I mean, the world revolves around belief, but Atheists refuse to accept it claiming their belief is the best, they will probably murder us all if they take over a country, I'm scared
Reminds me of the Communist stories of Afghanistan and how they packed the Universities claiming we are related to Monkeys therefore there is no GOD, and GOD is backward lol

These new Atheists seem to think they are fresh not realizing how old their arguments are



posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 01:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Matrix Traveller
The FACT remains....
Something produced this little Universe and Species in it...
If this was Not the case, we would Not exist.
So the Question still remains...

WHAT is evolving ???

a. The species (Biological Robotics)

Or...
b. What has produced this experience...

Why does the human species Flee from this FACT...

[edit on 30-8-2010 by The Matrix Traveller]


Personally i think everything is expanding. A expansion can also be used to explain how things evolve.

In the beginning everything must have been compressed, if not there wouldn't be a expansion or anything evolving. Because the infinite is a constant.
The infinite cant expand and it wont evolve unless there is a Awareness to do so. The Awareness must exist within the body of the infinite dimension. And only within this dimension can we have something that can evolve.

Our Awareness is based on how the infinite dimension shaped the finite matrix. Your signature image is a compressed part of that matrix. And we all share the same one, but within a different physical body.

You can look into it and find that it has a many more dimensions of knowledge that are undiscovered. You can go on for ever, but not within the body which holds the Awareness at present time and space. The body is restricted to the laws of physical expansion. That means we only have a short amount of time to look into our own Awareness and knowledge, within this physical body or dimension.

I have often asked my self if my perceived Awareness is really singular meaning my personal Awareness. Or are we all the same Awareness but borne into different bodies to experiance this dimension from different perspectives.







[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]



posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 01:36 AM
link   
reply to post by oozyism
 




Unlike Atheists I don't have a locked and fixed belief of the world


:bnghd:

This shows how completely ignorant you are to what an Atheist is. An atheist is merely someone who lacks belief in gods. The vast majority of Atheists, every single one I've ever met, are not absolutely certain there is no God because they are open to being proven wrong by evidence.



It was only couple of decades ago that people like you took the "sun not rotating on its axis" as an undisputed fact


I'm not sure what you are talking about. If you mean that many atheists follow where the evidence leads than you are correct. But wait aren't you contradicting that thing you said about Atheists having fixed beliefs? So which is it?

You see that's what open-minded really means, it means that as new and better information becomes available you can change your mind and follow the evidence. This is why Creationism is labeled as closed-minded, because it rejects the evidence for Evolution and cling to myth.

An example: If there was evidence for Jesus/Yahweh, the Christian deities, I would be a Christian. If there was evidence for Allah, the Islamic deity, I would be a Muslim. But if Christians were confronted with evidence that Allah was the real one how many do you think would convert? Only those with Open Minds right?

Are there closed minded atheists? Sure there are and there are plenty of closed-minded theists but you sure are being one of those closed-minded people by slamming the door on atheists by calling us an embarrassment to ATS. Most of the atheists I've seen in this thread have been trying to help you better understand Evolution and the evidence in support of it, heck even many theists have been trying to help. You didn't present any evidence that debunked evolution or proved God in any way, so there was nothing for the "open minded" to even be open to.



Now all of that being said, the discussion has evolved from debunking evolution, to finding out what drives evolution.


I have a feeling that's already been explained to you in detail. Environmental pressures have a great deal to do with driving evolution for one, but I'm sure that's been said a hundred times in this thread already.



Constitution is used in development and functioning of all nations, similar to DNA


Now you're just rambling some strange philosophical analogies...

I came in this thread to help you better understand Evolution and I feel I've done my best to accomplish that. If you want to continue this conversation send me a U2U and perhaps I can help you understand why us Atheists are the way we are you can help me understand why you mistake skepticism and evidence based beliefs as being "closed minded".



posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 03:05 AM
link   
reply to post by oozyism
 


Belief has not proof and proof has not belief. The two are divided entities. Faith needs no proof. A desire for proof in faith is called skepticism. Proof needs no faith to it, for it is solid and true. There is no mystery to it.

Evolution is proven fact.

God is an unprovable belief.


I believe in God because of how I view the universe, Bible, and personal experiences in my life. I know evolution is fact because of the proof and enormous data supporting it.

To mix belief and proven fact is simply ignorant. Forgive me if you take it negatively. We all have character flaws. It is, however, our responsibility to respond to them, not ignore it and let it be. My character flaw is arrogance, to which I strive to limit. Your character flaw is assumptions ignorance, to which you seem to just not care to limit.

[edit on 31-8-2010 by Gorman91]



posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 04:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 

As I have said before... I am Not a church goer nor do I follow "Roman doctrine", but I am also Not an "Atheist"...


The teachings of the LIGHT through Jesus the Carpenter, reported by James, says "Faith" without works is Dead....

bible "The Epistle of James" Chapter 2 Verse 17.
(The Greek Text of Stephens 1550)


17. Even so faith, if it haveth Not works, is Dead being alone.


And also in "The Epistle of James" Chapter 2 Verse 26.


26. For as the body without the body is Dead, so faith without works is Dead also.


So in fairness to Christian teaching Faith is Not alone...

Faith on its own, without "works" is useless...

Just as it takes "faith" to do anything at all, including just holding a pencil and writing, in that this also requires "Faith" in knowledge...

Without "Faith" you can't do anything and without "Works" Nothing happens...



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in

join