Evolution: FALSIFY IT!

reply to post by Arrowmancer



We wouldnt have "unbreachable" immune systems at all, Bearing in mind long before we were here (and i believe long after we are gone), microbes ruled the earth, cells which divide rapidly, given that, work out how fast a culture of cells can grow in 24 hours and potentially how many cells are in the said culture, not in that process of cell division, lets say in the binary fission of a cell one mutation occurs which maybe changes the tiniest trait of a cell, such as a cell surface receptor, this cell can now be considered a new strain, which unfortunately isnt recognised by our immune system, hence why we get the common cold several times a year, there are just that many strains and microbes are absolutely second to none when it comes to adaptation, see Clostridium Difficile for a reference.
Also, nowhere has it ever been said that we evolved directly from Apes, it is assumed because of our very close DNA match that we had one common ancestor, and contrary to popular belief we actually have a higher DNA match with pigs than Apes. There are several findings which actually do support Human evolution, its all dependant on the contributing factors which determine an organisms route in evolution, for instance, Neanderthals Lived further north, were climate was much cooler, Neanderthals were larger than us, size and surface area to heat loss ratio, oddly, the smaller a creature is the greater the amount of body heat that is lost. Humanoids however nearer to africa, displayed completely different traits, im missing the point though, as all contributing factors change the need to display such traits becomes redundant, since one of our main purposes is to conserve energy, hence why we walk on two legs rather than four, saves energy...no? and also why we store various macromolecules and nutrients for later use. Evolution isnt meant to make sense, and you arent going to see a change over a year, or even a million years that is noticable but every time we encounter something we will adapt or inevitably we are selected to die, sounds like a pretty crappy existence, but unfortunately im more willing to accept "we are because we are" than some higher plan.

reply to post by Blarneystoner


Magic Johnson is proof enough that there is a cure for AIDS. All diseases have cures but all diseases are curses upon mankind for all of the unnatural modifications to our food and drinking water supplies. I do not know what Magic Johnson did or who cured him, but it is something that any of us here can afford.

reply to post by creatednotEvolved


Johnson is far from cured, like every other person who suffers from the affliction he is subjected to a fairly large cocktail of drugs in order to "control" the virus, i can see why the misconception of him being cured has become viral though since phsyicians have reported Magic Johnsons viral state to be "undetectable" but one of the major problems with HIV is its ability to become dormant and hide, it is one hell of a complex virus, which is why some people can actually suffer from HIV without even knowing. There are various research programmes though in order to find a cure since the process in which HIV virion replicate and spread is fairly well understood, so several points in said process can be targetted and stop our own cells from being comandeered to do their dirty bidding.

Mike

Originally posted by Thain Esh Kelch

Now you are just making up stuff..

Your Wikipedia link
The presence of Precambrian animals somewhat dampens the "bang" of the explosion: not only was the appearance of animals gradual, but their evolutionary radiation ("diversification") may also not have been as rapid as once thought. Indeed, statistical analysis shows that the Cambrian explosion was no faster than any of the other radiations in animals' history.

Just because there is a dissenter from the general scientific spectrum of ideas, this does not negate the views of many others.

reply to post by madnessinmysoul


darwin said in his last book, his theories cant be obtained without divine intervention.

reply to post by TylerDurden2U

Originally posted by TylerDurden2U
reply to post by madnessinmysoul

 

darwin said in his last book, his theories cant be obtained without divine intervention.

There are two problems with this:

Problem 1: Either you have been lied to or you are lying, as it is assuredly false. Of course, I challenge you to produce the quote that verifies your claim.
Problem 2: Darwin isn't the be all and end all to evolution, he was the starting point....150+ years ago.

reply to post by TylerDurden2U

darwin said in his last book, his theories cant be obtained without divine intervention.

Really? That's fascinating. His last published work was The Formation of Vegetable Mould through the action of worms with observations of their habits in 1881. I downloaded a copy from Project Gutenburg and did a search for "divine", "intervention", "theory", and "theories". No hits for "divine" or "intervention" (or "God").

There's one hit for theory, which is actually a footnote:

[80] 'Illustrations of the Huttonian Theory of the Earth,' p. 107.

And there's one hit for theories, which is in reference to the "calciferous glands" found in worms:

But almost as many theories have been advanced on their use as there have been observers.

Or were you referring to a different "last book" of Darwin?

Fact checking... it's not just for breakfast any more!

I'm trying to figure out why the "elite" are worshiping giant owls, lizards, dragons, snakes etc and we're left to believe we came from apes? With a missing link (that will always be missing) and less chromosomes than the species we evolved from.

Plus our bodies are absolute crap compared to other animals in the wild. If we were naked in the jungle, desert or tundra most of us would likely die.

Not arguing , just wondering...

reply to post by eleventhsun

I'm trying to figure out why the "elite" are worshiping giant owls, lizards, dragons, snakes etc

Who?

and we're left to believe we came from apes?

Or shared a common ancestor with them, but who’s counting? Right?

With a missing link (that will always be missing)

The missing link is a logical fallacy akin to Zeno’s paradox. It’s also predicated on a linear model for evolution, which doesn’t even exist. Think family tree.

and less chromosomes than the species we evolved from.

Which occurred through chromosomal fusion. No net loss of genetic information, just a change in chromosome arrangement.

Plus our bodies are absolute crap compared to other animals in the wild. If we were naked in the jungle, desert or tundra most of us would likely die.

Name another species of mammal that exists in every single biome on this planet. We haven’t evolved to survive in those environments in the absence of technology because we don’t need to.

Not arguing , just wondering...

Since you’re wondering, have you thought about researching the answers to these questions yourself? The effort required is minimal.

reply to post by iterationzero


Those animals adapt, we don't physically adapt to any environment. Hell people complain about having to walk down the street in the sun, we make the environment adapt to us.

And if you don't notice people of power worshiping owls and lizards and other strange deities I think you need to look around a bit more.

reply to post by eleventhsun

Those animals adapt, we don't physically adapt to any environment. Hell people complain about having to walk down the street in the sun, we make the environment adapt to us.

Exactly my point - there's no need for us to evolve to extreme environmental conditions because of our technology, so in the absence of that technology, we're pretty fragile. Just like any animal that is taken out of its native climate.

And if you don't notice people of power worshiping owls and lizards and other strange deities I think you need to look around a bit more.

Or you could provide some examples.

reply to post by eleventhsun
Why burden the germ plasm with adaptations we don't need?.

reply to post by iterationzero


you seem to be skooled in evelution. do any half pond slime/frog/human skeletons exist? how about monkeys, wearing suits? any thing to give anything to support a fairytale for educated folk(evolution)?

Originally posted by TylerDurden2U
do any half pond slime/frog/human skeletons exist?

Are you trolling?

First, there is no half pond slime/frog/human skeleton because you just described it in 3 parts rather than just two. Second, "pond slime" wouldn't have a skeleton. Third, humans are not descended from frogs.

Why do you think such a specimen would exist? It would actually contradict Evolutionary Theory.

Originally posted by TylerDurden2U
how about monkeys, wearing suits? any thing to give anything to support a fairytale for educated folk(evolution)?

Humans are the only living organisms that manufacture and wear clothing.

Why would monkeys wear suits, other than being forced to do so by humans? They don't have the means of producing them.

reply to post by TylerDurden2U

If all you're going to be is a troll, at least be interesting about it. This is even more boring than the one about what Darwin said in his last book.

reply to post by iterationzero
you have proved your point. and yes, i know pond scum doesnt have a skeleton. just testing your superior beingness. do you have any proof that evolution exists?

reply to post by TylerDurden2U

Other than the century and half of evidence gathered that supports the theory of evolution and the complete lack of evidence that invalidates it? Nope.

reply to post by TylerDurden2U

do you have any proof that evolution exists?

Well, I did make a sister thread to this one...and it contains quite a few things that prove evolution.

Originally posted by TylerDurden2U
do you have any proof that evolution exists?

Yes. But first, you must understand what evolution is.

Evolution a change in allele frequency within a population over successive generations. This happens, we know for a fact that it does. Evolutionary Theory is a set of explanations for how this occurs.