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.

 

An archaelogist presents a study which points to evolution being a flawed theory..

page: 5
11
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 12:59 AM
link   
reply to post by lestweforget
 


Correct me if im wrong which i readily admit i can be

That's good. Well, you are. You're wrong.


i would believe that gravity is not a theory it is a fact, only attempts to explain its causes are theories.

It has already been explained to you that the word 'theory' in science does not mean the same thing it does in common conversation. Have you heard of the germ theory of disease? Yes, that's what science still calls it, hundreds of years after it was proved beyond any shadow of doubt that germs cause diseases.

You know, there really is no argument about evolution. The only people who think there is are religious fundamentalists in America and the Muslim world, and a few cultists like these Falun Gong types.


edit on 22/2/11 by Astyanax because: I left out the gong.




posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 09:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by lestweforget
Ever heard the term "educated idiot" thats where an intelligent person with no ability to discern for themselves goes and blindly believes in what is purported to them simply because it is accepted by their peirs.

Yes, I have. An educated idiot is a person who has a formal education but no common sense or ability to reason in a non-academic environment. But, regardless of your misuse of the term, name-calling really isn’t the best way to respond to my refutation of your points. Do you have a rebuttal for any of the points I raised regarding your lack of understanding of the difference between the common usage of the word theory and the scientific usage or regarding the wholly fabricated account of Darwin refuting his own theory on his deathbed?


Ever wonder why such a small percentage of medical experts cant accept evolution?

Because it’s a scientific theory with an enormous weight of evidence supporting it? Honestly, I wouldn’t want to go to a doctor that didn’t accept evolution as factual. But evolution is really part of the biological sciences, where medicine is more along the lines of applied biology. It’s similar to the between chemistry and chemical engineering. So if you really want to talk about a peer group that should accept evolution as fact, it would be biologists.


To think we just evolved by natural selection, by some sort of chance is just rediculous!

It’s ridiculous to believe in what has been repeatedly verified by observation and experimentation? Equating natural selection with chance gives some indication that you don’t really understand the theory of evolution or the evidence for it.


Look at the diverse phisical abilities of the human body, no other creature on earth comes close…

Name some of the diverse physical abilities that we have that no other animal on earth has.


… combine that with our mental capabilities that we are still learning of constantly…

Maybe you should look up some of the research on animal intelligence. There are several species that show the ability to distribute attention between different stimuli, perform categorization, display the same categories of memory (short term, long term, working, spatial…) as us, have excellent spatial cognition, use reasoning to solve problems, have language, and show self-awareness. Another thing to keep in mind is an application of the adage, “When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.” We look for aspects of human cognition and consciousness in other species. This doesn’t rule out other facets of cognition and consciousness of which we’re not in possession.


… we are too perfect to have just evolved

Really?



Your argument is really just an argument from personal incredulity. You're ignoring all of the evidence supporting evolution because you choose not to believe it or because some part of you can't believe it.


… if you disagree with this you my friend are an ingrate

Accepting evolution doesn’t preclude belief in a creator, so who am I being ungrateful toward? Or is this just more name-calling?


Correct me if im wrong which i readily admit i can be, i would believe that gravity is not a theory it is a fact, only attempts to explain its causes are theories.

Gladly! In science:

A fact is something that is verifiably accurate.

A law is a statement which is always true under specific circumstances.

A hypothesis is a testable, potentially falsifiable explanation of facts and/or laws.

A theory is a unifying framework explaining facts, laws, and hypotheses.

In other words, facts and laws are subordinate to a theory. The theory of gravity carries the weight that it does because it is testable and verifiable. All of the evidence currently available supports it. If new evidence is found, the theory will be modified to form a more complete framework for understanding gravity. The same holds true for all scientific theories, including evolution. If you’re going to say that there’s no evidence for evolution, then you need to make the same claim for all of the other theories that you hold near and dear.

Full disclosure: I cribbed these definitions from a slideshow. I don’t have a reference but I’ve seen it used elsewhere on these forums. If anyone wants to let me know where it came from, I’ll be happy to add a citation.


Even with my limited scientific knoweledge i understand basic science principles…

Your earlier posts put the lie to that statement.


… ever question what your taught?

Constantly. Any science curriculum worth anything teaches you to constantly question and test your assumptions. Science makes no progress by simply accepting the status quo, part and parcel.


Do you only know what you learnt in school?

No, though I have spent a significant amount of time in school. I also know what I’ve learned by experimenting on my own and during my current work as a chemist.


Let me put it this way, what percentage of information you deem important comes from the governments carriculum?

I’d wager not much. I graduated from high school well before the abomination of “No Child Left Behind” and from a school system in an area that places little value on science education. (Hint: the school board for the school district was the defendant in a fairly recent court case on evolution.) I had some great teachers that got me started, but most of what I learned prior to college was on my own.


Whats wrong with this; gravity exists, therefore gravity is a fact. The theory is only necessary when trying to explain how.

This sounds like something your estimation of an educated idiot would say: “we have a fact, who cares why it happens”. Statements like that are the death of scientific progress and understanding. That something happens is secondary to understanding the why and the how.



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 05:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by squizzy
reply to post by okamitengu
 


You can test forever the evolutionary theory with rats, dogs, chimps etc and you will only ever have a rat, dog, chimp.
A rat has never evolved into anything else, it may be bigger, smaller, different colour etc but will never become anything but a rat.
Also if we evolved we would always add new genetic material and we dont.
They say we once had a tail and that we have a tailbone on the base of our spines to prove it. If so that is a loss and that is not evolution as understrood.
edit on 17/2/2011 by squizzy because: (no reason given)


actually, your last line is false. Some mutations are side effects of other changes thet weigh more in terms of surival. Losing our tails (probably over a long period of time) could be a side effect from another more important mutation that ensured survival. So it's not impossible for that to happen..



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 07:42 PM
link   
This is too perfect!

I was sick for my first test in physical anthropology and my professor let me do a take home assignment to make up for it and the second question is:



Many people argue that evolution is "only a theory." Define theory and then describe how evolution does or does not fit the definition.


I am still chuckling about it. I can't wait to tell my prof about this thread.
edit on 24-2-2011 by Dendro because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 01:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Dendro
 


...don't. You'll get failed for following ignorant sources.

This is a far better resource than what is provided in this thread.

The last item reads:


First, we should clarify what "evolution" means. Like so many other words, it has more than one meaning. Its strict biological definition is "a change in allele frequencies over time." By that definition, evolution is an indisputable fact. Most people seem to associate the word "evolution" mainly with common descent, the theory that all life arose from one common ancestor. Many people believe that there is enough evidence to call this a fact, too. However, common descent is still not the theory of evolution, but just a fraction of it (and a part of several quite different theories as well). The theory of evolution not only says that life evolved, it also includes mechanisms, like mutations, natural selection, and genetic drift, which go a long way towards explaining how life evolved.

Calling the theory of evolution "only a theory" is, strictly speaking, true, but the idea it tries to convey is completely wrong. The argument rests on a confusion between what "theory" means in informal usage and in a scientific context. A theory, in the scientific sense, is "a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena" [Random House American College Dictionary]. The term does not imply tentativeness or lack of certainty. Generally speaking, scientific theories differ from scientific laws only in that laws can be expressed more tersely. Being a theory implies self-consistency, agreement with observations, and usefulness. (Creationism fails to be a theory mainly because of the last point; it makes few or no specific claims about what we would expect to find, so it can't be used for anything. When it does make falsifiable predictions, they prove to be false.)

Lack of proof isn't a weakness, either. On the contrary, claiming infallibility for one's conclusions is a sign of hubris. Nothing in the real world has ever been rigorously proved, or ever will be. Proof, in the mathematical sense, is possible only if you have the luxury of defining the universe you're operating in. In the real world, we must deal with levels of certainty based on observed evidence. The more and better evidence we have for something, the more certainty we assign to it; when there is enough evidence, we label the something a fact, even though it still isn't 100% certain.

What evolution has is what any good scientific claim has--evidence, and lots of it. Evolution is supported by a wide range of observations throughout the fields of genetics, anatomy, ecology, animal behavior, paleontology, and others. If you wish to challenge the theory of evolution, you must address that evidence. You must show that the evidence is either wrong or irrelevant or that it fits another theory better. Of course, to do this, you must know both the theory and the evidence.


This thread, on the other hand, screams pseudo-scientific BS at the top of its lungs. There is no science going on in this thread, it would be much safer to look at the established work. Physical anthropology is a rigorous field.



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 01:22 PM
link   
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 


I finished my make up assignment and submitted. I'm not going to lead her to this thread, only tell her the irony of arguing this essay question for a week and a half before I actually got the assignment.

She would actually probably be disappointed with me for bothering to futilely argue with creationists. I just can't help myself from poking the hornets' nest here and there.



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 07:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kailassa
reply to post by Gaussq
 

There is a forum on ATS for religion.

As you have shown your reason for your posts in this thread are to promote a religion, why didn't you post your arguments for Falun Gong there?



Well, someone just wrote a lot of misinformation about Falun Dafa here so I had to straighten the facts about it.

And no, this thread is to make several points:

1) People do not come from apes or any other common ancestor generating all different animals and human beings.

2) People are created at the start of each new civilization by higher dimensional beings, oftentimes referred to as Gods by everyday people.

3) What you perceive as "evolution" is simply that different Gods at each new civilization alters or improves a few things on the animals/human beings down here. That is why you can only see discrete changes and never a half "finger" or toe being grown between the eras.

4) In this thread we can see a definite need to discuss a multidimensional model of the universe, without any deeper understanding of this multidimensional cosmos there is little hope of ever understanding the changes in the lifeforms over the millions of years and the multitude of civilizations on planet earth. People form a fixed notion that a specific scientist offers the highest truth, like a God, and then they all go in that direction and even desperately tries to defend such a primitive theory, against all rational thinking. A scientist is all blindfolded just seeing a single dimension. Only true high-level cultivators can offer higher truth about human life and science. And they keep their information to themselves, or else human society would be severly disturbed - and that is not allowed.

5) Many times there were stone ages, as the article mentioned in this thread points out. Although the author only saw two stone ages in his article, it again coincides with the model of several civilizations independently existing on earth at different times with different tech levels, religions etc etc.

6) Master Li Hongzhi has pointed out in the book Zhuan Falun: mankind has been wiped out by higher powers at least 81 times after their moral values sinked below par. This model also follows the cosmic cycle of formation-stasis-degeneration-destruction and this model has been natural in our cosmos over the bilions of years. Just like the sun orbits around and have Milkovic cycles etc mankind will have its own cycles like clockwork.

Each time of destruction is like a metabolic process where a few good beings are kept and the rest are wiped out. Just like you eatuing a sausage, 10% nutrition picked up, 90% waste going down the drain as faeces. In fact all the cycles in the universe have a reflection in our human body which is a miniature of the universe and has a different(higher) frequency than the universe as you might have experienced going to the bathroom...

Just my two cents, no truth offered whatsoever.






edit on 28-2-2011 by Gaussq because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 08:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Gaussq
 

And do you have any proof for any of these points of yours?

Is this it?


Master Li Hongzhi has pointed out in the book Zhuan Falun

Sorry, that's just not good enough. Who the heck is Li Hongzhi and why should I believe him? I've heard plenty of lunatic claims from crackpot gurus in my time. Why should I believe this one?



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 08:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gaussq
1) People do not come from apes or any other common ancestor generating all different animals and human beings.

Except that there is unequivocal evidence for this ...


2) People are created at the start of each new civilization by higher dimensional beings, oftentimes referred to as Gods by everyday people.

... and not for this.


3) What you perceive as "evolution" is simply that different Gods at each new civilization alters or improves a few things on the animals/human beings down here. That is why you can only see discrete changes and never a half "finger" or toe being grown between the eras.

Except that evolution is a continuous process and is observable today.


Just my two cents, no truth offered whatsoever.

This is all that really needs to be said.



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 08:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gaussq

Just my two cents, no truth offered whatsoever.

As I said, there is a forum specifically for those who want to present "their two cents" rather than truth.



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 09:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Gaussq
 





What we all knew all the time is soon going to be a fact, man never evolved linearly from apes to human beings over million of years. We had dozens of prehistoric civilzations with very developed people like the Atlantis civilization etc. They were all wiped out when they became too morally corrupt.


They were wiped out because other civilizations destroyed them, or because of natural catastrophes. Mayans? Destroyed by the conquistadores. And the same goes for a ton all those ancient civilizations that didn't make it. And what's more, most of them are still there in some form. There's still descendants of Mayans living in the same area today...

Either way, you base your entire belief on an article from ts-si.org! After reading that article, which is an INTERPRETATION of the original article written by professor Shea. The original article is called "Homo sapiens is as Homo sapiens was: Behavioral Variability vs. 'Behavioral Modernity' in Paleolithic Archaeology." and doesn't come to the same conclusion as you at all. He doesn't say the theory of evolution is incorrect anywhere in the paper!!

The main conclusion in the paper is: Earliest humans not so different from us

In act, he even mentions that homo sapiens EVOLVED in that very same paper:



The Omo Kibish archaeological assemblages are similar to ones known from elsewhere from around the same time period in East Africa (e.g., Gademotta/Kukuletti, Aduma in the Middle Awash, and near Ileret in East Turkana), suggesting they may be part of a regional adaptive complex within which Homo sapiens originated.




The thing about aliens being our Masters/Gods(because their tech is superior) is just like the evolution theory, it is a ridiculous theory that makes people think they are primitive and come from monkeys.


Well, given the vastness of the universe, it's conceivable that there probably is some species that we would consider more evolved. Not sure why that would make me feel any less of myself though


And if you really knew anything about evolution, you'd know that we don't come from monkeys...we have a common ancestor with today's monkeys/apes.



And yet there are many prehistoric buildings carved in stone at the bottom of the oceans, the establishments says they are "natural" and still they include exquisit staircases and carved stone portraits that only very advanced people could produce.


Advanced FOR THEIR TIME...but not compared to us today. And which findings are the establishment hiding, give us concrete examples!!



NY Times and other newspapers in older days had several news reports about human giants being found as fossils. Today none of those news is acknowledged, the giant fossils all disappeared. Coincidence?...


Not really a coincidence given that all those "giants" have been debunked as hoaxes

LINK



There are human tracks imprinted in cliffs and mountains from millions years back


Again, care to back this up with evidence? Or is this just something you "heard from your wife's brother who heard it from his friend at work who met someone on a plane back to the US who told him a good friend of him somewhere read that archeologists found those imprints"?




How can humans develop in a linear fashion from a monkey to a man over millions of years, while all other systems in the universe are oscillating back and forth?


What are you talking about??? Living things evolve...even things that evolve very little over time. Take the crocodile for example: Today's croc looks just like the croc millions of years ago...but guess what, they couldn't produce offspring!! Why? Because their DNA still changed enough to make it impossible...



If human beings realize who they are and where they come from(higher dimensions, being Gods in ancient times), if they realize reincarnation is a fact and that the cause-effect of one´s lifestyle(your actions now give a consequence in your next life, just like the laws of physics, it is only a slower feedback loop) are facts, then I believe many things would improve with the blink of an eye.


What's your objective evidence for any of that? You seem so scared of "not knowing" that you buy into a complete fantasy world without proper evidence to back up any of it.



In fact the turnaround of human society will happen with mathematical precision when time is due since when mankind reaches a "minimum"(maximum moral corruption) on the cosmic oscillating curve it will turn around in the other direction and it will be called an apocalypse - mankind´s development only follows the cosmic, oscillating characteristics and mankind has absolutely no power to change the oscillating curve. Some people surrender themselves to the higher powers and transform themselves in time, others don´t see anything coming.


It's as if we're talking about dungeons and dragons! How on earth can you claim with a straight face that you have objective evidence or knowledge that this will happen?? There's no credible evidence to back up any of it, and I seriously wonder why you delude yourself like that. The world isn't that bad...you don't have to make up or buy into fairy tales to be happy.



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 12:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Dendro
 


Dendro, we don't argue for the people we're arguing against, we argue for the peanut gallery. You have no idea how many people are reading these threads...we used to, but for some reason ATS stopped tracking thread views (possibly to get rid of the "25 views and no replies!" self-replies), so we can't track it anymore. It's amazing to remember how some threads used to get 10-20 times as many views as posts.

I know for a fact that there are plenty of people reading here, argue for their sake. Argue for those who could be swayed.



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 03:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Astyanax
reply to post by Gaussq
 

And do you have any proof for any of these points of yours?

Is this it?


Master Li Hongzhi has pointed out in the book Zhuan Falun

Sorry, that's just not good enough. Who the heck is Li Hongzhi and why should I believe him? I've heard plenty of lunatic claims from crackpot gurus in my time. Why should I believe this one?



You need to read the book Zhuan Falun to understand anything about Falun Dafa(Gong) or Master Li Hongzhi, the theory is extremely complex and simple at the same time, five exercises are also included to improve your body. The book link is in my signature below to download free of charge. The book deals with how to become a truly good person, opening your third eye, developing supernormal powers etc etc.

If you manage to read the whole book you really are lucky.

Some people may think it is a coincidence 100 million people started practicing Falun Dafa in 7 years before the Communists started persecuting them.... I don´t. The practice is all free of charge and there is no membership, you must do it on your own but there are practice sites across the world where you can meet other people practicing Dafa too.

I show you this information about Li Hongzhi: www.trinity.edu...



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 03:55 AM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


I guess your reply belongs to an earlier stage of this thread. I already replied to many of these statements in my latest reply so please check that. About the submerged cities, footprints etc they surely exist but are of course not given any proper explanations due to the politics of science.

PS: New findings on seafloor from an ancient advanced civilization: www.heralddeparis.com...#
edit on 1-3-2011 by Gaussq because: (no reason given)


PS 2: The politics of science:

news.nationalgeographic.com... - note Robert Scoch who says the whole city is natural... Where does he come from - Boston University - a jesuit college...



edit on 1-3-2011 by Gaussq because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 10:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Gaussq
 

From your first link:


Researchers have revealed the first images from the Caribbean sea floor of what they believe are the archaeological remains of an ancient civilization. Guarding the location’s coordinates carefully, the project’s leader, who wishes to remain anonymous at this time, says the city could be thousands of years old...

So: no named source, no location given, no information at all, just a claim in a newspaper. A two-year-old claim at that.

FAIL

As for your second quote: a different location altogether (take a map of the world and look up 'Caribbean' and 'Japan'). And on your track record so far, I'm far more inclined to believe the 'Jesuit academic' when he says it's a natural formation, than believe your so-far totally unsubstantiated, nonsensical claims.

FAIL AGAIN

You're just full of lies and false claims, such as telling us you're a physicist. Physicist!


THREAD FAIL



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 01:23 AM
link   



You're just full of lies and false claims, such as telling us you're a physicist. Physicist!



Well, in fact I am an engineering physicist and I have been working with free energy physics among many other things. I also have a friend who works for NASA top secret on manmade saucers.

And this is absolutely true, as I am a Falun Dafa practitioner I must be completely honest.

If people just opened their eyes and added one and one their world view would change in a split second. What do people think the gvmt and the aliens have been up to for all those years when all the UFOs have been spotted?

You seem upset by many things I say, I just show you some public information and I never intended to "prove" anything as I explained many times. The proving(or rather common sense) part is up to each person himself as I see it. I give you a hint, there have been many strange comments from scientists about ancient civilizations over the years, why do these people "disappear" or "change opinions" all of a sudden?

Why do we still run a piston engine?.. There are many reasons but I would say the low human moral is responsible for our current situation. And it is up to each person to improve himself.


There are plenty of good people practicing Dafa across the world, I give you a link to the Falun Dafa practice site at Stanford university:

www.stanford.edu...

edit on 2-3-2011 by Gaussq because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-3-2011 by Gaussq because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 01:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kailassa

Originally posted by Gaussq

Just my two cents, no truth offered whatsoever.

As I said, there is a forum specifically for those who want to present "their two cents" rather than truth.


I've reported this thread yet again to the moderators in hopes to get it at least moved.



This forum is dedicated to the discussion of the organized conspiracy to influence science education through the introduction of creationism and other non-scientific origin concepts.


This thread is a slap in the face of the forum description.



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 02:31 AM
link   


As I said, there is a forum specifically for those who want to present "their two cents" rather than truth.

This thread is a slap in the face of the forum description.


Well, we differ on the point of origin here.

You think you sit on "absolute truth" because you trust the current public science´s standpoint on several issues like evolution. Your opinion is that science is "all done" as it offers absolute truth to you. In addition you do not think any sensitive information is withheld from you by your government.

As I see it current scientific truth will be smashed into pieces very soon, as it has been over and over throughout history.

There is truth and then there is higher truth, that you sit on absolute truth is just an illusion. That is my opinion. Therefore I will never be able to offer any absolute truth to people, just my two cents at my current wisdom level.

And there will alwyas be people of much higher wisdom than myself, that is certain.

PS: There are more ancient wonders of civilization hidden from your plain sight, many of them mocking the evolution theory:

______beforeitsnews/story/356/852/Cuba_Underwater_City,_Ancient_Aliens,_and_the_Book_Of_The_Damned.html

weburbanist.com...
edit on 2-3-2011 by Gaussq because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 02:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Gaussq
 


Majority of your replies have been based around Falun Gong. Not science which this forum is based around. You even completely butchered the context of the original article you posted and then had the gall to call yourself an archaeologist.



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 02:47 AM
link   

You even completely butchered the context of the original article you posted and then had the gall to call yourself an archaeologist.


My friend, we both know I never called myself an archaeologist. Feel free to quote me on that one if you can. In fact, I am not prone to tell lies. I also do not promise any absolute truth either. I just offer my sincere wisdom at my level.

The objective of this thread was and still is to get to a higher level of understanding than the current model of evolution. There were several stone ages at very different times in history as the original article proves. That points to several civilizations being generated at repetitive times throughout history.

And each civilization reached different tech levels, had different types of human beings etc etc. And there are so many submerged structures showing us clues to ancient civilizations.

They were all created by higher dimensional beings and Falun Dafa is the only public information available to completely explain human history since the creation of heaven and earth. Hence the relationship between Falun Dafa and the higher level understanding of mankind´s origin.

As I have shown you, that is why so many top level scientists at the top level universities practice Falun Dafa today. These people are not stupid, that is why they have such a high IQ.

And no, there will not be public proof until the end of this cosmic cycle(which I believe is just a few years away). And there is plenty of top classified information that keeps extremely interesting information from the public, that is just common sense too.


In fact my formal education is M. Sc. Eng. Physics.
edit on 2-3-2011 by Gaussq because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join