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.
Can you prove that unequivocally? And, no, faith doesn't count. So I am an idiot because I accept that the human species, as well as most modern primates, had one ancestor?
Originally posted by InnerstellarOne
Just thought if there were any natural selectionists here, Have a read of this, Probably refute your theory on evolution.
Nearly a half a billion years ago, tiny horseshoe crabs crept along the shorelines much like today's larger versions do, new fossil evidence suggests.
Two nearly complete fossil specimens discovered in Canada reveal a new genus of horseshoe crab, pushing their origins back at least 100 million years earlier than previously thought.
Dubbed Lunataspis aurora, the ancient horseshoe crab is estimated to have been just 1.5 inches (4 centimeters) from head to tail-tip. That's much smaller than its modern-day relatives that can span nearly 20 inches (50 centimeters).
"We do not know if the fossils were small because they were simply young animals or because Lunataspis just didn't grow any bigger," said researcher David Rudkin of the Royal Ontario Museum in Canada.
Crabby find
Rudkin and his colleagues, including Graham Young of the Manitoba Museum, spotted the fossils buried in 445-million-year-old rocks from the Ordovician period in central and northern Manitoba. They describe the discovery in the January issue of the journal Paleontology.
The specimens included patches of the animals' outer-covering and even evidence of their compound eyes.
Horseshoe crabs are not true crabs and are instead more closely related to spiders and scorpions. And like their eight-legged relatives, horseshoe crabs sport a flexible exoskeleton made of chitin rather than the hard-shell armoring worn by crabs.
Chitin degrades over time. For that reason, ancient specimens of horseshoe crabs have been sparse. Until now, the oldest fossils dated back 350 million years ago, from the Carboniferous period. Fossils have also been found in rocks from the Jurassic Period, suggesting the animals were crawling around beneath dinosaurs. Both the Carboniferous and the Jurassic fossil discoveries indicate the ancient horseshoe crabs greatly resembled their modern-day counterparts.
Primitive looks
Analysis of the recent finds also indicates the ocean creatures haven’t changed much over the eons.
"We wouldn't necessarily have expected horseshoe crabs to look very much like the modern ones, but that's exactly what they look like," Rudkin said.
"This body plan that they've invented, they've stayed with it for almost a half a billion years. It's a good plan," Rudkin told LiveScience. "They've survived almost unchanged up until the present day, whereas lots of other animals haven't."
And whereas major extinction events have wiped even the mightiest, non-avian dinosaurs from our planet, this primitive-looking organism has come out unscathed.
"The horseshoe crab, the lowly little animal that crawls out of the sea every once in a while to mate, it's survived for at least 445 million years in more or less the same form," Rudkin said.
He added that understanding how horseshoe crabs adapted to their ecological niche so early and then weathered natural crises will give scientists broader insights about how ocean ecosystems changed over time.
Originally posted by ammocase
It took a long time for judaism to adopt a full monotheism. Thats why there are many references to "other" gods, and the references to Yaweh being a god for the jews, and why god was a jealous god and he was to be worshipped only. There was a long list of gods that were in rotation during that time.
The bible is full of contradiction, mostly due the changes in society around it, and also because they borrowed many stories and teachings from other religions around it.
Originally posted by ChaosComplex
And to bring this back to topic...
Could "In ___ image" mean more than just physical appearance? Could this mean things like CURIOSITY, LOGIC, EMOTIONS, etc. are all qualities that "God" exhibits?
Originally posted by ChaosComplex
And to bring this back to topic...
Could "In ___ image" mean more than just physical appearance? Could this mean things like CURIOSITY, LOGIC, EMOTIONS, etc. are all qualities that "God" exhibits?
Could this also apply to evolution? Could this mean that "God" is highly capable of change?edit on 3/23/2011 by ChaosComplex because: more to add
Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by ChaosComplex
Of course that doesn't even take into account the whole great flood. All these races had to have popped up after that no?
Originally posted by TKDRL
...thank god for the internet
Originally posted by ChaosComplex
I think I may have stumbled onto something good just now...
All of this will be derived from my current understanding of the basic idea of Adam and Eve...
Adam and Eve were the first people.
Between the two of them, they reproduced...
These children then took wives, etc...
Where did these wives come from?
Where can you account for the many VASTLY different races on the Earth? I'm talking about the races that are visually (and sometimes biologically) different, Caucasian (or white), African (or black), and Asian. I see these as the three "main" races, not in a separation way, just the fact that the three are instantly recognizable. There has to be an explanation for this extreme difference, especially if all life supposedly stemmed from one male and one female (INBRED!!?!?!?!!)...
Originally posted by ammocase
Originally posted by ChaosComplex
I think I may have stumbled onto something good just now...
All of this will be derived from my current understanding of the basic idea of Adam and Eve...
Adam and Eve were the first people.
Between the two of them, they reproduced...
These children then took wives, etc...
Where did these wives come from?
Where can you account for the many VASTLY different races on the Earth? I'm talking about the races that are visually (and sometimes biologically) different, Caucasian (or white), African (or black), and Asian. I see these as the three "main" races, not in a separation way, just the fact that the three are instantly recognizable. There has to be an explanation for this extreme difference, especially if all life supposedly stemmed from one male and one female (INBRED!!?!?!?!!)...
They did research based on dna and mapped it all back to Africa. From Africa we spread toward mesopotamia, then spreading outwards to europe and asia. There is a lot of research that supports this, there is also research that claims to contradict this, though questionable in their attempt.
Differences come from our change we get from the enviorment. There are theories that explain this, like the skin color difference in black people from Africa, and the slanted eyes from people in asia. I have always believed that in 20,000 years Americans will have chaged to look like Native Americans in time.
This woman goes about explaining this via an interesting bit of logic. I've not seen all her videos, but she addresses the first question. Not sure if she addresses the part about the flood. www.youtube.com...
Originally posted by ChaosComplex
I think I may have stumbled onto something good just now...
All of this will be derived from my current understanding of the basic idea of Adam and Eve...
Adam and Eve were the first people.
Between the two of them, they reproduced...
These children then took wives, etc...
Where did these wives come from?
Originally posted by ammocase
The great flood was in many religious tales, even those that predate judaism. It was common for flooding in both mesopotamia and egypt to occur. I know for egypt the flooding of the nile came from the snow melting off the moutain tops in africa. And considering that the "world" was believed to have been whats around them only, it would make sense for them to believe that the world has flooded.
Originally posted by ChaosComplex
Originally posted by ammocase
The great flood was in many religious tales, even those that predate judaism. It was common for flooding in both mesopotamia and egypt to occur. I know for egypt the flooding of the nile came from the snow melting off the moutain tops in africa. And considering that the "world" was believed to have been whats around them only, it would make sense for them to believe that the world has flooded.
This seems pretty obvious, but for some reason the idea never crossed my mind.
That makes sense, if a people are "stuck" in one area, they may think that there is nothing beyond their home. If their home flooded, they may certainly think the entire world has met the same fate.
Noah was warned and told to build the ark...is this situation present in any other writings (forewarning)?
Originally posted by ammocase
Originally posted by ChaosComplex
Originally posted by ammocase
The great flood was in many religious tales, even those that predate judaism. It was common for flooding in both mesopotamia and egypt to occur. I know for egypt the flooding of the nile came from the snow melting off the moutain tops in africa. And considering that the "world" was believed to have been whats around them only, it would make sense for them to believe that the world has flooded.
This seems pretty obvious, but for some reason the idea never crossed my mind.
That makes sense, if a people are "stuck" in one area, they may think that there is nothing beyond their home. If their home flooded, they may certainly think the entire world has met the same fate.
Noah was warned and told to build the ark...is this situation present in any other writings (forewarning)?
Epic of Gilgamesh, "The Flood Tablet", which is displayed in the british museum, predates judaism as it is 1700 years older!!!! Utnapishtim was the name of the guy who was warned by the gods to load up animals as the floods will kill off all of mankind. If you consider the original to be the real version, then this should be the story to go by as these were the original stories taken (or stolen if you rather use that term) by the bible.
Here is a link to it in detail: religiouscrossroads.tribe.net...edit on 23-3-2011 by ammocase because: (no reason given)