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.

 

Evolution and heres your Proof!

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 6 2004 @ 07:25 PM
link   
www.sciencedaily.com...
So you say evolution isn't real, well here's a studied case starting from one type and ending with a totally new genetically different type.
There can be no denyng this Proof.

[edit on 10-8-2004 by John bull 1]




posted on Aug, 6 2004 @ 07:37 PM
link   
and religion's only argument is that lall of that stuff that says the world is too old , is saying that the devil put it there



posted on Aug, 6 2004 @ 07:59 PM
link   
Interesting article - but a fish is still a fish. Though I am open to the idea of evolution and even am convinced that it does exist to an extent - just as this article points out, I still have a hard time buying that all forms of life began from the same single celled organizm. When a fish becomes a lizard or a bird then I will be more convinced. Until then this appears to be merely adaptation and mutation. Don't get me wrong - I want to be convinced but this doesn't do it for me.



posted on Aug, 6 2004 @ 09:44 PM
link   
so badkitty your saying that the dinosaurs with wings are a freak of nature?.....all of them? and the similarities between birds and ancient lizards


MBF

posted on Aug, 6 2004 @ 10:00 PM
link   
I think that creation and evolution are the same thing. Science and religion are both too bullheaded to admit that they are looking at the same thing, just from a different perspective. Anything that is created must evolve from something else.



posted on Aug, 6 2004 @ 11:07 PM
link   
When I was a kid, I was Christian by family association.
I was taught that Evo is false, as a "fish can not come on land and change into another creature", that is is simply impossible.
My thought of that is.......... um, a crawling land creature, the Catepillar, changes into a creatue of flight - a Butterfly ......... a fish like creature of a Tadpole ---- oh my god --- comes on land and turns into a walking (and hopping, heh) Frog !!!

What'ya know - it can happen.

Wait, it can't - Evo is false, lol.

Misfit



posted on Aug, 7 2004 @ 12:33 AM
link   

From the link posted by Simcity4rushour
But when Streelman, then at the University of New Hampshire, Durham, and colleagues went to the island in 2001, they found the fish had evolved into two genetically distinct varieties in less than 20 years. The study appears in the August 13 edition of Molecular Ecology.


Evolution in 20 years...thats just amazing. Are we changing their environment to such an extent that they have to evolve so fast to survive?


Originally posted by badkitty
I still have a hard time buying that all forms of life began from the same single celled organizm.


I think you should read on "endosymbiotic theory," if not already. It explains it well.
Here are some links:
Endosymbiotic theory
Endosymbiosis and The Origin of Eukaryotes
There are better links on that subject, just do a google on similiar terms!


[edit on 8/7/2004 by jp1111]



posted on Aug, 7 2004 @ 12:38 AM
link   
If I am not mistaken, the link also states that this was Human induced evolution, indiciating that Humans were responsible in some fashion in the speedy evolution of these Fish. Now, does that say that Human evolution had some sort of outer influence?

Deep



posted on Aug, 7 2004 @ 12:52 AM
link   
Evolution of every species is due to outer influences. A species evolves because it has to survive in the changing environment through adaptations/mutations. All the changes through which evolution has occured in the past, including ours has been probably because of natural environmental changes. Now we are changing the environment due to our modern technology and its illeffects, so the fish's evolution is different in the sense that its due to our involvement in changing the environment!

[edit on 8/7/2004 by jp1111]



posted on Aug, 7 2004 @ 04:56 AM
link   
some jehova's witnesses came to my door a couple months ago...trying to teach me about the bible...they asked me how do i believe we came about i told them about evolution, they said how about creation, i gave them a few arguments to support Evolution, and they were stumped, they had no clue why they believed Creationism, so they said they would bring me a book about it.

a few days later, in my letter box, surely enough was a small book about creationism, a book that for its length was a huge waste of paper because it contained no new facts(Except excerts from questionable scientific journals) and had mistakes on the first few pages.....(saying that the sun(they were using in reference to the age of the earth) started as red. moved to orange and smaller, and then finally to very small, Blue and Very hot.....now i'm not an Astrologist but i have done year 8 science and that doesnt happen) the only thing this book had in it that i didnt hear in person from the wankers that came to my door was a whole chapter at the end dedicated to how if I become a witness I will be saved in the coming rapture...which reminds me they also used quotes from the bible!

if they ever come to my door again they'll get a beating



posted on Aug, 7 2004 @ 05:26 AM
link   
so you want to see a transinal animal (an animal changing from one type
(fish to another type land animal.
well look up the walking cat fish of texas . heres a fish that has evolved enough to be able to leave the water and go accros land and the ari bladder in the fish dobbles as a lung. I personly have seen with my own eyes a bull head cat fish survive over a week in a bad drought without water. again the fishs ari bladder works as a lung .there are manny typs of fish just like this around the world . and lets not forget the flytless birds of the world they all could fly in the past but because of no need to in the areas they lived the lost the ability and there a few that are on the brink of lousing there flying ability . So you go from an animal that can fly to an animal that is land or water bound . Id say that qulifies as a new type of animal.
Confusion says thoes with eyes closed will never see the mountian.
and yes i ment (confusion



posted on Aug, 7 2004 @ 08:03 AM
link   
This kind of evolution already happened in England, when the big coal engines start appearing, and a species of butterfly changed the colour so it could not be seen in the trees darkened by the smoke.



posted on Aug, 7 2004 @ 10:15 AM
link   
Erm...couldn't it be that the fish already had all those genes in it, just some weren't activated. And now a different gene is activated to make it look different... or a bit different?
der.

I'd really like you to tell me how the hell a single cell and change it's genes, or let alone have a mutation that changes it's genes to make it different in a better way...to make it better off.

Gimme a break.



posted on Aug, 7 2004 @ 11:00 AM
link   
Evolution:

Imagine you have two cactus's in the desert. Two of the same species, but one is slightly different to the other, in that it can hold more water. No in a period of drought, that more-water cactus is more likely to survive than the other one, thus passing on the superior genetic makeup to its offspring, whilst the other cactus dies and fails to pass on its genes. Over time, this cactus could well develop other mutations that would enable it too survive whatever the "weather", or equally condemn it too extinction, ie; a new animal could move into the area, and really likes cactus, but that species could, completely by accident, develop a mutation that gets rid off its spikes, thus making it easier for said animal to eat it.

This is how evolution happens. random mutations that may give an animal a slight advantage (or disadvantage) in the given environment. Over time, more mutations will appear, and offer advantages/disadvantages to the organism. Evolution is random, but self correcting. It is quite simply survival of the fittest animal in that given environment, but that very same animals offspring could develop a mutation that enabled them to be better, and therefore, over time, slowly change into an entirely different organism. Alternatively, that organism may develop a mutation that is no help whatsoever, like a slightly different coloured fur that wasn't quite so good at camoflage, thus making the animal easier pray, and inhibiting its chances of survival, therefore making the chances that that particular mutation surviving slimer. Thats why evolution appears ordered, as any mutations that dont fair so well tend to be snuffed out quickly (usually by something with bigger teeth)

For all those creationists, I say one thing:

How can you entrust a book, which is a copy of a copy of a copy and written by many different men thousands of years ago. Look up ancient sumerian/babylonian/egyptian stories, they are in the bible but written thousands of years earlier. The story of Horus is very similar to that of Jesus. The Jewish G-d is actually more than likely the ancient phonecian god Baa`l, and the ancient jews where originally polytheastic. Even when they worshipped G-d, they still had smaller deities, and G-d didnt forbid them, just said that they wouldn't worship any other gods BEFORE him, ie; he was the big head honcho God. To the point, all the major religions today are just EVOLVED forms of even older religions, just made to fit the times.


PS, personally I believe we where made by aliens, but evolution is still alot more likely than any cow dump spouted by the creationists.



posted on Aug, 9 2004 @ 12:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by badkitty
Until then this appears to be merely adaptation and mutation.


If its adaptation then its evolution. One can observe that populations of animals can have their traits change, and one can apparently observe reproductive barriers forming. There is no reason to think that there is a limit to prevent organisms evolving beyond their 'kind'. Also, the fossil evidence shows that 'kinds' don't even exist. Bird-kind clearly evolves out of Dinosaur-kind, for example. Given the data, is there any evidence that 'inter-kind' barriers exist?


mbf:
I think that creation and evolution are the same thing

Since creationism states that organims do not evolve and were created in total at the begining of the universe, I don't see how you can make this statement.


darage:
Erm...couldn't it be that the fish already had all those genes in it, just some weren't activated. And now a different gene is activated to make it look different... or a bit different?

If it had the genes, then a study of what genes it had would've revealed that. Unless you are saying that the genes were made invisible, weightless, didn't interfere or interact with the rest of the genome, and yet somehow were surpressed, and then magically 'turned on'.


darage:
I'd really like you to tell me how the hell a single cell and change it's genes, or let alone have a mutation that changes it's genes to make it different in a better way...to make it better off.


What exactly are you arguing agianst here? The first part of your sentence does not make any sense, could you try to re-state what you were trying to say? In the second part, are you saying that there are no beneficial mutations? This is simply wrong. The vast majority of mutations are neutral. The next most common type are deleterious. After that, however, there -are- known beneficial mutations. Your information is simply incorrect on that matter.



posted on Aug, 9 2004 @ 12:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan

darage:
Erm...couldn't it be that the fish already had all those genes in it, just some weren't activated. And now a different gene is activated to make it look different... or a bit different?

If it had the genes, then a study of what genes it had would've revealed that. Unless you are saying that the genes were made invisible, weightless, didn't interfere or interact with the rest of the genome, and yet somehow were surpressed, and then magically 'turned on'.


I agree. They wouldn't say two species "were genetically different" without a complete knowledge of both species' genetic makeup. A gene activated or unactivated would look the same. Activation of a gene, i think, refers to when the gene is transcripted and translated to a protein. So I would rather say that a mutation caused the difference in genes or a new gene was formed.



[edit on 8/9/2004 by jp1111]



posted on Aug, 10 2004 @ 06:05 AM
link   
The whale was a land mammal untill it became what it is today i rember when i was younger & 1st heard this i was thinking of these ruddy great whales walkin around on its flippers



posted on Aug, 10 2004 @ 07:08 AM
link   
There is no way evolution is responsible for our existence. I do believe we have evolved slightly, but we were created originally.

For evolution to be true, we would have had to have come from a single cell in the beginning. A single cell doesn't have eyes, ears, arms, ect. As this cell 'evolved', it must have at one time begun to see a need to detect light and color - so it developed an eye over a period of time. Then it saw a need to develop depth, so it developed another eye over a period of time. So unlikely that does sound. Also, if that period of time it took to 'evolve' those eyes, it would, at some point, have a half-evolved eye, why is it then that there is nothing today that is at that 'half-evolved' state. If we evolved from a single cell, we should be like a jelly fish today.

On top of that, we are made of atoms - everything is. Atoms don't touch their neighbor, so there is empty space between atoms and they are held together magnetically. We are mostly empty space. How then, being a lot atoms, can we think, feel, love, hate, enjoy music, baseball and apple pie.

To me this proves two things - we are from a higher power and/or another dimension, and we have soul.

Think about it - anything else is totally illogical. I can't believe how dumb folks can be - I think folks believe in evolution as a scape-goat. Folks don't want to believe in God so they look for their own justification. People need to look for the truth BEFORE they form an opinion - seek first, then analyze.



posted on Aug, 10 2004 @ 07:44 AM
link   
Well, I don't believe in god and I believe in the evolution, does that make me dumb or only make me someone with a different opinion?

And yes, we do come from a single cell, although made by the junction of two in some circumstances, maybe you parents didnt explain that to you...



posted on Aug, 10 2004 @ 07:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP
Well, I don't believe in god and I believe in the evolution, does that make me dumb or only make me someone with a different opinion?

And yes, we do come from a single cell, although made by the junction of two in some circumstances, maybe you parents didnt explain that to you...



"How dumb people can be" and "how dumb peolpe are" are different - one is an action and one just is.

I pretty much just told you that 2+2=4, to say that it equals 5 is more than an opinion. Instead of dismissing what I said, try looking into it a bit deeper.

How can a buch of atoms do what we do?

[edit on 10-8-2004 by godservant]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join