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 evolution wrong?*

page: 137
31
<< 134  135  136    138  139  140 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 01:23 PM
link   
reply to post by iterationzero
 





Given the information that's been provided so far in this thread, I'm not sure any further dumbing down is going to help. Further, it's not the point of this thread. The point of this thread is for people who reject evolution to provide evidence for their hypothesis explaining biodiversity. So far we've gotten "God did it" and "aliens did it". And the bulk of the "evidence" provided to support those hypotheses hasn't even been positive evidence for those hypotheses, it's been trying to show that evolution couldn't happen. It's a logical fallacy called a false dichotomy.
As though there is allready proof that evolution has anything to do witih biodiversity.




posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 01:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by iterationzero
 





Given the information that's been provided so far in this thread, I'm not sure any further dumbing down is going to help. Further, it's not the point of this thread. The point of this thread is for people who reject evolution to provide evidence for their hypothesis explaining biodiversity. So far we've gotten "God did it" and "aliens did it". And the bulk of the "evidence" provided to support those hypotheses hasn't even been positive evidence for those hypotheses, it's been trying to show that evolution couldn't happen. It's a logical fallacy called a false dichotomy.
As though there is allready proof that evolution has anything to do witih biodiversity.


That's EXACTLY what the theory of evolution explains and backs up with objective facts. Of course once again you simply ignore facts



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 01:53 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 





There seems to be no proof of....





Humans evolving in the past.


Yes there is...posted proof multiple time here.




Humans evolving in the present.


Yes there is...and the proof has been posted multiple times.




Any fossile or skelotole remains linking anything to evolution.


And once again you ignore facts...because all fossils FIT PERFECTLY and supports the theory.




Any connection between viruses evolving and humans evolving.


Same mechanism...




Proof of specieation in humans.


You mean apart from the fossil record, migratory trends, and DNA fully backing up speciation





Proof of microevolution or macroevolution in humans.


Thanks for once again proving to everyone that you're the pinnacle of ignorance. I and others have posted multiple links that unquestionably prove the above statement to be complete and utter nonsense. Once again, you chose to ignore FACTS





Proof of what we were before we were primates.


But we DO know





evidence of any of the other 5 million species evolving, or having evolved.


We have complete proof that this happened...and in fact...we also have proof that they're still evolving...and that includes humans.




The mass amounts of species variations from all 5 million evolving and having evolved.


Do yourself a favor and at least read up on the theory...because the above statement clearly shows you not only don't have a clue, your simply ignore facts.




You have zip, nada, nuka.


Given that it's YOU who ignores all facts and evidence debunking your laughable nonsense claims, it's obviously you who has nada





Now on the flip side we have clear documentation that tells us we aren't from earth, and that we were placed here.


Pye's random clown claims aren't "clear documentation"...it's FICTION until he allows peer reviews and until he presents hard data. He's a great snake oil salesman though, and a lot of gullible people like you fall for that nonsense. So good for him, at least he's making money out of it...

But I'm not really surprised...after all, you're waiting for crocoduck until you believe in the theory you so clearly don't understand

edit on 25-12-2011 by MrXYZ because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 01:57 PM
link   
iterationzero and others.. I applaud your patience and ability to keep this conversation civil. On the other hand I get frustrated reading the same lame ignorant reply's from posters that have been addressed over and over again.
What we are dealing with is childish, Insecure and contentious person who needs the attention.

Quoting, Robert Heinlen.
"Insecure. Lots of things you could call them, but that is probably the most accurate. They are worried they won't be heard or someone will over rule them or make them look foolish. If they get the last word then they win, at least in their minds".

Let the ignorant be ignorant and have the last word



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 02:08 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


I said it would be the CLOSEST thing to proof.

Which is still wrong. You can keep trying to qualify this any way you like, you're still wrong. It's not close to proof, it's not kinda sorta maybe something like proof -- it's the exact opposite of proof.


I can understand what your looking at because of two different species mating. Of course your also making an assumption that thats how it went. I was just looking at the end product.

Maybe you should read up on the history of the crocoduck so you actually understand the erroneous point the creator of it was trying to make instead of inventing your own meaning.



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 03:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by iterationzero
...already been addressed in this thread. ... already been adressed in this thread. ... already been addressed in this thread. ... already been addressed in this thread. ... no, I don't think I can re-explain it or dumb it down any further to be able to have it make sense to you. Sorry


"addressed" is not an answer and that's because none of you has a clear understanding of wtf you're talking about.
edit on 25-12-2011 by bottleslingguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 05:28 PM
link   
reply to post by bottleslingguy
 

When I say "addressed" I mean answered sufficiently for a reasonable person. You and itsthetooth have incredibly lopsided standards of what constitutes evidence when it comes to this subject. If it involves aliens, you're willing to accept the flimsiest subjective evidence because you've already decided that it must have been aliens; you're no different from creationists in this respect, as they've decided on the answer being God regardless of the evidence. However, when objective and reproducible evidence is provided for evolution, suddenly no amount of evidence is good enough to fill the gaps where you keep your aliens.

It's like a multi-course dinner of logical fallacy -- an appetizer of argument from personal incredulity, a main course of that specially seasoned version of the argument from ignorance called "aliens of the gaps" garnished with strawman arguments, finished with a dessert of false dichotomy.



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 07:21 PM
link   



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 07:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrXYZ



LOL you got proof of that!



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 07:59 PM
link   
reply to post by flyingfish
 





posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 08:20 PM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


When I said iterationzero and others.. MrXYZ is the one of the others, always appreciate your posts, spot on



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 08:54 PM
link   
reply to post by iterationzero
 

so it's safe to say you think aliens have never fiddled with our dna?



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 09:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by iterationzero
reply to post by bottleslingguy
 

When I say "addressed" I mean answered sufficiently for a reasonable person. You and itsthetooth have incredibly lopsided standards of what constitutes evidence when it comes to this subject. If it involves aliens, you're willing to accept the flimsiest subjective evidence because you've already decided that it must have been aliens; you're no different from creationists in this respect, as they've decided on the answer being God regardless of the evidence. However, when objective and reproducible evidence is provided for evolution, suddenly no amount of evidence is good enough to fill the gaps where you keep your aliens.

It's like a multi-course dinner of logical fallacy -- an appetizer of argument from personal incredulity, a main course of that specially seasoned version of the argument from ignorance called "aliens of the gaps" garnished with strawman arguments, finished with a dessert of false dichotomy.


I can only give you one star for this post, so I will quote it as an answer to the bottleguys last lame post



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 10:51 PM
link   
reply to post by iterationzero
 





Which is still wrong. You can keep trying to qualify this any way you like, you're still wrong. It's not close to proof, it's not kinda sorta maybe something like proof -- it's the exact opposite of proof.
Excellent, now that we both agree on how I had put it, and it just isn't possible. now you understand the point I was trying to make using it as an example. Evolution just isn't possible.




Maybe you should read up on the history of the crocoduck so you actually understand the erroneous point the creator of it was trying to make instead of inventing your own meaning.
So now your going to try to accuse me of making my own meaning on something that doesn't exist?



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 10:59 PM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 





Yes there is...posted proof multiple time here.
There has NEVER been proof of humans ever evolving, and you have never posted anything saying so.




Yes there is...and the proof has been posted multiple times.
Was this the same proof I have repeatedly pointed out to obviously admit to be inconclusive, or a postulated theory?




And once again you ignore facts...because all fossils FIT PERFECTLY and supports the theory.
There have never been any fossils that close the deal on evolution. If there were, you and I wouldn't be having this conversation.




Same mechanism...
However there is nothing that has proven that nechanisim also works on humans. Or is there a postulated theory for that one as well.




You mean apart from the fossil record, migratory trends, and DNA fully backing up speciation
It's only been witnessed in smaller pools of molecular life. This does not included humans.




Thanks for once again proving to everyone that you're the pinnacle of ignorance. I and others have posted multiple links that unquestionably prove the above statement to be complete and utter nonsense. Once again, you chose to ignore FACTS
OH NOW I GET it. I'm just suppose to accept it without proof, like you do. Nope sorry thats not me.



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 11:11 PM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 





But we DO know
Ok so what were we before we were primates?




We have complete proof that this happened...and in fact...we also have proof that they're still evolving...and that includes humans.
I see, so what do they know is still evolving and how do they know this?




Do yourself a favor and at least read up on the theory...because the above statement clearly shows you not only don't have a clue, your simply ignore facts.
No I was simply throwing out an eye opener because even after everything I have read that you have sent me in links, stateing that they are postulated theorys, evolution is not possible on any level. Even under observed specieation it never changed into another species. Basically you trying to convince me that it all happens to slow to watch, and at the same time that we have no bones of proof and at the same time we have no proof of transgression of other species and at the same time have no proof of appering to happen to any other species.

I'm sorry man I call BS on this.




Pye's random clown claims aren't "clear documentation"...it's FICTION until he allows peer reviews and until he presents hard data. He's a great snake oil salesman though, and a lot of gullible people like you fall for that nonsense. So good for him, at least he's making money out of it...

But I'm not really surprised...after all, you're waiting for crocoduck until you believe in the theory you so clearly don't understand
I don't stand soley on Pye's work, there is also Sitchens, Von danikens, and the bible. Are they are wrong too? Cause they are all telling me the same thing.

I never bought his book so he must not be doing to good. I will say however I must have gotten suckerd by you to by the stingy gene which I"m still waiting for. I only requested it because I think RD is awsome.



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 11:19 PM
link   
reply to post by iterationzero
 





When I say "addressed" I mean answered sufficiently for a reasonable person. You and itsthetooth have incredibly lopsided standards of what constitutes evidence when it comes to this subject. If it involves aliens, you're willing to accept the flimsiest subjective evidence because you've already decided that it must have been aliens; you're no different from creationists in this respect, as they've decided on the answer being God regardless of the evidence. However, when objective and reproducible evidence is provided for evolution, suddenly no amount of evidence is good enough to fill the gaps where you keep your aliens.
Your kidding me. You believe in something that is based on hypothetical theorys and we are the lopsided ones. Aliens were not a choice because it was all that was left, it was a choice because its written to have happened this way. Seriously at least there is documentation on it which seems to be a large setback in the evolution department.

Ya we evolved recently enough to where we didn't even keep documentation of anything untill biblical times. Yet evolution takes millions of years. So which is it, did we evolve fast, and have no proof or did we evolve slowly and never grew a brain until biblical times.




It's like a multi-course dinner of logical fallacy -- an appetizer of argument from personal incredulity, a main course of that specially seasoned version of the argument from ignorance called "aliens of the gaps" garnished with strawman arguments, finished with a dessert of false dichotomy.
The ony reason why you see it this way is because you are unable to seperate yourself from your current believe in order to open your eyes to what is going on. On the other hand I was able to do this. You see I didn't always believe in intervention, I learned it. Learning can be very difficult for someone that is pig headed. This is usually brought on by how the person was raised. Myself I was raised in a partail catholic and part agnostic family. You were probably brought up atheist. This is why you believe in what you do. It's the only logical answer for yourself.



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 11:35 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


Judging from your last post your still playing the same ignorant card after all these same questions have been answered time and time again.

You must have missed my post as well as all the countless others that clearly answer your questions again and again.



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 11:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
I think you know objective evidence is not possible from biblical times, much less anytime before hand.

On the other hand, you have NO excuse for not having it yourself. All of your evidence should be here, and easily accessable, yet there is none.

The links you posted don't pertain to humans, so its not objective.


Have you really not read a single link that was posted? TONS of them are about humans. I was talking more about evolution as a whole, but it's demonstrated and observed in lots of organisms, INCLUDING humans. What reason do you have to believe that DNA can mutate in millions of other plants and animals, but not in humans? The DNA itself is not much different.

But like you said, intervention is not a re-creatable event, therefor there is no objective evidence for it. That was my point all along, which shows you are clearly posting in the wrong thread. I just noticed a new ancient alien theory thread just started up. You may want to check it out.


Objective evidence from biblical times, give me a break.

Well I appreciate you at least acknowledging that there is no objective evidence to support your theory. Unfortunately this thread is about objective evidence, so... um see you in the other thread?

The main problem is that there IS objective evidence of evolution from "biblical times" and earlier.

www.hhmi.org...

I'm posting this link again for your reference. This is the same site that has the free evolution DVDs. Here are some very good recent lectures on the modern theory of evolution in HUMANS. I'd recommend watching the HD streaming ones. You don't even have to wait for shipping. Instant free learning is cool, but the choice is ultimately up to you. Good luck in your endeavors.
edit on 25-12-2011 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 11:48 PM
link   
reply to post by bottleslingguy
 





so it's safe to say you think aliens have never fiddled with our dna?
Nope, Itera and the other evolutionists actually believe that DNA has the power to change on its own through speciation, genetic drift, and mutations.

ONE thing I do know is a fact that they don't know is that DNA, (when tampered with) has the ability to RESET itself not allowing someone to make changes, unless they really know what they are doing.

It's sort of like the transponder key they use in cars. Unless you have permission, your not getting the car. So evolutionists actually believe that those changes pointed out by Pye were Genetically mutated organisims.

These GMO's would not only have to be smart enough to know how to reprogram DNA but also know how to circumvent the safetly reset feature. Keep in mind your not talking about a living creature doing this, your talking about small organisims or even viruses.
Now they have never found a GMO that has changed our DNA and they have never found any proof of this ever happening to humans, but they rest assured, this was the master plan and how it all went down.

From a detectives point of view we are just missing the proof of...
The GMO or viruses that did this to us or any other species for that matter.
Bones or fossils leaving any trace of sub species of any of the 5 million here.
Traces of this actually happening to humans right now. They claim it takes millions of years yet we seem to only have grown a brain smart enough to take care of ourselves in the last 10,000 years or so.

Realize that prior to biblical times, and excluding egyptian and mesopotamia erras, we seem to be lacking mass amounts of anything indicating we were even here. Our mtDNA never dipped below tens of thousands which is that of a medium sized city. Now we can't find these large amounts of bones that are missing. All you have to do is find one and you know usually where there is one person, there is more.

Those pre-eras had insane technology, yet we seem to not even be caught up with them to this day. I'm sold that they were different races, and had little to nothing to do with how we got here.
Evolution is trying to teach us that in over 4 million years, we evolved from primates, with a missing ancestor. It's just another way to say we have and cant get any proof. The missing link will never be found, trust me on this. It doesn't make any sense that we have a fitting lifestyle, fitting diet, fitting living arrangements, and made a decision to not only distance ourselves from all the other life here, but place ourselves in a sickly situation where we are in constant need to medical attention. We don't fit on this planet, and in fact mother nature is rejecting us. We do everything we can to circumvent her ways.

We don't even have any proof of what we were before we were primates. I would have figured we would have at least have been smart enough to keep documents of our lineage anyhow. The biblical period seems to be a turning point for belief, faith, understanding, creation, and even evolution. I don't why that is.



new topics

top topics



 
31
<< 134  135  136    138  139  140 >>

log in

join