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: 174
31
<< 171  172  173    175  176  177 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 09:08 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


I suggest looking into the genus Drosophilia. There have been a number of speciation events that have occurred within this species.




posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 11:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Quadrivium
reply to post by SplitInfinity
 


LUCA...was never the only one...but one of many. A single celled organizm can split by mytosis....but a complex...multi-cellular being cannot. Split Infinity

I do not understand what your saying here Split,
From everything I have read LUCA would of had to been a very complex creature for it to do as claimed.
It would of had to been, just as, if not more complex than the modern cell.

That's kinda like a dog chasing it's tail, yes?

Using evolution how could such a creature be that complex so early in the evolutionary process?

Not mocking, just want clarification.
Thanks,
Quad


edit on 8-1-2012 by Quadrivium because: changed "be" to "been"


The actual LUCA was not a multicellular creature that bred by sexual reproduction....it was in reality a SINGLE CELLED ORGANISM that reproduced by Cellular Mitosis. It split into to geneticly perfect replications of itself...as this organism spread out in number and area....Enviromental conditions as well as Genetic changes and Mutations especially mutations created by UV Radiation....caused these single celled animals DNA to chemically change and this newer generations carried different DNA....this progressed until it became convinient for survival for Earths original Lifeform...to become MULTICELLULAR as the more complex a lifeform is...the more apt it is to survive enviromental conditions

This entire Evolutionary process took Billions of Years until Man became a reality. Remember....Cromagnon was almost IDENTICAL to Homosapiens as if you saw one in a line up...you would be hard pressed to determine which was Cromagnon and which was Homosapien.

Neandertal...although there is evidence that Neandertal bred with Cromagnon....Neandertal was not around when Cromagnon eventually evolved into Homo Sapien. In reality....the spread of Man originating on the African Continent and spreading all over the globe....was accomplished by Cromagnon....which of course evolved to become US. Evolution is a fact...it is undeniable. Split Infinity



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 12:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
Can someone, anyone please tell me about one thing about evolution that has actually been witnessed, and has also been recreated in a lab.


Take a look at any CDC....Center for Disease Control....web site or information on Evolving Viral and Bachteriological Strains. There are THOUSANDS IF NOT MILLIONS OF EXAMPLES!

Evolution has been witnessed happening right in front of the eyes of Tens of Thousands of People looking at a strain under the Microscope.

This is what I have been trying to tell you or at least of an example of.....EVOLUTION IS UNDENIABLE....it is a FACT and we use this knowledge every day and to a greater and greater extent. Split Infinity



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 03:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Quadrivium
 
When you say morphed in an entirely new group of animals surely this is not what evolution describes.

It shows a relationship be it close or distant between all species.

Did you limit your thinking to the example I gave? If you take my explanation as having merit then when you go back further to the 'simple' life this would be where the groups evolved from. and unless a global extinction level happens that takes us back that far you are unlikely to see 'New groups'.

The extinction rate you described is a guesstimate that includes the species we believe we have not yet identified if I am correct. None the less worrying.

How much of this rate is down to man? How many of this number includes species A being replaced by species B due to direct competition? The American crayfish in the Thames for example. It carries a virus that it is immune to but is lethal to the native crayfish. The native crayfish face a very uncertain future.

Another good analogy is the business world. Industries form to fill a niche. The small companies grow and spread. They begin to take over and dominate the competition and become multinationals. The only antidote to this eventual mono culture is catastrophe and collapse.

That to me is evolutions greatest message. That as we move towards no or little diversity we will be the ones that pay the price. Humans have the unique power to prevent this in both commerce and the natural world but will remain powerless unless we identify the question.

Evolution as far as I am concerned identifies and asks that question. Creation hides away from it with 'dont worry more will be created.' As in business job creation does not work.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 03:57 AM
link   
reply to post by SplitInfinity
 

The theory of evolution is literally running out of time. Every time they look they find that life was not as "simple" as they assumed, even with this the supposed LUCA


The study lends support to a hypothesis that LUCA may have been more complex even than the simplest organisms alive today, said James Whitfield, a professor of entomology at Illinois and a co-author on the study.
www.astrobio.net...



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 04:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by colin42
reply to post by Quadrivium
 


Another good analogy is the business world. Industries form to fill a niche. The small companies grow and spread. They begin to take over and dominate the competition and become multinationals. The only antidote to this eventual mono culture is catastrophe and collapse.

Very good analogy by the way.
The business world was created, we see a need somewhere and fill the niche. The small companies grow and spread by human design. Some will/do dominate because the processes lacks balance. How much greater is nature in the world around you, than the buisness world colin?


That to me is evolutions greatest message. That as we move towards no or little diversity we will be the ones that pay the price. Humans have the unique power to prevent this in both commerce and the natural world but will remain powerless unless we identify the question.

Ahhh colin,
I see what your trying to say, you are right, somewhat. We might have the power to prevent this in commerce, we created it after all.
The natural world though is beyond us, we have gone too far, I believe. Too many have turned their backs on He who created it all.
Too many think they are "all powerful". The truth is that most times what ever we touch turns to crud. Likly if we tried too fix it we would botch it up worse.
And there is no turning back now, not for all. There is too much greed, envy and evil in the world, too many will not give up the hold on what they think they have.



Evolution as far as I am concerned identifies and asks that question. Creation hides away from it with 'dont worry
more will be created.' As in business job creation does not work.

I can truly see why you would say that, just know that not all Creationist see it that way.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 05:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Quadrivium
 
That is the crux of the issue I suppose. I see the business world and industry as evolving due to opportunity and you see it as created for a purpose.

Balance in anything is a fallacy. It is always tipped one way or the other no matter how slightly so change is inescapable.

I dont believe anything is beyond us. We have the knowledge now to reduce the impact of our populations and lifestyles now but agree that the biggest hurdle to that is self interest and greed.

I hope that I did not give the impression that I believe all creationists are rabid fundamentalists, I know full well they are not.

This is why I wanted a discussion on diversity if evolution is incorrect as the circular argument over semantics get us nowhere in a debate. Shows how naive I am because that has not happened and is not likely to either.



edit on 10-1-2012 by colin42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 09:37 AM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 


It seems that lifes diversity only has two honest arguable stances in this debate from what I have read. So taking them one at a time we have:

A deity did it, either fully formed or started it and let nature take over.
Nature did it on its own.

If a deity did make everything fully formed why are all forms not present throughout the history of the world? If said deity started it and let nature do its thing to get here that would seem to cause more issue on a theological stance imo than its honestly worth. Since we find that life has progressed through the history of this planet then the only viable one of the two is a creation to start the wheels turning.

If nature is the only reason then we have no argument other than the "show me the missing links."

I look forward to someone showing a reason for diversity outside of evolution. Let me rephrase, I look forward to someone showing a reason that doesn't include "sacred texts".



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 09:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Quadrivium
 


Evolution isn't running out of time and I think that you and I will find that we don't know as much as we think. There are always new discoveries which makes it that much more exciting. If LUCA is or was more complex is it actually LUCA? Its what we have found so far and thats what we base our studies on so far. But, that doesn't mean the theory is wrong. Who knows we may have an earth shattering discovery and they are wrong. The thing is when its proven science will adapt and use the new information. Sadly when others who can't accept they are wrong are shown proof they simply shut down refuse to hear it.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 10:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcalibur254
 





I suggest looking into the genus Drosophilia. There have been a number of speciation events that have occurred within this species.
And what if anything, does this species have to do with humans, or any other life here on earth?



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 10:25 AM
link   
reply to post by SplitInfinity
 





Take a look at any CDC....Center for Disease Control....web site or information on Evolving Viral and Bachteriological Strains. There are THOUSANDS IF NOT MILLIONS OF EXAMPLES!
I feel like I have had this convo before. When there are other strains that come out, the species is still the same. I can see how you might thing that its changing species, but its not. Even odder is that those changes might be permissable within that species all along. Just like humans can have blue eyes, or green eyes.

I had this same convo with someone throwing me to a wiki page about polar bears that are claimed to be evolving. A polar bear somehow mated with a kodiac bear and made a different type of bear. The bottom line is you started with bears, and you ended up with bears. It has no proof or bearing whats so ever in the realm of evolution.




Evolution has been witnessed happening right in front of the eyes of Tens of Thousands of People looking at a strain under the Microscope.

This is what I have been trying to tell you or at least of an example of.....EVOLUTION IS UNDENIABLE....it is a FACT and we use this knowledge every day and to a greater and greater extent. Split Infinity
And like I said, we have no way of knowing if those were changes that are normal within that species all along.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Quadrivium
I can understand the concept of what you are saying, but there is no evidence for this.
Yes mammals took over when dinosaurs became extinct, and yes the fossil records shows that some animals adapted to the point they became a different species but not that they morphed into an entirely new group of animals.
Yes new species can be found as one ascends the strata.
However, speciation within basic kinds is different from the introduction of new kinds, and evolution requires a dizzying array of basic new kinds. The origination of a new form has never been documented in the modern world of scientific observation, while perhaps several species every day go extinct. The opposite of evolution occurs today, and fossils show that the opposite of evolution also occurred in the past.


This is the same nonsensical stuff that countless others are saying and has been debunked several times. Nobody ever claimed that animals "morphed" into an entirely new group of animals. You are insinuating that it happens over night. It does not. Creatures SLOWLY change according to their environment. You admitted it is shown in the fossil record. There isn't a "new" form that suddenly emerges and it will NEVER be observed. We just use labels to explain where the species is, in its respective development and evolution. Extinction isn't the opposite of evolution, it's one of the main mechanisms. I wish half the people commenting on evolution would actually read a little bit about it before making such hasty generalizations about it.
edit on 10-1-2012 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 06:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Barcs
 





This is the same nonsensical stuff that countless others are saying and has been debunked several times. Nobody ever claimed that animals "morphed" into an entirely new group of animals. You are insinuating that it happens over night. It does not. Creatures SLOWLY change according to their environment. You admitted it is shown in the fossil record. There isn't a "new" form that suddenly emerges and it will NEVER be observed. We just use labels to explain where the species is, in its respective development and evolution. Extinction isn't the opposite of evolution, it's one of the main mechanisms. I wish half the people commenting on evolution would actually read a little bit about it before making such hasty generalizations about it.


It doesn't even happen slowly. This is what gets me about all of these postulated, hypothetical theorys. Aside from viruses and small organisms, speciation has never been witnessed. At best even with those example, its still the same species, just with some differences. Monkeys don't turn into humans, PERIOD. Dogs don't turn into cats. They also don't branch out and create sub species either.There has never been any missing links found out of the over 5 million species we have on this planet. Possibly a wake up call. There has never been any intermediate species found, out of the 5 million present. Possibly another wake up call. There have never been any fossils or bones tying any species to any other species, out of 2.5 million bones found, yet another wake up call.

I understand its not suppose to happen quickly enough for us to witness it, but without leaving any trace, and no trace of it happening any longer, really makes you wonder. How can someone believe in something that has no proof behind it, and no hope of proof based on how long its been considered. The fact is forever. After all we have the same types of people believing in magic, miracles, and imaginary friends with religion.

I just have to slap myself and ask if I"m alive to people doing what we all though wrong from religion. At least in religion there is documentation. I believe we were placed on this planet by another race. There is good reason why its hard to produce little to no proof of this. Aside, the bible concurs. With evolution there is no reason why we don't have proof. There are postulated theorys to cover why we don't have proof, but nothing to back those up. Evolution is nothing more than dozens of postulated theorys tied together. Someone could say the same thing about god being a space alien but at least we have a plethora of documented proof on that.

In the recent pages I have yet to have anyone present me with any links that say they ARENT just a hypothetical theory. What I'm not understanding, is how so many people can miss this part. Even odder is how some of the resistance I have met on here is so incredulous. And based on what, unprovalbe theorys?

The Bacterial Flagellum is Reducibly Complex
warforscience.wordpress.com...
Proves there is inteligence behind design. Gears and motors do not evolve, I dont care what anyone says. This site would argue, but I think the facts stick out on there own, Motors of this size did not grow out in a field.
edit on 10-1-2012 by itsthetooth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 06:37 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


That link is not proof of anything, and what you consider proof is not proof either. It's all just wishful thinking all the way around;Atheists,Muslims.Christians,Buddhists, Pagans... They all like to think they've got it figured out and that their "documentation" is the end all be all verdict on the matter. This simply isn't so. It's fine to believe whatever you like, it is not fine to assert that it is the truth. My opinion, of course.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 06:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Gigatronix
 





That link is not proof of anything, and what you consider proof is not proof either. It's all just wishful thinking all the way around;Atheists,Muslims.Christians,Buddhists, Pagans... They all like to think they've got it figured out and that their "documentation" is the end all be all verdict on the matter. This simply isn't so. It's fine to believe whatever you like, it is not fine to assert that it is the truth. My opinion, of course.
There are just way to many things pointing in the same direction. Sorry.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 06:49 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 





Monkeys don't turn into humans, PERIOD.


And evolution doesn't claim that happens


But monkeys and humans have a common ancestor...




Dogs don't turn into cats.


Evolution doesn't say that either





They also don't branch out and create sub species either.


Except...we know for a FACT that they do. A good example are wolves and dogs. Or Neanderthals and humans.




There has never been any missing links found out of the over 5 million species we have on this planet.


Except, we have thousands of transitional fossils. In fact, for many evolutionary lines we now have so many transitional fossils, it's hard to say where a species begins and ends.




There has never been any intermediate species found, out of the 5 million present. Possibly another wake up call. There have never been any fossils or bones tying any species to any other species, out of 2.5 million bones found, yet another wake up call.


Or you could open a biology book and for once stop being ignorant. This would allow you to realize what absolute nonsense your above quote is


People have posted detailed sources showing what blunder your statement is...multiple times...yet you simply continue to spread your ignorant and uneducated lies.




I understand its not suppose to happen quickly enough for us to witness it, but without leaving any trace, and no trace of it happening any longer, really makes you wonder.


Just because you ignore every single trace and evidence people post doesn't mean it didn't happen. All it means is that you're unwilling to accept reality





How can someone believe in something that has no proof behind it, and no hope of proof based on how long its been considered.


You have no idea how often I've asked myself that question reading your posts...sooooooo many times





At least in religion there is documentation.


Yes, SUBJECTIVE evidence. It should be evident why this isn't reliable. In the bible for example it's claimed that people can survive inside whales...which is obvious nonsense. Nonetheless, it's sold as truth.




I believe we were placed on this planet by another race. There is good reason why its hard to produce little to no proof of this. Aside, the bible concurs.


You're correct, you haven't presented anything that would prove your claim that we were placed here by an alien race. And the bible isn't proof of anything other than what people BELIEVED 2000 years ago based on their (compared to today limited) knowledge of how the world works. They also believed comets are a sign of god...go figure. That doesn't make them stupid, they simply didn't have the means to figure it out.




With evolution there is no reason why we don't have proof. There are postulated theorys to cover why we don't have proof, but nothing to back those up.


A scientific theory requires objective evidence and proof to be called a "theory". So to claim nothing backs up theories is beyond silly. Why don't you attack gravity next?





In the recent pages I have yet to have anyone present me with any links that say they ARENT just a hypothetical theory.


You don't seem to understand the difference between a "theory" and a "hypothesis".

Hypothesis

Scientific theory

And again, we are ACTIVELY APPLYING THE THEORY IN MODERN MEDICINE. If the theory were wrong, we wouldn't have many of the meds we have today. But let's ignore that like all the other proof...right? After all, ignorance is bliss, right?




The Bacterial Flagellum is Reducibly Complex
warforscience.wordpress.com...
Proves there is inteligence behind design.


Oh the old irreducible complexity argument


It's a typical example of an argument from ignorance, which is hilarious given this site's mantra is "deny ignorance"


You've made this argument before...numerous times...and every time people point out what utter nonsense it is, you simply ignore it


In short, your posts make it abundantly clear that you have no clue what you're talking about. You're "monkey doesn't turn into humans" posts make it clear you don't even understand the base premise behind the theory of evolution.

Once again, here's the link explaining it: LINK

And remember when you said speciation doesn't happen? Well, of course you're completely wrong again.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 06:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Gigatronix
 





That link is not proof of anything, and what you consider proof is not proof either. It's all just wishful thinking all the way around;Atheists,Muslims.Christians,Buddhists, Pagans... They all like to think they've got it figured out and that their "documentation" is the end all be all verdict on the matter. This simply isn't so. It's fine to believe whatever you like, it is not fine to assert that it is the truth. My opinion, of course.
Not proof of anything pfft. How in the world do you explain an organelle equiped with an electric motor, with stator, slip ring, arm, and the whole appearance of motors we have today.

A big coincidence?

There isn't anything you can say to try to explain how its even possible, just like the author of that page. He too believes it still happened in the wild. Right people motors growing in the wild, whats next super computers on board insects? The problem here is that it's a living organism. The day that cars could evolve is the day something like this would be possible, its just not possibe and has creator written all over it.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 06:55 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 

You are right, there are too many arrows pointing to a godless universe.

Apology accepted.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 07:01 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


I don't have to explain anything, you assert there is a god, you do the explaining.

Oh right, " Goddidit"

Enjoy your god of the gaps while you can, because in time there will be few gaps he can fill.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 07:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Gigatronix
 


I never said I thought he was still alive.




top topics



 
31
<< 171  172  173    175  176  177 >>

log in

join