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: 175
31
<< 172  173  174    176  177  178 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 07:14 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


Erm, so you think an ancient architect designed us then? But this architect is not God?

Actually I don't wanna know. I've been on this site too long today and ingested way too much nonsense. I'm full up whimsical flights of fancy.

Take care.




posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 08:43 PM
link   
I have read back through the post since I came on this thread (around page 154). I see a little more clearly now.

In a nut shell Some things that I have learned that I did not know about the theory.

1. The theory of evolution no longer deals with and never should have delt with the origins of life.

2. Evolution does not really deal with how so many different types of complex animals came to be or why they suddenly show up in the fossil record, fully formed with out the earlier fossils to show how they evolved.

3. Evolution mainly just deals with the adaptations of an animal group/type to show how that group/type can split and become different species of the same group/type.

Correct?



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 09:32 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


OK....I will give you an even greater line of logic and proof. A Human Sperm cell is an Animal Unto itself. So is a Human Egg cell. Both of these are not a Human Being...but they are a living single celled ANIMAL. They each have a determinate life span under conditions as any animal and each are a lifeform unto themselves.

It is not until an Egg Cell is penetrated by a sperm or two or more...that they are capable of duplification by Mytosis. But they are life unto themselves before this. If either of these animals were to be Geneticly altered and spliced with DNA of say your example...a sperm or egg cell of a Bear...and this CAN BE DONE....you would have another type of lifeform that has a combination of both Human and Bear traights.

This is very much like evolution in that many evolutionary changes of DNA were caused by Viral infections of Humans or animals or exposure to Solar Radiation especially UV light wavelengths....causes chemical reactions that change the DNA of any animal and Humans are animals. Thusly....since all ancestors of Homosapiens that had lost their fur....were black skinned due to the equitorial nature of the African Continent....we all were decended from people of Black skin...wide nostrils to allow greater volumes of air to come into our lungs due to the heat of the savana making the Air thinner via heat thus less oxygen per breath.

Just like my example of cross species genetic manipulation...which are using individual lifeforms...sperm and egg...so di the solar radiation change the cells that are responsible for pigmentation to protect themselves from cancer and sunburn by UV light chemically changing the DNA of skin cells which are also a single cell life form.

Your one large flaw in your thinking is that a Human Being is just a single lifeform...it is not. It is a collection of many specific single celled lifeforms that have become specialized and have shared DNA from the beginning Billions of years ago...until many different Multicellular constructs became a reality. We are one of them.
EVOLUTION BABY! Split Infinity



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 09:33 PM
link   
what if God....
created evolution ???? (mind blown!)



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 09:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Gigatronix
 





Erm, so you think an ancient architect designed us then? But this architect is not God?

Actually I don't wanna know. I've been on this site too long today and ingested way too much nonsense. I'm full up whimsical flights of fancy.

Take care.
Well you asked, so I'll answer and you can read when you have time.

It is possible that god frankenstiened us from other life. I'm sure he was not our original creator, because he had way to much conviction in his heart. I'll believe that our creator is a creator, and not a destroyer, like god was.



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





OK....I will give you an even greater line of logic and proof. A Human Sperm cell is an Animal Unto itself. So is a Human Egg cell. Both of these are not a Human Being...but they are a living single celled ANIMAL. They each have a determinate life span under conditions as any animal and each are a lifeform unto themselves.


True but because of Gametic isolation they are useless for anything other than the intended species.




It is not until an Egg Cell is penetrated by a sperm or two or more...that they are capable of duplification by Mytosis. But they are life unto themselves before this. If either of these animals were to be Geneticly altered and spliced with DNA of say your example...a sperm or egg cell of a Bear...and this CAN BE DONE....you would have another type of lifeform that has a combination of both Human and Bear traights.
There would have to be advanced intelligence behind it, which once again comes to the idea of a creator.




This is very much like evolution in that many evolutionary changes of DNA were caused by Viral infections of Humans or animals or exposure to Solar Radiation especially UV light wavelengths....causes chemical reactions that change the DNA of any animal and Humans are animals. Thusly....since all ancestors of Homosapiens that had lost their fur....were black skinned due to the equitorial nature of the African Continent....we all were decended from people of Black skin...wide nostrils to allow greater volumes of air to come into our lungs due to the heat of the savana making the Air thinner via heat thus less oxygen per breath.
It's just that none of this left any traces behind of doing this, and there is none going on today that we can find either. So either way we look, its just not there.





Just like my example of cross species genetic manipulation...which are using individual lifeforms...sperm and egg...so di the solar radiation change the cells that are responsible for pigmentation to protect themselves from cancer and sunburn by UV light chemically changing the DNA of skin cells which are also a single cell life form.
If cross species is how evolution works, how come it has left no trace behind for us to put this together, how come out of 2.5 million bones we still have to proof of transgression?




Your one large flaw in your thinking is that a Human Being is just a single lifeform...it is not. It is a collection of many specific single celled lifeforms that have become specialized and have shared DNA from the beginning Billions of years ago...until many different Multicellular constructs became a reality. We are one of them.
EVOLUTION BABY! Split Infinity
Well it is true that our DNA is shared with many other species, but this could have just of easily of been the work of a creator. It's honestly the ONLY thing that has any verifiable truth that may work in the direction of evolution. Unfortunatly its not proof.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 10:04 PM
link   
reply to post by valkyrie7
 





what if God....
created evolution ???? (mind blown!)
I thought about that as well, only problem is that this evolution bug leaves no trace and no evidence.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 12:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by valkyrie7
what if God....
created evolution ???? (mind blown!)


I have said many times that there is no conflict in ones belief in a GOD and the fact of Evolution. Split Infinity



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 02:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by valkyrie7
 





what if God....
created evolution ???? (mind blown!)
I thought about that as well, only problem is that this evolution bug leaves no trace and no evidence.


Plenty of hard objective evidence...you simply chose to ignore it so you can continue to believe in your fantasy land creation myth


Ignorance at its best


Probably also the reason the mods moved most of your "god is an alien" threads to Skunk Works

edit on 11-1-2012 by MrXYZ because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 05:14 AM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


Perhaps you would care to enlighten us with your non-fantacy version of how life began?



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 05:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Quadrivium
 


1. The theory of evolution no longer deals with and never should have delt with the origins of life.

I'd agree with this statement but there are others who wouldn't. PZ Myers and Nick Hud and the rest of the CCE come to mind. One of the things that complicates this issue is there is no cut-and-dry line between what is living and what is non-living, even in what we can observe today. Viruses, for example, are a point of contention in the debate. From an intro to the T4 virus:


Viruses straddle the definition of life. They lie somewhere between supra molecular complexes and very simple biological entities. Viruses contain some of the structures and exhibit some of the activities that are common to organic life, but they are missing many of the others. In general, viruses are entirely composed of a single strand of genetic information encased within a protein capsule. Viruses lack most of the internal structure and machinery which characterize 'life', including the biosynthetic machinery that is necessary for reproduction. In order for a virus to replicate it must infect a suitable host cell.

So if we're not sure whether or not something that we observe today is alive, it's going to be even harder to adequately choose a point along the abiogenetic path 3Bya where the molecule or supramolecular structure or what have you went from being nonliving to living.


2. Evolution does not really deal with how so many different types of complex animals came to be or why they suddenly show up in the fossil record, fully formed with out the earlier fossils to show how they evolved.

Since you're not being more specific here, I'm assuming you're talking about the "Cambrian Explosion". I'd argue that if you think that if the more complex phyla of organisms "suddenly show up in the fossil record, fully formed with out the earlier fossils to show how they evolved" then your understanding of the Cambrian Explosion is somewhat out of date. Direct precursors to Cambrian forms are seen prior to the event, transitional forms are seen within the Cambrian, and only some phyla appear during the Cambrian -- plants, for example, don't appear until several hundred My after the Cambrian.


3. Evolution mainly just deals with the adaptations of an animal group/type to show how that group/type can split and become different species of the same group/type.

I disagree with this. What you're describing is the easiest to observe, but evolution is not exclusive to that.

I find it interesting that while the theory of evolution has changed as new information is discovered, as you've been so quick to point out, that creationists have done the same. Initially, the hue and cry was that evolution didn't happen. Period. End of statement. But then, as the evidence grew and grew, suddenly, perhaps in a "Cambrian Explosion" like event but one of the ability to reason based on evidence instead of phyla, the creationists claimed that evolution below the species level was fine and dandy and clung so hard to the concept of microevolution, but that speciation events couldn't occur and that claims of macroevolution are the work of the Devil. Mind you, there's no explanation offered for why small changes are fine but they can't aggregate over time into larger changes, but that's neither here nor there. Now, as the evidence for speciation grows and grows, we're seeing more creationists soften their stance on macroevolution and kick the can a little further up the taxonomic ladder and say that changes at the genus level, which I guess they'll have to define as macromacroevolution so as not to sow the seeds of confusion, can't occur. It's an interesting evolution to observe.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 06:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Quadrivium
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


Perhaps you would care to enlighten us with your non-fantacy version of how life began?


Just read back a few pages, I posted dozens of links with hard facts and objective evidence...and none of them involves fantasy, contrary to that silly creation hypothesis that has ZERO objective evidence to back it up



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 08:45 AM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


Kinda busy,
Just gimme a run down of your thoughts on the matter.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 09:08 AM
link   
Shouldn't cattle be evolving to better withstand a desert climate ?



Doesn't seem to be happening here.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 09:47 AM
link   
reply to post by randyvs
 


Lol thats a little weak. But I suppose they have dealt with the desert about as well as god has progressed in dealing with disabilities.
pic related and sorry for the off topic post.





posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 10:04 AM
link   
reply to post by drivers1492
 


Perhaps if the case for evolution were stronger ? My post wouldn't be so weak.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 10:29 AM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 





Plenty of hard objective evidence...you simply chose to ignore it so you can continue to believe in your fantasy land creation myth

Ignorance at its best

Probably also the reason the mods moved most of your "god is an alien" threads to Skunk Works
Well unfortunatly that is due to there being personal opinion involved in those decisions. And we should all know that anytime personal opinion is involved, it can be wrong.

I don't choose to ignore proof. I embrace it, I'm looking for it, and waiting with anticipation to find a shred of it.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 10:30 AM
link   
reply to post by randyvs
 


No actually if it wasn't trying to represent an animal that doesn't live in the desert unable to live there. Following the same logic why haven't whales and dolphins sprouted legs since they die in the beach. There isn't any honest since to the idea of a grazing animal of that size and intake requirements suddenly having to change to that degree to make it in the desert. The reason for it being weak is the lack of intelligence in the comparison. Perhaps a bit more background would allow you to see that. There is plenty of information in this thread that would be beneficial for a proper understanding of the subject.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 10:42 AM
link   
Let me start by saying im not in any way religious. But as for Darwins theory, i don't buy it eather. If he is right how are the humans the only species to truly evolve intellect. I know there is evidence to suggest creatures evolved to some extent, but honestly, humans are fairly new to earth and somehow we evolved farther and faster than animals that existed with dinosaurs. Supposibly crocodiles were here when dinosaurs lived yet they changed little to none. I feel as though humans must have been helped along by a third party(ie. alien genetic experiments) I can't logically think we started as apes and became so advanced in a few short centuries when other creatures have been stuck in the stone age for hundreds of thousands of years. I have yet to see anything to prove any theory correct however so untill than its all just theory.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 11:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by drivers1492
reply to post by randyvs
 


No actually if it wasn't trying to represent an animal that doesn't live in the desert unable to live there. Following the same logic why haven't whales and dolphins sprouted legs since they die in the beach. There isn't any honest since to the idea of a grazing animal of that size and intake requirements suddenly having to change to that degree to make it in the desert. The reason for it being weak is the lack of intelligence in the comparison. Perhaps a bit more background would allow you to see that. There is plenty of information in this thread that would be beneficial for a proper understanding of the subject.


Or I could have avoided being facetious and pointed to the gene that only humans possess that is responsible for speech. The fact that it has always been with us and didn't evolve.
edit on 11-1-2012 by randyvs because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
31
<< 172  173  174    176  177  178 >>

log in

join