Can you prove evolution wrong

reply to post by colin42

Yes I agree. You have shown over these many pages that personal opinion can be wrong. Your personal opinion, because that is all it is is very wrong with nothing of substance to back it up.

You embrace truth? You embrace truth? You embrace truth like the Boston strangler embraced necks.

You would not know the truth if it came gift wrapped and with a label because all the evidence offered you shows how wrong you are.

Well at least there is clear documentation about intervention, and wait, we have nothing solid with evolutionism.

Out of 2.5 millions bones and fossils, nothing.
Out of lab work and forced speciation, nothing.


It's truly funny.
There isn't even documentation about our existance over 10k. And what older things there are, we don't even know if they were from our same race.
Different races, and documention showing we aren't from here, and aliens with powers, all smells like abduction to me.

It's as though we grew a brain over night, Not even bushmen yet, and have all these brains from no where. It's another clue that we aren't from here.

Can you prove evolution wrong? Answer: NO

Can you prove any persons beliefs wrong? Answer: NO

Will numerous people on ATS try and ask over and over again? Answer: YES

Oh well.....Have fun

reply to post by I See You

Can you prove evolution wrong? Answer: NO

Can you prove any persons beliefs wrong? Answer: NO

Will numerous people on ATS try and ask over and over again? Answer: YES

Oh well.....Have fun

Well it is pretty hard to disprove something thats never been proven to begin with.
We have no proof of microevolution, or macroevolution.
We have no bones or fossils.
We have no current species in transition, in any direction.
There is also nothing we have been able to prove with over 2.5 million bones and fossils.

Evolutionism is not possible for all of the aformentioned but also because we must have started from slime, and who made the slime. There always seems to be that starting point, like which came first the chicken of the egg.
It's even the same thing if you believe in creationalism. Who made the creator? It tells me that there is something out there that we don't yet understand, something that is neither creation or evolution.

reply to post by itsthetooth


Prime example of ignorance. You keep on posting total crap like "no fossils" or "no microevolution"...even after people posted links that clearly show we're actively applying the theory in modern medicine, and links that show THOUSANDS of transitional fossils. But of course you simply ignore facts to preserve your bat# crazy creation theory for which you presented ZERO objective evidence as backup

reply to post by itsthetooth


I would like to ask what proof are you looking for exactly? What would be the eureka discovery for you? When you view earths history of life why does it roll back to simple organisms and nothing else? There had to be something that progressed. I'm not really sure what sort of transition your looking for to make you say ohhhh ok that looks like a mix of two different types of animals. How about Archaeopteryx? Doesn't that particular fossil show a mix of reptile and bird characteristics? Sure you can argue that we don't know if it turned into something else but the point is it has traits from two distinct types of animals.

Why can't it have all come from slime? Do you have some knowledge we are not privy too outside of a feeling in your gut? The thing is you are being shown things that say yes there are transitions, by definition they do exist. Yet you claim no they don't. At the same time you propose a creator or a creator of the creator yet offer no substance to your reasoning other than you feel that its true.

The forces in nature are more incredible than most anyone will give them credit. Yet they will give credit to a feeling that makes them feel not alone or simply because it makes them think they have purpose in life now. I honestly don't understand why its so hard to believe in the intangible creator yet say poppycock to the tangible universe that gives them answers.

Originally posted by I See You
Can you prove evolution wrong? Answer: NO

Can you prove any persons beliefs wrong? Answer: NO

Will numerous people on ATS try and ask over and over again? Answer: YES

Oh well.....Have fun

Not your fault I know but the mods changed the title. This thread has nothing to do with proving evolution wrong as laid out in the OP that you really should have read before commenting.

This is about those that disagree with evolution to explain diverity without it.

reply to post by itsthetooth

Well at least there is clear documentation about intervention, and wait, we have nothing solid with evolutionism.

As you said previously. Personal opinion is often wrong. In your case it is always wrong. That must be some sort of record.

Out of 2.5 millions bones and fossils, nothing.
Out of lab work and forced speciation, nothing.

Yep no risk of loosing your 100% record here.

It's truly funny.

Yes I can hear demented laughter so that must be you.

There isn't even documentation about our existance over 10k. And what older things there are, we don't even know if they were from our same race.

You done it again. Your score still stands at 0% sense, 100% total nonsense. You must practice a lot.

Different races, and documention showing we aren't from here, and aliens with powers, all smells like abduction to me.

Agreed. Something smells from your direction and I have a fair idea what it is. Plenty of bulls in the Mexico area I take it.

It's as though we grew a brain over night, Not even bushmen yet, and have all these brains from no where. It's another clue that we aren't from here.

Yep. Just about sums up your ingnorance of evolution. I would add though. Whether we grew a brain over night or not what excuse do you have for not using your at all?

reply to post by itsthetooth

Well it is pretty hard to disprove something thats never been proven to begin with.

Funny that is what we have been telling you with the nonsense you spout made worse by your totally ignorance and inability to learn anything.

We have no proof of microevolution, or macroevolution.
We have no bones or fossils.
We have no current species in transition, in any direction.

Yep. You record remains intact but repeating the same thing over and over could be considered cheating.

There is also nothing we have been able to prove with over 2.5 million bones and fossils.

Phew! your back on form. You managed to claim 'we have no bones or fossils' and then in the same post claim the above. Back to 100% illogical nonsense.

Evolutionism is not possible for all of the aformentioned but also because we must have started from slime, and who made the slime. There always seems to be that starting point, like which came first the chicken of the egg.

Evolution has already answered that question. The egg came first because dinosaurs are the ancestors of birds. Dinosaurs laid eggs well before the chicken evolved.

It's even the same thing if you believe in creationalism. Who made the creator? It tells me that there is something out there that we don't yet understand, something that is neither creation or evolution.

There is a hell of a lot you dont understand. You have made that very clear

reply to post by MrXYZ

Prime example of ignorance. You keep on posting total crap like "no fossils" or "no microevolution"...even after people posted links that clearly show we're actively applying the theory in modern medicine, and links that show THOUSANDS of transitional fossils. But of course you simply ignore facts to preserve your bat# crazy creation theory for which you presented ZERO objective evidence as backup

Well I'm going to believe the links long before I beleve any of the posts by anyone on here. Your expecting me to just take peoples word over all else yet when I read the links they send me to, its plain and clear that evolution is not real, and in fact the links state that too. So that is what you might be referring to with zero objective evidence.

reply to post by drivers1492

I would like to ask what proof are you looking for exactly? What would be the eureka discovery for you? When you view earths history of life why does it roll back to simple organisms and nothing else? There had to be something that progressed. I'm not really sure what sort of transition your looking for to make you say ohhhh ok that looks like a mix of two different types of animals. How about Archaeopteryx? Doesn't that particular fossil show a mix of reptile and bird characteristics? Sure you can argue that we don't know if it turned into something else but the point is it has traits from two distinct types of animals.

Well proof for me would be one single example of a species changing into another species, with proof, but just enough for us to recognize whats going on.

Out of the 5 million species doing evolution, there has to be one right?

Why can't it have all come from slime? Do you have some knowledge we are not privy too outside of a feeling in your gut? The thing is you are being shown things that say yes there are transitions, by definition they do exist. Yet you claim no they don't. At the same time you propose a creator or a creator of the creator yet offer no substance to your reasoning other than you feel that its true.

No its not a gut feeling, its lack of any proof what so every. Maybe you have some links I could look at?

The forces in nature are more incredible than most anyone will give them credit. Yet they will give credit to a feeling that makes them feel not alone or simply because it makes them think they have purpose in life now. I honestly don't understand why its so hard to believe in the intangible creator yet say poppycock to the tangible universe that gives them answers.

I honestly think its just stupid to have gametic isolation while evolution can still happen. I know they are way different but if its so important to reproduce new species, that would be a ready fit way to do it.

reply to post by itsthetooth

Well I'm going to believe the links long before I beleve any of the posts by anyone on here.

I have a simple solution for you then seeing as though you intend not to debate with anyone on here as you state above.

Go somewhere else.

reply to post by itsthetooth


So I am assuming you feel the Archaeopteryx doesn't show any traits of being between species? When you say one species to another do you mean say a species of fish into another species of fish? Or does it need to be something more along the lines of a 4 legged land animal becoming a fully sea dwelling animal?

I have no links on slime lol I simply asked you why not.

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by MrXYZ

 

Prime example of ignorance. You keep on posting total crap like "no fossils" or "no microevolution"...even after people posted links that clearly show we're actively applying the theory in modern medicine, and links that show THOUSANDS of transitional fossils. But of course you simply ignore facts to preserve your bat# crazy creation theory for which you presented ZERO objective evidence as backup

Well I'm going to believe the links long before I beleve any of the posts by anyone on here. Your expecting me to just take peoples word over all else yet when I read the links they send me to, its plain and clear that evolution is not real, and in fact the links state that too. So that is what you might be referring to with zero objective evidence.

No one is expecting you to believe people's claims on here...which is why I and others have posted tons of SCIENTIFIC proven studies that clearly show that you don't know what you're talking about. But you simply ignore all the objective evidence

I mean, for crying out loud, you are totally ignoring the FACT that we are actively applying the theory in modern medicine.

As for you asking for speciation: Tons of examples

If you ask for some reptile turning into bird from one generation to the other, which seems to be what you're after, then you don't really understand the theory...because that's NOT how evolution works.

It's a gradual change over mostly VERY long time periods. Take the giraffe for example. It's neck grew every few generations from an animal that looked more like a horse until it didn't resemble the base ancestor any longer. But that didn't happen quickly like you ask for. We have detailed proof that it happened though, because we have FOSSILS and DNA as backup. You know...the fossils and DNA evidence you simply ignore because it goes against your ridiculous (and completely unsubstanciated) intervention nonsense.

reply to post by colin42

I have a simple solution for you then seeing as though you intend not to debate with anyone on here as you state above.

Go somewhere else.

Your request is proof that evolution could only exist through attrition.

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by MrXYZ

 

Well I'm going to believe the links long before I beleve any of the posts by anyone on here. Your expecting me to just take peoples word over all else yet when I read the links they send me to, its plain and clear that evolution is not real, and in fact the links state that too. So that is what you might be referring to with zero objective evidence.

The evidence has all been posted multiple times for you, and you consciously choose to ignore it without even reading. If you won't consider anything anyone has to say, including scientists that have spent their entire lives studying evolution, then why would you expect anybody to take your hypothesis seriously?

How are you still saying that microevolution has no evidence for it, when I posted it for you and then you admitted that it happens. It's like any progress that's made in this discussion gets erased because you constantly go back to your original poor arguments after they have been debunked.

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by colin42

 

I have a simple solution for you then seeing as though you intend not to debate with anyone on here as you state above.

Go somewhere else.

Your request is proof that evolution could only exist through attrition.

Your original statement shows you do not intend to debate or consider any of the evidence you are given. It also shows you intend not to provide the same also evident in these many pages. That being real evidence to substantiate your views so that we can give them proper consideration and enter into a debate. So why are you here in this thread? You dont fit.

Properly presented, real evidence does not mean the bible said so. Does not mean Sitchen said so and certainly does not mean Pye said so.

Finally your reply quoted above not only makes no sense and shows you still have no idea of what proof is, it seems you are closing your eyes and fantasising yet again.

Don’t you get it. No one is interested in what you think unless you can back up your thoughts with the very least a well presented idea and preferably backed up with evidence.

We don’t fit because we have hands although all the other species with hands do fit. We don’t fit because we have a varied diet ignoring the others that also have a varied diet. We cannot survive without milk except where we survive without milk. All infants would die without inoculations except where they don’t have them. We wear shoes so we cant be from here, except all the people that never wear shoes.

Your arguments against evolution, although this is not the thread to air them are just as pointless. 175 pages and you still come out with. You have not seen a rat become a cat. There are no bones or fossils except for the millions of bones and fossils. If we came from slime who created the slime. All planets are formed with a balanced eco system ignoring we would not know one way or another. A scientific theory is just a theory. The mess of other ignorant statements. None of which are the way to debunk evolution.

You are in fact a modern day king Canute. You are attempting to hold back the tide of evidence against you even though you are chest deep in it and getting deeper by the minute. Just like Canute the more you deny the rising tide the more ridiculous you look.

reply to post by Barcs

The evidence has all been posted multiple times for you, and you consciously choose to ignore it without even reading. If you won't consider anything anyone has to say, including scientists that have spent their entire lives studying evolution, then why would you expect anybody to take your hypothesis seriously?

If I'm choosing to ignore it, how could I possibly know that each one specifically tells that it's either a postualted theory or a hypothetical theory?

How are you still saying that microevolution has no evidence for it, when I posted it for you and then you admitted that it happens. It's like any progress that's made in this discussion gets erased because you constantly go back to your original poor arguments after they have been debunked.

Thats becuase some people are accepting microevolution, as just small things changing within a species. For example, maybe we have never had a person with purple eyes, then all of a sudden we do. How do we not know that the possibility was just always there but never presented itself for other reasons. It surly doesn't mean we have a new species thats no longer human.

reply to post by colin42

Your original statement shows you do not intend to debate or consider any of the evidence you are given. It also shows you intend not to provide the same also evident in these many pages. That being real evidence to substantiate your views so that we can give them proper consideration and enter into a debate. So why are you here in this thread? You dont fit.

Well I havent been fitted with anything that has been able to prove evolutionism or dissprove intervention, so so far, its looking pretty good.

Properly presented, real evidence does not mean the bible said so. Does not mean Sitchen said so and certainly does not mean Pye said so.

I know because everyone else is wrong, and your right. And you forgot Von daniken so I'm going to assume you agree with his work.

Finally your reply quoted above not only makes no sense and shows you still have no idea of what proof is, it seems you are closing your eyes and fantasising yet again.

Mine is based on testimonials and documentation from several others, what is yours based on?

Don’t you get it. No one is interested in what you think unless you can back up your thoughts with the very least a well presented idea and preferably backed up with evidence.

I think documentation from that erra is pretty darn good actually. It's a lot more than you have considering you should have all of your proof all around you, and you actually have nothing. I think if your squawing your box, your the pot calling the kettle black.

We don’t fit because we have hands although all the other species with hands do fit. We don’t fit because we have a varied diet ignoring the others that also have a varied diet. We cannot survive without milk except where we survive without milk. All infants would die without inoculations except where they don’t have them. We wear shoes so we cant be from here, except all the people that never wear shoes.

I have allready clairified this once for you, but I will do it again seeing how you suffer from selective reading.... We don't have hands that uniquely identify with anything specifice on this planet. We are scavangers that have been provided with a plethora of food that we were specifically told was NOT OUR intended food. I never said we can't survive without milk, we choose to depend on it given the other options. I never said ALL infants would die without vaccines. Shoes are kind of silly seeing how we are suppose to be from here, and your comment only means we werent suppose to live out in areas where we need shoes.

Your arguments against evolution, although this is not the thread to air them are just as pointless. 175 pages and you still come out with. You have not seen a rat become a cat. There are no bones or fossils except for the millions of bones and fossils. If we came from slime who created the slime. All planets are formed with a balanced eco system ignoring we would not know one way or another. A scientific theory is just a theory. The mess of other ignorant statements. None of which are the way to debunk evolution.

There are no bones or fossils that tie one species to another. I don't feel the need to debunk anything as you say. Nothing you have offered me short of birds taking a liking to humans from us moving in on there territory, even makes sense.

You are in fact a modern day king Canute. You are attempting to hold back the tide of evidence against you even though you are chest deep in it and getting deeper by the minute. Just like Canute the more you deny the rising tide the more ridiculous you look.

There is nothing holding me back aside from ignorance from others. Not that everyone should just believe in anything for any reason, but having an open mind helps. You really need to open your mind, but not so much that your brain falls out, and believing in evolution has caused just that.

reply to post by itsthetooth

Well I havent been fitted with anything that has been able to prove evolutionism or dissprove intervention, so so far, its looking pretty good.

You have refused to consider anything that proves evolution. A waste of time typing it but I will anyway. It is up to you to provide evidence of intervention not for anyone else to disprove it. Again you show a complete ignorance of how this goes.

I know because everyone else is wrong, and your right. And you forgot Von daniken so I'm going to assume you agree with his work.

Yep. A totally childish response that befits you. Also another trait of yours is to assume but as always your 100% record for wrong assumptions is safe.

Mine is based on testimonials and documentation from several others, what is yours based on?

As you asked. Real scientific studies that are backed up with verifiable evidence and peer reviewed by 1000's of trained and talented scientists. The bible does not count as documentation in science BTW.

I think documentation from that erra is pretty darn good actually. It's a lot more than you have considering you should have all of your proof all around you, and you actually have nothing. I think if your squawing your box, your the pot calling the kettle black.

Again what you think has no value. The proof is all around US. You choose to look the otherway.

I have allready clairified this once for you, but I will do it again seeing how you suffer from selective reading.... We don't have hands that uniquely identify with anything specifice on this planet. We are scavangers that have been provided with a plethora of food that we were specifically told was NOT OUT intended food. I never said we can't survive without milk, we choose to depend on it given the other options. I never said ALL infants would die without vaccines. Shoes are kind of silly seeing how we are suppose to be from here, and your comment only means we werent suppose to live out in areas where we need shoes.

More utter nonsense. Who told us specifically what was NOT OUR intended food? Show me. You not only said we need milk to survive you stated that mothers need milk to be able to produce milk for her nursing child. You said that no children would reach adulthood without vaccines many times. You brought shoe wearing in as evidence that we dont fit on this planet. Have you changed your mind on this point or just altered your words to suit your current answer as usual?

There are no bones or fossils that tie one species to another. I don't feel the need to debunk anything as you say. Nothing you have offered me short of birds taking a liking to humans from us moving in on there territory, even makes sense.

So you say. You dont mention wolves, horses, cattle, pigs, chickens, pigeons, rabbits, dolphins, All Birds of prey, gorillas, chimps that you maintained we have never interacted with ever. We will forget the 'bones and fossils because you have made it clear you refuse to look.

There is nothing holding me back aside from ignorance from others. Not that everyone should just believe in anything for any reason, but having an open mind helps. You really need to open your mind, but not so much that your brain falls out, and believing in evolution has caused just that.

Oh so you are right and everyone else is wrong, something you acuse others of. What is your belief based on? Oh if it is your reason then it must be true then. The only one on this thread with a totally closed mind is you. We have all the evidence to back it up as well.

You did it again though, acuse me of not opening my mind and then in the same sentance tell me my mind is so open my brain fell out. FYI I do not believe in evolution, I dont have to. I have educated myself by reading real information and comparing it to what I can see and touch. Evoution is real. I leave belief to you

Originally posted by andersensrm
I think that there is no such thing as evolution, I mean just look at all the evidence for god and jesus christ. Its everywhere! I can feel jesus everywhere I go, and I know that on Dec. 21st 2012 Jesus will come back to save everyone except for the sinners. Yay Jesus!

You do realise that Jesus was born sometime in July right? And do you also realise thatprior to Christianity becoming the official religion of the Roman Empire and that there were two Capitols of this Empire during these times that being Rome and Constantanople as that was named after the Roman Emperor Constantine....the Man responsible for naming Christianity the Empires official language?

Also...because of the early persecution of Christians....the exact year of Jesus' birth is unknown. We currently have the date correct to plus or minus 150 years as centuries went by before Christianity became all the rage.

This means it could very well be the year 2162 or it could be 1862....or any date inbetween those. Also...the Christian calender start with the year 1 not Zero....so even if we are acurate in the date being 2012 ANNO DOMINI....Latin for...The year of our Lord....not After Death...but representing Jesus' birth....the year would be 2011 and not 2012.

STILL....another issue is the current date as Leap Years were started in 46 BC with the creation of the Julian Calendar....but during the Dark ages....adhearence to Leap Years were not kept so accuratly plus the fact that the whole concept of a Calender system was based on Astronomical observations of the Spring, Summer, Fall and Winter solstices. Pagan holidays were substituted with Christian ones...the Spring solstace...a celebration of new plant growth, livestock, BUNNIES, CHICKS and GRASS in BASKETS were celebrations of ESTER the Fertility Goddess...thus Christians came up with EASTER. The Winter solstice celebration was changed into Christs Birthday or Christmas and etc....Split Infinity