Can you prove evolution wrong

reply to post by colin42

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.

There allready is proof in documentation from the bible, as well as hebrew translations from other biblical sources from sitchen, as well as physical proof as indicated in our DNA by Pye.

What does evolutionism have, a bunch of connecting theorys that have never been observed.

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.

Actually it was a childless response from you, saying that everyone is wrong and your right.

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.

Ya but there are no findings of proof in those studies. Evolution has NEVER been recreated, or you and I wouldn't be having this conversation. The bible not counting is entirly your opinion and just goes to show how close minded you are.

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

There is nothing around us that proves evolution, if it was possible, trust me Darwin would finally win his position.

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?

It specifically states in the bible that the things provided to us are not from our home, which is what I have been telling you all along. Yes we need milk, and must drink it from the cow because its all we have. If we aren't home, did it not occur to you that our intended source of calcium probably doesn't come from a cow ?

And yes mothers need calcium to produce but only because there health will diminish. You see her body will suck it out of her system to make sure the baby gets what he needs, in other words her bones will suffer without calcium. osteoporosis.emedtv.com...

Just because some people can die without vaccines doesn't mean I said everyone would die.

You sure do assume a lot.

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.

Again this may have been my fault to not clairify that I meant they had to always of had interaction with us from day one.

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.

Mine is based on documentation that is usually missunderstood from not being read in the supernatural perspective. When doing so, it makes total sense, no more fantasy as you understand it.

Documentation that clearly tells us how we got here and that earth is NOT our home. Including instruction that would allow us to get along with one another and rule over all the other life on the planet.

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

Yes you are one extreme or the other, and recently profiling me too.

Sorry to have confused you, but it can be confusing subjects. There has never been a lab witnessing evolution. If you think evolving is the same as a choice in eye color or hair color, then I can see the confusion allready.

Tooth....there are plenty of lab examples of proof of evolution. The CDC does experiments everyday that physically show EVOLUTIONARY processes happening right in front of the eyes of Doctors and Geneticists as they are observed under a microscope.

Evolution may take long periods of time in large Multicelular Animals...but in the case of using bachteria or Viral strains...EVOLUTION can be observed in a matter of minutes or even seconds.

This is the Straw that Breaks your arguements back...although I give you credit for drawing me into a Topic that I know your concepts are incorrect. When the CDC is looking for cures or geneticly mapping the DNA of specific organisms or Viral strains...they need to cover every possible Evolutionary change of a dangerous organism.

Let's use H1N1...SWINE Flu...the great worry is a Pandemic which has happened before when this SWINE Flu changes from one that just infects PIGS to one that can infect HUMANS. This has happened many times in the past as different strains evolve to infect other species than just SWINE and the last major SWINE Flu Pandemic KILLED MILLIONS of people.

H5N1 is the Bird Flu....since Humans now process Chickens in mass factories the prospect of an EVOLUTIONARY change that will allow this Bird Flu to infect Humans could be even more disasterous. Again...this Flu originally was Geneticly coded just to infect Birds....but several cases in China have poped up recently where it EVOLVED into a Flu that can infect Humans.

This type of Evolutionary change can be observed happening with many other types of organisms and it is the job of the CDC to be ready for all possible changes in either a Bacteria or Virals Genetic code.

This is the very nature of EVOLUTION as enviromental conditions as well as changes in food supply or lack of...will force an organism to change also just to survive. You cannot dispute this as we can see actual reorginization of the Atoms on a DNA Molecule changing positions and coding with an Electron Microscope.

THERE is your PROOF! Split Infinity

reply to post by SplitInfinity

Tooth....there are plenty of lab examples of proof of evolution. The CDC does experiments everyday that physically show EVOLUTIONARY processes happening right in front of the eyes of Doctors and Geneticists as they are observed under a microscope.

I doubt very seriously if the CDC has witnessed any species changing into a totally different species under a microscope.

Evolution may take long periods of time in large Multicelular Animals...but in the case of using bachteria or Viral strains...EVOLUTION can be observed in a matter of minutes or even seconds.

Where is there a rule that says it takes a long time. It sounds like an excuse just because we aren't able to find it anywhere.

This is the Straw that Breaks your arguements back...although I give you credit for drawing me into a Topic that I know your concepts are incorrect. When the CDC is looking for cures or geneticly mapping the DNA of specific organisms or Viral strains...they need to cover every possible Evolutionary change of a dangerous organism

Ya but just because something changes into another strain does not mean that it has changed into a completly different species.

Let's use H1N1...SWINE Flu...the great worry is a Pandemic which has happened before when this SWINE Flu changes from one that just infects PIGS to one that can infect HUMANS. This has happened many times in the past as different strains evolve to infect other species than just SWINE and the last major SWINE Flu Pandemic KILLED MILLIONS of people.

Yes I know the flu has taken on many different strains, but you always still have a flu when all is said and done.

H5N1 is the Bird Flu....since Humans now process Chickens in mass factories the prospect of an EVOLUTIONARY change that will allow this Bird Flu to infect Humans could be even more disasterous. Again...this Flu originally was Geneticly coded just to infect Birds....but several cases in China have poped up recently where it EVOLVED into a Flu that can infect Humans.

These are options that were always existant in that species to begin with, just like humans possibly turning up with purple eyes. Never seen it before but it is possible, bottom line is you still have a human.

This type of Evolutionary change can be observed happening with many other types of organisms and it is the job of the CDC to be ready for all possible changes in either a Bacteria or Virals Genetic code.

There is no magic when something changes strains, which is totally understandable on why they would want to follow up on it. Now if that same species was able to actually change into another species, we wouldn't be depending on the CDC to watch over it, we would be looking for help from the FBI.

This is the very nature of EVOLUTION as enviromental conditions as well as changes in food supply or lack of...will force an organism to change also just to survive. You cannot dispute this as we can see actual reorginization of the Atoms on a DNA Molecule changing positions and coding with an Electron Microscope.

Which again is all acceptable within the understanding of being in the same species.

Where is all of the proof of any intermediate species? Out of the 5 million species here on earth. Where are the connecting species that connect a single one of us? If man evolved from apes, where is our bones or fossils of transgression?

reply to post by itsthetooth


There is no logic to any of the replies that you have given to the way you have broken down into segments...my post.

YOU asked or denied the existance of anyone ever having been able to see EVOLUTION in progress. The CDC sees it all the time.

You redirect the Reality of EVOLUTION into flash point coments such as CROSS SPECIES. Even though we are perfectly capable of creating a cross species through either Genetic Manipulation....BUNNY and JELLY FISH...we made a Rabbit that glows in the dark....or simple breading....such as the birth of a MULE.

As far as HUMANS evolving from APES...this is not true and you use this as some kind of Flash Point to stir up the wrong conception of reality. HUMANS and APES have a common ancestor....there IS a fossil record and even better proof....there is solid 100% Genetic proof Humans and Apes have a common ancestor. All Primates evolved into different versions of the original common ancestor Primate....as Mumans are primates...we are related directly to Apes, Monkeys, Lemurs....etc.

But ALL LIFE ON EARTH is related to each other on a Genetic ancestoral Level. This is a fact and cannot be disputed. The science is there...the Genetic Proof is there.....there is no way to disprove it as it is a truth.
Split Infinity

reply to post by SplitInfinity

There is no logic to any of the replies that you have given to the way you have broken down into segments...my post.

YOU asked or denied the existance of anyone ever having been able to see EVOLUTION in progress. The CDC sees it all the time.

The flu changing into another strain is a hell of a lot different then say an ape turning into a human.

You redirect the Reality of EVOLUTION into flash point coments such as CROSS SPECIES. Even though we are perfectly capable of creating a cross species through either Genetic Manipulation....BUNNY and JELLY FISH...we made a Rabbit that glows in the dark....or simple breading....such as the birth of a MULE.

Ok but those aren't permissable though gametic isolation, and evolution is not about one species breeding with another, its about evolving from an existing species.

As far as HUMANS evolving from APES...this is not true and you use this as some kind of Flash Point to stir up the wrong conception of reality. HUMANS and APES have a common ancestor....there IS a fossil record and even better proof....there is solid 100% Genetic proof Humans and Apes have a common ancestor. All Primates evolved into different versions of the original common ancestor Primate....as Mumans are primates...we are related directly to Apes, Monkeys, Lemurs....etc.

The only thing that the term "common ancestor" means is at least one lineage that we don't have proof. You could just as easily say the same thing about any two species. It's just an excuse because you aren't able to find that common ancestor. The reason though is because it never existed.

But ALL LIFE ON EARTH is related to each other on a Genetic ancestoral Level. This is a fact and cannot be disputed. The science is there...the Genetic Proof is there.....there is no way to disprove it as it is a truth.
Split Infinity

No we all share the same protiens and amino acids, which does not mean we are related. Again somone in a lab coat might have just used the same amino acids and protiens to make all this different life. At best you might say we are all related because we were all made by the same creator, but honestly thats even pushing it.

Just because we have matching sections of DNA is not proof in itself that we are related. It is suspicious however to at least make you wonder if the designer has some type of format or routine he follows.

You can't believe in evolution because we all had to start at the level of severe intelligence. You also can't just believe in a creator because who made the creator?

There is something much bigger out there, something we don't quite understand yet. Not that we couldn't understand, but at least for now, we don't.

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by SplitInfinity

 

There is no logic to any of the replies that you have given to the way you have broken down into segments...my post.

YOU asked or denied the existance of anyone ever having been able to see EVOLUTION in progress. The CDC sees it all the time.

The flu changing into another strain is a hell of a lot different then say an ape turning into a human.

You redirect the Reality of EVOLUTION into flash point coments such as CROSS SPECIES. Even though we are perfectly capable of creating a cross species through either Genetic Manipulation....BUNNY and JELLY FISH...we made a Rabbit that glows in the dark....or simple breading....such as the birth of a MULE.

Ok but those aren't permissable though gametic isolation, and evolution is not about one species breeding with another, its about evolving from an existing species.

As far as HUMANS evolving from APES...this is not true and you use this as some kind of Flash Point to stir up the wrong conception of reality. HUMANS and APES have a common ancestor....there IS a fossil record and even better proof....there is solid 100% Genetic proof Humans and Apes have a common ancestor. All Primates evolved into different versions of the original common ancestor Primate....as Mumans are primates...we are related directly to Apes, Monkeys, Lemurs....etc.

The only thing that the term "common ancestor" means is at least one lineage that we don't have proof. You could just as easily say the same thing about any two species. It's just an excuse because you aren't able to find that common ancestor. The reason though is because it never existed.

But ALL LIFE ON EARTH is related to each other on a Genetic ancestoral Level. This is a fact and cannot be disputed. The science is there...the Genetic Proof is there.....there is no way to disprove it as it is a truth.
Split Infinity

No we all share the same protiens and amino acids, which does not mean we are related. Again somone in a lab coat might have just used the same amino acids and protiens to make all this different life. At best you might say we are all related because we were all made by the same creator, but honestly thats even pushing it.

Just because we have matching sections of DNA is not proof in itself that we are related. It is suspicious however to at least make you wonder if the designer has some type of format or routine he follows.

You can't believe in evolution because we all had to start at the level of severe intelligence. You also can't just believe in a creator because who made the creator?

There is something much bigger out there, something we don't quite understand yet. Not that we couldn't understand, but at least for now, we don't.

Your doing it again...NO ONE is saying that Humans EVOLVED from APES. We had a common ancestor and we have 100% VERIFIABLE PROOF! There is no longer any question. Unfortunatly you do not have enough knowledge in Genetics for if you did...you could take the Human Genome Map and compare it to the MULTITUDES of other animals including Great Apes and other creatures that we also have mapped their entire Genome....put the two Maps on a comparitive computer software program and match us all up.

Even though we have a great deal of fossil records and on their own...they would be enough for any court to have suficient evidence to rule in favor of Humans and Great Apes having a common ancestor....but you simply REFUSE to admit or at the very least research for yourself the UNDENIABLE PROOF THAT IS OUT THERE for any and all to see.

I can't understand why you feel this is such a threat to your concept of a belief in GOD as even the Vatican and Pope John Paul II have freely admitted that Genetic Evidence points to the proof that GOD used EVOLUTION as a process to create life on Earth.

If the Church can admit this...and this was YEARS ago...way before we had the abilities of Genetics we now posses....why can't YOU at least try to understand it? This is the POPE for crying out loud...saying EVOLUTION IS A REALITY! Yet...you cling to false concepts and backwards thinking that even the Church has decided is too behind the times to continue spreading falsehoods about as a way to stay infront of the scientific curve to not alienate possible new youthful believers.

Split Infinity

reply to post by itsthetooth

There allready is proof in documentation from the bible, as well as hebrew translations from other biblical sources from sitchen, as well as physical proof as indicated in our DNA by Pye.

What does evolutionism have, a bunch of connecting theorys that have never been observed.

Still? Really?

As people have pointed out dozen of times, the bible isn't proof of anything but what people BELIEVED to be true back then based on their (compared to today) limited knowledge. It's not OBJECTIVE proof and therefore not reliable at all. As for Pye, thanks for making me chuckle by mentioning that clown again

For those who just joined the thread: Pye is a guy who made some silly star child skull claims without ever providing any peer reviews or real data to back up those claims. Sadly, a lot of gullible people fall for that snake oil salesman...including itsthetooth

As for your "no proof for evolution" nonsense: People have posted dozen of links showing hard facts and data backing up the theory. And without OBSERVABLE evidence it wouldn't be classified as a scientific theory in the first place. And of course we're actively applying it in modern medicine, another FACT you continue to ignore.

In short, you're nothing but a cheap troll because it's clear you're not here to discuss. Like a CD on auto-repeat, you simply continue to spread your nonsense, even after people 100% debunked that crap. That's a prime example of IGNORANCE. Kinda sad that you're so brainwashed by snake oil salesmen, that you can't even see reality anymore.

I doubt very seriously if the CDC has witnessed any species changing into a totally different species under a microscope.

I just posted irrefutable proof of that on the last page...you know...the link you simply ignored in order not to destroy your fantasy land nonsense?

My guess is, you're just trolling. No one can be that ignorant and stupid without doing it ironically....

reply to post by itsthetooth
Part 1

There allready is proof in documentation from the bible, as well as hebrew translations from other biblical sources from sitchen, as well as physical proof as indicated in our DNA by Pye.

Again your 'documentation' is not acceptable as proof in science. The bible is not acceptable as proof even if it 100% described a real event. The data was not gathered under controlled conditions and has gone through many re writes and translations. IT IS NOT PROOF.
Pye and sitchhen again. Strange how these offer no 'REAL' evidence but you accept them 100% but reject Evolution that shows evidence at every step.

You never included Von Daniken? By your logic used in a previous post to me this must mean you no longer accept his words as truth.

Actually it was a childless response from you, saying that everyone is wrong and your right.

Really. Below is YOUR response to me. YOU wote everyone is wrong nonsense. Get a grip man. The childish behaviour was the nit picking because I forgot to list Von Daniken.

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.
Ya but there are no findings of proof in those studies. Evolution has NEVER been recreated, or you and I wouldn't be having this conversation. The bible not counting is entirly your opinion and just goes to show how close minded you are.

No findings of proof? Oh dear you will always retain that 100% nonsense record. I did not say the bible does not count. I said the bible does not and cannot be used as evidence in science.

There is nothing around us that proves evolution, if it was possible, trust me Darwin would finally win his position.

Darwins argument was over 100 years ago. Evolution has moved on from then as you have been told and shown many times. Your argument is akin to talking about handsome cabs vs horse and cart when we travel today in cars. Meaningless.

It specifically states in the bible that the things provided to us are not from our home, which is what I have been telling you all along

Despite never showing where it says this in the bible (ie constructing an argument) as above. The bible is not admisable as evidence which everyone has been telling you all along.

Yes we need milk, and must drink it from the cow because its all we have. If we aren't home, did it not occur to you that our intended source of calcium probably doesn't come from a cow

Oh dear all this U turning explains your dizzy replies. Just one page back you said

I never said we can't survive without milk, we choose to depend on it given the other options.

Now you state we must drink milk so I again offer the Bushman and lactose intolerant as evidence that we do not need to drink milk to survive.

There are no intended sources of sustenance but sure I have considered sources of calcium. When I and others listed the food that contains it. You chose to reply with 'so we should all live in California'.

And yes mothers need calcium to produce but only because there health will diminish. You see her body will suck it out of her system to make sure the baby gets what he needs, in other words her bones will suffer without calcium. osteoporosis.emedtv.com...

No one disputes mothers to be need a rich and varied diet, only you wrote that must be milk. You also wrote she needs milk to produce milk.

Just because some people can die without vaccines doesn't mean I said everyone would die.

You maintained many times. Without vaccines no child would reach adulthood but at least above shows some progress which you will no doubt refute in a future post.

You sure do assume a lot.

That is known as transfered guilt. You are the undisputed champ in the assuming ring. 100% record.

Again this may have been my fault to not clairify that I meant they had to always of had interaction with us from day one.

We must have interacted with them all that is plain. So explain what you class as day one?

Mine is based on documentation that is usually missunderstood from not being read in the supernatural perspective. When doing so, it makes total sense, no more fantasy as you understand it.

Precisely why the bible cannot be used as scientific proof. Thank you for the definition. Dont forget to read it yourself.

Documentation that clearly tells us how we got here and that earth is NOT our home. Including instruction that would allow us to get along with one another and rule over all the other life on the planet.

You never show these explicit descriptions that earth is not our home. How did we get on with each other before the bible? Our society was formed long before it was ever written.

reply to post by colin42
Part 2

Including instruction that would allow us to get along with one another and rule over all the other life on the planet.

That nonsense. Go have lunch with a pride of lions and see how well you rule. As I have wrote before and you disputed, poorly. ALL life is related and reliant on ALL other life be it plant or animal. The we rule nonsense is how humanity has justified its misuse of the planet.

Yes you are one extreme or the other, and recently profiling me too.

Oh so because I show that you are wrong and cannot form a viable argument I am profiling you? If that were the case I believe I have got your profile just about spot on.

Sorry to have confused you, but it can be confusing subjects. There has never been a lab witnessing evolution. If you think evolving is the same as a choice in eye color or hair color, then I can see the confusion allready.

Split has done a great job in his posts to you explaining how wrong you are ....... AGAIN so I refer you to his replies to you.

reply to post by colin42


I have been trying Colin...but I am not angry or upse with him....he actually makes me sad. Sad because this is an example of how much further we have to EVOLVE before we can use REAL UNDERSTANDINGS with verifiable PROOF....to help us make decisions that will help Humanity.

I am sorry to say that some of us are not ready to take the next step....or even admit the step is there even if they see it with their own eyes...to making this world a better place. This type or senceless argument over a VERIFIABLE FACT....are the type of things that used to and still do...start WARS!

People who say they are close to GOD yet break one of all Religions basic tenements...that being...TRUTH! Rules like Judge not lest you be judged....is happening here. Truth is being warped to form a JUDGMENT that is not a reality or truth. In this case....Tooth is fighting to SEPERATE Humans from other Life on this Planet. This type of thought morphs very quickly into....Well...because they do not believe what I do....they are not of the body or somehow less than Human thus forcing them or killing them is not objectionable to GOD.

During the Crusades...the Pope made a declaration that it was OK to KILL a Muslim with a rounded MACE....basicly a heavy steel ball on a chain connected to a handle that a Crusader could whip around and crush the skulls of the NON-BELIEVERS. But the Pope determined that it was not OK to KILL a NON-BELIEVER with a MACE that had spikes as the display of Blood would somehow offend GOD!....as if the POPE knew anything about what does or doesnot offend GOD.

This attitude is very similar to what is going on in this topic...TOOTH will justifiy just about anything that has it's roots in the Bible....there is a lot of nasty killing that goes on in the Old Testement. But killing is OK in his mind if the Bible says it's OK....just as IGNORING A TRUTH is OK if it seems to be at odds with even the most rediculous of Biblical Nonsence such as ADAM and EVE.

It makes me sad for Humans...it makes me sad for Tooth. Split Infinity

reply to post by SplitInfinity
I have to agree with your post 100%. All modern religions preach love and yet all modern religions are used to promote hatred and horror.

I truely cannot understand why those with faith. More precisely some of those with faith cannot have both evolution and a creator. Evolution has nothing to say on creation. How we came to be here is anyones guess. One thing that cannot be disputed. Unless life has always been then it must have been created by someone, something be that chemistry, physics, god or combination of all.

I think it is clear I do no feel the need for a god but I do not deny others that belief. I also believe and correct me if I am wrong that at one time christianity encouraged the persuit of knowledge and science and if so how did sections of its followers become so dead set against it? Fear?

Cave paintings are often described as early man worshipping the animals around him. I wonder if it was more that he wished to honor the creatures that sustained his life at the cost of theirs.

I truely wanted a debate on what other explanations for the diversity we see. Only one person attempted to start off an alternative. Emanation which was soon swamped and lost. Emanation was something I was unaware of and find little information on. What there is looks to me like a philosphors idea of evolution which was quite interesting considering how far back the idea stretches and if nothing else shows man has always been a thinking, ingenious animal we just let ourselves down at times when we give into the primative part of ourselves.

reply to post by SplitInfinity

Your doing it again...NO ONE is saying that Humans EVOLVED from APES. We had a common ancestor and we have 100% VERIFIABLE PROOF! There is no longer any question. Unfortunatly you do not have enough knowledge in Genetics for if you did...you could take the Human Genome Map and compare it to the MULTITUDES of other animals including Great Apes and other creatures that we also have mapped their entire Genome....put the two Maps on a comparitive computer software program and match us all up.

All that saying we had a common ancestor does is admitt that we have evolved from apes, but we just cant find any proof. And btw our genome doesn't match with an apes, its just close, and close doesn't mean as much as you think it does in this matter.

Even though we have a great deal of fossil records and on their own...they would be enough for any court to have suficient evidence to rule in favor of Humans and Great Apes having a common ancestor....but you simply REFUSE to admit or at the very least research for yourself the UNDENIABLE PROOF THAT IS OUT THERE for any and all to see.

So then you are admitting now in understanding what having a common ancestor means that every time you bring up the term your admitting there will never be proof of a connection between us and apes.

I can't understand why you feel this is such a threat to your concept of a belief in GOD as even the Vatican and Pope John Paul II have freely admitted that Genetic Evidence points to the proof that GOD used EVOLUTION as a process to create life on Earth.

I don't have a strong desire to believe in god, aside from the fact that the bible places him in our troubles. Its more of a problem that we were placed here and not from earth.

If the Church can admit this...and this was YEARS ago...way before we had the abilities of Genetics we now posses....why can't YOU at least try to understand it? This is the POPE for crying out loud...saying EVOLUTION IS A REALITY! Yet...you cling to false concepts and backwards thinking that even the Church has decided is too behind the times to continue spreading falsehoods about as a way to stay infront of the scientific curve to not alienate possible new youthful believers.

Because I think that people are mistaking a miracle for something that always existed to begin with. I don't think that male horse mating with a female donkey, making a mule, is magic, I think its because they are from the same genetic family to begin with.

reply to post by MrXYZ

Still? Really?

As people have pointed out dozen of times, the bible isn't proof of anything but what people BELIEVED to be true back then based on their (compared to today) limited knowledge. It's not OBJECTIVE proof and therefore not reliable at all. As for Pye, thanks for making me chuckle by mentioning that clown again

I see so just because you don't accept them, there is no way they could be true.

For those who just joined the thread: Pye is a guy who made some silly star child skull claims without ever providing any peer reviews or real data to back up those claims. Sadly, a lot of gullible people fall for that snake oil salesman...including itsthetooth

I seriously doubt that just because something lacks peer reviews, it cant possibly be true.

As for your "no proof for evolution" nonsense: People have posted dozen of links showing hard facts and data backing up the theory. And without OBSERVABLE evidence it wouldn't be classified as a scientific theory in the first place. And of course we're actively applying it in modern medicine, another FACT you continue to ignore.

Aside from viruses no one is applying microevolution or macroevolution to modern medicine.

In short, you're nothing but a cheap troll because it's clear you're not here to discuss. Like a CD on auto-repeat, you simply continue to spread your nonsense, even after people 100% debunked that crap. That's a prime example of IGNORANCE. Kinda sad that you're so brainwashed by snake oil salesmen, that you can't even see reality anymore.

I wouldn't have to repeat myself if others werent doing it as well

I just posted irrefutable proof of that on the last page...you know...the link you simply ignored in order not to destroy your fantasy land nonsense?

My guess is, you're just trolling. No one can be that ignorant and stupid without doing it ironically....

I replied about that link allready, and its not proof by any means. Of course I love how eveyone got silent when I threw in flagellum.

reply to post by colin42

Again your 'documentation' is not acceptable as proof in science. The bible is not acceptable as proof even if it 100% described a real event. The data was not gathered under controlled conditions and has gone through many re writes and translations. IT IS NOT PROOF.
Pye and sitchhen again. Strange how these offer no 'REAL' evidence but you accept them 100% but reject Evolution that shows evidence at every step.

You never included Von Daniken? By your logic used in a previous post to me this must mean you no longer accept his words as truth.

Not acceptable by you, only because there is a chance that evolution fails as its no longer the only choice of belief. But yet you say its not a belief so what gives?

Really. Below is YOUR response to me. YOU wote everyone is wrong nonsense. Get a grip man. The childish behaviour was the nit picking because I forgot to list Von Daniken.

Thats what your saying, like if your trying to win through attrition.

No findings of proof? Oh dear you will always retain that 100% nonsense record. I did not say the bible does not count. I said the bible does not and cannot be used as evidence in science.

There are things in the bible that have been verfied, like Pye with all the human genetic defects. Oh but he doesn't count either, even though it wasn't his angle. You see its pretty hard to argue with hinesite, and thats what your trying to do. It's past provable, its now.

Darwins argument was over 100 years ago. Evolution has moved on from then as you have been told and shown many times. Your argument is akin to talking about handsome cabs vs horse and cart when we travel today in cars. Meaningless.

True, except that micro and macro evolution still don't exist.

Aside from viruses.

Despite never showing where it says this in the bible (ie constructing an argument) as above. The bible is not admisable as evidence which everyone has been telling you all along.

You mean anything that could squash evolutionism is not admisable.

Oh dear all this U turning explains your dizzy replies. Just one page back you said


I never said we can't survive without milk, we choose to depend on it given the other options.

Now you state we must drink milk so I again offer the Bushman and lactose intolerant as evidence that we do not need to drink milk to survive.

There are no intended sources of sustenance but sure I have considered sources of calcium. When I and others listed the food that contains it. You chose to reply with 'so we should all live in California'.

That depends on your location and access to other sources, its very complicated which I"m sure is why your not getting this.

No one disputes mothers to be need a rich and varied diet, only you wrote that must be milk. You also wrote she needs milk to produce milk.


Just because some people can die without vaccines doesn't mean I said everyone would die.

You maintained many times. Without vaccines no child would reach adulthood but at least above shows some progress which you will no doubt refute in a future post.

Again it depends on which location your at, and other sources you have by you. No I said over 2 dozen defects that wont allow you to live past puberty. That doesn't mean it affects everyone, I think your lost here.

You never show these explicit descriptions that earth is not our home. How did we get on with each other before the bible? Our society was formed long before it was ever written.

Very poorly is all I can see, unless there was intervention from other worlds back then, which I totally believe.

Originally posted by itsthetooth
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?

You haven't demonstrated that. You haven't provided any quotes from the sources or shown which parts are speculation or where it says anything like that. You are being intentionally deceptive and flat out lying in many cases. You haven't provided any objective evidence of your alternative theory to evolution. Oh well.

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.

What does that have to do with anything I said? Micro evolution is PROVEN. It has been observed in a lab. I have given you the link. You are just making things up questioning why nobody has purple eyes. Why not talk about skin color, brain size, hair or other traits that we can observe that proves humans have evolved since their species was first considered a species. Why not follow the fossils that clearly show small change over 7 million+ years. Talk about WHAT IS, not WHAT ISN'T. The premise of your argument is a 'what if' statement. If you're arguing with a science you need to use science to show it is wrong. You can't just make blank statements and guesses about humans not fitting in. You have thoroughly failed at your attempt to deceive people in this thread. Just leave already.

reply to post by itsthetooth

Not acceptable by you, only because there is a chance that evolution fails as its no longer the only choice of belief. But yet you say its not a belief so what gives?

No wrong again. Not acceptable by SCIENCE. What gives with you? It is easy to grasp. Science does not accept heresay. You have had 'scientific method' explained to you many times. Stop acting like a petulent child.

Thats what your saying, like if your trying to win through attrition.

No that is what you wrote. I quoted you. go back and check if you doubt it.

There are things in the bible that have been verfied, like Pye with all the human genetic defects. Oh but he doesn't count either, even though it wasn't his angle. You see its pretty hard to argue with hinesite, and thats what your trying to do. It's past provable, its now.

Wrong again. See above.

True, except that micro and macro evolution still don't exist.
Aside from viruses.

Tut tut tut. Will you ever learn?

You mean anything that could squash evolutionism is not admisable.

Wrong yet again. I mean what I wrote. Read it again, that is what I meant. The bible is not admisable evidence in science.

That depends on your location and access to other sources, its very complicated which I"m sure is why your not getting this.

It's not complicated at all. The question scares you because you cannot answer it just as you have not done again.

Again it depends on which location your at, and other sources you have by you. No I said over 2 dozen defects that wont allow you to live past puberty. That doesn't mean it affects everyone, I think your lost here.

Again lying to yourself. That is a new stance you have taken and a lot different to your original one that was shown wrong many times.

Very poorly is all I can see, unless there was intervention from other worlds back then, which I totally believe.

What a very poor reply. More if's, unlesses and I belives. Wonderful evidence only in your book.

reply to post by colin42


Evolution totally does not exist. Just look at all the evidence and it will become clear that the earth as well as the entire universe was created only about 5000 years ago by god. When we come to realize that god has all the answers and will take care of us, we really don't have to do anything because god will always be there to save you. Once we realize that jesus is coming back to save us all, we won't have to worry about all the worries in the world...

reply to post by andersensrm


If I may quote you from another thread you were involved in www.abovetopsecret.com... Compelling and Convincing Evidence that Life was Created! What Say You?

Originally posted by andersensrm
You guys are having all these deep seated discussions about religion and such, and whether evolution exists which has nothing to do with this thread, btw. Evolution exists, saying it doesn't is like saying the world is a square, and that the sun revolves around the earth. Its nonsense. Of course evolution exist, thats just how it works. You have the right to believe whatever you want, but I choose to believe that I am a human being that lives on the planet earth, not some child of god, living on a planet he created, giving us the free will to do whatever we want. O yea and then he built the entire universe which we have no influence on, one we haven't even begun to explore yet. Its a bunch of nonsense, we are trying to explain something we literally can't concieve. We can use all the analogies, and technological models we can, but we will never understand the origins of life, at least not any time soon. We still think some god created life, but then we'd have to redefine our definition of life, because isn't god "alive", yet if he created life how can he be?

you clearly state you believe in evolution and mock the god your saying yah jesus for in this post in this thread.

Obvious troll is obvious

reply to post by drivers1492


Aww man whoops, oh well ya got me. Sorry Couldn't help but write that just because of how ridiculous it sounds. I wanted to get some kind of "yeah me too" or "i agree" response but none. Probably because no real person believes in that, its just silly...

reply to post by andersensrm
Dont you think we have enough of those posts to begin with? On a thread asking those that do not think evolution to be true to explain diversity without it?