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: 183
31
<< 180  181  182    184  185  186 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 15 2012 @ 05:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Connector
 





I think you just found this threads mascot...lol




posted on Jan, 15 2012 @ 05:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Connector
 
I cannot lend you a hand. I do have my ape brother play soothing music in the background and every now and then he gives me a hug.

He says 'whoop, pip, click grunt' but I know he means 'that is what families for'.

Idmonster

Your mascot gets my vote


edit on 15-1-2012 by colin42 because: Idmonster



posted on Jan, 15 2012 @ 06:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by colin42
reply to post by Connector
 
I cannot lend you a hand. I do have my ape brother play soothing music in the background and every now and then he gives me a hug.

He says 'whoop, pip, click grunt' but I know he means 'that is what families for'.

Idmonster

Your mascot gets my vote


edit on 15-1-2012 by colin42 because: Idmonster


Think you've mixed up our posts.....understandable in this thread though.



posted on Jan, 15 2012 @ 07:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Connector
 





Come on now...don't be coy.....


I'm not being coy, I'm asking !!!!




See what I did there

Ya know...I'm starting to think that itsthetooth maybe unto something here because I really do feel like I'm observing an alien life force whenever I read one of his replies....oh well keep the hilarity rolling
Cool, I'm making progress.



posted on Jan, 15 2012 @ 07:18 PM
link   
reply to post by idmonster
 





Really, your only understanding of "environment" is weather?
It is the first that comes to mind.




What is evolutionism?


Well its a belief. Oddly not based on much but just that.




Seriously, i'd like a reply. I think the only way that we are going to get a thorough understanding is for you to explain what you think evolution is. Using the term "evolutionism" when doing your "reasearch" is possibly taking you to some very unreliable web sites. (you are aware, i assume that anyone can edit wiki references, I for example might pop over to the entry for "the bible" and edit the page to start" This is a work of fiction, any resembalnce to person livking or dead.....etc" you get the drift.


Well sure but my belief in intervention stems from a multitude of things, and several references. It's very complex but has total continuity unlike evolutionism or religion.

Some but not all are...
Vestigal organs.
The bible.
Sitchen.
Von Daniken.
Lloyd Pye.
Human genetics.
elements missing here on earth.
and so on.



posted on Jan, 15 2012 @ 07:23 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





So you say not wearing shoes in your area would make your feet drop off and I explain that the invention of shoes enabled us to live in your area you come to the conclussion that means I am saying we can control the weather????


In other words the evolution bug was smart enough to know that it could make us smart enough to make shoes to venture out of our comfort zone. I'm sorry man, I'm not feeling the evolution bug.




And that was an answer too???????


Evolution being something that you cant see.




Still far superior to your debating skills no matter how bad I failed.


Actually I haven't debated too much, just pointed out what the links I was sent to told me, that other people seem to be overlooking.

And I like now how for the 5th time I have waited for a reply on flagellum, and you sidestep an answer every chance you get. It's ok I didn't expect an answer seeing how this bug has creation written all over it and your speechless about it.



posted on Jan, 15 2012 @ 07:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Barcs
 

Mostly I disagree with the assumptions the "theory" makes about early life, the origins of life and groups of animals evolving into entirely different groups of animals.
I also think of genetic mutations in a slightly different way as many.
There are mostly two types of mutations, yes? Those that help and those that hinder.
Much reading has brought me to the simple conclusion as follows.....

The mutations that hinder are cause by the DNA sequence being changed by outside influences such as desiese, viruses, chemicals, radiation, DNA replication errors, exc. These are involuntary.

The mutations that help are the bodies reaction to changes in environment or competition. These are voluntary.
Quad



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 03:54 AM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



In other words the evolution bug was smart enough to know that it could make us smart enough to make shoes to venture out of our comfort zone. I'm sorry man, I'm not feeling the evolution bug.
Confirmation you do not have a clue what you are building your fantasy around do you.


Evolution being something that you cant see.
Especially when you refuse to look


Actually I haven't debated too much, just pointed out what the links I was sent to told me, that other people seem to be overlooking.
What a disgusting admission on a forum meant for debate. So you sit back and demand links which you do not read, claim they show nothing and demand more links. Troll.


And I like now how for the 5th time I have waited for a reply on flagellum, and you sidestep an answer every chance you get. It's ok I didn't expect an answer seeing how this bug has creation written all over it and your speechless about it.
Seeing as though I am waiting and have been waiting since around page 60 for you to respond to many more questions than one I will answer yours when you decided to take part in this debate instead of taking on the role of troll.

I have told you before but your reading skills and contact with reality may mean you need reminding. I am not dancing to your tune. We either dance together or not at all.



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 11:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Quadrivium
reply to post by Barcs
 

Mostly I disagree with the assumptions the "theory" makes about early life, the origins of life and groups of animals evolving into entirely different groups of animals.
I also think of genetic mutations in a slightly different way as many.
There are mostly two types of mutations, yes? Those that help and those that hinder.
Much reading has brought me to the simple conclusion as follows.....

The mutations that hinder are cause by the DNA sequence being changed by outside influences such as desiese, viruses, chemicals, radiation, DNA replication errors, exc. These are involuntary.

The mutations that help are the bodies reaction to changes in environment or competition. These are voluntary.
Quad


Ok, so you agree with evolution, just not over long periods of time where the changes add up. The only problem with that, is that the fossil record shows exactly that. That certainly isn't an assumption, speciation has been witnessed many times, and macro evolution is nothing but micro on the long term. There is no separate mechanism for it. If you agree that small changes are possible, then you have to agree that millions of small changes over millions of years could appear to be big change, could it not? Or does it cap off somewhere?

There are more than 2 types of mutation, and they certainly don't only have to do with whether or not they are helpful, harmful or neutral. That part is dealt with by natural selection.

Classification of mutation types

I disagree with the notion that mutations are voluntary, or a result of the body reacting to the environment. No scientific study has ever suggested that. Some mutations are small, they aren't noticed for thousands of generations until they combine with other mutations. They aren't just one-lifetime changes that are determined by a consciousness. If that were the case, I'd expect a lot more big changes, rather than tiny changes that add up over hundreds of thousands of years.

From a non scientific perspective, I do like that idea. I agree that we have a lot more control over our own bodies than many folks realize. The brain is incredibly powerful, but I'm not convinced it would choose so many small insignificant mutations that eventually make a big difference over millions of generations. You'd also have to consider the evolution of bacteria, viruses, and other microscopic organisms that are not conscious and do not have a brain. How does it work in this case. What would be the actual mechanism for replicating the new genetic code if not causes by one of the other factors? I'll admit that this is a pretty interesting hypothesis, however. Do you have any reading material I could check out?

edit on 16-1-2012 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 01:06 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





Confirmation you do not have a clue what you are building your fantasy around do you.
Well I wasn't building anything around evolution, it appears thats allready been done.




Especially when you refuse to look


I have looked everywhere. Unless your holding onto some little secret, no one has been able to provide me with anything that says otherwise.




What a disgusting admission on a forum meant for debate. So you sit back and demand links which you do not read, claim they show nothing and demand more links. Troll.


Who said I don't read them. How could I possibly copy and past parts tellng me they are fake unless I read them.




Seeing as though I am waiting and have been waiting since around page 60 for you to respond to many more questions than one I will answer yours when you decided to take part in this debate instead of taking on the role of troll.

I have told you before but your reading skills and contact with reality may mean you need reminding. I am not dancing to your tune. We either dance together or not at all.


Well then you must be the master of trolls, because it occurs to me that the only thing you ever answered in my questions was about a species that depends on man, and that wasn't even answered right, so then all you do is complain like it was. You make your own rules, you don't answer questions, then turn around and call me the troll. If that isn't the pot calling the kettle black.



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 01:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Quadrivium
 





Mostly I disagree with the assumptions the "theory" makes about early life, the origins of life and groups of animals evolving into entirely different groups of animals.
I also think of genetic mutations in a slightly different way as many.
There are mostly two types of mutations, yes? Those that help and those that hinder.
Much reading has brought me to the simple conclusion as follows.....


Are those the ONLY assumptions you disagree with? I personally found the whole idea to be based on assumptions, so I dislike it all.



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 01:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Connector
 





Ya know...I'm starting to think that itsthetooth maybe unto something here because I really do feel like I'm observing an alien life force whenever I read one of his replies....oh well keep the hilarity rolling.


So what your saying is you would rather believe in something that has never been witnessed before, and has no substance to support it, over something that has been reported to have been witnessed by over 4 million people.



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 02:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Connector
 





Come on now...don't be coy.....


Just what we need an additional person profilling others.



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 03:47 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



Well I wasn't building anything around evolution, it appears thats allready been done.

Again. Your reading skill and ability to understand what is written is shown by you to be below the average IQ because yet again you have not replied to the point made. Pathetic.


I have looked everywhere. Unless your holding onto some little secret, no one has been able to provide me with anything that says otherwise.
Your dishonesty is why people do not wish to enter into debate with you. You have even admitted you have debated very little. Shameful


Who said I don't read them. How could I possibly copy and past parts tellng me they are fake unless I read them.
If that were true then why are you constantly being acused of never responding to anything in those links by those you duped into providing you. Dishonest and untrustworthy.


Well then you must be the master of trolls, because it occurs to me that the only thing you ever answered in my questions was about a species that depends on man, and that wasn't even answered right, so then all you do is complain like it was. You make your own rules, you don't answer questions, then turn around and call me the troll. If that isn't the pot calling the kettle black.
The answer I gave you was not wrong as others pointed out. You ruled it out becuse it showed you wrong. Just as you rule out or change the goal posts on anything that shows you wrong and in almost every post you are shown to be very, very wrong.

I very much doubt you have the intelligence for anything to occur to you and for it to have any connection with reality or based on any evidence if you somehow fluked it.

You have now reached saturation point. No one gives a dam enough about your posts to reply to you because of your continued dishonesty, diversion and untrustworthyness.


edit on 16-1-2012 by colin42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 05:32 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


I just have one question for you, and it is relevant because it will explain a little bit of how your mind works.

Why do you trust the sources you use for your information?



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 05:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Quadrivium
reply to post by SplitInfinity
 

Split,
I know what evolution is.
But I don't take it past the point of adaptation.
Let's take origins out of the picture for a moment.
So, at some point in history, we have different groups of animals on the earth, as they spread out and compete, they adapt.
Yes, that's part of the "theory" but to me that's just adaptation. I drop all of the assumptions associated with the "theory".
You mentioned sharks and crocs. They has been basically the same since they showed up in the fossil record. They might have moved and adapted, creating knew species of crocs and sharks but using the "theory", from what did they evolve?
All life on earth have basically the same building blocks, DNA.
You might say that proves evolution true, it shows we all came from LUCA.
But I say it is because we were all Created using the same building blocks, language or DNA also know as DNA.
Quad



QUAD....What if I were to tell you that I have seen LIFE that has not EVOLVED from DNA? How would that senario change your concepts on how limited the view is of many on this thread.

I probably shouldn't have said what I just did but I grow weary of listening to REDICULOUS statements trying to discredit a FACT that is EVOLUTION that our scientists and Geneticists and Multiple Large Corporations are right now...spending TRILLION OF DOLLARS World Wide in an effort to lock in their ability to own the rights to Geneticly Engineered Crop Seed.

Human Beings are not the only Life in the Universe or Multivese and we sure as HELL or not the only INTELLIGENT LIFE....if you can call Man....Intelligent.

DNA and RNA are just one varient of many types of Genetic Coding that has EVOLVED in the Universe and Multiverse. Understand this...GENESIS....has been achieved in the LAB. The only reason it has not been told to the Masses is that this type of Knowledge has certain adverse effects associated with it as people in general are not ready to accept this PROVEN FACT....that being....that LIFE is a bypoduct of the UNIVERSAL and MULTIVERSAL EVOLUTIONARY STATE of how Matter and Energy as well as how Human Beings are all part of a MUCH LARGER SYSTEM of LIFE and REALITY.

I could have said this in my first post and tried to use just basic facts of logic and reality but I can see now that for some of you...NOTHING...no matter how Logical in it's Proof....will let you see the obvious facts and that even though I have no problem with your belief in a GOD...you obviously are too afraid to take the first steps toward freedom of your MINDS.

You are in fact SLAVES to a Mental System of CONTROL that has it's tendrills burried so deep into your conceptions and idealizms of What Is Reality...I fear that I or anyone else will ever have the ability to cut this CANCER out of your SOUL. For that is what CANCER is...it is an ordinary piece of you that by GENETIC DISPOSITION....has mutated something that was once a work part of the body into a Changed Mutated Version of itself.

Unfortunately....the part of you that was been warped is your ability to see REALITY and not be afraid of it but embrace it and USE IT! Split Infinity



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 05:34 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





Again. Your reading skill and ability to understand what is written is shown by you to be below the average IQ because yet again you have not replied to the point made. Pathetic.


Well if I have overlooked something and its not getting repeated, I probably wont be able to answer it. I have however answered most questions.




Your dishonesty is why people do not wish to enter into debate with you. You have even admitted you have debated very little. Shameful


Well what do you expect when the links I'm being sent to all say that evolution is not real.




If that were true then why are you constantly being acused of never responding to anything in those links by those you duped into providing you. Dishonest and untrustworthy.


Thats a downright lie.




The answer I gave you was not wrong as others pointed out. You ruled it out becuse it showed you wrong. Just as you rule out or change the goal posts on anything that shows you wrong and in almost every post you are shown to be very, very wrong.


It might have been my fault not explaiing what I was looking for in more detail. You should seriously give it a go again since you were so good. But I do promise you I did not change the rules just because you thought you found one. I'm still looking for anything that has a natural bond out of necessety with man. From birth to death, not something that many invokes like a dog.




I very much doubt you have the intelligence for anything to occur to you and for it to have any connection with reality or based on any evidence if you somehow fluked it.


Well thats just your opinion and you know what they say about opinions.



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 05:40 PM
link   
Who do I need to speak to on ATS to get one of those buttons like on facebook, where you click ignore and then all posts from a particular member dont show up when you view a thread?



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 05:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 





I just have one question for you, and it is relevant because it will explain a little bit of how your mind works.

Why do you trust the sources you use for your information?


Well I think that depends on each source cause they are all different.
But with the bible, I think there were to many people involved for it to not be real. Maybe because its the best selling book on the planet, possibly because I find a lot of truth in it.

Sitchen has gotten a bad rep from people nit picking him on his translations, and I do mean nit picking. He is the only one at this time that offers a reason on why we were placed here. There is matching information between Sitchen and the bible, and thats what I'm going with.

Von daniken claims to have found advanced technology in the bible, as did I as well. He also claims that that god was an astronaut, just like the bible and sitchen. So its looking very plausable at this point. I do know he got busted for plagerism some time back but it was not related on this work. Some people profile him and just assume nothing good can come from him after that point.

Lloyd Pye is said to follow Sitchen. Sitchen however knew nothing about our current DNA findings so I call BS on this. Those findings closed my search when they revealed proof in all of the aforementioned. The interesting part is that Pye does not present them with the same understanding, he thinks we were an engineered species, and we might be. Howver those findings also concur with punishments that were handed down from god, and he probably doesn't realize this. Pye's background is good and he is a worthy candidate to present what he offers both in the star child and human genetics. Laying the findings out for the public to hear, in human genetics allows full exposure for peer review, and it would be nice if someone would challange him as I get sick of hearing he did this without peer reviews. I honeslty don't think it is what determins if something is truth or not.



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 05:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by colin42
 




I'm still looking for anything that has a natural bond out of necessety with man. From birth to death, not something that many invokes like a dog



Whats so special about man? Give us an example of any animal to animal " bond" of the type your refering to so we have a reference.

Part of the problem is your constantly asking for "proof" without clearly defining what you would accept as proof.

p.s. before you say anteater:

The giant anteater's diet consists mainly of ground-dwelling ants, although it will occasionally eat termites and army ants. The anteater's acute sense of smell detects the ants. Its long claws are used to get into the nests. It catches the ants with its long, sticky tongue. It gets most of the moisture it needs from its food, which includes fruit and larvae.

From www.wonderclub.com...fruit




top topics



 
31
<< 180  181  182    184  185  186 >>

log in

join