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.
Well any link counts, but I'm looking for ones that directly point out a connection between the bones and humans. Provided that's the most looked for species.
What would count as a link to you? You clearly choose to ignore all the hundreds and thousands of transitionary fossils, so what counts as a link?
Originally posted by itsthetooth
I see, so you totally dismiss that we are able to find prehistoric bones, but can't find any more recent ones? How is it that we are able to find dinosaur bones? They are older and rare.
Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by Varemia
Well any link counts, but I'm looking for ones that directly point out a connection between the bones and humans. Provided that's the most looked for species.
What would count as a link to you? You clearly choose to ignore all the hundreds and thousands of transitionary fossils, so what counts as a link?
well I didn't know they are ALL fossilized.
Ok, you're an idiot. I'm sorry, that's against the TOS, but dinosaur "bones" are FOSSILS!
Good lord, I'm getting so sick and tired of how much you don't know.
No I have been sent to it several times.
You mean like the extensive hominoid fossil record we already have? You seemed to have already dismissed it.
your idea of evolution is to disprove that anything of meaning,purpose, or intelligence could exist before the culmination and manifestation of human intelligence?
you say everything is random except for what you can do?
so you say life evolves, why for you does that dismiss a higher level of intelligence that put forth the universe?
my point is its hard to talk to you when you think that everything is just stupid chemicals.... the way i look at it is,, the fact that chemicals, stupid or not exist, means there is an original inventor behind their existence, whatever that reason is, it was "intelligent" enough to "design" or blast off an infinite system of eternal eventage which include all scales, dimensions, geometry, laws of physics, stars, worlds, your intelligence, my sorry excuse for intelligence, all the intelligence that has ever existed or ever will, the fact that those "stupid" chemicals can evolve into diverse species and intelligence, is reason enough for me to submit to the fact that there is that which knows multiplied multiples of infinity more then I can hope to know in a few revolutions on this rock.
Originally posted by ImaFungi
reply to post by Varemia
what hes getting at,, is that evolutionists, with their belief of evolution try to dismiss the possibility that the way of evolution, or anything that has to do with life was created, intelligently...
evolutionists believe that it is completely a process of chance and probability that the conditions were right on this planet, and the sun was the right distance to allow for life to spark into existence, and start its long trek of evolution....
what is it that is deciding to take into its shape and route of species, is it not what you would call will or intelligence, that drives every living being through their life, through eons of time, allowing their genealogical successors to gain the benefits of their toil and victory?
That's interesting because I have never said that all life never started on this planet.
The thread has been hijacked by an individual who insists that life was not created on this planet at all, that it arrived here fully formed from elsewhere. His "proof" is as follows: (I will paraphrase)
Uh hu.
1.The anteater eats ants (he refers to this as a "target food"
True so far, no one has been able to successfully contest it.
2. Humans do not have a target food.
Its one of many of his attributes but yes.
3.The anteater is from here because it has a target food.
Yes I know its hard to understand but a species must have food.
4. We are not from here because we dont.
That's a cherry picked portion of a very large and complex picture, and its not just because I say so, its because the facts tell us so.
5. we're not supposed to drink cows milk (the only reason for this is that its "cows mucus" and tooth doesnt seem to like that idea)
There are over 2 dozen defects in our DNA that will not allow you to live past puberty. Of course what everyone is blind to is that we don't know if they are autosomal dominant genes. Everyone on here argues with me that medical intervention is not needed at all, doctors are stupid and don't know what they are doing, and there purpose is useless. We simply don't need vaccines.
6. We would all be dead without medical intervention. (despite millions of "live" people who appear to have managed life without it)
I smell intervention LOL.
Now thats a good question, and this is where a lot of the sensible discussion (i.e. thoes not involving [DELETED]...hes like the candyman, dont use the name or he will appear)
I like how you just conveniently add your own words to the definition to make it suit your argument. Nope sorry, your wrong, and I caught you trying to pull one over. There is no "scientific" and everyone knows the difference. So take your pseudo science elsewhere.
As far as you continuously referencing my find on the virus, you know nothing about it, so it just shows your honest character and how your so quick to profile people without the possibility of knowing what your talking about.
I don't know what to tell you. I grabbed my boss, and had her read this so she could give me her definition and it appears we both agree. I think where the problem might be is that your mistaking a theory for a scientific theory. Your also totally dismissing the words hypothetical and postulated, I guess because you don't want to see or address them.
Sure, you tout, but remember, these has already been explained and your profiling me again.
Now just for giggles I went back and refreshed again on reading up on the term theory. Again, it also states that it is derived from speculation and contemplation.
Itera, did you fail to take your meds today? I did not place hypothetical and theory in the same phrase, they were already there.
Well then you need to be the brave soul to step up and let them know they need to address it as such, rather than postulated, hypothetical theory's. IMO I think they did this for a reason, because they didn't want to lie.
True but there is such a thing as a scientific theory or a scientific fact.
Maybe its because mine isn't hypothetical or postulated.
Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by idmonster
The thread has been hijacked by an individual who insists that life was not created on this planet at all, that it arrived here fully formed from elsewhere. His "proof" is as follows: (I will paraphrase)
That's interesting because I have never said that all life never started on this planet.
6. We would all be dead without medical intervention. (despite millions of "live" people who appear to have managed life without it)
There are over 2 dozen defects in our DNA that will not allow you to live past puberty. Of course what everyone is blind to is that we don't know if they are autosomal dominant genes. Everyone on here argues with me that medical intervention is not needed at all, doctors are stupid and don't know what they are doing, and there purpose is useless. We simply don't need vaccines.
Dear lord no. Not this, anything but this.
You want to know what I think is going on , Ima....
Especially when as tooth does, you close your mind to everything that shows his version of reality is that of a halfwit.
It is almost impossible to understand how these things could be in place without the intervention of some type of creator.
He really does not. You just wait and see how insane he is.
I don't say that with exaggeration
Brace yourself, its coming. You will be shocked.
its really hard to understand almost every step of life without it.
Now you would think a science master and the discoverer of an 'Arcane' virus would understand that evolution does not, and cannot explain creation. You would imagine this would sink in after being expalined this about every other page of this thread alone.
All the way down to the chemicals. Who made the chemicals, who made the complex chains that allow them to work in the way that they do. Who programmed the chains.
You have to go back about 20 - 30 pages to see where it was explained to him that the egg came first which after a major tantrum by tooth he claimed chickens may have been brought to earth as well. Humans clucky helper although eggs are not our 'target food' despite this.
Anyhow. one thing that I often think about is the old saying which came first the chicken or the egg.
This is his pretence that he is a thinker but actually when you have read enough of his garbage he has deep personality problems linked to anal probes and abduction.
But I do the same thing with a creator. Who made the creator. It really leaves me stumped.
This program that he never links to or backs up in anyway is a common line of tripe squirted out regulary like dhiorea. Not only is he the identifier of an arcane virus (he refuses to explain what that even means) he is also it seems is privy to information about life on other planets. He maintains that these planets also have a balanced eco system which ours does not because we are not from here.
I watched a program one time that said that planets are formed from gasses, and from what they can tell, there is just life on those planets.
I thought I was?
Talk about freaky
Actually someone replied using a silly example to show how rediculous tooths veiws were. Tooths understanding of the written word is so poor that he believes it was friendly banter.
A joke was offered to me to see better what was happening.
This he also spews out every few pages and sadly. IS THE ONLY THING HE HAS LEARNED IN OVER 200 pages
There is a giant celestial squid in the cosmos that poops out planets and life. All hail to Trevor the giant celestial squid.
This old rubbish again. Well I suppose it was ovedue an outing. You were stupid enough not to alter your pasted notes and again left it in
There are over 2 dozen defects in our DNA that will not allow you to live past puberty. Of course what everyone is blind to is that we don't know if they are autosomal dominant genes. Everyone on here argues with me that medical intervention is not needed at all, doctors are stupid and don't know what they are doing, and there purpose is useless. We simply don't need vaccines.
The very thing you acuse people of lying about when they quote it back to you.
There are over 2 dozen defects in our DNA that will not allow you to live past puberty
Originally posted by colin42
reply to post by idmonster
Originally posted by idmonster
Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by idmonster
I think there is a big difference between my grand kids having my features and apes mutating into humans. I actually do believe that apes could become humans, but it would take trillions of years, and well earth hasn't been around that long so what does that tell you.
It just seems to be missing that little important word in front of it saying scientific.
Sorry if you don’t like the definition of a scientific theory, but you don’t get to redefine it so you can argue against it. What I said is accurate and accepted by the scientific community as a description of what a scientific theory is.
And I'm suppose to take your word on this after your trying to convince me that hypothetical, postualted theorys are fact.
It’s like all of your other claims -- unsubstantiated. And the lack of knowledge you keep openly displaying about how science works in general means it’s going to continue to be unsubstantiated.
Google it, even wiki has a good one
Present your source for the definition of a scientific theory.
From wiki en.wikipedia.org...
The adjective hypothetical, meaning "having the nature of a hypothesis", or "being assumed to exist as an immediate consequence of a hypothesis", can refer to any of these meanings of the term "hypothesis".
So now your turning around and admitting that it's listed as a hypothetical theory.
Many have in the past and continue to today. Dawkins, Gould, every member of the USNAS, every member of the AAAS, the vast majority of the global scientific community...
Neither of which are they listed as.
Yes, there are. And evolution is a scientific fact. And modern evolutionary synthesis is a scientific theory.
Most are that obvious, you are correct but the type of virus I found doesn't apply in that way, it is very different.
The existence of a virus would be a fact, not a theory, so your analogy is a failure.
Even though the words "hypothesis" and "theory" are often used synonymously, a scientific hypothesis is not the same as a scientific theory. A working hypothesis is a provisionally accepted hypothesis proposed for further research.
The fact is that non indiginious species might be able to be identified in part based on the lack of target food, in addition to them possibly being a scavenger.
Fair comment, just us and some other as yet unidentifeid species which I guess is a claim yuo will make when somebody points out anoither animal, that in your world appears to have a target food
No my guess is that even if I did post proof you would do nothing but try to discredit it after the fact but here you go, eat up.
An outright lie. No-one has made any such claim, if they had, i'm sure you could quote them. But you cant. Personaly, if i were accused of being a liar, I wouldnt care where the quote was that proved that I wasnt a liar, I would find it and post it. My guess is that your reply will be "that it was so long ago", "i cant go back" etc etc.
Well colin is just one, but others agree with him. He keeps referring to he bushman as proof that we don't need vaccines, and I always tell him he needs to let doctors know this.
So theres a challenge, prove that you are not a liar, find the quote that anyone made that states that "medical intervention is not needed at all, doctors are stupid and don't know what they are doing, and there purpose is useless. We simply don't need vaccines."
I think there is a big difference between my grand kids having my features and apes mutating into humans.
I actually do believe that apes could become humans, but it would take trillions of years
101 tooth. Apes mutating into humans shows no advancement at all.
I think there is a big difference between my grand kids having my features and apes mutating into humans.
He uses this to show we are not from here and not as an acceptance evolution may occur
I actually do believe that apes could become humans, but it would take trillions of years
Here's his punch line. Same old same old
and well earth hasn't been around that long so what does that tell you.