It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Because everyone of the others have concluded you are a waste of space and have decided to leave you to wallow in your abject ignorance. They are of course correct.
Why do you seem to be the only one blubering about this.
Oh yes, you can see the sites I just posted for Colin to compare with and you will see that there is no comparison. Humans are sick, plain and simple. I asked my doctor, are humans really sick, she said yes. I asked my family doctor are humans really sick, he said yes. We are sick.
well i thought you said It was alarmingly prevalent in humans,,, exaggerated compared to other animals,, that is my reasoning on why humans may have more exaggerating areas of sickness and disease...
Well I can't argue that we created some of our own problems but I don't think its but a small percentage of what we are dealing with. Another part of this is because of our defects that are in our genes. Did you check out Lloyd Pye's video human genetics.
because other animals have for millennia have had a very specific life pattern, growing to the environment and environment growing to them.... humans for he past thousands of years and especially last 200 have been going through great change in environments,, introducing chemicals, and radiations, just a lot more areas to develop abnormalities then if humans never introduced those drastic changed into their environment..
I did respond already. I gave you a list of things we do share with the ant eater. In addition to answering the ones you specifically listed. There was nothing unique about your list.
You have not replied in any way shape or form because you cannot. I have asked you to discuss why all the things we share with ants that no other animals do and you blew of every point with your usual ignorant avoidance and why?
Not at all, I still stand on it, and you still have failed to give explanation as to why you don't accept mine while I have already given reason why yours had no merit.
Because if you discussed them you would have to admit you have based your entire idiot non evidenced waffle is wrong.
I never said that ants are not from here, it seems to be a fabrication on your end. What I said is that humans are not from here and by comparison to ants, or rather ant eaters, its obvious.
That either ants are not from here or humans are. You do not answer because you are a liar and a fraud.
If the genes in question were NOT autosomal dominant, then the bushman could have them, while they would not necessarily effect him.
Again you avoid an explanation of the part autosomal dominance plays in the survival past puberty of the Bushman.
Only when it appears you have closed your eyes, your ears, and your brain, and your just running your mouth.
By default your refusal to discuss any points means you know you are full of crap and ALL of you belief system is wrong.
Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by andersensrm
I think its important to understand that everything on this planet is supposed, and I emphasize on that word, to be part of a cycle of life. Humans are NOT part of any cycle of life on this planet, in fact we are constantly being rejected by mother nature and we continue to destroy the planet. Our existence is and has always been a threat to this planet. Mother nature is not our mother nature. While this is only one of many things that tell us this, it's probably one of the most important to realize.
The average was done across the board for all life, except intelligent life, obviously we haven't found any other examples of that.
So we leave and nothing happens, I don't see how this proves we aren't from here.
The next thing I realize is how we have no target food. Sure we have food, but from a scavengers point of view, we have nothing we positively ID as being specific for humans. As a matter of fact, a science quote I read years ago claimed that scientists had discovered that humans can live alone on bread and milk, neither of which is natural without process.
We have lived the way we live for so long, that we are complacent to accept things even though they are not normal. No one will ever convince me that cows milk was intended for human consumption, and not a single person on this thread has come up with a reasonable reason why we do drink it. It's obvious that the cow was provided to us by god. As with everything else he provided it was noted that none of the things were originally intended for us, as though they are just supplements. In addition, it was noted that none of the things brought here were from our home as well.
There is much more that aid in this direction but I think you get the point. After much thought about this, and the existing life on this planet I started to realize some important things. Evolution CANT be possible. The reason I say this is because I have put a lot of thought into the working agenda of the life on this planet. Everything is suppose to be part of a balanced eco system and we aren't part of it. It's just a tad to obvious. Further more, I realized that evolution is not possible based on there not being a food supply for new species. It's just not possible. If a new species pops up, whats it suppose to eat?
It can't eat the old food it used to as this is for the previous species and would imply no change. It would also mean the new species is stealing food from the previous species. Everything is just balanced to the point where it wouldn't allow new species to survive without stepping on some others toes. Of course its also weird how we are never able to find bones of transgression that prove any connection with other life. We never have a missing link but we always have common ancestors. It's a contradiction from us being able to see a species changing in a lab, but we just aren't able to find any bones to prove it. And where are all the new names and scientists that got to name these new species?
I'm sorry, but I call BS on the whole evolution platter.
Neither, according to doctors, wiki statistcs, pharmacys and the fact that we depend on insurance, we are sick, and diseased.
Are you saying physically sick? are you personally sick? Id say there are probably 3 billion humans that are lively alive right now, in good health, enjoyment, doing there thing.
It's not an issue of semantics, its an issue of definition. If you read the wiki on both of them you will see that evolution comes up under the definition of adaptation but only under a section approved by a well known evolutionist.
So adaptation is not evolution??? So this is a game of semantics, your saying evolution does not exist, because adaptation are not a part of evolution. But anyone talking about evolution is going to say that adaptations is a part of its theory. Thats how evolution explains everything through adaptation. We can call it whatever you want, it doesn't matter. So adaptations lead to what we are now, thats all you were trying to say?
I can't argue that our presence here on earth in addition to other things that were brought here and weren't suppose to be, have caused a lot of issues.
Thats the whole point, is to step on other species "toes". Thats where the survival of the fittest comes in. As much as you would like it to be, life isn't balanced. 97% of all the species that have ever lived on earth, are extinct.
Well there is no doubt some animals that steel food, and some of that might be in the normal order of things. You have to remember this type of thing is really hard to guage. It's not hard to recognize an outsider however, and humans are not from here.
This is because the animals we see today, essentially stole their food source. Seems pretty simple to me. Now we seem to be a lot different, because we are sentient. We have technology, and thinking minds. Maybe this came about from E.T.'s visiting us and creating us as some type of slave race. When they were done, they left. And now here we are trying to figure it all out. But to say evolution doesn't exist is just a play on words. Your saying evolution is one thing, everyone else is saying its another. Which is why we will get nowhere, as long as you say evolution has nothing to do with adaptation, and we say it does.
Originally posted by itsthetooth
I didn't know it was 97% but would challenge that, probably more like 10% which is totally understandable with how things are off balance.
Well in order for changes to even be possible there has to be direction, drive, or some type of motivation behind it. If not, we would be seeing species with 3 eyes, and we never do. There has to be an acceptable line of things that are allowed to change, and a line of things that wont change.
You keep refering to evolution as some entity, or being of some kind, behind the controls telling us where to go, and what to eat. Its just a term refering to how we adapt and change. Thats all.
It has to, and this is why I refer to evolution as the bug.
It doesn't control us or tell us what to do, it just a term that we can use so we understand what we are both talking about. Thats the point of language is to come up with terms so we can all communicate. Thats all it is. I don't know how you get from that, to evolution being some kind of mad scientist.
Well varemia you wouldn't know anything about these numbers as you believe we are on our home planet to begin with.
Wow, you really love using your imagination to come up with imaginary numbers to make everything feel better in your mind. Just give up man. Your selective reading, downright twisting of facts, and blatant lies are getting ridiculous.
If this were how things work, why is it that the ant eater hasn't evolved away from eating ants? I mean there is no question he was made to eat ants, and you can't argue that he evolved into eathing ants, what did we evolve into eating? Cows milk? Processed food.
I still don't understand. Lets say Im an iguana. I like eating plants and stuff. Then one day I'm on a grassy patch with a couple of my buddies near the ocean, it breaks off and I'm sent off into the ocean. After a couple of hours my grassy patch washes up on a island. The plants and stuff that I like to eat are non-existent. I see a couple of my buddies eat some plants, and they end up dead. Then its just me and a couple of other iguanas left. We get desperate and decide to look into the ocean for food. We realize we are really bad at swimming, some of us drown, but we managed to get some plant food fairly close to shore. Over time we make babies and create new generations who have to continually go farther and farther out to get the plant food. Over time we make adaptations and evolve to be better swimmers. Now the iguana has changed, evolved, and all it took was the environment and the individual. No bug necessary. I don't see how there has to be something to "hide the bodies" since nature does a pretty good job destroying the bones and any evidence of them, of course on the odd occasion when they end up as fossils.