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: 243
31
<< 240  241  242    244  245  246 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 18 2012 @ 07:02 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 


I understand that you guys are a little pissed at tooth, I understand why. But also you have to appreciate it in a way. A lot of the time, we think we know how something works, so we stop analyzing it. Only to find out that we had it wrong. So I think it is good, to constantly analyze everything for any kind of changes or discrepancies. Also it gives you a chance to think it through yourselves as you have to argue your point. So what if this guy ignores, or whatever, if it was such a worthless conversation it would have ended ages ago.




posted on Feb, 18 2012 @ 07:22 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





Again unsupported clap trap. A balanced meal is just that its not a term. What about a personal trainer? With the choice of food and the variations in the population a dietician looks to be a good idea.
I think your missing the point Colin, if we need a personal trainer, there is something very wrong. Ants don't need personal trainers.




The reason we make new food is called making a profit you muppet.
I can't argue that there is obviously some food created for pure profit. For example Pop, is not good for us, so it must be profit. The bottom line is some food is processed with nutrition in mind. Why do we have to make our own food? It's simple, because our real food isn't here.




Proof you dont read anything offered to you because that is exactly what ants do. I backed up what I said you yet again have not and you have not even bothered to read what was on offer. Ignorant.
I don't agree that they do in fact do all these things, but lets pretend for the moment that they do. You once again overlooked the most important aspect in all of this, they do it naturally, we don't.




More unsubstantiated clap trap. Your dishonesty knows no bounds.
Nope, your the only one clapping your trap Colin.




It is clearly documented in the bible how good honey is for us but you dont accept that. If even you doubt the information why should others accept it? Especially as you dont back up what you say yet again.
I never said I don't accept that, I totally accept it. What your not accepting is the other part where the bible also tells us that all of the things that were provided for us, were also not from our home. In other words they aren't things originally meant for us, or not our intended food. So we are back to what I keep saying about our food choices.




and I agree.

Probably the most dishonest thing you have wrote yet.
Geez Colin, I can't agree with you to disagree.



posted on Feb, 18 2012 @ 07:30 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





The point is and you are very aware of the point. ALL the things you say show humans are not from here ants also do. So either both ants and humans are from here or both are not.
Well like I told you long ago, those points are useless, but I will go ahead and re address them. Lets say for the sake of argument and Colins world there is some things that we share. The problem is that they do them NATURALY, we don't.




So you are in a hard place. Whatever your choice you have shown yourself to be wrong. What is perfect is it is the anteater that hangs you.

The rest of your post is not worth answering as it is just another attempt at avoiding the points made.
No the anteater is still the ideal example of a species having target food and his design actually fitting a purpose.
There is no question this guy was made to eat ants. Now what were we made to eat, and try to follow it up with the same detailed reasons that prove it.



posted on Feb, 18 2012 @ 07:37 PM
link   
reply to post by andersensrm
 





I understand that you guys are a little pissed at tooth, I understand why. But also you have to appreciate it in a way. A lot of the time, we think we know how something works, so we stop analyzing it. Only to find out that we had it wrong. So I think it is good, to constantly analyze everything for any kind of changes or discrepancies. Also it gives you a chance to think it through yourselves as you have to argue your point. So what if this guy ignores, or whatever, if it was such a worthless conversation it would have ended ages ago
I have thrown bones at everyone on this thread to try to get them to explain to my why things are a certain way, that obviously proves we aren't from here. Not a single time could anyone come up with anything decent. Colin would argue and say otherwise but he seems to always leave out the element of humans not doing things naturaly.

I'm convinced we aren't from earth and I would bet my life on it. The bible tells us that earth is not our home so we have clear documentation that is telling us this, and most choose to ignore it. We have no documentation about our evolution, not a damn thing. And there is a reason why as well, because we werent here. The fact that we werent here all the time actually answers so many questions.



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 02:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by andersensrm
reply to post by colin42
 


I understand that you guys are a little pissed at tooth, I understand why. But also you have to appreciate it in a way. A lot of the time, we think we know how something works, so we stop analyzing it. Only to find out that we had it wrong. So I think it is good, to constantly analyze everything for any kind of changes or discrepancies. Also it gives you a chance to think it through yourselves as you have to argue your point. So what if this guy ignores, or whatever, if it was such a worthless conversation it would have ended ages ago.


It's not Tooth's beliefs that piss me off. It's his misunderstanding of evolutionary theory. He continues to boast about his knowledge about it, and almost every time, he has evolution completely wrong! You can't prove something wrong if you don't even know what you're disproving.



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 03:25 AM
link   
reply to post by andersensrm
 
That is exactly why I made the topic of this thread to discuss the diversity we see without refering to evolution. It had an unhelpful title change granted. But it was meant to actually learn each others point of view without ending up entrenched defending them. Closest we got to that was with Quad and I found that conversation fascinating.

When tooth first posted he was treated with respect and also reminded of what the thread was about, again and again and again. He was still catered for and abused that help again and again and again.

He was spoon fed information in links. Descriptions and 200 pages later he shows his determination not to understand one single point, not one. Still says 'an ape cannot turn into a human and what would he eat if he did.'

He does not even pretend to have read the answers and info given and has destroyed any chance of this thread ever achieving its intended goal. I had small hopes of this working but when tooth infected this thread it had no chance at all.

If he was just stupid I would hold back. I cannot forgive outright lies and blatant dishonesty.



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 03:47 AM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



I think your missing the point Colin, if we need a personal trainer, there is something very wrong. Ants don't need personal trainers.
Your wrong again. If you had read the information I spoon fed to you it clearly shows ants do have trainers. Not in sports but in how to find things, perform actions but again you refused the invite to learn something.

You are the one that missed the point. You missed the point of this whole thread and purposely so.


I can't argue that there is obviously some food created for pure profit. For example Pop, is not good for us, so it must be profit. The bottom line is some food is processed with nutrition in mind. Why do we have to make our own food? It's simple, because our real food isn't here.
Unless you grow it yourself for your own use ALL food is produced for profit. The packageing is designed to shout out 'buy me'. Is life so very different in Spokane that you never see this?


I don't agree that they do in fact do all these things, but lets pretend for the moment that they do. You once again overlooked the most important aspect in all of this, they do it naturally, we don't.
You bloody fool, not only is it in writing it is shown in the video clips provided. This information is in abundance on the internet. It is why many are facinated with ant society yet you ignore this and say 'I DONT AGREE THAT THEY DO IN FACT DO ALL THESE THINGS.' Your ignorance knows no bounds.

Even other creationists have used the ant as an argument FOR creation and a maker. You could have learned from this and strengthened your belief in the same time. You chose pig ignorance. (sorry pigs)


I never said I don't accept that, I totally accept it. What your not accepting is the other part where the bible also tells us that all of the things that were provided for us, were also not from our home. In other words they aren't things originally meant for us, or not our intended food. So we are back to what I keep saying about our food choices.
So without any evidence you could say bee's, cows, chickens, crops and an extensive list past this ARE NOT FROM HERE. Your whole premise on trarget food is wrong from the title of 'Target food' onwards.


Geez Colin, I can't agree with you to disagree.
You were replying to andersen who wrote


Personally I see a lot of people getting angry with your ideas, I welcome them, as I do any challenger to my ideas. If no one ever challenged any ideas, then we would never get to the truth.
You do not accept any challenge to your ideas. You refuse to discuss your ideas and the arguments against them. You certainly are not after the TRUTH.

My comment stands your agreement with Andersen is the biggest lie you have made yet



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 04:04 AM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



Well like I told you long ago, those points are useless, but I will go ahead and re address them. Lets say for the sake of argument and Colins world there is some things that we share. The problem is that they do them NATURALY, we don't.
Again I have to tell you because it does not seem to sink in. You are using NATURAL in completely the wrong context. There is no such thing which is why you cannot provide a definition. Just as you cannot provide one for RELATIONSHIP

The ants do the same things we do. If the ant is natural so are we. If we are not natural then neither is the ant unless of course you can provide evidence or make a reasoned argument against it but you plainly cannot.

So try again but this time go back and read the information provided for you.


No the anteater is still the ideal example of a species having target food and his design actually fitting a purpose.
There is no question this guy was made to eat ants. Now what were we made to eat, and try to follow it up with the same detailed reasons that prove it.
Ah yes the hanging witness. You say you believe designed. I show evidence of evolved into that niche. The fact remains if you choose to accept ants are not from here then neither is the ant eater. If because of the anteater you insist ants are from here ALL of your evidence for man not being from here falls at you feet.

This is why you dishonestly cling to a desperate and unfounded argument that consists of ants are natural and humans are not.

Do you remember in a previous post you agreed that an exchange leads to knowledge? The above shows yet again I was correct in calling you dishonest.


edit on 19-2-2012 by colin42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 04:20 AM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



I have thrown bones at everyone on this thread to try to get them to explain to my why things are a certain way, that obviously proves we aren't from here. Not a single time could anyone come up with anything decent. Colin would argue and say otherwise but he seems to always leave out the element of humans not doing things naturaly.
You have put forward unsubstantiated and plainly wrong comments. You have never made a reasoned argument for your statements but have rejected out of hand anyone that does.

Your claim of no one coming up with anything decent is akin to Nelson holding his spy glass to his blind eye and claiming 'I see no ships'.

Again please provide definition for natural in the context you are attempting to use it in.


I'm convinced we aren't from earth and I would bet my life on it. The bible tells us that earth is not our home so we have clear documentation that is telling us this, and most choose to ignore it.
Your interpretation. Others with faith would disagree that is if you ever made an argument that would allow them or anyone else to disagree, or even agree.


We have no documentation about our evolution, not a damn thing. And there is a reason why as well, because we werent here. The fact that we werent here all the time actually answers so many questions.
You have been given a truck load of documentation. The internet has an almost infinite source of more but you reject all out of hand, every dam thing.

There is no'FACT that we were not here all the time' and you have not made any valid arguments that supports your stance.

You refuse to discuss any points made or debate any points raised.

Definition of Argument:- an oral disagreement; verbal opposition; contention

Definition of Discussion:-consider or examine by argument, comment, etc.; talk over or write about, especially to explore solutions.

Debate:- Debate is a broader form of argument than logical argument, which only

Try it sometime. It helps on a discussion forum

edit on 19-2-2012 by colin42 because: Definitions



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 04:39 AM
link   
I read a quote by James Randi today that, I think, sums up itsthetooth's rationale on the subject very well:


There exists in society a very special class of persons that I have always referred to as the Believers. These are folks who have chosen to accept a certain religion, philosophy, theory, idea or notion and cling to that belief regardless of any evidence that might, for anyone else, bring it into doubt. They are the ones who encourage and support the fanatics and the frauds of any given age. No amount of evidence, no matter how strong, will bring them any enlightenment. They are the sheep who beg to be fleeced and butchered, and who will battle fiercely to preserve their right to be victimized...

Itsthetooth is a perfect example of a Believer. My most recent reply to one of his posts, which was yet another example of itsthetooth's perfidy on the subject of evolution, will be my last reply to one of his posts in this thread. Hopefully Quad comes back and we can get some kind of actual discussion going again on the subject at hand.



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 04:45 AM
link   
reply to post by iterationzero
 
Its a shame I can only give one star for your post.

I also hope Quad returns but I doubt it while this maddness continues.


edit on 19-2-2012 by colin42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 10:39 AM
link   
I just have to throw this out there, I'm feeling motivated again. Target food does not exist. In nature, food is not provided based on the demand, like modern day capitalism. All organisms need sustenance or they will die. It's that simple. There are 3 kinds of animals in regards to their diet. Herbivores, Carnivores and Omnivores. Herbivores eat mostly plants, carnivores eat mostly meat, and Omnivores eat both. Humans are omnivores, therefor the food we need to survive is everywhere. There isn't a target food. We eat whatever we can get a hold of. Today its different because we invented money and have medicine based on doctors who have studied the human body and what the healthiest foods are to eat. You can't ignore humans that survived hundreds of thousands of years without all this technology and deep knowledge of how things work.

No creature has a target food. They eat what they can find, or they die out. Some are better at obtaining certain foods than others. Humans are no different from any other creature on the planet as far as diet goes. We eat what we need to survive, it's just that we are intelligent enough to make decisions and organize a system of agriculture to bring food to us, instead of having to hunt and gather like the old days. We can eat a large variety of foods, but so can most creatures. Target food does not exist. Competition does. Plenty of animals have nearly identical diets. There isn't a single thing we eat, that another creature on earth cannot. Yes, some are much healthier than others, and yes companies make processed foods for convenience, but we have the choice of how to eat. The target food concept is nonsense. It means nothing, since we can survive perfectly fine off the earth and have for millions of years.
edit on 19-2-2012 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 12:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by colin42
reply to post by iterationzero
 
Its a shame I can only give one star for your post.

I also hope Quad returns but I doubt it while this maddness continues.


edit on 19-2-2012 by colin42 because: (no reason given)


I agree
star for iterationzero. Quad can at least understand the concept of a debate unlike tooth who is dishonest and an outright liar.

In the mean time a new upload from AronRa




edit on 19-2-2012 by flyingfish because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 01:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 





It's not Tooth's beliefs that piss me off. It's his misunderstanding of evolutionary theory. He continues to boast about his knowledge about it, and almost every time, he has evolution completely wrong! You can't prove something wrong if you don't even know what you're disproving.
What exactly do I have wrong, be specific?



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 01:16 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 


Its all only because you fialed to realize that with what I have presented, evolution CAN'T exist.

Colin I don't get on here and just lie, I have no idea what your referring to.
edit on 19-2-2012 by itsthetooth because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 01:50 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





Your wrong again. If you had read the information I spoon fed to you it clearly shows ants do have trainers. Not in sports but in how to find things, perform actions but again you refused the invite to learn something.

You are the one that missed the point. You missed the point of this whole thread and purposely so.
I like how through your choice of dishonesty, you still choose to ignore the pointed out fact that they do these things naturaly, and we don't.

Quit being so dishonest Colin.




Unless you grow it yourself for your own use ALL food is produced for profit. The packageing is designed to shout out 'buy me'. Is life so very different in Spokane that you never see this?
Well I don't eat the packaging so there must be some mistake here. All food has some type of profit at least in the harvesting of it. Some charge more because its prepared and processed.
So now the question becoms why did we shy away from gathering our own food?
Is this perhaps a redundant question that stems back from different foods growing in different areas therefore they need to be shipped, and some packaged and shipped. I think some of it is at least.
So then the question becomes why did we choose to leave a lifestyle that equiped us with a fitted diet and accomidations?
There is a catch 22 here and I think you totally missed it this time and last time.
You see, there is no way we could have left such a suited lifestyle. If we had, we would have incorporated some of the original living needs into what we have today, assuming that is the best way for us. Instead we totally jumped out of the box and share no common arrangments at all.
Let me summerize this for you, we no longer:
hang from trees.
Throw poo.
Eat an excess diet of fruits.
Live in a better suited climate.
And just about anything else you can think of.

I argue that there would be no reason for us to leave a suited lifestyle but this of course is assuming our species didn't change. If it did, then we need to change. Where the catch here is was our decisions a change for the better, in other words would we be better off to go back even though we are a different species. I feel simply becuase of the climate issues, its better hands down. The reason we chose to move from that type of living style says a lot about us as a species. We are on the prowle for our suited lifestyle, which sad to say has still not been found to this day. And it wont, because once again we aren't from here.
So we failed to evolve, or like I like to say, we de-evolved. I understad this is very complicated and probably hard to grasp, but maybe after explaining it this way it will make more sense.

If we evolved, we sure did a sucky job of it. It makes no sense that a species like us would evolve backwards, and expect to make progress for the future, non at all, I'm sorry.

Of course there is this other possibility that I keep bringing up, that we never evolved to begin with, and were actually dumped here from another planet.




You bloody fool, not only is it in writing it is shown in the video clips provided. This information is in abundance on the internet. It is why many are facinated with ant society yet you ignore this and say 'I DONT AGREE THAT THEY DO IN FACT DO ALL THESE THINGS.' Your ignorance knows no bounds.

Even other creationists have used the ant as an argument FOR creation and a maker. You could have learned from this and strengthened your belief in the same time. You chose pig ignorance. (sorry pigs)
And now for the fourth time now you have kindly ignored my reply that ants do these things naturally and we don't. Quit be dishonest and address it.




So without any evidence you could say bee's, cows, chickens, crops and an extensive list past this ARE NOT FROM HERE. Your whole premise on trarget food is wrong from the title of 'Target food' onwards.
If they are in the bible, as being brought here for us, it is also written that nothing that was given to us is from our home. This means its not actually meant for us to eat, even though that was gods intention. This was all part of a punishement to disassociate us with our home planet and everything thats on it. Again, he was NOT a good guy.




You do not accept any challenge to your ideas. You refuse to discuss your ideas and the arguments against them. You certainly are not after the TRUTH.

My comment stands your agreement with Andersen is the biggest lie you have made yet
Now come on man, that is such a crock, I don't accept challenges. Why do you think I'm on this thread proving that we were dumped here. I only stand to get the highest resistance and the most negative feedback, all because I want someone to prove me wrong. I have tried to prove this wrong and I can't.



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 01:57 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





Again I have to tell you because it does not seem to sink in. You are using NATURAL in completely the wrong context. There is no such thing which is why you cannot provide a definition. Just as you cannot provide one for RELATIONSHIP
And you would be right this time, at least anytime you refer to human involvment, there is no such thing as natural.




The ants do the same things we do. If the ant is natural so are we.
I beg to differ, and just because you might have found some common things between us (some of which I question) the fact is we still live a processed life and they don't in the same way.




If we are not natural then neither is the ant unless of course you can provide evidence or make a reasoned argument against it but you plainly cannot.
Well sure I can. Humans suffere from what you can see as redundant adaptation. You can see almost everywhere that we are stumbling over our efforts to adapt and process. Lets pretend the ant does use processing as well, is it redundant, NO. its not. We still don't fit in here, and we never will.




Ah yes the hanging witness. You say you believe designed. I show evidence of evolved into that niche. The fact remains if you choose to accept ants are not from here then neither is the ant eater. If because of the anteater you insist ants are from here ALL of your evidence for man not being from here falls at you feet.

This is why you dishonestly cling to a desperate and unfounded argument that consists of ants are natural and humans are not.

Do you remember in a previous post you agreed that an exchange leads to knowledge? The above shows yet again I was correct in calling you dishonest.
Well lets call a spade a spade ok. Looking at the ant eater he can say unequivocally that ants are one of his target foods. What do humans have Colin??? Answer please ????



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 02:03 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





You have put forward unsubstantiated and plainly wrong comments. You have never made a reasoned argument for your statements but have rejected out of hand anyone that does.
I think what your describing here is called a strong debate.




Your claim of no one coming up with anything decent is akin to Nelson holding his spy glass to his blind eye and claiming 'I see no ships'.
I don't know who Nelson is, but I have been using both eyes.




Again please provide definition for natural in the context you are attempting to use it in.
I think redundancy in process can spot something not natural.




Your interpretation. Others with faith would disagree that is if you ever made an argument that would allow them or anyone else to disagree, or even agree.
Only if reading requires interpretation.




You have been given a truck load of documentation. The internet has an almost infinite source of more but you reject all out of hand, every dam thing.

There is no'FACT that we were not here all the time' and you have not made any valid arguments that supports your stance.

You refuse to discuss any points made or debate any points raised.

Definition of Argument:- an oral disagreement; verbal opposition; contention

Definition of Discussion:-consider or examine by argument, comment, etc.; talk over or write about, especially to explore solutions.

Debate:- Debate is a broader form of argument than logical argument, which only

Try it sometime. It helps on a discussion forum
There is no truck load, not even a letter dating back to biblical times or earlier, proving that evolution was in motion back then. Sorry man I don't buy it.



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 02:08 PM
link   
reply to post by iterationzero
 





I read a quote by James Randi today that, I think, sums up itsthetooth's rationale on the subject very well:


There exists in society a very special class of persons that I have always referred to as the Believers. These are folks who have chosen to accept a certain religion, philosophy, theory, idea or notion and cling to that belief regardless of any evidence that might, for anyone else, bring it into doubt. They are the ones who encourage and support the fanatics and the frauds of any given age. No amount of evidence, no matter how strong, will bring them any enlightenment. They are the sheep who beg to be fleeced and butchered, and who will battle fiercely to preserve their right to be victimized...

Itsthetooth is a perfect example of a Believer. My most recent reply to one of his posts, which was yet another example of itsthetooth's perfidy on the subject of evolution, will be my last reply to one of his posts in this thread. Hopefully Quad comes back and we can get some kind of actual discussion going again on the subject at hand.
Just one slight problem with this, if I'm encourageing and supporting fanatics, why am I on this thread doing it? Are you the said believer? Your completly wrong in your observation with me.

I'm on here to meet the strongest resistance that I possibly could. I knew before hand that hardcore believers are those in the evolution threads. They are strong willed and never willing to bend.
So I present what I have, and notice how I ask for anyone to please debate this and prove me wrong, and well, I'm still here. I'm convinced that intervention was the role that brought us here, and evoltuionists have been helping me prove it.



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 02:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Barcs
I just have to throw this out there, I'm feeling motivated again. Target food does not exist. In nature, food is not provided based on the demand, like modern day capitalism. All organisms need sustenance or they will die. It's that simple. There are 3 kinds of animals in regards to their diet. Herbivores, Carnivores and Omnivores. Herbivores eat mostly plants, carnivores eat mostly meat, and Omnivores eat both. Humans are omnivores, therefor the food we need to survive is everywhere. There isn't a target food. We eat whatever we can get a hold of. Today its different because we invented money and have medicine based on doctors who have studied the human body and what the healthiest foods are to eat. You can't ignore humans that survived hundreds of thousands of years without all this technology and deep knowledge of how things work.

No creature has a target food. They eat what they can find, or they die out. Some are better at obtaining certain foods than others. Humans are no different from any other creature on the planet as far as diet goes. We eat what we need to survive, it's just that we are intelligent enough to make decisions and organize a system of agriculture to bring food to us, instead of having to hunt and gather like the old days. We can eat a large variety of foods, but so can most creatures. Target food does not exist. Competition does. Plenty of animals have nearly identical diets. There isn't a single thing we eat, that another creature on earth cannot. Yes, some are much healthier than others, and yes companies make processed foods for convenience, but we have the choice of how to eat. The target food concept is nonsense. It means nothing, since we can survive perfectly fine off the earth and have for millions of years.
edit on 19-2-2012 by Barcs because: (no reason given)


Makes sense to me. What have you got to say tooth? Why do we need food that we are supposed to eat? ( Target food?) I don't see how this rules out evolution. Creatures create their own evolution, not the other way around.



new topics

top topics



 
31
<< 240  241  242    244  245  246 >>

log in

join