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: 257
31
<< 254  255  256    258  259  260 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 03:13 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





What world do you live in? Bones get eaten by many animals and spread around as well.
Sharks are probably the only species I know of that digest bones. More importantly I don't know of anything that specifically feeds on human type of bones.




Why have you started talking like a pirate? They have all been linked to humans, obviously
Well that would mean that they are either human, or a missing link and I haven't heard of any missing links.




They have but like ants, wolves, sparrows, balanced eco systems you have chosen to ignore the evidence to hold onto your childish nonsense that has none
Unless you know something I don't I have never heard of any of those bones being tied into any sub species of humans.




posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 03:36 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


Ok, tell me. What part of BONES BREAK DOWN do you not freaking understand?

In moist areas, bones will dissolve very quickly. In cold, dry areas it can take a little longer, upwards of a hundred years to a thousand years. Now, you're talking about finding BONES from millions of years ago. Are you stupid?



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 03:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


Ok, tell me. What part of BONES BREAK DOWN do you not freaking understand?

In moist areas, bones will dissolve very quickly. In cold, dry areas it can take a little longer, upwards of a hundred years to a thousand years. Now, you're talking about finding BONES from millions of years ago. Are you stupid?


But where are all the bones going? They don't just dissapear right?







posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 05:09 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



Sharks are probably the only species I know of that digest bones. More importantly I don't know of anything that specifically feeds on human type of bones.
I do not know how you manage with every post you make to get everything wrong. from Pigs, dogs, to worms all chomp bones. Nothing is wasted in nature except the money spent on your education.


Well that would mean that they are either human, or a missing link and I haven't heard of any missing links.
No it means these are another thing you refuse to consider.


Unless you know something I don't I have never heard of any of those bones being tied into any sub species of humans.
I know loads of things you dont know as I am prepared to learn.


edit on 24-2-2012 by colin42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 08:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 


So then how is it we are able to find dinasour bones, and they are even older?



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 09:40 PM
link   
hmmm..newgeology.us/presentation32 .html finally!!! the link had to be broken up to show dumb thing what about macroevolution not being proven
edit on 24-2-2012 by SpiritWolfPup because: (no reason given)

edit on 24-2-2012 by SpiritWolfPup because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 11:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by Varemia
 


So then how is it we are able to find dinasour bones, and they are even older?


Do you even think before you post
Dinosaurs ruled the Earth for 160 million years! it is special when we find fossils.
You also fail and ignore the fact that even if we have never even found fossils, evolution is still obvious.
Let the tooth flogging continue!! others are learning from your stupidity, your only fooling yourself.
edit on 25-2-2012 by flyingfish because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 11:11 AM
link   
reply to post by flyingfish
 





Do you even think before you post Dinosaurs ruled the Earth for 160 million years! it is special when we find fossils.
You also fail and ignore the fact that even if we have never even found fossils, evolution is still obvious.
Let the tooth flogging continue!! others are learning from your stupidity, your only fooling yourself.
Well seeing how there is no bones proving a missing link, and only common ancestors, pretty much squares it up. There is no such thing as evoltuion.



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 11:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by Varemia
 


So then how is it we are able to find dinasour bones, and they are even older?


Fossils. Do you understand the words coming off of my keyboard?



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 11:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by flyingfish
 





Do you even think before you post Dinosaurs ruled the Earth for 160 million years! it is special when we find fossils.
You also fail and ignore the fact that even if we have never even found fossils, evolution is still obvious.
Let the tooth flogging continue!! others are learning from your stupidity, your only fooling yourself.
Well seeing how there is no bones proving a missing link, and only common ancestors, pretty much squares it up. There is no such thing as evoltuion.


Newsflash for people who care about facts:

There are THOUSANDS of fossils proving common descent!

I have to ask tooth, are you a troll or simply stupid? Because you keep on repeating this claim even though you've been shown 100% wrong about a gazillion times in this thread. This isn't a matter of you not knowing anymore, it's simply you ignoring facts on purpose...and even worse...you try to dumb down others with your ignorance.



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 11:52 AM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



Well seeing how there is no bones proving a missing link, and only common ancestors, pretty much squares it up. There is no such thing as evoltuion.



Well seeing how there is no bones proving a missing link,
I did not know missing links had bones?


and only common ancestors, pretty much squares it up.
Yep we have the transitional fossils as you have been linked too


There is no such thing as evoltuion.
Correct. Evolution is not a thing it is a descriptive name used to describe the process.

Edit
Here is maybe another reason
Paleolithic religion

Religious behaviour is thought to have emerged by the Upper Paleolithic, before 30,000 years ago at the latest,[1] but behavioral patterns such as burial rites that one might characterize as religious - or as ancestral to religious behaviour - reach back into the Middle Paleolithic, as early as 300,000 years ago, coinciding with the first appearance of Homo neanderthalensis and Homo sapiens. Religious behaviour may combine (for example) ritual, spirituality, mythology and magical thinking or animism - aspects that may have had separate histories of development during the Middle Paleolithic before combining into "religion proper" of behavioral modernity

So when did our ancestors begin performing rituals around the death of group members and what form may it have taken?

There are many in practice even today. From cannibalism, burial through cremation to encouraging scavengers to disperse the corpse. Sometimes this helps when investigating ancient sites.

Our early ancestors would be unlikely to dig deep holes and so the dispersal or destruction may also decrease the amount of fossils we find even further than what has already been described that early man lived in places where the chance of fossilisation is very rare.

So the fact we have so many is really due to the vigilance of a few dedicated investigators
edit on 25-2-2012 by colin42 because: Link added

edit on 25-2-2012 by colin42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 12:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by flyingfish
 





Do you even think before you post Dinosaurs ruled the Earth for 160 million years! it is special when we find fossils.
You also fail and ignore the fact that even if we have never even found fossils, evolution is still obvious.
Let the tooth flogging continue!! others are learning from your stupidity, your only fooling yourself.
Well seeing how there is no bones proving a missing link, and only common ancestors, pretty much squares it up. There is no such thing as evoltuion.


There is no such thing as a missing link, it is myth. The chain link myth is a misconception that origins are linear and straightforward. Origins are a far more complicated affair. Evolution is more like a tree with roots, branches, twigs into leaves. There are dead ends and pitfalls with hundreds of ancestral cousins becoming extinct.
Learn more



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 12:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrXYZ

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by flyingfish
 





Do you even think before you post Dinosaurs ruled the Earth for 160 million years! it is special when we find fossils.
You also fail and ignore the fact that even if we have never even found fossils, evolution is still obvious.
Let the tooth flogging continue!! others are learning from your stupidity, your only fooling yourself.
Well seeing how there is no bones proving a missing link, and only common ancestors, pretty much squares it up. There is no such thing as evoltuion.


Newsflash for people who care about facts:

There are THOUSANDS of fossils proving common descent!

I have to ask tooth, are you a troll or simply stupid? Because you keep on repeating this claim even though you've been shown 100% wrong about a gazillion times in this thread. This isn't a matter of you not knowing anymore, it's simply you ignoring facts on purpose...and even worse...you try to dumb down others with your ignorance.

I think tooth is probably smarter than he leads on, I believe he's misleading on purpose. He's probably a leader of some church and is simply towing the line. It is his duty to keep the lie alive.



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 12:32 PM
link   


There are many in practice even today. From cannibalism, burial through cremation to encouraging scavengers to disperse the corpse. Sometimes this helps when investigating ancient sites. Our early ancestors would be unlikely to dig deep holes and so the dispersal or destruction may also decrease the amount of fossils we find even further than what has already been described that early man lived in places where the chance of fossilisation is very rare.
reply to post by colin42
 

Good point.
Just the other day I saw a show about sky burial. I was slightly shocked not for the dead but for the guys in charge of the ritual. Seemed gruesome and over the top for me, but yea what a send off!



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by Barcs
 


Oh ok, and I assume things can't possibly change order in one shot, it takes several turns in millions of years.


That's correct.

Now I smile like a proud dad watching his only son that made it.



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 01:31 PM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 





Newsflash for people who care about facts:

There are THOUSANDS of fossils proving common descent!

I have to ask tooth, are you a troll or simply stupid? Because you keep on repeating this claim even though you've been shown 100% wrong about a gazillion times in this thread. This isn't a matter of you not knowing anymore, it's simply you ignoring facts on purpose...and even worse...you try to dumb down others with your ignorance.
I didn't see any specifically on that link that were ruled as proven common ancestors.

I don't know people, I think its a little odd that we can find and test bones proven to be related to us, those not related to us, but none that recently decended from us. It tells me once again they just don't exist.



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 01:35 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


Common descent isn't even in doubt..there's soooooooo much evidence.

But let me guess, you will just pretend all that evidence doesn't exist to spread your ignorance and continue to dumb down people on here in the process?



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 01:38 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





Well seeing how there is no bones proving a missing link,
I did not know missing links had bones?
Well there is simply none herre.




and only common ancestors, pretty much squares it up.

Yep we have the transitional fossils as you have been linked too
I was given the link for transitional fossils but have yet to see anything that proves they exist.



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 01:42 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





So when did our ancestors begin performing rituals around the death of group members and what form may it have taken?
Well they aren't sure, its clearly written to be a thought.




Our early ancestors would be unlikely to dig deep holes and so the dispersal or destruction may also decrease the amount of fossils we find even further than what has already been described that early man lived in places where the chance of fossilisation is very rare.

So the fact we have so many is really due to the vigilance of a few dedicated investigators
I see, so when it comes to direct decent ancestors, those always got buarried so deep that no fossils remain. But out of the other 2.5 fossils we have found, they didn't practice the same burial techniques. They only buaried them deep when they knew they were a direct ancesotr.



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 01:45 PM
link   
reply to post by flyingfish
 





There is no such thing as a missing link, it is myth. The chain link myth is a misconception that origins are linear and straightforward. Origins are a far more complicated affair. Evolution is more like a tree with roots, branches, twigs into leaves. There are dead ends and pitfalls with hundreds of ancestral cousins becoming extinct.
Learn more
Ok fine, so there is never any bones of direct decent. Call it what you want, they still don't exist. Darwin was right, if he was never able to find any, then he knew that his theory was all wrong.

This is the same reason why the new term common ancestor was to repalce the missing link term, it was also to exclude darwins ideas from that point forward. I'm sorry but I think he was right, no bones, no proof, no theory.



new topics

top topics



 
31
<< 254  255  256    258  259  260 >>

log in

join