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: 280
31
<< 277  278  279    281  282  283 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 5 2012 @ 05:23 PM
link   
reply to post by BlackSatinDancer
 





i don't know, man.

this monkey brain shlt would explain a lot about some of the guys i've dated.


lol... no, i just can't wrap my head around this and they seem to just make excuse after excuse but they don't even understand OUR CURRENT DNA fully.

lofty claims, lofty claims...
Dont be so quick to throw in the towel. I have yet to be issued an evolution link that doesn't say its a hypothetical or postualted theory. At least the links they have been sending me to are telling the truth.




posted on Mar, 5 2012 @ 05:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Toothache
Isn't it obvious that the homo genus originated on Venus? There was a time, millions of years ago when Venus had a viable climate, oceans and an atmosphere comparable to our own today. Nuclear wars polluted the atmosphere so badly that the only option was escape. They used the best of their technology to save a chosen few. They crash landed in Africa, amongst early Australopithecus. The rest is history. Evolution is still real. Just different.


Interesting, I guess I'd like to see the evidence that Venus was ever inhabitable by us. I've heard Earth resides in a very small "safety zone" that I am pretty sure Venus is not in.



posted on Mar, 5 2012 @ 10:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by HappyBunny

Originally posted by SplitInfinity

Originally posted by sykonot
I can prove all humans fallible.

See any topic regarding the Earth being flat.

We were CERTAIN!

hmmm


In Reality...there are drawings or paintings on some type of Tree Bark or Reed paper that were drawn by Cro-Magnon Man....this is what Homo Sapiens were evolved from...they looked like us...had a slightly larger Brain than us....and even though statisticly they were a bit taller...you or I would find it near impossible to determine who was Cro-Magnon or Homo Sapien in a line up.

These drawings or paintings of the Moon...showed an art form known as SHADOWING....including some Lunar Crators that can bee seen with the naked eye...that prove beyond a doubt...some Groups of Cro-Magnon 40 to 60 thousand years ago KNEW THE MOON AND EARTH were NOT FLAT! They knew they were round.
Split Infinity


So that means they had to get their information from aliens? They weren't bright enough to figure it out for themselves?

Cro Magnon were us. Period. They don't even call them Cro Magnon anymore even though we use it for convenience because most people have heard of them. The new term is Early Modern Humans, although we now know they weren't early at all and that anatomically modern people have been around for more than 100,000 years.
Happy Bunny....I hope you were not responding to me since I have already stated that Homosapiens are Cro Magnon evolved and they became us. They had even larger brains than we did and the HUMAN GENOME PROJECT shows NO EVIDENCE of Genetic Tampering by E.T. or anything else besides Viral Infections and other Disease. Split Infinity



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 07:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by SplitInfinity

Originally posted by HappyBunny

Originally posted by SplitInfinity

Originally posted by sykonot
I can prove all humans fallible.

See any topic regarding the Earth being flat.

We were CERTAIN!

hmmm


In Reality...there are drawings or paintings on some type of Tree Bark or Reed paper that were drawn by Cro-Magnon Man....this is what Homo Sapiens were evolved from...they looked like us...had a slightly larger Brain than us....and even though statisticly they were a bit taller...you or I would find it near impossible to determine who was Cro-Magnon or Homo Sapien in a line up.

These drawings or paintings of the Moon...showed an art form known as SHADOWING....including some Lunar Crators that can bee seen with the naked eye...that prove beyond a doubt...some Groups of Cro-Magnon 40 to 60 thousand years ago KNEW THE MOON AND EARTH were NOT FLAT! They knew they were round.
Split Infinity


So that means they had to get their information from aliens? They weren't bright enough to figure it out for themselves?

Cro Magnon were us. Period. They don't even call them Cro Magnon anymore even though we use it for convenience because most people have heard of them. The new term is Early Modern Humans, although we now know they weren't early at all and that anatomically modern people have been around for more than 100,000 years.
Happy Bunny....I hope you were not responding to me since I have already stated that Homosapiens are Cro Magnon evolved and they became us. They had even larger brains than we did and the HUMAN GENOME PROJECT shows NO EVIDENCE of Genetic Tampering by E.T. or anything else besides Viral Infections and other Disease. Split Infinity


Hi Split,

That was yesterday and I couldn't tell you who I was responding to, to be honest.
I'm glad we're on the same page, although I'd argue that viruses have played a huge part in transforming our genome.



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 07:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by BlackSatinDancer

The charts claim to go back 15MYA and this is 13MYA so he should be in there, right?


WTF are you talking about?

I guess you missed this one that I posted yesterday in your haste to try to obliterate my argument. (Fail, by the way.) Like Toothy, you don't READ anything before you post. You just react and run your motor mouth without grasping the subject material:

en.wikipedia.org...


so now tell me which one of your links is false, because it must be one or the other.


Neither is false. You're just not understanding the material.


also, this is pretty indicative that it's not coming from this touted knowledge of the filed but that you searched for it being unhappy with your last attempt and now you have three different links which show inconsistencies which each other. k


How are they inconsistent?


BRAVO!!!

Good job!

also, i love the "believed by SOME part"

Who was it that kept saying BUT ITS PROVEN FACT.

Uh, this sounds like theory "believed by some"...yep, that's what it says.


Address the points, please. You're sounding like a damned fool shooting your mouth off again.

Here's a tip: If you don't know what you're talking about, it's better to not say anything at all. Everybody else understands the material, and if you'd bother to try to understand what you're reading, you probably would, too.


forget 13MYA... You have to go back further than that now if homo was lumped in with gibbons 15MYA, but this pieroapithecus lived 13MYA.


Homo as a genus did not exist until around 2.4 or so million years ago. What part of that are you not understanding?

I listed the extant genera for each family. If you don't know what "extant" means, go look it up.

Obviously you did not read the last sentence:


Rather than a full common ancestor, it has been suggested that the species may be ancestral to humans, chimpanzees and gorillas but not orangutans, given certain characteristics of the face.


There's your 13 million years. Any other questions?


that in itself suggest right there it is NOT the common ANCESTOR (meaning they lived prior to the lesser apes, not BEFORE and prior to the great apes, not DURING)


I think we just took care of this.


suggesting that what this really is, is just another primate who MIGHT have a common ancestor with humans and other apes... but is not in itself a common ancestor and for #S SAKE... you ought to have the sense to know that right off the bat, because it is a PRIMATE, not a hominid.. or hominid closer to primates. it is simply describes as primate and doesn't seem to me to have more compelling likenesses that to humans than any other primate. making it DOUBTFULLY the common ancestor of what humans branched from.


Dude, watch your mouth, seriously.


common sense common sense.

not to mention as the article states, in spain?


I see no problem with that. Apes, and hominids, live all over Africa and Asia and once existed as far north as the British Isles.


13MYA... the common ancestor of apes living in africa around that time or before to 15MYA

GENIUS!
edit on 5-3-2012 by BlackSatinDancer because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-3-2012 by BlackSatinDancer because: (no reason given)


You don't know what we mean by "common ancestor", do you? It's okay, you can admit it. The rest of your post is just gibberish.

Try reconstructing your thoughts and post something coherent.
edit on 3/6/2012 by HappyBunny because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 09:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by andersensrm
It isn't just about physical appearance but that accounts for a lot. We have the same tendencies as well, we use tools, hunt, gather, socialize. We have a lot of similar traits, of course when you go, well I don't see their cars or buildings so they aren't anything like us. Makes no sense at all. African bushmen are more like apes, in that they live off the land, rather than technological industry, does that make them a different species?


And honestly, there are only a few distinct differences. Here are a few:

1. less hair
2. upright walking
3. bigger brain
4. chin

Other than that, we have the same skeletal structure, the same organs, the same teeth, the same everything.



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 10:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 





And honestly, there are only a few distinct differences. Here are a few:

1. less hair
2. upright walking
3. bigger brain
4. chin

Other than that, we have the same skeletal structure, the same organs, the same teeth, the same everything.
Shows you what you know Varema. Our brain is four times the size. I would say thats a little more than just bigger.



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 11:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
Shows you what you know Varema. Our brain is four times the size. I would say thats a little more than just bigger.


Hm, nope. Bigger applies to that. If you observe the fossils, you can see a trend of increasing brain size. Technically, Neanderthals had bigger brains than us, but they had more robust bodies, so the brain-to-body ratio that we use to estimate intelligence is about equal. Other animals with large brains include dolphins and crows. Even chimps have large brains, just not as large as ours.

I'm really not sure what you're trying to argue here except how ignorant you truly are.



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 02:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 


Well I'm just arguing the obvious, that there is no way we could have evolved with a larger brain and fewer chromosomes.



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 03:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by Varemia
 


Well I'm just arguing the obvious, that there is no way we could have evolved with a larger brain and fewer chromosomes.


Could have sworn that the natural fusion of two chromosomes and environmental pressures to pass down the genes for more intelligence was already explained to you... multiple damn times. You have literally zero reading comprehension.



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 04:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Varemia

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by Varemia
 


Well I'm just arguing the obvious, that there is no way we could have evolved with a larger brain and fewer chromosomes.


Could have sworn that the natural fusion of two chromosomes and environmental pressures to pass down the genes for more intelligence was already explained to you... multiple damn times. You have literally zero reading comprehension.

This is why I am now primarily a passive observer on this thread.

Will still contribute when new, thought provoking issues arise.

keep up the good work guy, deny that ignorance.



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 10:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 





Could have sworn that the natural fusion of two chromosomes and environmental pressures to pass down the genes for more intelligence was already explained to you... multiple damn times. You have literally zero reading comprehension.
Well it was first explained to me as an event that only occurs in labratorys. If your talking about me just taking any joe shmoes word over that, no I haven't.

This came from a well known author and I tend to have a tad more faith in an author than someone off this thread that say doesn't have those type of credentials.



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 11:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by Varemia
 





Could have sworn that the natural fusion of two chromosomes and environmental pressures to pass down the genes for more intelligence was already explained to you... multiple damn times. You have literally zero reading comprehension.
Well it was first explained to me as an event that only occurs in labratorys. If your talking about me just taking any joe shmoes word over that, no I haven't.

This came from a well known author and I tend to have a tad more faith in an author than someone off this thread that say doesn't have those type of credentials.



I've given you plenty of authors. You seem to think that only YOUR authors are true. That's faith, and you damn well know it.



posted on Mar, 7 2012 @ 10:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 





I've given you plenty of authors. You seem to think that only YOUR authors are true. That's faith, and you damn well know it.
I seriously don't recall any links you have sent me about fused genes in DNA.



posted on Mar, 7 2012 @ 12:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by Varemia
 





I've given you plenty of authors. You seem to think that only YOUR authors are true. That's faith, and you damn well know it.
I seriously don't recall any links you have sent me about fused genes in DNA.


Here's a page that cites books written by people all down the page.
www.gate.net...

The wikipedia has a number of references at the bottome:
en.wikipedia.org...(human)

Get crackin.



posted on Mar, 7 2012 @ 07:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 


Today researchers announce they have completed the genome sequence for the gorilla. The data shows that much of the human genome more closely resembles the gorilla than it does the chimpanzee genome. It turns out that 15% of the human genome is closer to the gorilla genome.



"Our most significant findings reveal not only differences between the species reflecting millions of years of evolutionary divergence, but also similarities in parallel changes over time since their common ancestor," says Dr Chris Tyler-Smith, senior author from the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute. "We found that gorillas share many parallel genetic changes with humans including the evolution of our hearing. Scientists had suggested that the rapid evolution of human hearing genes was linked to the evolution of language. Our results cast doubt on this, as hearing genes have evolved in gorillas at a similar rate to those in humans."


Source



posted on Mar, 7 2012 @ 10:05 PM
link   
reply to post by HappyBunny
 

Bunny...that is what I said...Viral Infections are all throughout the Human Genome as well as all lifes genome.

The Funny thing is...a VIRUS...is NOT ALIVE. The guys that won the Nobel Prize on their work on Virus was won in the catagory of CHEMISTRY...NOT BIOLOGY. A VIRUS is a non-living molecule that multiplies only when it gets into a host. Split Infinity



posted on Mar, 8 2012 @ 09:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
Well it was first explained to me as an event that only occurs in labratorys. If your talking about me just taking any joe shmoes word over that, no I haven't.

This came from a well known author and I tend to have a tad more faith in an author than someone off this thread that say doesn't have those type of credentials.


But yet you don't believe actual scientific experiments done by professionals and experts in the field.
Sorry a "well known" author does not have more credibility than a scientist who specializes in biology and has studied it for decades.
edit on 8-3-2012 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 8 2012 @ 11:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 





Here's a page that cites books written by people all down the page.
It would appear they are trying to justify the fusion. I take it with a grain of salt since it is written by an evolutionist.

As I have stated before there is a striking match in our chromosomes, but I don't agree that we are related.
It is even possible that we were an engineered species that someone used these other parts from.

I don't agree with the evolutionists about this. Just because the chromosomes appear to have matched in natural causes, doesn't mean that's proof it did.

It reminds me of every time there is a discussion on here about something in the wild. We give so much credibility to things in the wild not being tampered with, when the fact is, we don't know.



posted on Mar, 8 2012 @ 11:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Barcs
 





But yet you don't believe actual scientific experiments done by professionals and experts in the field. Sorry a "well known" author does not have more credibility than a scientist who specializes in biology and has studied it for decades.
And your telling me YOU have these credentials?



new topics

top topics



 
31
<< 277  278  279    281  282  283 >>

log in

join