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: 281
31
<< 278  279  280    282  283  284 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 8 2012 @ 01:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
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.


It sounds like you classify anyone who disagrees with you as an evolutionist. Shall I reverse your technique onto you and refuse to even read the words of anyone who hints at believing that aliens or God created/deposited man? They are all creationists/depositists. There, now I don't have to listen to any of them. They're all biased.

What I'm trying to show here is that you are being an ignorant dolt by telling me that you are ignoring the professional opinions of people because their opinion puts them in your arbitrary category of evolutionist.




posted on Mar, 8 2012 @ 02:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
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?


Nope, but the people who conducted the countless science experiments that prove evolution do.

There's no such thing as an evolutionist. They are BIOLOGISTS.
edit on 8-3-2012 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 9 2012 @ 07:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
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



In biochemistry, when you take out the biology, you're left with pure chemistry. Not surprised that he won in chemistry considering there is no such thing as a Nobel in biology. Even Watson and Crick won the Nobel in Physiology or Medicine.

A virus isn't technically alive, yes, in that it needs a host in order to replicate its RNA or DNA. But it's not a molecule, either. As someone once put it, it's a "piece of nucleic acid surrounded by bad news." Yet it is infectious. And their evolution is something of a mystery. Some seemed to have evolved from plasmids, others from bacteria. Now, plasmids ARE DNA molecules that CAN replicate independently of chromosomal DNA. (See replicons.)

Have you ever heard of prions? It may be that we need to expand our definition of life. Have you ever read Erwin Schroedinger's What is Life?



posted on Mar, 9 2012 @ 07:29 AM
link   
Accidental double post.
edit on 3/9/2012 by HappyBunny because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 9 2012 @ 08:25 AM
link   
reply to post by HappyBunny
 


Question about prions-- if someone was on a very severe diet, would the neural tissue metabolize the prions for calories?

Is it possible that humans were on a different line all the way from our dinosaur ancestors? As in none of our actual preceeding species have been found? Analigously to two species of fish that split 200 million years ago but still look similar.



posted on Mar, 9 2012 @ 08:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Semicollegiate
reply to post by HappyBunny
 


Question about prions-- if someone was on a very severe diet, would the neural tissue metabolize the prions for calories?


That's a good question and I don't know if that's ever been addressed, so I'm just going to guess. You wouldn't live long enough to worry about it. But if the neural tissue did do that, you'd literally have to be starving to death first. Prion diseases are caused by aberrant metabolism of the cellular prion proteins to begin with. In the absence of adequate carbohydrates, the body will burn fat next. Protein of any kind would be the absolute last resort, and the body won't distinguish between a bicep and an internal organ, either. And ALL of those calories will go to feeding the brain. That's why so many starving people die from multiple organ failure--the heart, liver, and kidneys get sacrificed to keep the brain alive.



Is it possible that humans were on a different line all the way from our dinosaur ancestors? As in none of our actual preceeding species have been found? Analigously to two species of fish that split 200 million years ago but still look similar.


Well, genetics and Hox genes tell a different story.
edit on 3/9/2012 by HappyBunny because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 9 2012 @ 08:59 AM
link   
reply to post by HappyBunny
 


Aren't the Hox genes the ones we have in common with every animal. They are the general body layout genes right? Like head goes on neck goes on chest etc.

The longevity diet uses exersice to keep the metabolism up rather than calorie intake. If you consume at the starvation level (with copious vitamins cofactors and whatnot) but exersice alot, the metabolism eats everything that is not being exersiced and slows down. If there was a complete list of things that the brain does, then the brain could be exersiced the same way and all the bad sruff would be metabolized.

All emotions, all skills, all perspectives, all recreations every day. Or maybe fantasy visualisations would be enough, if there was a list.
edit on 9-3-2012 by Semicollegiate because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 9 2012 @ 09:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Semicollegiate
reply to post by HappyBunny
 


Aren't the Hox genes the ones we have in common with every animal. They are the general body layout genes right? Like head goes on neck goes on chest etc.


That's right. And we can see how we developed hands from flippers and fins.


The longevity diet uses exersice to keep the metabolism up rather than calorie intake. If you consume at the starvation level (with copious vitamins cofactors and whatnot) but exersice alot, the metabolism eats everything that is not being exersiced and slows down. If there was a complete list of things that the brain does, then the brain could be exersiced the same way and all the bad sruff would be metabolized.

Why would anybody want to eat at the starvation level? It is impossible to eat that few calories and get all the nutrients your body needs. I'm not a big fan of vitamins. If you eat a variety of foods, you'll meet all your nutritional needs. What we have now is a society in which calories are more than adequate, but they're nutrient-poor.

In my professional opinion, what you're advocating is borderline eating disorder.

Exercise does keep your metabolism up. What that means is that the mitochondria are firing on all cylinders. And you need energy input--ie, food--to do that. You also need plenty of water. The more you exercise, the more you can eat. It's that simple.

If you do it wrong, you'll actually gain weight. It's total calories. Where those calories come from doesn't really matter that much.

Longevity is as much a product of genetics as it is environment.


All emotions, all skills, all perspectives, all recreations every day. Or maybe fantasy visualisations would be enough, if there was a list.
edit on 9-3-2012 by Semicollegiate because: (no reason given)


Sorry, not following you?



posted on Mar, 9 2012 @ 10:13 AM
link   
reply to post by HappyBunny
 


A thorough mental exersice regimen could activate all of the neurons in the brain every day so as to promote an increase in the metabolism of every neuron. The object being to metabolise the bad stuff inside the blood-brain barrier.

I am wondering how many different types of activity the brain does so as to make a thorough exersice list. Kinda like decathalon or body-building for the brain. Just wondering.

Do we have any genes in common with plants? Maybe some carbohydrate metabolism or protien structure genes. Or the basic Eukaryotic gene.

I agree that health is in the genes to some extent. Health is also dependant on getting protien and nutrients during childhood.

Most of the theory (tested and confirmed in lab rodents) behind the longevity program is that when you eat at some low calorie intake your metabolism slows down and so you age slowly. You must exersice then to keep healing with your slowed metabolism.

This longevity program seems to assume that you are born with all of the stem cells that are used in your entire life and so you slow your metabolism to save them as long as possible. Also less intake into your body means fewer toxins and carcinogens taken into your body.

If your body makes stem cells in response some knid of stess or stimulation then that would be a better strategy, maybe.

edit on 9-3-2012 by Semicollegiate because: (no reason given)

edit on 9-3-2012 by Semicollegiate because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 9 2012 @ 10:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 





It sounds like you classify anyone who disagrees with you as an evolutionist. Shall I reverse your technique onto you and refuse to even read the words of anyone who hints at believing that aliens or God created/deposited man? They are all creationists/depositists. There, now I don't have to listen to any of them. They're all biased.

What I'm trying to show here is that you are being an ignorant dolt by telling me that you are ignoring the professional opinions of people because their opinion puts them in your arbitrary category of evolutionist.
Only cause they tend to be biased. I also find that a lot of the material seems to be open to interpretation, and I don't get out of it what you do. I always seem to get stuck where they are pointing out that it is a postulated hypothetical theory, and I accept what they are saying. I think anyone that wants to know the truth should heed those words and realize that they are telling you right off the bat that the theory is not proven.

I for one think there is a very good reason why that is, and its not explainable by another theory.
edit on 9-3-2012 by itsthetooth because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 9 2012 @ 10:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Barcs
 





Nope, but the people who conducted the countless science experiments that prove evolution do.

There's no such thing as an evolutionist. They are BIOLOGISTS.
Well that depends on if you think evolution is real or a belief. I think its a belief. I haven't been provided with any information yet that doesn't say its a postulated or hypothetical theory.

Maybe its simply because they know they can't prove or witness macro evolution.



posted on Mar, 9 2012 @ 10:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
Only cause they tend to be biased. I also find that a lot of the material seems to be open to interpretation, and I don't get out of it what you do. I always seem to get stuck where they are pointing out that it is a postulated hypothetical theory, and I accept what they are saying. I think anyone that wants to know the truth should heed those words and realize that they are telling you right off the bat that the theory is not proven.

I for one think there is a very good reason why that is, and its not explainable by another theory.
edit on 9-3-2012 by itsthetooth because: (no reason given)


So why then do you accept the word of these other guys? There's no logical reason for you to give more credit to science fiction authors.



posted on Mar, 9 2012 @ 10:47 AM
link   
reply to post by HappyBunny
 





Originally posted by Semicollegiate
reply to post by HappyBunny


Aren't the Hox genes the ones we have in common with every animal. They are the general body layout genes right? Like head goes on neck goes on chest etc.



That's right. And we can see how we developed hands from flippers and fins.

The longevity diet uses exersice to keep the metabolism up rather than calorie intake. If you consume at the starvation level (with copious vitamins cofactors and whatnot) but exersice alot, the metabolism eats everything that is not being exersiced and slows down. If there was a complete list of things that the brain does, then the brain could be exersiced the same way and all the bad sruff would be metabolized.


Why would anybody want to eat at the starvation level? It is impossible to eat that few calories and get all the nutrients your body needs. I'm not a big fan of vitamins. If you eat a variety of foods, you'll meet all your nutritional needs. What we have now is a society in which calories are more than adequate, but they're nutrient-poor.

In my professional opinion, what you're advocating is borderline eating disorder.

Exercise does keep your metabolism up. What that means is that the mitochondria are firing on all cylinders. And you need energy input--ie, food--to do that. You also need plenty of water. The more you exercise, the more you can eat. It's that simple.

If you do it wrong, you'll actually gain weight. It's total calories. Where those calories come from doesn't really matter that much.

Longevity is as much a product of genetics as it is environment.

All emotions, all skills, all perspectives, all recreations every day. Or maybe fantasy visualisations would be enough, if there was a list.


You are simply suffering from something called denial.
I have explained many times over why our diet situation is what it is, and you are wrong about simply eating the right foods to be healthy. You would have to simultaneously live on 4 continents, and gorge yourself on a variety of foods to be tip top healthy. The bottom line is, we are all suffering to some degree in nutrition. This food that we eat is NOT OUR FOOD. Its even clear in the bible that we were given many things to help us but that none of those things are from home. In other words, its not our intended food. Supplements, dietitians, exercise, diet related sickness are all part of this bigger picture.

The bottom line is we aren't from here, we don't belong here, this planet is and will continue to reject us. This is why I'm on this thread talking about this. Evolution is the biggest crock when your missing the most important part of whats really going on. Earth is NOT our home, it even tells us in the bible, so its documented.
edit on 9-3-2012 by itsthetooth because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 9 2012 @ 10:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 





So why then do you accept the word of these other guys? There's no logical reason for you to give more credit to science fiction authors.
Well it depends on a lot of other factors. I would research the person to see if anyone has challenged them on the claims. Aside from that, if they are strictly listed as a sci-fi writer then of course I would know that. Pye as an example is a writer of both non fiction and sci fi. I would have to ask you the same thing seeing how all the link I have been sent to are postulated hypothetical theory's, making them obviously sci fi. What is your excuse?



posted on Mar, 9 2012 @ 11:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by HappyBunny
 





Originally posted by Semicollegiate
reply to post by HappyBunny


Aren't the Hox genes the ones we have in common with every animal. They are the general body layout genes right? Like head goes on neck goes on chest etc.



That's right. And we can see how we developed hands from flippers and fins.

The longevity diet uses exersice to keep the metabolism up rather than calorie intake. If you consume at the starvation level (with copious vitamins cofactors and whatnot) but exersice alot, the metabolism eats everything that is not being exersiced and slows down. If there was a complete list of things that the brain does, then the brain could be exersiced the same way and all the bad sruff would be metabolized.


Why would anybody want to eat at the starvation level? It is impossible to eat that few calories and get all the nutrients your body needs. I'm not a big fan of vitamins. If you eat a variety of foods, you'll meet all your nutritional needs. What we have now is a society in which calories are more than adequate, but they're nutrient-poor.

In my professional opinion, what you're advocating is borderline eating disorder.

Exercise does keep your metabolism up. What that means is that the mitochondria are firing on all cylinders. And you need energy input--ie, food--to do that. You also need plenty of water. The more you exercise, the more you can eat. It's that simple.

If you do it wrong, you'll actually gain weight. It's total calories. Where those calories come from doesn't really matter that much.

Longevity is as much a product of genetics as it is environment.

All emotions, all skills, all perspectives, all recreations every day. Or maybe fantasy visualisations would be enough, if there was a list.


You are simply suffering from something called denial.


And you're suffering from something called delusions.


I have explained many times over why our diet situation is what it is, and you are wrong about simply eating the right foods to be healthy. You would have to simultaneously live on 4 continents, and gorge yourself on a variety of foods to be tip top healthy. The bottom line is, we are all suffering to some degree in nutrition. This food that we eat is NOT OUR FOOD. Its even clear in the bible that we were given many things to help us but that none of those things are from home. In other words, its not our intended food. Supplements, dietitians, exercise, diet related sickness are all part of this bigger picture.

The bottom line is we aren't from here, we don't belong here, this planet is and will continue to reject us. This is why I'm on this thread talking about this. Evolution is the biggest crock when your missing the most important part of whats really going on. Earth is NOT our home, it even tells us in the bible, so its documented.
edit on 9-3-2012 by itsthetooth because: (no reason given)


You know what, Toothy? Butt out. I do this for a living and have for the last 20+ years. You don't and I think it's safe to say you don't know what you're talking about.



posted on Mar, 9 2012 @ 11:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by Varemia
 





So why then do you accept the word of these other guys? There's no logical reason for you to give more credit to science fiction authors.
Well it depends on a lot of other factors. I would research the person to see if anyone has challenged them on the claims. Aside from that, if they are strictly listed as a sci-fi writer then of course I would know that. Pye as an example is a writer of both non fiction and sci fi. I would have to ask you the same thing seeing how all the link I have been sent to are postulated hypothetical theory's, making them obviously sci fi. What is your excuse?


No, theories which have been tested in a lab, observed by hundreds of thousands of scientists, and accepted and debated at scientific panels are decidedly NOT science fiction.

You would have to be a moron to accept the WORD of a random guy writing a book for money over scientific discourse. I mean, you don't have to accept everything the scientific community comes out with, but you should understand that it's not just musings of some guy's imagination (which is technically what your guys do). It's a conglomeration of ideas backed up by evidence and critiqued by literally thousands of people.

So your excuse is that you just trust your guys to never lie. My excuse is that I am an active member in scientific discussions. When new evidence shows up, the theories are adjusted to be more in line with reality. When new evidence shows up against the ideas of your guys, you just dismiss it as made up stuff by "evolutionists."

Do you not see the hypocrisy?



posted on Mar, 9 2012 @ 11:14 AM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


Well then how in the world did these people survive?

en.wikipedia.org...

They ate food only within a hundred mile radius, yet they were healthy as ever. I've read some places that eating locally is good for the immune system too, because you will adopt antibodies from some foods and become resistant to an area's diseases.

well.blogs.nytimes.com...



posted on Mar, 9 2012 @ 11:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Semicollegiate
reply to post by HappyBunny
 


A thorough mental exersice regimen could activate all of the neurons in the brain every day so as to promote an increase in the metabolism of every neuron. The object being to metabolise the bad stuff inside the blood-brain barrier.

I am wondering how many different types of activity the brain does so as to make a thorough exersice list. Kinda like decathalon or body-building for the brain. Just wondering.

Do we have any genes in common with plants? Maybe some carbohydrate metabolism or protien structure genes. Or the basic Eukaryotic gene.

I agree that health is in the genes to some extent. Health is also dependant on getting protien and nutrients during childhood.

Most of the theory (tested and confirmed in lab rodents) behind the longevity program is that when you eat at some low calorie intake your metabolism slows down and so you age slowly. You must exersice then to keep healing with your slowed metabolism.

This longevity program seems to assume that you are born with all of the stem cells that are used in your entire life and so you slow your metabolism to save them as long as possible. Also less intake into your body means fewer toxins and carcinogens taken into your body.

If your body makes stem cells in response some knid of stess or stimulation then that would be a better strategy, maybe.

edit on 9-3-2012 by Semicollegiate because: (no reason given)

edit on 9-3-2012 by Semicollegiate because: (no reason given)


That's the trade-off for having a big brain. Complexity doesn't equal longevity, that is true, and IMO is evidence against a designer. But you have to take into account that slower metabolisms are also prone to diseases like diabetes. Which in itself may be viral, but that's another issue.

The body replaces every cell in the body approximately every 7 years. We're now using stem cells to regenerate tissues. What happens is that the stem cells become dedifferentiated and/or transdifferented cells. What that means is that the cells become non-specific; you can use them to regenerate every cell in the body, whether its a blood cell or a nerve cell or a muscle cell. Regeneration begins with stem cells via a blastema just like in a salamander or octopus.

If you don't use up your stem cells, you don't regenerate anything.



posted on Mar, 9 2012 @ 11:25 AM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


Being happy is important to health.

No theory can be proven because the scientific method only checks a negative. If a thoery has stood the test of time you can gamble that it is a good approximation of reality and so use the theory to make a prediction in various relevant situations. If your predictions are true you know that the theory is even better and truer than before.
There will always be something about the theory that doesn't match reality exactly and that is why they say that a theory isn't proven.



posted on Mar, 9 2012 @ 11:26 AM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


double post
edit on 9-3-2012 by Semicollegiate because: (no reason given)







 
31
<< 278  279  280    282  283  284 >>

log in

join