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.
I just made this account to get into this debate…
first off I love how people completely discredit the idea of creationism because they put it into a context like "magic".
If you want to go down the "magic" road lets talk about slime puddles that have been in the deep jungle since the jungle began. why aren't they spitting out little frog people to-be?
same goes for apes that have never seen anything but the jungle for generations and generations. shouldn't they be people by now? walking out of the jungle on 2 feet, trying trying to fit into society?
evolution is real, but only micro-evolution (which can change by leaps but not species),
and so is God.
however man i feel just ran a muck with evolution.they figured out pieces of information like "this group of humans living in the Himalaya's are hairier than average" or "this fish in the Marianas trench hunts with a light coming out of his head" and suddenly we all evolved from slime?
if scientists are all knowing how come they cant make something like skin, and the brain or an eye? (without taking it from an existing sample tho). If we just pop up out of slime it shouldn't be too hard to speed up the process.
3 key points to evolution and why something had to of made us. 1) if we all came from organisms living on a rock that came from the big bang why did everything take a different shape like people, dogs, cats, birds etc? shouldn't we all be the same and act the same.
2) why do we have a conscience and morals of right and wrong based on feelings? no animal has that.
And 3) the biggest question. if the universe made us, then what made the universe? p.s. speaking of the universe check out the nerves in your brain and compare them to the universe. sprott.physics.wisc.edu... . awfully similar…
I think you’re missing the bigger picture of the “magic” context, and that is that there is simply no objective evidence for creationism. It’s an untestable and unfalsifiable, and therefore inherently unscientific, phenomenon because it’s dependent on supernatural causation.
This isn’t related to evolution, this is related to abiogenesis. But the oversimplified answer to your question is that the Earth’s atmosphere when life first arose was vastly different from what it is today. Today’s oxidizing atmosphere would destroy any of the molecular precursors formed before they ever had a chance to form larger molecules and begin to self-aggregate.
Speciation has been observed. I’ll be waiting for you to move the goalposts to saying that it can’t occur on a genus level.
Maybe all organisms would look the same if our planet were a single monolithic environment. Organisms adapt to their various niches within various environments.
You sure about that? And keep in mind that we keep looking for intelligence and characteristics of intelligence in other animals based on a single data point -- us. Seems pretty hubristic to assume that, no?
you talk about supernatural causation. but really the explanation of life through evolution is the same thing.
here let this little 12 year old make my point for me anguishedrepose.com... ove-the-big-bang-theory/.
im not a lab geek. im more in the construction field so im not gonna debate the small sciences that support your theory but at the same time dont prove anything.
listen to the kid about carbon.. again your missing a lot of letters in your alphabet.
this is what im saying.. SMALL changes within the species. a bird might change its wing type, or the way it fly's, hunts, its beak, its color, or whatever, but that bird is still a bird.
if evolution is responsible for us. why haven't alligators started walking upright by now and decided to get out of the swamp?
then read this.
shouldn't every micro organism on earth be something else by now?
you act like there was this great force that came in with a gun and made everything change.
if it was alive already why would it need to change more.
and how would it become grass. and trees. and flowers. then also assume we were on the way next (cause those bastards are so smart) so it made sure all those plants exhaled oxygen after it took the form of the 1,000's of different species of plants.
evolutions so flawed with holes its like a screen door. it works when you ignore all the theory killing questions. again. not enough letters.. just like you don't think though the big bang theory. you know how much energy would be released if these planets smashed together to make our world? enough to kill anything living on it. amoebas and all..
links broken.. it would be irrelevant to you anyway coming from your "niche" talk,
which i would like explained. what qualifies as a "niche"?
i see loads of apes in our world today so clearly they had to of been doing ok for as long have been.
why would one species just decide to become human?
why wouldn't it be all of them? shouldn't monkeys should have just evolved into people everywhere if pangia was going on making their land different and making them adapt?
don't you think they'd be more efficient if they could go on land and stay on land?
Or grow bigger legs to make them better at running and catching bigger prey?
and i cant tell everything with you is formulas and numbers.
you don't take any creativeness into account.
take for instance the way we breath in oxygen and produce carbon dioxide for plants to take in. why the hell would micro-amoeba tree's-to-be just to be happen to be aware of us needing oxygen? and why so many colors. it should just be monotone like most planets in our universe. sounds like it was planed out to me..everything here has a purpose. right down to ants that clean up messes. evolution must have thought of that too, its so clever!
just explain to me the steps on how we evolve beginning to end. like amoeba, to tadpole, to frog, to frog person, then to monkey? just give me the play by play ..
Ive never met an evolutionist that disagreed with the big bang theory either. so tell me what do u believe put earth where it is if you dont believe that
You’re making statements that lead me to believe that you really haven’t put any effort into understanding what claims are put forth by evolution. This statement, for example, implies that you believe that the apes we currently share this planet with haven’t evolved either. As we share a common ancestor with them, and the genetic evidence supports this to an incredible degree, this is simply not the case.
If you have a bunch of organisms making a waste product, why wouldn’t some other organism evolve the ability to utilize that waste product? Especially when we’re talking about some relatively simple chemical reactions involved.
Sure I do. You’re the one who thought that monkeys creating tools to solve problems was nothing special.
Originally posted by TWISTEDWORDS
What if in the beginning we had only these two things.
specific traits of a chimp and of a man
how did the big bang theory start? you didnt answer this.
notions based on old, false assumptions, and that neither of them is accurate.
Im putting little effort into responding to these posts hence the typos, un-capped letters, and lack of documented evidence because im aware of the fact that were on a forum for a site called above top secret.
clearly your an educated fellow so im just going to make some more points before you hurt yourself with every big word you can use. nobody in real life talks like that unless your wearing a white lab coat all day.
1) you say fossil records prove everything, so link me to the fossil records for the missing link. the generation of man monkeys that had specific traits of a chimp and of a man. or any evolved species for that matter. if u think a frog can become a monkey wheres the monkey frog? or the in-betweens on any evolved species. every species was clearly made as its on species.
2) how did the big bang theory start? you didnt answer this.
3) i wanted the chain like fashion explained. not to delve into why i dont understand it. so when you explain each step to me you can listen to how stupid it sounds
wheres my dog to eat my S#@t?
you act like everything moves in a set fashion but it makes decisions based on its environment.
so if that's the case why wouldn't everything climb its way to the top of the food chain. what makes it just decide to settle for whats its doing like alligators.sounds a tad contradicting.
its not. when they start talking ill be impressed. ive seen dogs play basketball, open dishwashers,cabinets,doors, hunt,and more. ive seen finches with the cactus needles, dolphins communicate through squeaking and order attacks on schools of fish in a uniformed hunting technique using bubbles and circling the prey, elephants paint. and still after all that im not stupid enough to put them on a human level
Originally posted by Tony4211
Saying Evolution is an assumption implies that it has no evidence. If that is the conclusion you have come to, you have not done proper research. You may have missed the 150+ years of research that is floating around.
But if the conclusion drawn from the evidence is based on
at least one incorrect assumption from the start, what good is it?
Really? So not only is evolution wrong, but your view is flawless?
Originally posted by iterationzero
... you're not really raising any scientific questions against evolution, much less "theory killing" ones.