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: 321
31
<< 318  319  320    322  323  324 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 02:40 AM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



Sorry guys I don't buy it either way.
You are the one that believes that a person can live inside a whale. You are the person that believes an evolved species would have no food.

You are the person that claims to be a science major and that I dont buy. Try again Pinocchio




posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 04:43 AM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 





The only other option in this is that we had DNA labs back in biblical times. I dunno, what do you honestly think? Did we evolve, or did we de-evolve?


We definitely evolved.




First of all you can't just claim to be able to dismiss all of the bible, your acting like you have personally tried everything thats in there and no for a fact that its all false. Second is that there could be parts that are largly misunderstood. This is why I keep saying I don't think your qualified to read it.


Look, it's really simple: There is a LOT of stuff in the bible that is demonstrably wrong, and this is a FACT. So using it as proof for anything but what people believed back then is CRAZY!




There are statements within the bible claiming that its intent is to be honest. Do you have some sort of documentation that says this is wrong?


Who cares? The bible isn't objective evidence and also claims bat# crazy stuff like people living in whales...




Not at all, it proves why we are here, how we got here, and who put us here. It also proves the findings in our DNA.


Now you make it abundantly clear that you have NO CLUE about scientific major. I think you claimed you're a science major...that claim is complete and utter nonsense. Either that, or you're going to fail horribly.

There are no "findings" in our DNA, and only Pye claims they exist. But since he REFUSES to share his data, all we have is his word...which is 100% useless. You are buying into a fantasy world that doesn't even have proof as backup...please tell me you're not this gullible





Humans are NOT on a list of speciation, and I challenge you to prove that. You pulled that out of the air.


There is no "list of speciation"


We all evolved, and that includes humans. We know because of the DNA and fossil record, as well as migratory trends. And contrary to your intervention hypothesis (it's not even a theory, lol), evolution is backed up by objective evidence...




So then by your own admission, you agree that DNA has the ability to change on its own, without warning or reason. Making our understanding in all aspects of DNA completly worthless.


God of the gaps





I understand but for some reason everyone on this thread accepts a theory as fact, when it isn't, so its the only way I can remind them just how wrong they are.


So you are trying to "educate" the rest by inventing random words that don't exist in reality? Makes perfect sense





I'm sorry if you missed it but I also copy and pasted the postualte and hypothesis sections as well, if you missed them you will have to go back a couple of pages.


Oh, you quoted some text, but your "postulated hypothetical theory" can't be found in any of those quotes...hell, even "hypothetical theory" can't be found


The word "postulated", "theoretical", and "theory" all appear in the text, but not in a row and not in the context you're using it in...you're simply mixing random words





I didn't say we don't have food to eat, we don't have any target food, or food that was intended for us. There is a big difference and I honestly don't expect you to understand it.


We have target food depending on where we live.





That is correct and you can also eat toilet paper and toothpaste, but that doesn't mean it was meant for you.


So in your bat# crazy fantasy world, a monkey eating an apple is natural...but a human doing it is somehow proof of intervention. Makes perfect sense I guess...IF YOU LIKE FICTION!!!


You HAVE to be a troll...no one is this gullible and ignorant of facts, it just can't be.



posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 10:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by MrXYZ
Rhesus isn't a "monkey gene", it refers to the D antigen of the Rhesus blood group system. It has nothing to do with "monkey genes".

I'd just like to clarify the thing about Rh+ and Rh- further. Every human has this gene, it's just that some humans have an allele of this gene, which has a disrupting mutation that prevents the gene from being translated into a protein, thus Rh- phenotype (notice I simplified this, read article for further info). So as it turns out, this gene is not important for our biological function (Rh- people live just fine), which begs the question, why did the hypothetical designer put it there (even we know it's not needed, yet the presumably far more intelligent hypothetical designer couldn't figure this out)? I'm sure our science major and 'identifier of arcane virus' (aka the biggest liar around) has a sensible answer to this. In the evolutionary frame work Rh- phenotype is but a result of a neutral mutation. Also, take notice that this is but one example out of 1,000s of useless things we have (e.g. tailbone, integrated degraded retro-viral genomes in our genome, etc.). This pattern argues extremely strongly against intelligent design, yet clowns such as Pye try to twist them around by intentional (?) misinterpretation (e.g. in this case saying that Rh- phenotype = no Rh gene = Rh gene was removed by aliens). It would almost be worth it to pay to see Pye talk in some seminar just so I could trash his fairy tale in front of a large crowd.
edit on 27-3-2012 by rhinoceros because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 10:31 AM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





You are the one that believes that a person can live inside a whale. You are the person that believes an evolved species would have no food.

You are the person that claims to be a science major and that I dont buy. Try again Pinocchio
Has anyone debunked it, have you attempted it yourself? How can be so incredulous on things you haven't ever tried before. I'm not saying I believe it to be true, just that there could be some circumstances that we are unaware of.

So Mr. Lie like a rug, I want to see your proof on how you know this is false, or are you lying?



posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 10:54 AM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 





We definitely evolved.
Really, lets look at this seriously. We have no target food, we seem to have brought nothing with us from our earlier years here on earth. It's almost as though we just popped into existence. We don't fit in and in fact the planet is rejecting us. We have so many health problems that we had to adopt physicians and medical firms. But you honestly think we evolved. It seriously looks more like we de evolved if anything. We have gone backwards. From fitting in, having target food, being healthy, and not being rejected by the planet.




Look, it's really simple: There is a LOT of stuff in the bible that is demonstrably wrong, and this is a FACT. So using it as proof for anything but what people believed back then is CRAZY!
I understand what your saying, and to a degree, agree with you. If something is way out of sorts, it might not be healthy to trust in it completely. At the same time that doesn't mean the rest of the book is bad, if you feel otherwise than you are profiling.




Who cares? The bible isn't objective evidence and also claims bat# crazy stuff like people living in whales..
Again I don't think you can just dismiss the entire book because there are some things that don't make sense.




Now you make it abundantly clear that you have NO CLUE about scientific major. I think you claimed you're a science major...that claim is complete and utter nonsense. Either that, or you're going to fail horribly.
Actually I excelled in my class.




There are no "findings" in our DNA, and only Pye claims they exist. But since he REFUSES to share his data, all we have is his word...which is 100% useless. You are buying into a fantasy world that doesn't even have proof as backup...please tell me you're not this gullible
Pye's findings are base on THE HUMAN GENOME. The human genome is public information, so there is nothing that can be hidden.




There is no "list of speciation"

We all evolved, and that includes humans. We know because of the DNA and fossil record, as well as migratory trends. And contrary to your intervention hypothesis (it's not even a theory, lol), evolution is backed up by objective evidence...
Thats not what wiki says. It only states that some few select aquatic life, some viruses and some bacteria have been witnessed with speciation. I think your assuming a lot.




Oh, you quoted some text, but your "postulated hypothetical theory" can't be found in any of those quotes...hell, even "hypothetical theory" can't be found

The word "postulated", "theoretical", and "theory" all appear in the text, but not in a row and not in the context you're using it in...you're simply mixing random words
Thats because I was referring to the theory as a whole. As you know evolution is a bunch of theorys working together. Well it turns out they aren't working at all.




We have target food depending on where we live.
I have asked, begged, pleaded, and challenged anyone to produce a single target food. Do you have one or are you just saying that.




So in your bat# crazy fantasy world, a monkey eating an apple is natural...but a human doing it is somehow proof of intervention. Makes perfect sense I guess...IF YOU LIKE FICTION!!!
See this is where your dropping the ball, it goes much deeper than that. Could you say that apples are an important part of the monkeys diet. Yes, there is probably nutrients in the apple that he depends on. Could he have complications if they were cut out of his diet. When you ask the same questions about humans you can see we do not depend on apples. So your example fails. Apples are NOT a target food, and we do fine without them.




So in your bat# crazy fantasy world, a monkey eating an apple is natural...but a human doing it is somehow proof of intervention. Makes perfect sense I guess...IF YOU LIKE FICTION!!!
Actually your the one believe in postualte and hypothetical theorys, not me, I'm just getting mine from documentation.

So here it is for the umteenth time...
www.talkorigins.org...

Evolution, the overarching concept that unifies the biological sciences, in fact embraces a plurality of theories and hypotheses.

And in another paragraph...

The theory specifically postulates that all of the earth's known biota are genealogically related,

Which is false.



posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 10:57 AM
link   
reply to post by rhinoceros
 





I'd just like to clarify the thing about Rh+ and Rh- further. Every human has this gene, it's just that some humans have an allele of this gene, which has a disrupting mutation that prevents the gene from being translated into a protein, thus Rh- phenotype (notice I simplified this, read article for further info). So as it turns out, this gene is not important for our biological function (Rh- people live just fine), which begs the question, why did the hypothetical designer put it there (similar to other stuff like why we have tailbones etc.)? I'm sure our science major and 'identifier of arcane virus' (aka the biggest liar around) has a sensible answer to this..
I said it before, I'll say it again, our DNA has been tampered with.



posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 11:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
I said it before, I'll say it again, our DNA has been tampered with.


I said it before, and here once more. You're a liar and incapable of rational thought. Likewise, you lack the skills required to accumulate new knowledge, and these facts considered, it's utterly pointless to continue a discussion with you (it's but a waste of my time).

If you want to discuss something with me further, first tell me how exactly you identified an arcane virus (materials & methods in such detail that this can be reproduced). I'm questioning the science major part as well, but coming from you, the identifying part is just too obvious of a lie. You don't know nor understand the first thing about biology or even the scientific method, yet we are to believe that you identified an arcane virus. I don't think so.
edit on 27-3-2012 by rhinoceros because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 11:29 AM
link   
reply to post by rhinoceros
 





I said it before, and here once more. You're a liar and incapable of rational thought. Likewise, you lack the skills required to accumulate new knowledge, and these facts considered, it's utterly pointless to continue a discussion with you (it's but a waste of my time).
I love how you just totally ignore me pointing out, by copying and pasting the link that evolution is a fake. Talk about being a liar, look at what your believing in.




If you want to discuss something with me further, first tell me how exactly you identified an arcane virus (materials & methods in such detail that this can be reproduced). I'm questioning the science major part as well, but coming from you, the identifying part is just too obvious of a lie.
Oh I'm not going to share that type of personal information on here. You all are incredulous pro fillers. I'm not that stupid.

You can read it when I get it published just like the rest of the world. My research goes back to 1984, I'm not just going to share it with a bunch of vindictive profillers.



posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by colin42
 





You are the one that believes that a person can live inside a whale. You are the person that believes an evolved species would have no food.

You are the person that claims to be a science major and that I dont buy. Try again Pinocchio
Has anyone debunked it, have you attempted it yourself? How can be so incredulous on things you haven't ever tried before. I'm not saying I believe it to be true, just that there could be some circumstances that we are unaware of.

So Mr. Lie like a rug, I want to see your proof on how you know this is false, or are you lying?


The whole whale thing has been 100% debunked because it's PHYSICALLY and BIOLOGICALLY IMPOSSIBLE


1) Pressure would crush you.
2) You'd end up in the stomach where there is NO AIR.
3) You wouldn't fit through the mouth of a whale as a whole human...unless it's one of the larger blue whales...but even then you'd have to squeeze.
4) Blue whales don't swallow large creatures...only whales with teeth do that, and they rip their prey apart before swallowing.

In short, I can't believe you're arguing in favor of the whale thing...it's INSANITY!! It also shows that you value your belief over facts and rationality





I said it before, I'll say it again, our DNA has been tampered with.


You can say it a hundred times, use bold large type font...but unless you provide evidence, which you haven't, you're essentially telling us fiction


Plus, you keep on claiming we don't have "target food", when there's thousands of items that are perfect food for us. That claim has been completely debunked...yet like a broken tape recorder you simply keep on repeating that nonsense...just like you do with that silly "our DNA has been tampered with" thing. It's really stunning. You created your own little mini-religion, and just like any religion it isn't based on facts. That would be OK...but sadly you pretend this BELIEF is truth. Even worse, you attack proven scientific theories because they don't fit your fantasy land

edit on 27-3-2012 by MrXYZ because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 11:33 AM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 





The whole whale thing has been 100% debunked because it's PHYSICALLY and BIOLOGICALLY IMPOSSIBLE

1) Pressure would crush you.
2) You'd end up in the stomach where there is NO AIR.
3) You wouldn't fit through the mouth of a whale as a whole human...unless it's one of the larger blue whales...but even then you'd have to squeeze.
4) Blue whales don't swallow large creatures...only whales with teeth do that, and they rip their prey apart before swallowing.

In short, I can't believe you're arguing in favor of the whale thing...it's INSANITY!! It also shows that you value your belief over facts and rationality
First of all since the bible deals with supernatural events, it is possible that the whale they used was no ordinary whale. Second it could have been the carcass of a whale or possibly a ship that had the appearance of a whale.



posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 11:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
Oh I'm not going to share that type of personal information on here. You all are incredulous pro fillers. I'm not that stupid.

There is not a single person here who believes your lies, just let it go.



posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 11:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by MrXYZ
 





The whole whale thing has been 100% debunked because it's PHYSICALLY and BIOLOGICALLY IMPOSSIBLE

1) Pressure would crush you.
2) You'd end up in the stomach where there is NO AIR.
3) You wouldn't fit through the mouth of a whale as a whole human...unless it's one of the larger blue whales...but even then you'd have to squeeze.
4) Blue whales don't swallow large creatures...only whales with teeth do that, and they rip their prey apart before swallowing.

In short, I can't believe you're arguing in favor of the whale thing...it's INSANITY!! It also shows that you value your belief over facts and rationality
First of all since the bible deals with supernatural events, it is possible that the whale they used was no ordinary whale. Second it could have been the carcass of a whale or possibly a ship that had the appearance of a whale.


They had words for "ship" back then...it makes NO SENSE to call it a whale. What's next? You want Starbucks to call coffee "turtles"??

A carcass of a whale STILL doesn't have any air inside his stomach...so any person entering it would suffocate.

And lastly, just because the bible deals with supernatural events (none of which have been proven...hell, many have been DEBUNKED!), are you seriously saying "anything's possible, it doesn't have to make sense"?


You can't be serious!!



posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 11:43 AM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 





The whole whale thing has been 100% debunked because it's PHYSICALLY and BIOLOGICALLY IMPOSSIBLE

1) Pressure would crush you.
2) You'd end up in the stomach where there is NO AIR.
3) You wouldn't fit through the mouth of a whale as a whole human...unless it's one of the larger blue whales...but even then you'd have to squeeze.
4) Blue whales don't swallow large creatures...only whales with teeth do that, and they rip their prey apart before swallowing.

In short, I can't believe you're arguing in favor of the whale thing...it's INSANITY!! It also shows that you value your belief over facts and rationality
People CAN live inside a whale you morons.

www.truthorfiction.com...


I can't believe you, lies lies lies. A person can't live in a whale. You know what, there is only one reason why this can happen, because it can.
edit on 27-3-2012 by itsthetooth because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 11:48 AM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 





And lastly, just because the bible deals with supernatural events (none of which have been proven...hell, many have been DEBUNKED!), are you seriously saying "anything's possible, it doesn't have to make sense"?

You can't be serious!!
Oh I wasn't aware we had supernatural ability's to test those, silly me.



posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 11:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
Oh I wasn't aware we had supernatural ability's to test those, silly me.

We do, because I am in fact God. My posts might appear to the contrary, and I am not going to prove myself, but really I am not lying. I am God.
edit on 27-3-2012 by rhinoceros because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 12:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by rhinoceros

Originally posted by itsthetooth
Oh I wasn't aware we had supernatural ability's to test those, silly me.

We do, because I am in fact God. My posts might appear to the contrary, and I am not going to prove myself, but really I am not lying. I am God.
edit on 27-3-2012 by rhinoceros because: (no reason given)


Unfortunately, I can only give you one star for that.



posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 12:12 PM
link   
reply to post by HappyBunny
 

I wish we could have a poll: Which of the following you find more likely?

A) itsthetooth is a science major and 'identifier of arcane virus'

or

B) rhinoceros is God


I'm leaning towards B strongly, even thou I am fairly certain that I am not God. It's just that I am even more certain that itsthetooth is in fact a liar.
edit on 27-3-2012 by rhinoceros because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by rhinoceros
reply to post by HappyBunny
 

I wish we could have a poll: Which of the following you find more likely?

A) itsthetooth is a science major and 'identifier of arcane virus'

or

B) rhinoceros is God


I'm leaning towards B strongly, even thou I am fairly certain that I am not God. It's just that I am even more certain that itsthetooth is in fact a liar.
edit on 27-3-2012 by rhinoceros because: (no reason given)


Okay, I really can't resist a Douglas Adams quote here.


Now it is such a bizarrely improbably coincidence that anything so mindbogglingly useful [the Babel fish] could have evolved by chance that some thinkers have chosen to see it as a final and clinching proof of the non-existence of God.
The argument goes something like this: "I refuse to prove that I exist," says God, "for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing."
"But," says Man, "the Babel fish is a dead giveaway isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you don't. QED"
"Oh dear," says God, "I hadn't thought of that," and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.


But yeah, I like B.



posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 12:22 PM
link   
reply to post by rhinoceros
 





I wish we could have a poll: Which of the following you find more likely?

A) itsthetooth is a science major and 'identifier of arcane virus'

or

B) rhinoceros is God


I'm leaning towards B strongly, even thou I am fairly certain that I am not God. It's just that I am even more certain that itsthetooth is in fact a liar.
It's all subjective. The part that your failing to realize here is that we have no reason to believe you are god.
edit on 27-3-2012 by itsthetooth because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 12:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
It's all subjective. The part that your failing to realize here is that we have no reason to believe you are god.

True, but we have every reason to believe that you are not a science major, and certainly not an 'identifier of arcane virus'.




top topics



 
31
<< 318  319  320    322  323  324 >>

log in

join