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: 324
31
<< 321  322  323    325  326  327 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 08:36 AM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


Natural selection does not apply anymore, and I'm not too sure if it ever did with us humans. I don't know what rock you have conveniently placed over your head, but where I come from, the idiots thrive and multiply, while those that are intelligent are kept out of the equation. If natural selection is valid, than why is it that intelligence and high levels of perception are frowned upon? I will not argue the fact that animals have evolved over time, but when it comes to humans, the theory of evolution falls flat on it's face. The fact is, we do not belong here. One need only poke their head out the window to see why. Most animals survive within nature, while we try to bend nature to our will.




posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 08:38 AM
link   
reply to post by hudsonhawk69
 


The funny thing is, people that propogate such out of date and invalid theories are, in themselves, the antithesis to their own theory lol. If anyone thinks that we humans have evolved into what we are now, they are obviously not that evolved lol.



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 09:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by xXxinfidelxXx
reply to post by HappyBunny
 


There is a reason why they call it the THEORY of evolution, dude.


That's Mrs. Dude, thanks. And you obviously don't know the difference between a scientific theory and a law.


Theories only last long enough for them to be replaced by other theories. You put to much stock in the paltry understandings that we, as humans are capable of. You may think we are all infallible (or at least those in the field of "science"), but human understanding, especially as of late, is quite lacking if you ask me.


Can you say "strawman"? I never, ever said we were infallible. In fact, if you go back through this thread, I've said on multiple occasions that the theory of evolution may not be perfect because we don't know everything yet, but it is without a doubt the best thing we've got going.


The evolutionary theory is just the new "flat earth" as far as I'm concerned.


Just like a creationist. You disparage what you don't understand, yet don't offer up any alternative theories or ideas.



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 09:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by xXxinfidelxXx
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


Natural selection does not apply anymore, and I'm not too sure if it ever did with us humans. I don't know what rock you have conveniently placed over your head, but where I come from, the idiots thrive and multiply, while those that are intelligent are kept out of the equation. If natural selection is valid, than why is it that intelligence and high levels of perception are frowned upon?


That's political and religious, not scientific. And you're showing your arrogance and hubris if you honestly believe you're one of the intelligent ones who have been frowned upon. You can blame your creationist and religious buddies for that.


I will not argue the fact that animals have evolved over time, but when it comes to humans, the theory of evolution falls flat on it's face.


And what makes you think that? Humans are animals. Now, pay attention here.

If A=C and B=C, then A=C.

Therefore, if animals evolve, and humans are animals, then humans evolve.

I can't spell it out any clearer than that.


The fact is, we do not belong here. One need only poke their head out the window to see why. Most animals survive within nature, while we try to bend nature to our will.


Toothy, is that you?



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 09:59 AM
link   
reply to post by HappyBunny
 


Congratulations. You have taken the time out of your day to come and insult me without any evidence towards your point of view. I have provided plenty of evidence towards mine. When it comes down to it though, you're just gonna see whatever it is you want to see.



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 10:01 AM
link   
reply to post by HappyBunny
 


Actually I have provided my theory as to what happened with us, but then again you would actually have to read my posts to know that. Fail. The only thing worse than a guy who thinks they know everything is a woman that thinks they know everything as I am quite aware of the fact that no matter what a guy says, we are wrong irregardless. Have fun picking that one apart. Fact of the matter is, you let your emotions cloud your judgement (no that wasn't a sexist comment either, I was referring to you alone, since it's obvious that you enjoy taking things out of context)
edit on 28/3/2012 by xXxinfidelxXx because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 10:07 AM
link   
reply to post by HappyBunny
 


In addition, I have quite a thorough understanding on the evolutionary progression of many species. Bad assumption on your part. I also know that the only species on this entire planet that does not fit is us. If you have everything all figured out, which you obviously think you do, how do you explain an entire species "evolving" in spite of it's ecosystem, instead of evolving within it. Have fun with that one.



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 10:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by xXxinfidelxXx
reply to post by HappyBunny
 


Actually I have provided my theory as to what happened with us, but then again you would actually have to read my posts to know that. Fail. The only thing worse than a guy who thinks they know everything is a woman that thinks they know everything as I am quite aware of the fact that no matter what a guy says, we are wrong irregardless. Have fun picking that one apart. Fact of the matter is, you let your emotions cloud your judgement (no that wasn't a sexist comment either, I was referring to you alone, since it's obvious that you enjoy taking things out of context)


1. You haven't provided a theory but an idea (not even a hypothesis). Theories can be tested and falsified. In science a law means: we know this happens, but can't explain the mechanism, whereas a theory is one step further: we know this happens, and here is how.

2. Saying things like "If natural selection is valid, than why is it that intelligence and high levels of perception are frowned upon?" only makes it apparent to us that you never even bothered to learn the theory. No where does it say that nature selects for high intelligence or high levels of perception. Fitness in 'Survival of the fittest' means 'those that have the most offspring that manage to repeat the process'. There was a time in human evolution when high intelligence provided fitness, but in the current society it provides no gain in reference to making babies.

So you see, you have not provided any evidence. You have only provided an idea, that is based on misperception and ignorance.
edit on 28-3-2012 by rhinoceros because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 10:41 AM
link   
reply to post by rhinoceros
 





The divide between Old World and New World monkeys is far greater than that between e.g. humans and chimps, but yes, they're still monkeys,
Rhin the stretch between chimps and chimps is not greater than chimps and humans. OMG.




very much the same way humans and chimps are still apes.
Well I totally disagree with this statement, I think that humans are humans and apes are apes, and therefore, humans are not apes. We have nothing aside from similar DNA that says otherwise.




Are whales still ungulates (well they never were, but ungulates and whales share a relatively recent common ancestor which looked a lot more like ungulates than whales, and yes, there is a fossil record from this ancestor to whales).
Whats an ungulate?




edit. whole point of original post was to question your view that genetics don't mean anything, yet you failed to address this part completely..
Well no, what I mean is if we allow ourselves to believe that evolution, or any other thing for that matter, has the ability to change DNA without understanding or reason, than in believing so, also means we can't trust anything we have come to know about DNA as it could have changed at any time.

Hope that clears up what I'm trying to say.



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 10:46 AM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 





Thank you for providing such a STUNNING example of blind belief

No facts, no rationality, no logic...just pure blind belief.
I was just quoting the site, what do you believe they have blind faith too?




Given that he emphatically stated that humans are not primates for several pages of this thread and then proceeded to link a Wikipedia pages that categorically states that humans are primates as his proof that humans are not primates, I think you're putting way too much faith in High Genus He-who-shall-not-be-name of the First Interventionist Church of the Arcane Virus and his ability to read and process information.
Well I had already commented about this and made it clear that my ears were much larger prior to learning about evolution being a fabricated theory. I did not read the entire article on primates, which is why I missed that part. I already stated this. Are you possibly scanning and only finding the parts you want to read?



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 10:49 AM
link   
reply to post by iterationzero
 





Given that he emphatically stated that humans are not primates for several pages of this thread and then proceeded to link a Wikipedia pages that categorically states that humans are primates as his proof that humans are not primates, I think you're putting way too much faith in High Genus He-who-shall-not-be-name of the First Interventionist Church of the Arcane Virus and his ability to read and process information.
By the way profiling someone to try to advantage your point in my opinion is the poorest tactic in the world. What it means is that you can no longer show case your ideas and points to a winning side, and therefore must turn to this other tactic as its all you have left. I don't believe in profiling people as your making assumptions about the person based on prior dealings that future dealings will be the same, and there is no proof that will happen.



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 10:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
Well I totally disagree with this statement, I think that humans are humans and apes are apes, and therefore, humans are not apes. We have nothing aside from similar DNA that says otherwise.

Conveniently forgetting the fossil record and similarities in anatomy, as well as basic logic related to genetics (this part I guess you're not forgetting but simply fail to understand).



Whats an ungulate?

A group of mammals including horses, zebras, donkeys, bisons, rhinos, camels, hippos, tapirs, goats, pigs, sheep, giraffes, okapis, moose, elks, deer, antelopes, gazelles, etc.




also means we can't trust anything we have come to know about DNA as it could have changed at any time.

No it does not. You believe this because of your severe lack in knowledge related to nature, biology, genetics, logic and reason.



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 10:54 AM
link   
reply to post by xXxinfidelxXx
 





Natural selection does not apply anymore, and I'm not too sure if it ever did with us humans. I don't know what rock you have conveniently placed over your head, but where I come from, the idiots thrive and multiply, while those that are intelligent are kept out of the equation. If natural selection is valid, than why is it that intelligence and high levels of perception are frowned upon? I will not argue the fact that animals have evolved over time, but when it comes to humans, the theory of evolution falls flat on it's face. The fact is, we do not belong here. One need only poke their head out the window to see why. Most animals survive within nature, while we try to bend nature to our will.
Yes xXx its an obvious point that most others on here have been up against me on here. We don't fit in and its obvious in a multitude of ways and redundant adaptation. This is why I came up with the theory that we must have de-evolved.



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 10:59 AM
link   
reply to post by HappyBunny
 





The fact is, we do not belong here. One need only poke their head out the window to see why. Most animals survive within nature, while we try to bend nature to our will.



Toothy, is that you?
No hes not me happy and you would be wise to lend an ear and wise up to whats oh so obvious. We are not from here happy and I honestly don't know how much more obvious it could be. Of course I can go off a hell of a lot deeper about this to the extent of us not being part of the eco system on this planet. Notice how we are destroying the planet and how the planet is rejecting us. I swear if you can't see how obvious this is, your just being incredulous.



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 11:14 AM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 


I believe God created everything. That doesnt mean that i dont think things cant evolve but i just believe that they cant evolve into a totally different species. And the reason i dont think that humans evolved is because some human would pretty much have to be born to an ape so i think even if we started to look like humans we would still be talking ape language and acting like apes and i dont really think that we would be as intelligent as we are. And fossil records? There hasnt been a true missing link found. And why arent we still evolving? Isnt it interesting that we still grow wisdom teeth when we dont need them and they cant even really fit in our mouth? And really my only problem with evolution is where did the VERY FIRST thing come from? Did it just poof out of thin air? That sounds pretty ridiculous i think something would have had to at least start everything out.



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 11:19 AM
link   
reply to post by rhinoceros
 





Conveniently forgetting the fossil record and similarities in anatomy, as well as basic logic related to genetics (this part I guess you're not forgetting but simply fail to understand).

Oh no I totally get that we have a scary amount of things in common with them. I don't think that proves relation.




also means we can't trust anything we have come to know about DNA as it could have changed at any time.


No it does not. You believe this because of your severe lack in knowledge related to nature, biology, genetics, logic and reason.
I don't believe so, what I'm trying to say is that if you honestly believe in DNA just changing on its own without direction or reason, then by your own admission, we couldn't possibly agree with anything that the DNA tells us as it could have changed.



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 11:41 AM
link   
reply to post by HappyBunny
 





That's Mrs. Dude, thanks. And you obviously don't know the difference between a scientific theory and a law.
But happy evolution has never been announced as a scientific theory, can you show something that says otherwise?




Just like a creationist. You disparage what you don't understand, yet don't offer up any alternative theories or ideas.
Just remember, that if we don't have the correct answers at this time, does not mean we need to settle and accept an alternative.



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 11:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by xXxinfidelxXx
reply to post by HappyBunny
 


Congratulations. You have taken the time out of your day to come and insult me without any evidence towards your point of view. I have provided plenty of evidence towards mine. When it comes down to it though, you're just gonna see whatever it is you want to see.


There are 324 pages of my point of view as well as other peoples'. Please go read them.



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 11:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by xXxinfidelxXx
reply to post by HappyBunny
 


In addition, I have quite a thorough understanding on the evolutionary progression of many species. Bad assumption on your part. I also know that the only species on this entire planet that does not fit is us. If you have everything all figured out, which you obviously think you do, how do you explain an entire species "evolving" in spite of it's ecosystem, instead of evolving within it. Have fun with that one.


Got any evidence that we evolved outside of our ecosystem? I'd love to see it.



posted on Mar, 28 2012 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by xXxinfidelxXx
reply to post by HappyBunny
 


Actually I have provided my theory as to what happened with us, but then again you would actually have to read my posts to know that. Fail. The only thing worse than a guy who thinks they know everything is a woman that thinks they know everything as I am quite aware of the fact that no matter what a guy says, we are wrong irregardless. Have fun picking that one apart. Fact of the matter is, you let your emotions cloud your judgement (no that wasn't a sexist comment either, I was referring to you alone, since it's obvious that you enjoy taking things out of context)
edit on 28/3/2012 by xXxinfidelxXx because: (no reason given)


No, you provided nothing more than idea. Even a hypothesis requires more than that.

What the hell does the fact that you're a guy have to do with anything? Yet another strawman.



new topics

top topics



 
31
<< 321  322  323    325  326  327 >>

log in

join