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: 333
31
<< 330  331  332    334  335  336 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 29 2012 @ 03:05 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 


Here is a good one for you Colin, just to show you how much huamns aren't in there natural habitat.

This two year old wandered out of his home, and was first called missing. Why would we call someone missing when they are in there natural habitat? Because the wild is NOT our natural habitat. His status went from missing to recovery, also meaning that there is no way he could survive in the wild without help. Now honestly how natural does these surroundings sound?

www.huffingtonpost.com...




posted on Mar, 29 2012 @ 03:16 PM
link   
reply to post by rhinoceros
 





Really? I though just a few posts ago you insisted that living inside whales is a totally viable option for humans, even after being told what would happen..

From now on whenever someone invokes God, I will invoke Anti God, a being that cancels out ever single action of God.
I have nothing anyone has given me that acientifically proves other wise.



posted on Mar, 29 2012 @ 03:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by MrXYZ
 





No, I'm saying there's stuff we know because of scientific objective evidence (eg. evolution), and stuff we simply don't know. You on the other hand simply fill a gap in knowledge (aka what we don't know) with magic (aka god or aliens intervening) even though you have ZERO objective evidence to support your case
You don't need to fill any gaps, everything is already documented, its just an issue of identifying it.


Of course there are gaps in our knowledge. And nothing you posted could be considered "documented" evidence supporting your claim. Identifying and finding evidence is great, but it would help if you could apply some logic and rationality when examining evidence


That way, you'd never fall for clowns like Pye...



posted on Mar, 29 2012 @ 03:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by rhinoceros
 





Really? I though just a few posts ago you insisted that living inside whales is a totally viable option for humans, even after being told what would happen..

From now on whenever someone invokes God, I will invoke Anti God, a being that cancels out ever single action of God.
I have nothing anyone has given me that acientifically proves other wise.



Except for all the physical and biological FACTS you mean? The one you continue to ignore.

Amazing how every time one of your claims is debunked you close your eyes and ears and go "lalalalalalalalalala, there is no proof....i can't seeeeeee it....lalalaalalalalala". You're not even trying to refute the evidence brought against your claims, you are now at a point where you are simply ignoring that very evidence. Ignorance is bliss I guess



posted on Mar, 29 2012 @ 03:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by colin42
 


Here is a good one for you Colin, just to show you how much huamns aren't in there natural habitat.

This two year old wandered out of his home, and was first called missing. Why would we call someone missing when they are in there natural habitat? Because the wild is NOT our natural habitat. His status went from missing to recovery, also meaning that there is no way he could survive in the wild without help. Now honestly how natural does these surroundings sound?

www.huffingtonpost.com...


Yes, and infants generally don't survive well on their own even within their habitat. Take an infant gazelle and place it alone somewhere in the Serengeti...or somewhere where polar bears hunt (to use your "out of natural habitat analogy)...and then count the minutes until that gazelle is dead


LOGIC for crying out loud!



posted on Mar, 29 2012 @ 03:39 PM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 





Of course there are gaps in our knowledge. And nothing you posted could be considered "documented" evidence supporting your claim. Identifying and finding evidence is great, but it would help if you could apply some logic and rationality when examining evidence

That way, you'd never fall for clowns like Pye...
The human genome is public info so I'm just waiting for anyone to debunk him.



posted on Mar, 29 2012 @ 03:40 PM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 





Except for all the physical and biological FACTS you mean? The one you continue to ignore.

Amazing how every time one of your claims is debunked you close your eyes and ears and go "lalalalalalalalalala, there is no proof....i can't seeeeeee it....lalalaalalalalala". You're not even trying to refute the evidence brought against your claims, you are now at a point where you are simply ignoring that very evidence. Ignorance is bliss I guess
You mean sort of like how evolution has no proof to back it up. Ya at least the bible could be forewarned documentation.



posted on Mar, 29 2012 @ 03:42 PM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 





Yes, and infants generally don't survive well on their own even within their habitat. Take an infant gazelle and place it alone somewhere in the Serengeti...or somewhere where polar bears hunt (to use your "out of natural habitat analogy)...and then count the minutes until that gazelle is dead

LOGIC for crying out loud!
Your obviously wrong. Gazells are born in the wild and the live in the wild, they are also equiped to live in the wild which is why its assumed this boy in the wild would be dead after 2 days. Can you assume a baby gazell is dead after two days, no you cant. Your wrong again.



posted on Mar, 29 2012 @ 03:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by MrXYZ
 





Of course there are gaps in our knowledge. And nothing you posted could be considered "documented" evidence supporting your claim. Identifying and finding evidence is great, but it would help if you could apply some logic and rationality when examining evidence

That way, you'd never fall for clowns like Pye...
The human genome is public info so I'm just waiting for anyone to debunk him.


Yes, and the samples that were peer reviewed were 100% human. Only Pye claims there's alien components, yet he refuses to release the data proving it


Just like you are claiming people can live inside whales, yet you completely fail at providing evidence explaining how people wouldn't get crushed, wouldn't suffocate, or die of pressure. You 2 would get along well

edit on 29-3-2012 by MrXYZ because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 29 2012 @ 03:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by MrXYZ
 





Yes, and infants generally don't survive well on their own even within their habitat. Take an infant gazelle and place it alone somewhere in the Serengeti...or somewhere where polar bears hunt (to use your "out of natural habitat analogy)...and then count the minutes until that gazelle is dead

LOGIC for crying out loud!
Your obviously wrong. Gazells are born in the wild and the live in the wild, they are also equiped to live in the wild which is why its assumed this boy in the wild would be dead after 2 days. Can you assume a baby gazell is dead after two days, no you cant. Your wrong again.


Yes, a baby gazelle would easily survive alone for 2 days in the Serengeti




On what planet do you live?



posted on Mar, 29 2012 @ 05:46 PM
link   
reply to post by rhinoceros
 


i'm a little tea pot, short and stout! here is my handle, oops dont look at my spout you perverts!



posted on Mar, 29 2012 @ 05:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by colin42
 


Here is a good one for you Colin, just to show you how much huamns aren't in there natural habitat.

This two year old wandered out of his home, and was first called missing. Why would we call someone missing when they are in there natural habitat? Because the wild is NOT our natural habitat. His status went from missing to recovery, also meaning that there is no way he could survive in the wild without help. Now honestly how natural does these surroundings sound?

www.huffingtonpost.com...
Are you really trying to use this as your evidence, really?

Have you never watched any wildlife documentary? Jeeze you are really quite a sad person to have such a lack of knowledge of the world you live in. Do you really need to have infant care explained to you?

All of the higher animals nurture their young and protect them. If you cannot even grasp this then I have no idea why you are arguing against evolution when you dont have a clue about real life at all..

Unfortunately for you after that post yours ears must have grown bigger than Dumbo the Elephants. You had best learn somthing quick to reduce them before you get caught in the wind.



posted on Mar, 29 2012 @ 06:08 PM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 





Yes, a baby gazelle would easily survive alone for 2 days in the Serengeti
Good thing thats not the only place you would find them. And if they are so intolerent of the wild why is there species not extinct?



posted on Mar, 29 2012 @ 06:20 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 


First of all, one can not prove a negative. Thats a fundamental violation of scientific principles. But its quite easy to prove evolution right. Antibiotic resistance is a good example. Bacteria adapts, and thats a basic example of evolution.



posted on Mar, 29 2012 @ 07:44 PM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


You seem to like talking crap even more than one of my jockier co-workers. Problem is, if you were standing in front of me, you wouldn't have the balls. Plain and simple. So in your fantasy world people that know their stuff never make mistakes? Must be nice, as where I live we are all human and privy to all the perks that go with it. Must be nice to live with your head in the clouds, where the only correct disposition is your disposition and everybody bows to your every word. Funny thing is, I haven't seen you add anything constructive to this thread (if anything, at least my ranting added a counterpoint based on information), as a matter of fact, all I have seen you do here is ridicule anyone who has a dissenting opinion, without backing up your own words. You cannot hold the moral high ground if you never occupy it. A little thing I learned in the military. By god though, please don't enlist, they have more than their share of braindead cannon fodder as it is without adding you into the mix. Now, I may have gotten off to a rough start in this thread, but eventually, I explained pretty much every point of my position that i could think of while being that tired ( I do actually work for a living you know, regardless of whether you know what that's like or not.), and you still ridiculed my posts as if I wasn't providing anything. If you want to evaluate any of the good points that I made instead of the one (SINGULAR) that I messed up, you might find that I am not just some moron with a loud mouth and I do have a fully functional brain. You would mess up too if you had to sort 600 skids a day. And just in case you are still hung up on that fossil, the age was 5 million. Ya happy now? I doubt it, but I really don't care either.
edit on 29/3/2012 by xXxinfidelxXx because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 29 2012 @ 07:46 PM
link   
reply to post by arbiture
 


You brought a well formulated argument to the wrong place man. Most minds are closed in this thread, quite obviously. Any attempt at a decent debate is quickly muddled by insults here. If you really wanna discuss this topic, I would suggest starting a new thread, as I am too lazy to lol. Kudos for trying though.



posted on Mar, 29 2012 @ 07:47 PM
link   
I don't really understand why you guys are discussing baby gazelles. The premise that humans don't fit nature due to biological reasons is rubbish, just ask any jungle tribe person (yes there are still such left). The fact that the cultural evolution of the western world has separated us from nature isn't relative to ToE.



posted on Mar, 29 2012 @ 07:57 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


Meh believe me you don't want to be like me. I am only like this because it's the only way I know how to be. The road that I travel is not one that I would wish on my worst enemy, as it is just plain lonely, but I am what I am. That's what these clowns don't seem to realize. I am not just being an asshole, this is who I am, for better or for worse, with emphasis on the latter. Don't worry about XYZ though as they are the 3 letters before ZERO lol kinda speaks volumes about the person behind the posts doesn't it. Also, Colin looks suspiciously like Colon, which also speaks volumes about the content of said posts. Meh, anyways.....sometimes it's better to tuck your tail than to have to be the alpha male all the time, when all those who consider themselves alphas are just sheep in wolves' clothing. I think you know who I'm referring to so I don't think I need to elaborate on that point. Meh. I guess it's too much to ask for people to actually discuss things instead of just standing on a soap box and telling everybody else with a voice of their own to shut up. Reminds me of a movie I saw from the '30s, which was a little hard to understand, as it was in GERMAN. Meh I think I'm done ranting for now. Have a good one.
edit on 29/3/2012 by xXxinfidelxXx because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 29 2012 @ 08:02 PM
link   
reply to post by rhinoceros
 


They are discussing such things as this thread should have been killed off long ago as it is just full of angry dudes shouting at each other.



posted on Mar, 29 2012 @ 08:02 PM
link   
reply to post by xXxinfidelxXx
 





You seem to like talking crap even more than one of my jockier co-workers. Problem is, if you were standing in front of me, you wouldn't have the balls. Plain and simple.


I'm fairly outspoken in real life...so if you talked crap in real life, fear wouldn't hold me back from responding


Also, nice to see ad hominem attack and "I'm so great" nonsense





So in your fantasy world people that know their stuff never make mistakes? Must be nice, as where I live we are all human and privy to all the perks that go with it. Must be nice to live with your head in the clouds, where the only correct disposition is your disposition and everybody bows to your every word. Funny thing is, I haven't seen you add anything constructive to this thread (if anything, at least my ranting added a counterpoint based on information), as a matter of fact, all I have seen you do here is ridicule anyone who has a dissenting opinion, without backing up your own words.


Oh, you are of course entitled to make mistakes, everyone does. The thing is, you kept on insisting on that 15m figure even after you were proven wrong. Speaking about that, what do you mean by "without backing up your own words". Backing up my own words is EXACTLY what I did, which is why we know your 15m figure was nonsense even if you kept on insisting on it.




You cannot hold the moral high ground if you never occupy it. A little thing I learned in the military. By god though, please don't enlist, they have more than their share of braindead cannon fodder as it is without adding you into the mix.


And another ad hominem attack for good measure





Now, I may have gotten off to a rough start in this thread, but eventually, I explained pretty much every point of my position that i could think of while being that tired ( I do actually work for a living you know, regardless of whether you know what that's like or not.), and you still ridiculed my posts as if I wasn't providing anything.


Well...you DIDN'T prove anything


I didn't ridicule your posts either, I pointed out how your argumentation was wrong. Things only got heated because you kept on ignoring all evidence that debunked your posts. And last I checked it was you who got out of line judging from your T&C warnings...




If you want to evaluate any of the good points that I made instead of the one (SINGULAR) that I messed up, you might find that I am not just some moron with a loud mouth and I do have a fully functional brain. You would mess up too if you had to sort 600 skids a day. And just in case you are still hung up on that fossil, the age was 5 million. Ya happy now? I doubt it, but I really don't care either.


5m years is COMPLETELY wrong too. Nobody found homo sapiens fossils dating back 5m years. Our ancestor from back then had a brain size 1/5th of ours. It is an early Hominina though, one of our earliest direct ancestors.




top topics



 
31
<< 330  331  332    334  335  336 >>

log in

join