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: 355
31
<< 352  353  354    356  357  358 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 07:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by idmonster
 





No it doesnt.

In fact, if aliens exist in this uneverse (and they probably do) they will be purely within nature, i.e. natural.

For want of a better definition, supernatural means "magic".
Of course it does. As an example have you never seen the video to Katie Perrys ET? She explains it all.

Just because they are not on this planet doesn't mean they don't exist.


roger that,

you quoted as an example




posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 10:11 PM
link   
reply to post by idmonster
 





roger that,

you quoted as an example
And I still agree, I think she gave a pretty good explanation. I was shocked to hear it coming from her but still.



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 10:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by idmonster
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


Nope, i figure on amusing myself, and the best thing is, there are gems going way back from other posters that are equaly as ridiculous, and in some cases, equaly as funny as yours which i may have overlooked otherwise.

Anyway, upto page 86 now, fav quote so far in this batch is:

“I'm not the one with the odd belief here.”




I'm trying to do this chronologicaly


I CAN'T WAIT..
edit on 7-4-2012 by flyingfish because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2012 @ 12:45 PM
link   
Disclaimer: Family easter drink.

To be honest and sticking with the idea of this thread. Tooths intervention idea does have questions to answer from the evolution side but he has no idea what those questions are.

If I was in his camp I would be asking why, ants as we see it, with an almost logic 0 or 1 response know how to farm not, dissmissing them as natural with no supporting evidence. The conversation I originally asked for:

Explain diversity today without refering to evolution.

Tooth failed in every way because he is to say the least, 'Ignorant'. That does not mean others cannot put forward an argument that we can discuss that we can talk about with respect to get an understanding other threads do not ask for.

If you really want to do a toothism top ten you have to include the question/statement he is answering too. 'Cows wild or not eat grass'. reply: Depends on whether it is domesticate grass has a whole different meaning.

To be honest. I am as much angered by tooths dishonesty as I am by 300 pages and I have seen no growth in his ability to put forward a better defence. As much as I disagree with him I could have acepted growth. He showed none.

This thread did well to last as long as 50 posts. It, in no way should be approaching 400 at the level it has lived on and I am as guilty as any but I just cannot let that level of ignorance go unchallenged.

Top ten of tooths silly ansers? means failure by us to provide evidence he could understand and a resolute denial to understand any evidence on his side to learn and grow.

Not what I wanted for this thread



posted on Apr, 8 2012 @ 02:34 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





To be honest and sticking with the idea of this thread. Tooths intervention idea does have questions to answer from the evolution side but he has no idea what those questions are.

If I was in his camp I would be asking why, ants as we see it, with an almost logic 0 or 1 response know how to farm not, dissmissing them as natural with no supporting evidence. The conversation I originally asked for:
Well farming is a natural event, as many species do this. You have to eliminate the common differences between species to understand them. This is why I keep saying you obviously don't know how to remove man from the equation to better understand what is going on.

Bees harvest, as another example and we sure didn't teach the ants and bees how to do this, but it is possible they taught us.




Explain diversity today without refering to evolution.
As I have stated many times over, diversity could easily be explained by a creator using recycled life.




Tooth failed in every way because he is to say the least, 'Ignorant'. That does not mean others cannot put forward an argument that we can discuss that we can talk about with respect to get an understanding other threads do not ask for.
It sure seemed otherwise, which is why I called it the evolution channel.




If you really want to do a toothism top ten you have to include the question/statement he is answering too. 'Cows wild or not eat grass'. reply: Depends on whether it is domesticate grass has a whole different meaning.
You think thats so cute, what are you going to do when there is a wiki up about toothisim.

You are wrong again, in your assumption that domesticated cows only eat grass.
notmilk.com...
This is so common in fact that the things they put into feed have been linked to mad cow disease and ecoli.




To be honest. I am as much angered by tooths dishonesty as I am by 300 pages and I have seen no growth in his ability to put forward a better defence. As much as I disagree with him I could have acepted growth. He showed none.
Well its nice that your finally admitting to usually being dishonest. So what sparked you to be honest in this instance? If your referring to growth as in the acceptance of evolution, I totally accept what I have read on authoritative sites, not what others have been trying to spoon feed me, which I have commented about all along.




This thread did well to last as long as 50 posts. It, in no way should be approaching 400 at the level it has lived on and I am as guilty as any but I just cannot let that level of ignorance go unchallenged.
If I'm so ignorant why are you not able to come up with plausible solutions to my questions? I think your being incredulous and lying to yourself.




Top ten of tooths silly ansers? means failure by us to provide evidence he could understand and a resolute denial to understand any evidence on his side to learn and grow.

Not what I wanted for this thread
I still wait, in darkness for anyone to prove or provide proof of the spoon fed garbage that is rampant on this thread. On the other hand I have learned a hell of a lot about evolution in general. I knew very little to nothing when I first came to this thread so you are wrong there. I have only chosen to trust what I'm able to verify through honest sites that are clear in there understanding. Sites posing that evolution is real, with no details IMO is just a slap in the face to intelligence.



posted on Apr, 8 2012 @ 03:31 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



Well farming is a natural event, as many species do this.
You complete and utter ignorant fool. This is why I oppose you at every ignorant word that spews from your bottomless pit of absolute ignorance.

NAME THE OTHER SPECIES THAT FARM.

Also SO HUMANS FARMING IS NATURAL. Not what you have said in your past posts


You have to eliminate the common differences between species to understand them. This is why I keep saying you obviously don't know how to remove man from the equation to better understand what is going on.
I offer you an olive branch and you throw it in my face you complete baffoon. You backward clown. You do not even deserve the crown of an ignorant top ten.


Bees harvest, as another example and we sure didn't teach the ants and bees how to do this, but it is possible they taught us.
Have you no understanding of the language you use? Bees do not plant, tend and harvest they gather pollen and nectar. You stinking pit of ignorant festering bile.


As I have stated many times over, diversity could easily be explained by a creator using recycled life
That is not a discussion about the diversity we see around us today. It is the un intelligent, ignorant baffoonary of the brain dead fool that killed this thread and its intentions. Climb back under the rock you came from you festering carbuncle of ignorant bliss.


It sure seemed otherwise, which is why I called it the evolution channel.
Where would we be without your unrealated answer to a comment. Your total disconnection to the reality in which you live.


You think thats so cute, what are you going to do when there is a wiki up about toothisim.
The fact that you welcome this 'top ten ignorant statements' status finally explains why you infected this thread. How low, how pathetic and utimately how base a form of life are you?


You are wrong again, in your assumption that domesticated cows only eat grass.
I know cows are herbivors. Telling you this, the person that believes domestic grass is a form of life is a step too far for your level of understanding. DOLT.


This is so common in fact that the things they put into feed have been linked to mad cow disease and ecoli.
How much fat did they waste when they filled that void above your shoulders????????????


Well its nice that your finally admitting to usually being dishonest.
Not one word I wrote did I admit dishonesty. Your dishonesty is plain for all to see


So what sparked you to be honest in this instance?
Yet again you show no ability to read what is written and magnified your desire to only dwell in your fantasy world. A coward and a dishonest coward at that.


If your referring to growth as in the acceptance of evolution, I totally accept what I have read on authoritative sites, not what others have been trying to spoon feed me, which I have commented about all along.
You are the complete clown arent you. I have told you on many occassions this is not about changing your belief. You refuse to even aknowledge that belief is what you have even when writing 'It is not a religion but I believe in it'. Growing means that your argument has improved but being the intellectual equivalent of a flea your points today are no different than from your first post.

Ignorant, unintelligent excrement of a complete and utter fool. Pinocchio by name and Pinocchio by nature.


If I'm so ignorant why are you not able to come up with plausible solutions to my questions? I think your being incredulous and lying to yourself
Quite simply you putrid fool. YOUR DISHONESTY


I still wait, in darkness for anyone to prove or provide proof of the spoon fed garbage that is rampant on this thread.
Provide the definitions for the terms you made up and use. Give the updated version of 'target food'

Answer this question, which one is correct


Well I never said that all or even most others have target food, especially since it even tells us in the bible that a lot of species were brought here, means they probably won't have target food.
or


Aside from humans, most things here have target food.
Explain how you came to this conclusion


You never answered: It does not matter if you were confused or not. YOU CLAIMED ANTS HARVESTING CHEMICALS WAS NATURAL WHEN ANTS DO NOT HARVEST CHEMICALS. AGAIN I ASK

HOW DID YOU REACH THAT CONCLUSION???????
Do you think I forgot you rodent?


On the other hand I have learned a hell of a lot about evolution in general.
Your empty ignorance is a beacon to how much you have NOT learned and refused to learn.

edit on 8-4-2012 by colin42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2012 @ 04:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by idmonster

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by idmonster
 





No it doesnt.

In fact, if aliens exist in this uneverse (and they probably do) they will be purely within nature, i.e. natural.

For want of a better definition, supernatural means "magic".
Of course it does. As an example have you never seen the video to Katie Perrys ET? She explains it all.

Just because they are not on this planet doesn't mean they don't exist.


roger that,

you quoted as an example
Just pointing this out from the idiot.


You think thats so cute, what are you going to do when there is a wiki up about toothisim.
You think it is fun but he see's it as a reward. The guy is a retard, plain and simple.



posted on Apr, 8 2012 @ 08:37 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





You think thats so cute, what are you going to do when there is a wiki up about toothisim.

You think it is fun but he see's it as a reward. The guy is a retard, plain and simple.
If I'm such a retard how come you cant come up with a decent answer for any of my questions? Tree sparrow, Meh, no target food so target food must not be real, even though everyone I ask agrees with me that it totally makes sense.



posted on Apr, 8 2012 @ 09:04 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





Also SO HUMANS FARMING IS NATURAL. Not what you have said in your past posts
I never said when humans do it that its natural.




You complete and utter ignorant fool. This is why I oppose you at every ignorant word that spews from your bottomless pit of absolute ignorance.

NAME THE OTHER SPECIES THAT FARM.


Beavers harvest.
Hamsters harvest.
Rats have been known to harvest.
Squirrels do.
Chipmunks.
Bees.

Actually its so big, there is a wiki on it, you moron.

en.wikipedia.org...(animal_behavior)




I offer you an olive branch and you throw it in my face you complete baffoon. You backward clown. You do not even deserve the crown of an ignorant top ten.
Well if there is anything I do deserve, you certainly couldn't explain it.




Have you no understanding of the language you use? Bees do not plant, tend and harvest they gather pollen and nectar. You stinking pit of ignorant festering bile.
Well your obviously wrong because I found websites that agrees.




That is not a discussion about the diversity we see around us today. It is the un intelligent, ignorant baffoonary of the brain dead fool that killed this thread and its intentions. Climb back under the rock you came from you festering carbuncle of ignorant bliss.
Probably because you haven't caught on yet. Diversity is not explainable if intervention was the our means for getting here. Your OP was doing nothing more than assuming that evolution is the vehicle for why we are here, and your wrong.




Where would we be without your unrealated answer to a comment. Your total disconnection to the reality in which you live.
Well you all would be frolicking in the shaddows of desusion, continuing to believe that we have a common ancestor with apes. I still have yet to hear about the vehicle that was used to obtain this assumption.




The fact that you welcome this 'top ten ignorant statements' status finally explains why you infected this thread. How low, how pathetic and utimately how base a form of life are you?
Well thats just your opinion, just like how I commented that I'm not the one with an odd belief here, and I honestly feel that way. I think that evolution is an odd belief, but I also think that intervention is too, just that it has a hell of a lot more supporting it than evolution does.




I know cows are herbivors. Telling you this, the person that believes domestic grass is a form of life is a step too far for your level of understanding. DOLT.
Since your so narrow minded, I also wanted to point out to you just how much you lie. Barley was the first domesticated grass... ancientfoods.wordpress.com... but I honestly was just joking around when I wrote that.




How much fat did they waste when they filled that void above your shoulders????????????
Did you miss the point Einstien ? Domesticated cows eat feed which is man made.




Not one word I wrote did I admit dishonesty. Your dishonesty is plain for all to see
You started your sentance out by saying well to be honest, as though you aren't usually.




Yet again you show no ability to read what is written and magnified your desire to only dwell in your fantasy world. A coward and a dishonest coward at that.
Ok you were man enough to admitt that you usually lie, I will admit I may have lied as well. Back when I said I was impressed.




You are the complete clown arent you. I have told you on many occassions this is not about changing your belief. You refuse to even aknowledge that belief is what you have even when writing 'It is not a religion but I believe in it'. Growing means that your argument has improved but being the intellectual equivalent of a flea your points today are no different than from your first post.
And the only thing you have to base this on is the fact that I don't take other peoples words on things, how lame is that. If I just believed everything without honest reason.




Quite simply you putrid fool. YOUR DISHONESTY
And you still failed horribly at answering any of my questions.




Aside from humans, most things here have target food.
This one is correct, the other was a typo.




Explain how you came to this conclusion
Uhm.... because its like obvious.




Do you think I forgot you rodent?
Simple, ants aren't known for any unnatural activities.




Your empty ignorance is a beacon to how much you have NOT learned and refused to learn.
Well if I was to just accept everything at face value, I would believe that evoluti



posted on Apr, 8 2012 @ 09:07 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





Your empty ignorance is a beacon to how much you have NOT learned and refused to learn.
... evoltuion was the key to all life forms, even though nothing I have read off sites indicates so. I might believe that one day our species could evolve into something else, which there is also nothing to support that idea. The methods, reason and drive for this aleged activity is invisible and only several theorys are in strong debate. Macroevolution must be true because its just micro happening many times over. It has to be the weakest rube goldberg machine I have ever seen in my life.

I would also no longer believe in intervention, even though not a single person has presented me with any thing that proves it to be false.



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 02:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by colin42
 





You think thats so cute, what are you going to do when there is a wiki up about toothisim.

You think it is fun but he see's it as a reward. The guy is a retard, plain and simple.
If I'm such a retard how come you cant come up with a decent answer for any of my questions? Tree sparrow, Meh, no target food so target food must not be real, even though everyone I ask agrees with me that it totally makes sense.

You supply the definitions to the terms you use as you have been asked to for many pages now. Twonk



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 02:38 AM
link   
I'll play devil advocate (disclaimer I believe in evolution so get off my back)

I always find evolution to be interesting. The evidence is over time we evolved from ape/monkey (according to which view you believe in). But the theory is based on assumptions. The evidence we have are apes, ????, Neanderthal, humans. We are making an assumption that we come directly from apes (not that we could be created from something else). So we're making a huge assumptions and jumping through the evidence. Think of taking a picture of your face once a day for 25 years. You can see aging overtime (think of evolution this way). I would assume that we could do the same with evolution. But we currently don't have the evidence for this.

Our only evidence is from fossils. We look at differing prehistoric ages and look at the fossils overtime. But every now and then we see things that don't look like any fossil from the previous age. But why? For example I remember seeing a worm become a kabuto-like thingy (pokemon reference) with nothing in between. How did evolution occur so quickly?

Furthermore, why do some animals stay the same? Turtles and some strange fish in south america existed during the dinosaurs. why didn't they evolve? Furthermore, we have apes/monkeys and humans. Why didn't they all become humans? We are by far superior and able to easily kill monkeys/apes.

The best argument I've seen is that our genetics (human) and apes/monkeys are closely similar. But I remember reading a science article whereby our genetics (human) are actually closer to some earthworms. So did earthworms change its genetics to apes and then reverted back once it became human?

just playing devil's advocates



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 03:05 AM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



I never said when humans do it that its natural.
You acurracy when using the english language is appalling. Either that or you are just a pathertic liar. This posted by you


Well farming is a natural event, as many species do this



Beavers harvest.
Hamsters harvest.
Rats have been known to harvest.
Squirrels do.
Chipmunks.
Bees.

Actually its so big, there is a wiki on it, you moron.
You provided a link to HOARDING and you have the cheek to call me a moron


So you could not supply a list because none of those listed either farm, tend livestock and more to the point harvest their crops. You thick, lazy minded oaf.


Well if there is anything I do deserve, you certainly couldn't explain it.
The only thing we know for sure is you would be unable to define it.


Well your obviously wrong because I found websites that agrees.
Supply that website. It would not be the same one you linked to about hoarding would it pea brain?


Probably because you haven't caught on yet. Diversity is not explainable if intervention was the our means for getting here. Your OP was doing nothing more than assuming that evolution is the vehicle for why we are here, and your wrong.
Your total lack of understanding of your native language means you have no understanding about anything fool and you dont ever show signs of getting any


Well you all would be frolicking in the shaddows of desusion, continuing to believe that we have a common ancestor with apes. I still have yet to hear about the vehicle that was used to obtain this assumption.
Here you make my point. Empty headed fool with an equally empty life who takes a list about his idiotic statments and lies is a reward for work well done. PatheticCretin.com


Well thats just your opinion,
Nope all yours


You think thats so cute, what are you going to do when there is a wiki up about toothisim.
I wont even bother quoting the rest of that sentence as your cretinous remarks list is long enough already.


Since your so narrow minded, I also wanted to point out to you just how much you lie. Barley was the first domesticated grass... ancientfoods.wordpress.com... but I honestly was just joking around when I wrote that.
Which is why I suggested the question should be included in any list. Lets put it in context shall we. You state that a cow is not in the wild if it eats domesticated grass. You cannot see that context matters is no surprise to me. You are a moron after all.


Did you miss the point Einstien ? Domesticated cows eat feed which is man made.
Did you miss the point pea brain that they wasted a lot of fat when filling the void above your neck.


You started your sentance out by saying well to be honest, as though you aren't usually.
Again showing you have no idea of how to use or read your native language. Shockingly ignorant display everytime you reply


Ok you were man enough to admitt that you usually lie, I will admit I may have lied as well. Back when I said I was impressed.
Again as you cannot comprehend english. I have always been honest. Your admission of being a liar has come as no shock to anyone


And the only thing you have to base this on is the fact that I don't take other peoples words on things, how lame is that. If I just believed everything without honest reason.
Is that right.


Well if I'm a sapiensaphobe about this, then you must be new to whats going on. I didn't have to research the goof, I had never heard of anything that ants do that is unnatural. Now I understand that you guys might rely on the straight forward approach and find it pretty time consuming and tidius, but I on the other hand just realized some common sense facts. As a result a lot of unnecessary work was avoided.
Here you imply that you will accept any old rubbish to avoid hard 'tidius' work. You really are a fool.


And you still failed horribly at answering any of my questions.
Nope. You did not like the answer. You have maintain you have not been supplied answers, you have. You maintain no one can explain, they have. You say links have not been provide they have and all the evidence points to you not bothering to read them. So the answer is still:

YOUR DISHONESTY



edit on 9-4-2012 by colin42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 03:26 AM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 
How tragic it is to end one post pointing out your dishonest approach to this thread and have to open the next also highlighting your dishonesty.


Aside from humans, most things here have target food.



This one is correct, the other was a typo.
Again I will point out that in no way do I accept that the other statement was a typo.


Well I never said that all or even most others have target food, especially since it even tells us in the bible that a lot of species were brought here, means they probably won't have target food.
You clearly justify the first part of this rubbish by refering to the bible as supporting evidence. So this is clearly not a typo but your dishonest tactic to avoid accepting you are wrong by continually changing the meanings of your made up terms, hence the reason for demanding they be defined which you have refused to do.

Back to your answer. So the bible is therefore incorrect when as you say, it tells us lots of species were brought here but you maintain NOW that 'Aside from humans, most things here have target food.'

Supply the definition for target food. Explain what you mean by MOST.


Uhm.... because its like obvious.
Not an answer but if this is too 'tidius' for you then I see no point in you taking part in this discussion because again you are persuing the dishonest course rather than addressing the question


You never answered: It does not matter if you were confused or not. YOU CLAIMED ANTS HARVESTING CHEMICALS WAS NATURAL WHEN ANTS DO NOT HARVEST CHEMICALS. AGAIN I ASK

HOW DID YOU REACH THAT CONCLUSION???????



Simple, ants aren't known for any unnatural activities.
They definitely are not known to harvest chemicals. So how did you reach the conclusion that harvesting chemicals is natural to ants?


Well if I was to just accept everything at face value, I would believe that evoluti
Your words below show that you are more than prepared to accept anything on face value that fits your fantasy. Ignorance at its best.


Well if I'm a sapiensaphobe about this, then you must be new to whats going on. I didn't have to research the goof, I had never heard of anything that ants do that is unnatural. Now I understand that you guys might rely on the straight forward approach and find it pretty time consuming and tidius, but I on the other hand just realized some common sense facts. As a result a lot of unnecessary work was avoided


PS where are the definitions for the made up terms you use and where is the updated version of 'Target Food'?


edit on 9-4-2012 by colin42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 03:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by colin42
 





Your empty ignorance is a beacon to how much you have NOT learned and refused to learn.
... evoltuion was the key to all life forms, even though nothing I have read off sites indicates so. I might believe that one day our species could evolve into something else, which there is also nothing to support that idea. The methods, reason and drive for this aleged activity is invisible and only several theorys are in strong debate. Macroevolution must be true because its just micro happening many times over. It has to be the weakest rube goldberg machine I have ever seen in my life.

I would also no longer believe in intervention, even though not a single person has presented me with any thing that proves it to be false.
Your empty ignorance is a beacon to how much you have NOT learned and refused to learn.



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 03:45 AM
link   
reply to post by someguy0083
 
Hi



I always find evolution to be interesting. The evidence is over time we evolved from ape/monkey (according to which view you believe in).
We neither evolved from apes or monkey. We share a common ancestor with all primates and that includes other apes and monkeys.


But the theory is based on assumptions. The evidence we have are apes, ????, Neanderthal, humans. We are making an assumption that we come directly from apes (not that we could be created from something else). So we're making a huge assumptions and jumping through the evidence.
The fossil records and the supporting evidence from DNA shows that the assumptions made were correct and the ones left are not such a great leap of faith.


Our only evidence is from fossils.
The evidence is overwhelming and from many more places than fossils. Observation, DNA, fossil record and modern medicine.


We look at differing prehistoric ages and look at the fossils overtime. But every now and then we see things that don't look like any fossil from the previous age. But why? For example I remember seeing a worm become a kabuto-like thingy (pokemon reference) with nothing in between. How did evolution occur so quickly?
Not sure what you are saying here. Sorry.


Furthermore, why do some animals stay the same? Turtles and some strange fish in south america existed during the dinosaurs. why didn't they evolve?
The short answer to that is they have. You also have to look at their enviroment because if the animal in question is well adapted to his enviroment and that enviroment does not change then there is little to drive evolution and it appears to remain the same.


Furthermore, we have apes/monkeys and humans. Why didn't they all become humans? We are by far superior and able to easily kill monkeys/apes.
If you tried to live the life of another primate you would quickly find out that we are not far superior to them. Evolution is not about a better, improved model. Evolution describes how living long enough to pass on your genes and any advantages to the next generation changes lifeforms over time. Nothing more.


The best argument I've seen is that our genetics (human) and apes/monkeys are closely similar. But I remember reading a science article whereby our genetics (human) are actually closer to some earthworms. So did earthworms change its genetics to apes and then reverted back once it became human?
You would have to link to that information as I have never seen it.



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 10:51 AM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





You supply the definitions to the terms you use as you have been asked to for many pages now. Twonk
I already explained to you that the terms your asking for definition of, are obtainable through the standard definitions.



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 11:06 AM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





You acurracy when using the english language is appalling. Either that or you are just a pathertic liar. This posted by you


Well farming is a natural event, as many species do this



Beavers harvest.
Hamsters harvest.
Rats have been known to harvest.
Squirrels do.
Chipmunks.
Bees.

Actually its so big, there is a wiki on it, you moron.

You provided a link to HOARDING and you have the cheek to call me a moron

That would be because that is the wiki that google takes you to when you search that word, moron!




So you could not supply a list because none of those listed either farm, tend livestock and more to the point harvest their crops. You thick, lazy minded oaf. Ants tending livestock LOL, you really have lost it.




Supply that website. It would not be the same one you linked to about hoarding would it pea brain?

You will have to google it yourself because if I try to post it, the link wont work.




Probably because you haven't caught on yet. Diversity is not explainable if intervention was the our means for getting here. Your OP was doing nothing more than assuming that evolution is the vehicle for why we are here, and your wrong.

Your total lack of understanding of your native language means you have no understanding about anything fool and you dont ever show signs of getting any
Since you like to assume so much, why don't you just assume I'm right.




Here you make my point. Empty headed fool with an equally empty life who takes a list about his idiotic statments and lies is a reward for work well done. PatheticCretin.com
You can shadow me in your ignorance, I know how to use google, and apparently you don't.




Which is why I suggested the question should be included in any list. Lets put it in context shall we. You state that a cow is not in the wild if it eats domesticated grass. You cannot see that context matters is no surprise to me. You are a moron after all.
Ya but milk cows don't live on grass, they are grain fed, and the grain is man made you moron.




Again showing you have no idea of how to use or read your native language. Shockingly ignorant display everytime you reply
I'm still shocked that you chose to be honest for once.




And the only thing you have to base this on is the fact that I don't take other peoples words on things, how lame is that. If I just believed everything without honest reason.

Is that right.
Actually it would be wrong if I were doing it.




Well if I'm a sapiensaphobe about this, then you must be new to whats going on. I didn't have to research the goof, I had never heard of anything that ants do that is unnatural. Now I understand that you guys might rely on the straight forward approach and find it pretty time consuming and tidius, but I on the other hand just realized some common sense facts. As a result a lot of unnecessary work was avoided.

Here you imply that you will accept any old rubbish to avoid hard 'tidius' work. You really are a fool
Well you missed the point, no big shocker, which was that sometimes that answer is right in front of us and doesn't require a lot of work to find.




And you still failed horribly at answering any of my questions.

Nope. You did not like the answer. You have maintain you have not been supplied answers, you have. You maintain no one can explain, they have. You say links have not been provide they have and all the evidence points to you not bothering to read them. So the answer is still:

YOUR DISHONESTY
I think the dishonesty is in your being incredulous. You ignored every possibility I brought up, then in the attempt to try to disassemble things, tripped over your own work. Even if a house sparrow does have a relationship with our homes, that isn't to say that he has a relationship with us. But you stood firm on your flimsy tail and were so incredulous that it had to be a good answer.
Who is really being dishonest here?
Epic fail.



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 11:17 AM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





How tragic it is to end one post pointing out your dishonest approach to this thread and have to open the next also highlighting your dishonesty.


Aside from humans, most things here have target food.
One thing is for sure, you sure have integrity in being incredulous.




This one is correct, the other was a typo.

Again I will point out that in no way do I accept that the other statement was a typo
Of course not, because someone as perfect as I am, never makes mistakes right? Thanks for standing up for me.




Well I never said that all or even most others have target food, especially since it even tells us in the bible that a lot of species were brought here, means they probably won't have target food.

You clearly justify the first part of this rubbish by refering to the bible as supporting evidence. So this is clearly not a typo but your dishonest tactic to avoid accepting you are wrong by continually changing the meanings of your made up terms, hence the reason for demanding they be defined which you have refused to do.
Well they have already been defined and they aren't going to change if thats what your waiting for.




Back to your answer. So the bible is therefore incorrect when as you say, it tells us lots of species were brought here but you maintain NOW that 'Aside from humans, most things here have target food.'

Supply the definition for target food. Explain what you mean by MOST.
Well this is obviously where your train got derailed, your making an assumption (like you always do) that a lot means most, and it doesn't have to. I'm sure there were a lot of species brought here, but it may not add up to most, considering there was probably a plethora of life already here.




Not an answer but if this is too 'tidius' for you then I see no point in you taking part in this discussion because again you are persuing the dishonest course rather than addressing the question


You never answered: It does not matter if you were confused or not. YOU CLAIMED ANTS HARVESTING CHEMICALS WAS NATURAL WHEN ANTS DO NOT HARVEST CHEMICALS. AGAIN I ASK

HOW DID YOU REACH THAT CONCLUSION???????
Simple, I had never heard of anything unnatural that the ants partake in.




They definitely are not known to harvest chemicals. So how did you reach the conclusion that harvesting chemicals is natural to ants?
Well I thought I was quoting you.




Well if I was to just accept everything at face value, I would believe that evoluti

Your words below show that you are more than prepared to accept anything on face value that fits your fantasy. Ignorance at its best.
I have clearly shown that there is ample reason that suggests intervention did in fact happen to us. There is more proof of this than there is of evolution.




Well if I'm a sapiensaphobe about this, then you must be new to whats going on. I didn't have to research the goof, I had never heard of anything that ants do that is unnatural. Now I understand that you guys might rely on the straight forward approach and find it pretty time consuming and tidius, but I on the other hand just realized some common sense facts. As a result a lot of unnecessary work was avoided



PS where are the definitions for the made up terms you use and where is the updated version of 'Target Food'?

The terms are the common usage of the words and target food is not going to change.



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 11:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by colin42
 





You supply the definitions to the terms you use as you have been asked to for many pages now. Twonk
I already explained to you that the terms your asking for definition of, are obtainable through the standard definitions.
And I have explained to you that if you use two words togther then you change their meaning.

Redundant adaption is not the same as redundant or adaption. You made up and use that term, you supply the definition as it does not exist anywhere than in your head albeit there being plenty of room.

That goes for all your nonesens terms. Supply the definitions. Where is the updated version of 'target food'? You left that open saying it might be correct so I want YOU to confirm it.




top topics



 
31
<< 352  353  354    356  357  358 >>

log in

join