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: 359
31
<< 356  357  358    360  361  362 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 02:33 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



You claim, but you are unable to provide reason that would otherwise explain how it is that we automatically know this.
How dare you try to say I am unable to provide you with information after the last 5 pages where you have provide next to zero and even that one link you know call 'shotty' information. But hey, here you go another link for you too ignore Water Safety/Baby centre I see nowhere it saying throw your baby in the water, it will be fine, it has instincts.


Your also unable to provide the learning channel in which ants use to teach there offspring how to use pheromones.
No one learns how to use pheromones. Jeezus get an education Pheromones

A pheromone (from Greek φέρω phero "to bear" + hormone from Greek ὁρμή - "impetus") is a secreted or excreted chemical factor that triggers a social response in members of the same species. Pheromones are chemicals capable of acting outside the body of the secreting individual to impact the behavior of the receiving individual.[1] There are alarm pheromones, food trail pheromones, sex pheromones, and many others that affect behavior or physiology. Their use among insects has been particularly well documented. In addition, some vertebrates and plants communicate by using pheromones.
Your ignorance is funny at first but wears a bit thin like an old joke told too many times.


Where did you pull that out of? No I said that locating any instinctive abilitys is rare, like automatically knowing how to swim.
From your poorly constructed answer of course


This is a good example of instinct. A rare one since we don't seem to have to many here. You can assume that there is large bodys of water on our home planet from this.




posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 02:53 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





How dare you try to say I am unable to provide you with information after the last 5 pages where you have provide next to zero and even that one link you know call 'shotty' information. But hey, here you go another link for you too ignore Water Safety/Baby centre I see nowhere it saying throw your baby in the water, it will be fine, it has instincts.


Here is a site that better explains how babys automatically know how to swim.

www.bellybelly.com.au...

I'm shocked you didn't know this.




No one learns how to use pheromones. Jeezus get an education Pheromones
You do if they aren't OUR pheromones.




Your ignorance is funny at first but wears a bit thin like an old joke told too many times.
OH I see where you got lost here. I was referring to us using pheromones from other species to manipulate situations, its unnatural but we do it.




From your poorly constructed answer of course
Well I provided you a good link that explains it, so it can't be that poor.



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 02:55 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



I had included your prior reply with that, so that you woudln't say what.
Your ignorance is beyond astounding. Read that question and your response again and then understand why I wrote WHAT!


They do use pheromones, are you saying that is false?
For pity sake it has been put infront of you many times in just these few pages. ANTS USE PHEROMONES TO COMMUNICATE.


Apparently, your making it appear as though they pull it out of there ass, but even then they have to either be harvesting it, manufacturing it, and eventually carrying it at some point.
by some fluke you actually got the correct answer but unfortunately you thought you were being funny. The anal gland is one of the glands used to secrete pheromones here is a link, one of many available Anal glands secete pheromones
As for harvesting it, please yet again all I can say is get an education.


Well I thought they did a lot more than that, and yest I knew that.
And you complain that all I do is call you a liar. You so did not know ants use pheromones to communicate. It is the one thing you have not wrote they use them for, everything else but that.

It also shows that none of the information I supplied has been learned by you. Nothing penatrated that dense bone that surrounds what must be mud.


So how is it that its so hard for me to grasp what they do, when your trying to tell me that we are just like them in so many ways? I think your wrong.
Another incoherent jumble of words. Its become your tell. Whenever you lie you start jumbling your words and/or issuing insults.

All I can make sense of is you think I am wrong but again you offer no supporting evidence.
edit on 11-4-2012 by colin42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 03:26 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



Here is a site that better explains how babys automatically know how to swim.

www.bellybelly.com.au...

I'm shocked you didn't know this.
What shocks me is your ignorance. How does this answer any part of the social setup/process we parallel with ants? How does this show what ants do is natural but what humans do is not?

But please explain to me why these same toddlers drown in puddles of about an inch when surely instinct should have saved them? They ony have to turn their heads afterall.

A baby struggling to reach the surface to breath being instinctive could just as easily be a pointer to our evolutionary path. The reason why it appears relaxed has more to do with it not knowing if it does not reach the surface in time it will die. A newbourn has no fear of what it cannot understand so is relaxed.

This is supported by the fact we appear to loose this 'instinct' very quickly as we age. What I would like to know is what you think instinct is?


You do if they aren't OUR pheromones.
And that is an ignorant answer to what?


Your also unable to provide the learning channel in which ants use to teach there offspring how to use pheromones.
Which I did. Which you have obvoiusly not read.


OH I see where you got lost here. I was referring to us using pheromones from other species to manipulate situations, its unnatural but we do it.
Please stop insulting my intelligence with your pathetic lies. Again I quote you with the answer you gave.


Your also unable to provide the learning channel in which ants use to teach there offspring how to use


I also note you have again skipped posts that challenge you. Again rejected the information supplied by me using ants to prove the point. Time to call the results

You have been supplied with more than enough information that shows humans are native to this planet or that no animals are native to this planet.

Your questions more than answered and with supporting evidence

You have supplied zero information to support your fantasy that we are not from here.

Refused to provide definitons or explantions of your made up terms with the only purpose I can see is it leaves you lying room to change their meaning whenever it suits you.

Asked for information and then ignored it to the point of not even reading it because it again proves you wrong.

You have avoided any reasoned discussion around the points made and ignored and purposely feigned misunderstandings at even the basic levels.

Given that you claim to be a science major and a borderline genius this can only be seen as a dishonest tactic to avoid the obvious fact you have nothing to support you or your fantasy and more than ready to lie to defend it.

Your fantasy has been rejected and found to be foundationless.


edit on 11-4-2012 by colin42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 09:07 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





Here is a site that better explains how babys automatically know how to swim.

www.bellybelly.com.au...

I'm shocked you didn't know this.

What shocks me is your ignorance. How does this answer any part of the social setup/process we parallel with ants? How does this show what ants do is natural but what humans do is not?
I wasn't talking about social structure, I was referring to things we know and can call instinct. The point is that there is like nothing in this arena for humans. Everything we know aside from this one thing I can find, we are taught. It's proof that we are not in our element.




But please explain to me why these same toddlers drown in puddles of about an inch when surely instinct should have saved them? They ony have to turn their heads afterall.
Because your weightless while in it, not on it.




A baby struggling to reach the surface to breath being instinctive could just as easily be a pointer to our evolutionary path. The reason why it appears relaxed has more to do with it not knowing if it does not reach the surface in time it will die. A newbourn has no fear of what it cannot understand so is relaxed.

This is supported by the fact we appear to loose this 'instinct' very quickly as we age. What I would like to know is what you think instinct is?
Instinct is something that you automatically know wihtout having to be taught.




You do if they aren't OUR pheromones.

And that is an ignorant answer to what?
I was referring to humans handeling pheromones from other animals.




Your also unable to provide the learning channel in which ants use to teach there offspring how to use pheromones.

Which I did. Which you have obvoiusly not read.
So do they learn it, or is it instinct?




OH I see where you got lost here. I was referring to us using pheromones from other species to manipulate situations, its unnatural but we do it.

Please stop insulting my intelligence with your pathetic lies. Again I quote you with the answer you gave.


Your also unable to provide the learning channel in which ants use to teach there offspring how to use
These were two different scenerios.




I also note you have again skipped posts that challenge you. Again rejected the information supplied by me using ants to prove the point. Time to call the results

You have been supplied with more than enough information that shows humans are native to this planet or that no animals are native to this planet.
You haven't provided a single shred of anything that says we are from here. I would love to hear it. The only thing is have provided is pseudo science claiming that other species do the same things we do. You haven't even proven they are from here either, your just assuming.




Your questions more than answered and with supporting evidence
Ya sure, so what are our hands for? Any answer for that one?




You have supplied zero information to support your fantasy that we are not from here.
This thread is littered with clues that prove we aren't from here. We don't even live in the wild, like you claim to keep pretending to not understand.




Refused to provide definitons or explantions of your made up terms with the only purpose I can see is it leaves you lying room to change their meaning whenever it suits you.
I'm going to change wiki meanins, I would love to see that one.




Asked for information and then ignored it to the point of not even reading it because it again proves you wrong.
Your guessing, and your wrong.




You have avoided any reasoned discussion around the points made and ignored and purposely feigned misunderstandings at even the basic levels.
I have responded to every reply you have posted. You are the one that hasn't answered all of my questions. You ignore them then keep asking me for answers I have already given.




Given that you claim to be a science major and a borderline genius this can only be seen as a dishonest tactic to avoid the obvious fact you have nothing to support you or your fantasy and more than ready to lie to defend it.
That makes a lot of sense, believe in something that you know is a lie.




Your fantasy has been rejected and found to be foundationless.
Yet your still unable to answer the simplest of questions, like what is our hands for. Or what is our target food. But its all false. Right.



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 11:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by colin42
 












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.










(note that when I came upon this post, I replied right away so I have no idea what other people are saying regarding this post)


Yo Tooth, I think your a "special needs" person.

You really should atleast tell this community that you are; That way, atleast we can understand your "short-comings"

If your not a "special needs" person, than your just both ignorant, stupid, and either can't read correctly (half-iliterate), or are just a darn lier.

Someone says, "...I am as much angered by toohs dishonesty as I am by 300 pages..."

and your reply is, "Well its nice that your finally admitting to usually being dishonest."

IF ANYBODY NEEDS AN EXPLANATION AS TO WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS, A TRIP TO THE DOCTOR WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA!



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 11:13 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 


I can feel your pain in dealing with such ignorance. Tooth is probably a special needs person. (I try to see things optimistically, cause it either he is special needs, or he is half-literate, or an ignorant fool, or all of the above lol)

Tooth aint worth it... Nobody should ever give an Ignorant Fool who has repeatedly demonstrated intentional dishonestly more than 1 olive branch ....



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 11:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by someguy0083
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


Evolution says that Apes and Humans have a similar ancestor, not that Humans came from apes.

Evolution is much more than assumptions. It's confirmed assumptions that have been repeatedly proven yet
there are "better" ways to prove any scientific theory. That is, anything in science including Evolution, is never 100% proven. That is, there is ALWAYS a way to improve ANY theory, NO MATTER how proven it already is.

Science doesn't deal with, doesn't address, and is completely independent of religion.

Science approaches any 'issue' with no pre-conceived notions, and uses empirical evidence and common sense to proof an issue.

Religion approaches every 'issue' with the same pre-conceived notion, and uses that one pre-conceived notion to explain an issue.



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 03:24 AM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 
Your fantasy has been rejected and found to be foundationless. You had your chance and for all the reasons given you failed tragically.


Yet your still unable to answer the simplest of questions, like what is our hands for. Or what is our target food. But its all false. Right.
For the last time. You have not supplied the definition for target food. No comment.

You have not provided any backup to your fantasy so yep, even if it is not all false you have not proved one jot real.

As for what are our hands for? In this case
followed by the finger.

Now if you want to hold a conversation about the thread topic, 'Explain Diversity Without Refering To Evolution' make your point. If not go talk to someone else about your fantasy I have fully satisfied myself that it has no merrit, is just your delusion and you told one lie too many.



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 03:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Confusion42
 
Thanks

I started this thread because I wanted to avoid the same old circular argument this topic seems to always evolve into


Well I avoided the same old argument, thats for sure but it was definitely the same old circle


Oh well at least I know more about ants now than when I began talking to tooth, shame he learnt nothing at all.
edit on 12-4-2012 by colin42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 12:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
Because your weightless while in it, not on it.


This isn't correct. You're not weightless. You're buoyant. The density of the human body is about that of water (coincidence? I think not!), but blow the air out of your lungs and you will sink.



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 02:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Confusion42
reply to post by colin42
 


I can feel your pain in dealing with such ignorance. Tooth is probably a special needs person. (I try to see things optimistically, cause it either he is special needs, or he is half-literate, or an ignorant fool, or all of the above lol)

Tooth aint worth it... Nobody should ever give an Ignorant Fool who has repeatedly demonstrated intentional dishonestly more than 1 olive branch ....


I can't believe this thread is still going with Tooth repeating the same exact arguments over and over. He started this back around page 50 and not a single one of his points has developed since then. I mean, doesn't that get boring after a while? I think the only way to "win" this is to simply ignore him. I suspect troll more likely than special needs person, simply by the way he selectively responds to certain points, but flat out dismisses everything that contradicts him. He flat out ignored the thread that was specifically about Pye and ancient astronaut theory, but keeps trying to fight this battle on evolution, in a thread where he's off topic with every post he makes. That should show you the motivations right there.
edit on 12-4-2012 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 05:48 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 


re·dun·dant/riˈdəndənt/Adjective: 1.No longer needed or useful; superfluous.
2.(of words or data) Able to be omitted without loss of meaning or function.

ad·ap·ta·tion/ˌadapˈtāSHən/Noun: 1.The action or process of adapting or being adapted.
2.A movie, television drama, or stage play that has been adapted from a written work, typically a novel.

wild/wīld/Adjective: (of an animal or plant) Living or growing in the natural environment; not domesticated or cultivated.
Adverb: In an uncontrolled manner: "the bad guys shot wild".
Noun: A natural state or uncultivated or uninhabited region: "kiwis are virtually extinct in the wild".
Synonyms: adjective. savage - mad - feral
noun. wilderness - waste

un·nat·u·ral/ˌənˈnaCH(ə)rəl/Adjective: 1.Contrary to the ordinary course of nature; abnormal.
2.Not existing in nature; artificial.
Synonyms: abnormal - artificial - factitious - affected

food/fo͞od/Noun: Any nutritious substance that people or animals eat or drink, or that plants absorb, in order to maintain life and growth.
Synonyms: nourishment - fare - nutriment - aliment - pabulum

tar·get/ˈtärgit/Noun: A person, object, or place selected as the aim of an attack.
Verb: Select as an object of attention or attack.
Synonyms: aim - mark - goal - objective - object - purpose



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 05:50 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





I started this thread because I wanted to avoid the same old circular argument this topic seems to always evolve into
And you honestly thought you would do so by starting out your thread with setting aside all of the evidence about evolution crap.

There is no evidence, its an unproven theory.



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 05:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Barcs
 





I can't believe this thread is still going with Tooth repeating the same exact arguments over and over. He started this back around page 50 and not a single one of his points has developed since then. I mean, doesn't that get boring after a while? I think the only way to "win" this is to simply ignore him. I suspect troll more likely than special needs person, simply by the way he selectively responds to certain points, but flat out dismisses everything that contradicts him. He flat out ignored the thread that was specifically about Pye and ancient astronaut theory, but keeps trying to fight this battle on evolution, in a thread where he's off topic with every post he makes. That should show you the motivations right there.
So let me get this straight, others are unable to answer my questions which in turn proves my theory, and that makes me special needs?

I don't get it, is because Colin repeatedly ignores my definitions claiming I haven't sent any or that he just refuses to accept them? So because someone is going to be a horses ass that makes the other person special needs. I don't think so. It's the lamest trick in the book to avoid admitting that you have failed in answering my valid questions.



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 05:55 PM
link   
reply to post by HappyBunny
 





This isn't correct. You're not weightless. You're buoyant. The density of the human body is about that of water (coincidence? I think not!), but blow the air out of your lungs and you will sink.
Ok? And there is a world of difference?



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 07:04 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 





So let me get this straight, others are unable to answer my questions which in turn proves my theory, and that makes me special needs?


No....the fact that everyone has answered your questions and you refuse to intelligently and honestly enter debate, but more importantly, the fact you don't understand that, makes you special needs. Oh ya...and the fact you misspelled genius in three separate posts, yet claim to be a borderline genius, sort of sealed the deal.

Also, hands are used to manipulate our environment, just as any other primates that have them.....

Do monkey's have paws or hands?

So monkey's( primates) either aren't from here( which you previously argued against, in defense of animal vs human disease) or we evolved from a common ancestor, as evolution suggests.



Tell me more of this "domesticated grass" that determines if a cow is natural or not.....BTW, heads up....I lived and worked in the country for a large potion of my life beside a cattle farm and have extensive knowledge in animal husbandry. Let's go tete et tete on the subject shall we? FACTS only, no "surmising" or "speculating". Failure to do so, will result in no reply and signify your failure


~ETA~
I'm all ears for alien intervention IF you could provide any verifiable scientific proof, which you have NOT. Science does not have any bias. Just facts, not philosophical / religious musings.


~ETA2~ After careful thought.....please don't reply to this post. I have better things in life to do then cyber smack someone like yourself......Larry M

edit on 12-4-2012 by Connector because: (no reason given)


edit on 12-4-2012 by Connector because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 10:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Connector
 





No....the fact that everyone has answered your questions and you refuse to intelligently and honestly enter debate,
So let me get this straight, because no one is able to surface with any answers to my easy questions, I'm the one not entering into a debate?




but more importantly, the fact you don't understand that, makes you special needs. Oh ya...and the fact you misspelled genius in three separate posts, yet claim to be a borderline genius, sort of sealed the deal.
I guess I must have missed that part in the definition that clearly states you must know how to spell the word genius or at least be a good speller.




Also, hands are used to manipulate our environment, just as any other primates that have them.....
Epic fail, but I'm glad you tried.




Do monkey's have paws or hands?

So monkey's( primates) either aren't from here( which you previously argued against, in defense of animal vs human disease) or we evolved from a common ancestor, as evolution suggests.

I'm missing the connection here on why your assuming either.




Tell me more of this "domesticated grass" that determines if a cow is natural or not.....BTW, heads up....I lived and worked in the country for a large potion of my life beside a cattle farm and have extensive knowledge in animal husbandry. Let's go tete et tete on the subject shall we? FACTS only, no "surmising" or "speculating". Failure to do so, will result in no reply and signify your failure
Well domesticated grass is real, but I was only making a joke.




I'm all ears for alien intervention IF you could provide any verifiable scientific proof, which you have NOT. Science does not have any bias. Just facts, not philosophical / religious musings.
There is documentation of it in the bible. Aside from that, its been a few to many years to produce current findings.




~ETA2~ After careful thought.....please don't reply to this post. I have better things in life to do then cyber smack someone like yourself......Larry M
If that was a cyber smack it must have been a kiss because no harm done here, and my name is not larry M.



posted on Apr, 13 2012 @ 05:58 AM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 





There is documentation of it in the bible. Aside from that, its been a few to many years to produce current findings.


Still listing the bible as proof I see


Since you use scripture as proof, you clearly also believe in gods with elephant heads turning into fish like Hindus do. After all, if it says so in scripture is must be true....no matter if objective scientific completely debunks this


Tooth's fantasy land must be an amazing place!! Comets are a sign of god, snakes can talk, children with hydrocephalus turn into aliens, and the list goes on. It's a bit like a mix of scifi and fantasy mixed with a healthy dose of magic to "make it all work"



posted on Apr, 13 2012 @ 12:13 PM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 





Still listing the bible as proof I see

Since you use scripture as proof, you clearly also believe in gods with elephant heads turning into fish like Hindus do. After all, if it says so in scripture is must be true....no matter if objective scientific completely debunks this

Tooth's fantasy land must be an amazing place!! Comets are a sign of god, snakes can talk, children with hydrocephalus turn into aliens, and the list goes on. It's a bit like a mix of scifi and fantasy mixed with a healthy dose of magic to "make it all work"
At the same time you have nothing to disprove any of this aside from your disbelief.




top topics



 
31
<< 356  357  358    360  361  362 >>

log in

join