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: 393
31
<< 390  391  392    394  395  396 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 24 2012 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by MrXYZ
 





Quantum physics doesn't make the earth go around the sun. By definition, quantum physics deals with the very small. If you wanna know why the earth goes around the sun, I suggest you read up on gravity
,


Also, it's really had to take you serious if you keep on mentioning that "please buy my ebook" clown Pye
Well than show me exactly who has debunked him. And don't try to troll with that same old lame excuse that you can't debunk Pye because his work is not on the table. Human DNA is public information, and has been for some time now.


Human DNA, yes. But he won't allow sampling of his skull anymore as the only peer reviewed test showed it to be 100% human. Kinda hard to sell ebooks that way




posted on May, 24 2012 @ 11:36 AM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





I have never had any problem crushing your nonsense,
Crushing? You never even addressed them. Changing the subject is not addressing them. Changing the subject from an eco balanced fish tank to a tank thats killing the life is not addressing it. Changing the subject from animals that have a relationship with humans to birds that have a relationship with mans home is not addressing the subject.

Sorry but your wrong.




No one ran except you
Then how is it that I'm still here, again your a liar.




left over spare parts
I never said left over spare parts, I have no idea where you got that from. You must have been not paying attention.



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 11:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Barcs
 


I think your missing my whole point Barc. What I'm saying is that mutations, natural selection, and sexuall selection have never been witnessed in the lab or in the wild. If it had, they would not only have proven evolution to be real, but also be able to identify exactly whats to blame for the occurances. They guessed, and came up with three possible reasons, but have never witnessed, or proved them.



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 11:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Barcs
 


Thank you for the link, I ordered them, and will watch them all. I have the time so its not a problem, and thank you again.



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 11:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by Barcs
 


I think your missing my whole point Barc. What I'm saying is that mutations, natural selection, and sexuall selection have never been witnessed in the lab or in the wild. If it had, they would not only have proven evolution to be real, but also be able to identify exactly whats to blame for the occurances. They guessed, and came up with three possible reasons, but have never witnessed, or proved them.


You do realize all those 3 things have been witnessed not only in labs but also nature, right? You simply ignoring that FACT doesn't change this fact



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 01:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by colin42
 





There are 390+ pages that show you to be the dishonest. ignorant troll. You have never supplied the definitions for your made up nonsense. You backtrack, avoid, ignore and run like a coward from anything that you cannot answer.

Your judge and jury is everyone that has read and took part in this thread. From what I see they all find you guilty of being a dishonest liar. An ignorant fool, deep in denial.
You went from accepting them and using them in your arrangment about ants, to rejecting them, to now claiming that I never gave them. Liar.


How would you know what I wrote about ants. Your yellow stripe shone and you ran screaming 'unnatural' you pudding. I have never accepted your made up terms, quite the reverse I have tried to get you to define them but you refuse to enter into any discussion however I try. You are just a fake. I have accepted you are, all you need do is look in the mirror and recognise it too.



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 01:25 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



Crushing? You never even addressed them. Changing the subject is not addressing them. Changing the subject from an eco balanced fish tank to a tank thats killing the life is not addressing it. Changing the subject from animals that have a relationship with humans to birds that have a relationship with mans home is not addressing the subject.
Oh yeah the balanced fish and plant in a sealed globe that turned out to be a red shrimp and algea. The shrimp lives in the wild from memory 20 years in the globe 18 months in which time it consumes its own body. I provided links, videos and even fixed your broken link. Thats you suffering a pretty crushing defeat in my book,

The house sparrow. If it has a relationship with mans houses then it has a relationship with man, another crushing defeat for you. But hey dont stop there you forgot to mention where I crushed you with wolves, ants, ants 2, God promising a land full of milk and honey to mention a few. Face it you have been crushed wafer thin.


Then how is it that I'm still here, again your a liar.
I dont know. I did ask you but you did not answer. Why are you still here?


I never said left over spare parts, I have no idea where you got that from. You must have been not paying attention.
Gone are the days where I searched back and quoted you. You have wrote that every time I ask you to answer the threads topic.

But hey that reminds me. You did not answer my question AGAIN. Let me repeat it.

Show with evidence how intervention explains the diversity we see around us today. 'god used spare parts' is not suffice.

You also forgot to answer why after spouting off about how you do not accept assumtions or anything not backed by evidence you write.


Bio diversity can be explained by having more than one creator as well.
Thats an assumption and where is the evidence?



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 02:55 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





Oh yeah the balanced fish and plant in a sealed globe that turned out to be a red shrimp and algea. The shrimp lives in the wild from memory 20 years in the globe 18 months in which time it consumes its own body. I provided links, videos and even fixed your broken link. Thats you suffering a pretty crushing defeat in my book,
And as a result you totally missed the point, then as a result of that, you don't understand what I was getting at. I think your just doing it on purpose. It doesn't matter that he only lives 18 months, it was mans feeble attempt to recreate a balance using as few critters as possible but I'm sure youll miss it again. You can't create the ideal enviroment with just a few critters, it takes a planet full to get it right.




The house sparrow. If it has a relationship with mans houses then it has a relationship with man, another crushing defeat for you. But hey dont stop there you forgot to mention where I crushed you with wolves, ants, ants 2, God promising a land full of milk and honey to mention a few. Face it you have been crushed wafer thin.
No it doesn't, and I would have asked for a relationshiop between animal and our homes if thats what I meant.




I dont know. I did ask you but you did not answer. Why are you still here?
Because I'm not running anywhere like you keep claiming that I am.




Gone are the days where I searched back and quoted you. You have wrote that every time I ask you to answer the threads topic.

But hey that reminds me. You did not answer my question AGAIN. Let me repeat it.

Show with evidence how intervention explains the diversity we see around us today. 'god used spare parts' is not suffice.

You also forgot to answer why after spouting off about how you do not accept assumtions or anything not backed by evidence you write.
That is the extent of my opinion about the topic, a creator, or several creators could have done all this, and you have no proof to prove otherwise. I on the other hand do have proof that a creator was involved somewhere, many different times. Flagellum is one, and the bible listing intervention and clearly showing that we aren't from here. It's best on your side of the argument that keep pretending that the bible is a sci fi book as it pretty much lays evolution to rest. At least evolution in the sense of how humans are found to be on this planet.



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 03:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by Barcs
 


I think your missing my whole point Barc. What I'm saying is that mutations, natural selection, and sexuall selection have never been witnessed in the lab or in the wild. If it had, they would not only have proven evolution to be real, but also be able to identify exactly whats to blame for the occurances. They guessed, and came up with three possible reasons, but have never witnessed, or proved them.


Genetic mutations - www.genetics.org...

Natural selection - www.sciencedaily.com...

Sexual selection - Part of natural selection. Just walk down the street. Tell me whether or not you are attracted to certain people more than others. Men are generally more attracted to cute, fit, sexy, well groomed women rather than unattractive, overweight, hairy ones. That is sexual selection. Claiming that doesn't exist is denying your basic essence as a human being.

So yes, they have proven evolution to be real. That was my entire point the whole time.


Thank you for the link, I ordered them, and will watch them all. I have the time so its not a problem, and thank you again.


Good. Please let me know if there are any parts you have questions about or have trouble understanding.



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 04:27 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



And as a result you totally missed the point, then as a result of that, you don't understand what I was getting at. I think your just doing it on purpose. It doesn't matter that he only lives 18 months, it was mans feeble attempt to recreate a balance using as few critters as possible but I'm sure youll miss it again. You can't create the ideal enviroment with just a few critters, it takes a planet full to get it right.
Here is a great example of your dishonesty. Thanks I could not have done better.

You claimed that the sphere was a balanced eco system and I told you there was no such thing and the sphere was a torture chamber for the poor shrimp. But now you seem to recall this was an example you gave of man trying to create a balanced system.


Your dishonesty knows no bounds. You also claimed to have knowledge that ALL planets have a balanced eco system. How you know this you never divulged but this planet does not have one as there is no such thing which I proved to you and you ran.



No it doesn't, and I would have asked for a relationshiop between animal and our homes if thats what I meant.
It changes nothing. All life has a relationship with our home, this planet. You really need to take some english comprehension lessons as yours are appalling. The house sparrow's relationship is with man because we build the houses it nests in. If you cannot accept that it shows how ignorant you really are.


Because I'm not running anywhere like you keep claiming that I am.
You run from questions you cannot answer. You run from facts you cannot rebut. In short you run from anything that threatens your silly fantasy. Like I have already written. Your lack of comprehension is tragic.


That is the extent of my opinion about the topic, a creator, or several creators could have done all this, and you have no proof to prove otherwise.
So you have made assumptions with no evidence to back them up. I thought you accepted nothing based on assumptions and not backed by evidence? Perhaps I have got the wrong guy.


No I just choose to not believe in things that aren't backed up. Intervention is redundantly backed up.
Nope it was you right down to the stupid ending.


I on the other hand do have proof that a creator was involved somewhere, many different times.
I wonder why you never show any?


Flagellum is one,
Dealt with and you were shown to be wrong.


and the bible listing intervention and clearly showing that we aren't from here.
Your evidence. A book based on belief and you call it evidence. How sad.


It's best on your side of the argument that keep pretending that the bible is a sci fi book as it pretty much lays evolution to rest.
How very, very sad. Funny thing is you always say the bible tells you this and that but never show where it shows it.


At least evolution in the sense of how humans are found to be on this planet.
What a stupid, ignorant reply. So are you know implying that evolution plays its part for diversity of everything other than man?



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 04:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Barcs
 





Genetic mutations
First of all its an estimate, you know why, because of what I keep telling you, they can't identify it.




Natural selection
Its the same story here, is change causing evolution, or is evolution causing change?




Sexual selection - Part of natural selection. Just walk down the street. Tell me whether or not you are attracted to certain people more than others. Men are generally more attracted to cute, fit, sexy, well groomed women rather than unattractive, overweight, hairy ones. That is sexual selection. Claiming that doesn't exist is denying your basic essence as a human being.

So yes, they have proven evolution to be real. That was my entire point the whole time.
To breed, or not to breed, that is evolution. I'm sorry man I'm not buying this.



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 07:00 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


Evolution is a process, not a cause for change. It's really sad that after all those pages you STILL don't know what evolution really is...and all because your astounding ignorance blocks any rational thoughts in your brain to protect that bat# crazy fairytale religion you created. Sad, sad, sad...and a clear sign that the education system is failing.



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 11:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrXYZ
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


Sad, sad, sad...and a clear sign that the education system is failing.

It's the religious nutters that are still trying to feed toothism dis-info to our children. If we didn't import brains from the other side of the planet we'd probably still be burning witches.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 12:01 PM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 





Evolution is a process, not a cause for change. It's really sad that after all those pages you STILL don't know what evolution really is...and all because your astounding ignorance blocks any rational thoughts in your brain to protect that bat# crazy fairytale religion you created. Sad, sad, sad...and a clear sign that the education system is failing.
Then there is no excuse why it can't be identified.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 12:02 PM
link   
reply to post by flyingfish
 





It's the religious nutters that are still trying to feed toothism dis-info to our children. If we didn't import brains from the other side of the planet we'd probably still be burning witches.
This is how I know you guys are either not paying attention or just don't understand, because I'm not religious.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 12:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by MrXYZ
 





Evolution is a process, not a cause for change. It's really sad that after all those pages you STILL don't know what evolution really is...and all because your astounding ignorance blocks any rational thoughts in your brain to protect that bat# crazy fairytale religion you created. Sad, sad, sad...and a clear sign that the education system is failing.
Then there is no excuse why it can't be identified.


What can't be identified? All of the 3 things you claim haven't been observed have been observed both in the lab and nature. For crying out loud, we are ACTIVELY APPLYING that knowledge every single day



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 12:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by flyingfish
 





It's the religious nutters that are still trying to feed toothism dis-info to our children. If we didn't import brains from the other side of the planet we'd probably still be burning witches.
This is how I know you guys are either not paying attention or just don't understand, because I'm not religious.


You mean apart from referencing the bible and creating your own bat# crazy mini-religion that has ZERO evidence behind it?



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 12:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by flyingfish
 





It's the religious nutters that are still trying to feed toothism dis-info to our children. If we didn't import brains from the other side of the planet we'd probably still be burning witches.
This is how I know you guys are either not paying attention or just don't understand, because I'm not religious.


It does not matter if you say your not religious! all your ideas require faith, do not have anything testable, backed up by any objective evidence, have any explanatory power. ZERO..



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 01:05 PM
link   
reply to post by flyingfish
 





It does not matter if you say your not religious! all your ideas require faith, do not have anything testable, backed up by any objective evidence, have any explanatory power. ZERO..
Well you just say that and believe that because you choose to disbelieve the bible. I choose to believe it.

There is no scientific proof that can prove or disprove the bible as ET intervention can't be recreated on demand.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 01:10 PM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 





You mean apart from referencing the bible and creating your own bat# crazy mini-religion that has ZERO evidence behind it?
You might see it that way as your not realizing that I understand it differently. I feel what I'm understanding is how it was meant to be understood. Semantics has taken the opposite choice in words.

When speaking with bible thumpers about what could have possibly of been meant about earth not being our home, meaning we are from another planet is the last thing on here mind. They are the ones that made up there own views about it and somehow took it like it was meant in a spiritual sense, yet it never said that.

So they are wrong, and you are wrong, my view on this is dead on.
There is no way that all of the semantics could be pointing in the same direction, which makes intervention clear and dead on.




top topics



 
31
<< 390  391  392    394  395  396 >>

log in

join