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: 43
31
<< 40  41  42    44  45  46 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 29 2011 @ 11:25 AM
link   


Go to Egypt and bang your head against one of the pyramids. If there is a pyramid there that's your proof. Granted you're very intelligent, but that doesn't mean you're correct.
reply to post by bottleslingguy
 


The pyramids are objective evidence that our ancestors were intelligent enough to build simple geometric structures out of stone.
You are trying to suggest they needed some outside intervention, when in fact all your doing is minimizing their efforts to prop up a proven scam.




posted on Oct, 29 2011 @ 12:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by flyingfish



Go to Egypt and bang your head against one of the pyramids. If there is a pyramid there that's your proof. Granted you're very intelligent, but that doesn't mean you're correct.
reply to post by bottleslingguy
 


The pyramids are objective evidence that our ancestors were intelligent enough to build simple geometric structures out of stone.
You are trying to suggest they needed some outside intervention, when in fact all your doing is minimizing their efforts to prop up a proven scam.


It doesn't matter how much credit you give our ancestors' ability to think, it is a logistical and physical fact they could not have done the work required to build the pyramids with the simple tools people like you give them credit for. The number of blocks in the three main pyramids at Giza could not have been quarried, transported and put in place within the "commonly accepted" time frame. If the number don't add up in reality then they must have had some help via some other technology. This was no small feat and cutting and shaping stones of that scale takes a level of technological sophistication to do it is absurd to say they did it with copper and ropes. We're talking diamond tipped cutting tools, core bit drilling at tens of thousands of rpms with cutting head pressures in the tons- granite had the same properties back then as it does now. If it was possible to do so easily why aren't they still making them?



posted on Oct, 29 2011 @ 12:41 PM
link   
reply to post by bottleslingguy
 


This is the wrong thread for pyramid theories, there are plenty of existing threads discussing this topic ad nausem.
The facts are clear in the building process while all other theory's rely on a healthy dose of faith, not unlike creationist claims.
Lets stick to the facts and get back on topic.
If you have any proof that evolution is wrong then bring it, I'm positive your not going to find it in the pyramids.
edit on 29-10-2011 by flyingfish because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 29 2011 @ 02:14 PM
link   
Hope exists that someday a discussion of "evolution" would be found that does not have the motivation of

Atheist and others - proving evolution would prove God doesn't exist, there is no Creator, Christianity is based on fairytales, and the bible is composed of fanciful human imagination.

Christian majority - to believe in a Creator means evolution could not exist. To believe evolution exists is anti-God and believing in lies which would condemn you to suffering in hell forever and ever.


Anyone we know of that has been asked what evolution means to them they typically reply "mankind evolved from apes".

Is that really what it is all about?

So can anyone prove evolution wrong? Of course it can be proven wrong; At least the main sense of what evolution has come to represent and how the term is commonly used. If a person believes that evolution means man came from apes and so that disproves the existence of a God or Gods and/or a Creator then yes, the concept of what evolution has become is wrong. If a person believes that the existence of God means that evolution could not exist then yes, the concept of what evolution has become is wrong.

Evolution is wrong in that it does not necessarily disprove the existence of God, Gods, or Creators.
Evolution is wrong in that believing in a God's, Gods', or Creator's existence does not disprove evolution exists.

HOWEVER

Evolution is not anti-creation

Evolution may enlighten mankind to the mastery of a God, God's, or Creator.

Evolution may bring to light the wild imagination of the so-called interpretation of the so-called bible believer and their motives. Many an Atheist would agree of so-called bible believers they "will turn away their ears from the truth, and turn aside to fables"

Christianity denies evolution; the scriptures don't and never did.
Christianity's doctrines don't acknowledge evolution as part of a Creator's plan; the scriptures don't dispute evolution's existence but rather support it.
Christianity has deceived others into believing their fairy tale interpretation of Creation is factual when it may be fanciful but it is obviously anything but factual. Since Atheists have not figured that out it leaves one to question their motives.

What attests to poor motives of the Christian and the Atheist is the way they represent themselves, their doctrines, and the facts. Most of the time discussions turn into name calling character bashing festivals. This should be enough reason for anyone to realize Christianity and Atheism are not groups for anyone sincere to be a part of.

As far as we are concerned that is enough to prove the prevailing concept of "evolution" is wrong.

Anyone willing to look at our natural surroundings and the bible scientifically and respectfully with motives to find the truth rather than to support improperly motivated views count us in.
edit on 29-10-2011 by The Riley Family because: removed the word "their"



posted on Oct, 29 2011 @ 02:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by flyingfish
reply to post by bottleslingguy
 


This is the wrong thread for pyramid theories, there are plenty of existing threads discussing this topic ad nausem.
The facts are clear in the building process while all other theory's rely on a healthy dose of faith, not unlike creationist claims.
Lets stick to the facts and get back on topic.
If you have any proof that evolution is wrong then bring it, I'm positive your not going to find it in the pyramids.
edit on 29-10-2011 by flyingfish because: (no reason given)


"facts are clear" gimme a break
what a cop out. why didn't you say this two posts ago? you jumped right into it before you got smacked with some reality.



posted on Oct, 29 2011 @ 02:38 PM
link   
reply to post by bottleslingguy
 




"facts are clear" gimme a break what a cop out. why didn't you say this two posts ago? you jumped right into it before you got smacked with some reality.

No cop out, I have explained my position on the pyramids over and over again on the other threads, if you do a little research you will find all the info you need on these boards.
By the way I reject "your" reality- I still agree with me.

Back to the topic-



posted on Oct, 29 2011 @ 04:16 PM
link   
So the pelvic bone of the whale is of no relevance.

The pelvic bone in the Manatee is also then of no significance and the genetic testing to show its link to living land animals means nothing.

To accept everything was created as is means man and other 'modern' animals were competing with all the animals shown to have also existed and lived in direct competition it would appear.

These prehistoric creatures were shown in many cases to be highly adapted to their niches.

Can anyone please explain how this would work?

edit on 29-10-2011 by colin42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 29 2011 @ 05:34 PM
link   
reply to post by The Riley Family
 


Atheist and others - proving evolution would prove God doesn't exist, there is no Creator, Christianity is based on fairytales, and the bible is composed of fanciful human imagination.

As both an atheist and a scientist, I can't express enough how wrong-headed this interpretation is. First, atheism and evolution aren't the same thing. It's an unnecessary conflation of two separate concepts. The existence of a god or gods is, by its very nature, an unfalsifiable proposition. Evolution, observable as a fact and supported by all of the evidence gathered to date as a theory, only contradicts a literal interpretation of the passages of Genesis that relate to the origins of mankind and other species. Not the existence of God. All you're doing by making these claims is propagating a stereotype, not showing what claim are made by evolution or atheists as they actually are.


Anyone we know of that has been asked what evolution means to them they typically reply "mankind evolved from apes".

Which just goes to show how uninformed most people are about evolution.


Is that really what it is all about?

If you think that's "really what it is all about", then you haven't read the thread.


So can anyone prove evolution wrong? Of course it can be proven wrong; At least the main sense of what evolution has come to represent and how the term is commonly used. If a person believes that evolution means man came from apes and so that disproves the existence of a God or Gods and/or a Creator then yes, the concept of what evolution has become is wrong. If a person believes that the existence of God means that evolution could not exist then yes, the concept of what evolution has become is wrong.

Evolution is wrong in that it does not necessarily disprove the existence of God, Gods, or Creators.
Evolution is wrong in that believing in a God's, Gods', or Creator's existence does not disprove evolution exists.

This is nothing more than a strawman argument for the reasons outlined above. The theory of evolution is absolutely falsifiable -- all scientific theories are, ultimately, falsifiable. It's why evolution is a scientific theory and creationism/intelligent design are inherently unscientific.


As far as we are concerned that is enough to prove the prevailing concept of "evolution" is wrong.[/qoute]
So you can't or won't try and refute evolution based on its scientific merits, but only in terms of you own fallacious conflation of evolution and atheism? That's the definition of a strawman argument.



posted on Oct, 29 2011 @ 06:18 PM
link   
So neither of you felt like backing up your points or responding to my counterpoints. Not surprising. Aliens visiting the earth in the past and manipulating DNA doesn't contradict evolution, unless you take the standpoint that aliens have been manipulating this planet for 4.5 billion years. That sounds a bit ridiculous to me, and seems like more work that its really worth. Yeah, lets dedicate 4 billion years to building a planet. The earth was formed in a supernova, and evidence is the hard metals and minerals that we find. Gold, iron, steel etc. The besides the time frame, the main problem with that theory is that micro evolution and genetic mutations are observable in nature today. So life can evolve, but it didn't?
edit on 29-10-2011 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 29 2011 @ 09:18 PM
link   
I think it is possible we evolved on another planet, but we seem to be lacking the oodles of proof that should be present here on earth. I think out of desperation people sticking to evolution have resorted to accepting GMO's as an excuse. It seems to be the only way to try to explain unprovable changes in such a short amount of time. I'm still not understanding how someone can believe we evolved with 2 fewer chromosomes. It makes no sense. Even that those two are still there but fused, which only happens in a labratory. Is it possible that DNA manipulation was used to merge primates with something else which is what we are?


It's possible. It explains a lot. Many of the ancient aliens programs are indicating that we are the product of DNA manipulation. It's scary, very scary. One thing is clear about our creation time line. It's not matching up with the bible. God supposedly created us about 7,000 years ago which conflicts with our mtDNA showing us to be over 200,000 years old. Perhaps creating us in his image, was the image in a microscope. If he used existing DNA from other life, it could explain why the DNA facts don't match up with the bible.


Making frankensteins from existing things IMO does not make you a creator, more of a mad scientist. It's in line with another finding in the bible where god visits us from a space ship and has a four headed creature with him of lion ox eagle and man. It's apparent he plays with DNA, and was a space travler, IMO an alien. Of course this all still raises how and who created us. Did we evolve at all, or have we not changed much from our first day. The easy to find proof should all be here on this planet, but it doesn't seem to be. There should be proof hand over fist, and there isn't. It's simply because we didn't originate from here.


Zecharia Sitchen believes we were miners for gold, and were to serve gold to god. Is it possible we were an engineered enslaved species? There are parts of the bible that concur. Erich Von Daniken did a good job in explaining some findings in Charriots of the gods and how there was advanced technology in biblical times. Lloyd Pye with his human genetics exposes obvious tampering and altering in our DNA, more severe findings of gross defects in our genes.


All of these guys are basically pointing in the same direction. When I talk to evolutionists, they seem to be quick to discredit most of them, but never seem to be able to discredit all of them at the same time. Some of favorites are that the bible is a fairy tale. Zecharia didn't know how to spell. Erich admitting wrong findings. Pye was found to be a fake. I would like to share one I heard over 20 years ago. Darwin was wrong. The reason why his theory never stuck is because it's full of holes.


It reminds me of mainstream religion overlooking the preface of the bible that states it deals with things that are supernatural. It's an important oversight by a vast amount of people. People don't like to hear they are wrong, but even worse they don't like to be proven wrong. If we evolved on this planet, we should have so much indisputable proof that it wouldn't even be a question. If we aren't from here, it would be hard to find this proof, which is the case. There is no excuse for the lack of tons of proof.



posted on Oct, 29 2011 @ 09:32 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


If we evolved on another planet why do we have the same biology as the other mammals on this one? just curious.



posted on Oct, 29 2011 @ 09:39 PM
link   
reply to post by steveknows
 


Thats a good question. It is possible that we are not the only things brought to this planet. The bible concurs. Many things were brought here for us, but none of them are from or like that of our home planet. Hebrews.



posted on Oct, 29 2011 @ 10:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by steveknows
 


Thats a good question. It is possible that we are not the only things brought to this planet. The bible concurs. Many things were brought here for us, but none of them are from or like that of our home planet. Hebrews.



I will tell you that I don't believe we come from somewhere else. I believe that we are a natural event of this planet and an amazing one.

However because you recognised the quality of my question and didn't just dump on it and because you chose words such as "It is possible" I believe that you have an approach which is rare in this forum and I have no problem hearing what you have to say.

Bravo to you



posted on Oct, 30 2011 @ 12:11 AM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


I'm still not understanding how someone can believe we evolved with 2 fewer chromosomes.

I'm still not understanding how someone can believe that number of chromosomes is the main measure of "how evolved" a species is. Especially given that we have a similar amount of genetic material to chimpanzees -- there's no loss of genetic material in a true chromosomal fusion, we just have one larger chromosome where chimps have two smaller ones.


All of these guys are basically pointing in the same direction.

Of course they are -- Sitchin based his work on von Däniken, Pye based his on Sitchin. They're not three independent sources.


When I talk to evolutionists, they seem to be quick to discredit most of them, but never seem to be able to discredit all of them at the same time.

Why would they need to if, as you claim, they are three independent sources?


Darwin was wrong.

No, he just didn't have a full picture. That's why the modern theory of evolution aka modern evolution synthesis isn't called Darwinism.


The reason why his theory never stuck is because it's full of holes.

Never stuck? You mean the theory that's never been falsified in over a century and a half and forms the basis of all modern biology? That theory?


It reminds me of mainstream religion overlooking the preface of the bible that states it deals with things that are supernatural.

To which preface of the Bible are you referring?


There is no excuse for the lack of tons of proof.

I couldn't have said it better myself, since in your last thread you admitted that you have zero objective evidence to support your claim. This is in contrast to over a century and a half of evidence collected in support of evolution. Where is your "tons of proof"?



posted on Oct, 30 2011 @ 12:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by steveknows

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by steveknows
 


Thats a good question. It is possible that we are not the only things brought to this planet. The bible concurs. Many things were brought here for us, but none of them are from or like that of our home planet. Hebrews.



I will tell you that I don't believe we come from somewhere else. I believe that we are a natural event of this planet and an amazing one.

However because you recognised the quality of my question and didn't just dump on it and because you chose words such as "It is possible" I believe that you have an approach which is rare in this forum and I have no problem hearing what you have to say.

Bravo to you


I believe strongly in the bible, just that it has been misinterpreted all of this time. I'm not the only one that thinks god is a space alien, FYI there are a few others out there. My deceased father was an excellent detective and taught me some pretty cool things about how the mind works. Not that I know everything, but some things my friends do find shocking. As far as the bible being a fairy tale, I can tell you that people don't lie, the person lies. Not that conspiracies don't happen, but there are simply to many people involved in the making of the bible for it to be a fairy tale. Our misinterpretation of it's meaning is a whole other problem.


If you watch Lloyd Pye's human genetics, see if you realize any connection to the bible. He never once talks about religion but does mention evolution. He is calling his direction "Intervention." It's funny because he probably never realized that it does match the bible in almost everyway. The over 4 thousand defects could be from all of the punishments that god handed down to us. I think we always ignored all of the punishments not realizing how they affecting each and everyone of us to this day. If you open up your yellow pages of the phone book, Look at what percentage Doctors, physicians, hospitals, and all medical related services make up the yellow pages.


God came through with his punishments, and we have overlooked it not realizing. It's so messed up because with each punishment, its explained what the punisment will be, but it's never explained how it's executed. I believe DNA manipulation was used to make it so. It does explain the defects found, but there is much more.


It would appear that we have disabled powers. Many times in the bible the mention of telepathy comes into play. God can hear our thoughts and prayers was missunderstood as miracles, magic, and imaginary friends, totally taken out of context, it's simply telepathy. The reason I was able to figure this out was because of a device in the bible called the ark of the covinent, used so Moses can talk to god. It made no sense if he can hear our thoughts and prayers. It's because telepathy must have a limitation in range, so the ark was used for longer distances. The device was even stationed at the top of a mountain which is where we put our radio antennas still to this day. One thing that was odd was the use of radio period. For that time, its advanced, but not for interstellar communications.


I have always thought it was retarted that we try to send and recieve radio messages through space as it's pointless. It takes 3 seconds to radio someone on the moon and 4 hours to someone one on pluto. So another planet thats hundreds of light years away is pointless. Just like the burning bush was a radio device, god was using these devices to hide behind, he didn't want to show his face because we knew him, or at least his race anyhow. Our species (at least the first ones placed here) would have recognized him probably as an enemy, its the only reason to hide. This is also how he lost controll of us, you cant control an entire planet with mind control, so faith and punishment were brought into the picture. I honestly believe that adam and eve were abducted and brought to earth, thats what aliens do.

Erasing there memory, and not showing his face made sure there memory didn't come back. God visiting us in a charriot in the ezekiel chapter also concurs. I tested the idea of telepathy on an avid legalist christian that refuses to believe in aliens. I asked... if you were sitting down minding your own business and started to hear voices, what would you think it is. At first she thought she might be having a breakdown but not eveyone in the bible could be crazy, so her next idea was a spirit or a ghost. What a coincedence, two common words in the bible. It was their way of trying to explain telepathy.



posted on Oct, 30 2011 @ 12:57 AM
link   
It would appear we have disabled powers. The very first punisment in the bible appears to be the loss of telepathy. Isiah 6 mentions a power called precieve. In a twisted way its explaining how our remaining abilitys will be emphasized as a result of losing this power.


There are seven reasons that suggest we have disabled powers.

1. In my over thirty years studying the supernatural and paranormal, I always thought it was odd that reports about other life that visits us, seems to always have special powers, and we don’t. Looking at this from the commonality of life, we appear to be missing some abilities.

2. There are multiple suggestions in the bible that also concur with us having ability’s removed from us, as a form of punishment. One of which is telepathy, and another called perceive. There might be others missing as well.

3. Vestigial organs are present in the human species, and could be part of some or our disabled ability’s.

4. Only using 10% of our brain, or at least 10% of it’s capability, means we are missing 90% of it’s function.

5. The size of our head is not average by comparison to other life here on earth. In comparison to our body size, our head exceeds the compared percentage by anything else here on earth.

6. Lloyd Pye reveals DNA findings that could also support the idea of us having disabled powers. The first is that our DNA has been tampered with, and the second is the inverted sections, the third is the dormant unrecognizable sections.

7. Heightened remaining senses. We are the only species that has sex for enjoyment, as just an example. There are many things about are existing senses that could be overly sensitive as a result of missing ability’s.



posted on Oct, 30 2011 @ 05:11 AM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


3. Vestigial organs are present in the human species, and could be part of some or our disabled ability’s.

We're not the only species with vestigial or atavistic organs. How does your hypothesis account for those?


4. Only using 10% of our brain, or at least 10% of it’s capability, means we are missing 90% of it’s function.

Popular myth.


6. Lloyd Pye reveals DNA findings that could also support the idea of us having disabled powers. The first is that our DNA has been tampered with,

And the evidence for our DNA having been tampered with is what, exactly?


and the second is the inverted sections

Inversions are common in many species of organisms. How does your hypothesis account for those?


the third is the dormant unrecognizable sections.

All species have non-coding DNA. How does your hypothesis account for those?


7. Heightened remaining senses. We are the only species that has sex for enjoyment, as just an example. There are many things about are existing senses that could be overly sensitive as a result of missing ability’s.

Another popular myth.



posted on Oct, 30 2011 @ 05:12 AM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


if we were created by aliens from another planet from within this universe, then there is no god
if we were created by aliens from outside the computer we live in, then yes god is an alien being and god exists.

i agree the bible is mis-intrepretated, and the average person hasn't got a clue about it

f.y.i i believe we were created and as a result means i accept we are a digital being



posted on Oct, 30 2011 @ 06:43 AM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 





1. In my over thirty years studying the supernatural and paranormal, I always thought it was odd that reports about other life that visits us, seems to always have special powers, and we don’t. Looking at this from the commonality of life, we appear to be missing some abilities.


And none of that "paranormal" stuff is backed up by OBJECTIVE evidence...so who cares?





2. There are multiple suggestions in the bible that also concur with us having ability’s removed from us, as a form of punishment. One of which is telepathy, and another called perceive. There might be others missing as well.


The bible is only proof of what people back then BELIEVED, it doesn't necessarily represent reality. Hell, a lot of things in the bible are demonstrably wrong, like that global flood, or the exodus of the Jews.




3. Vestigial organs are present in the human species, and could be part of some or our disabled ability’s.


Animals have junk DNA too. If anything, that serves as further proof of evolution





4. Only using 10% of our brain, or at least 10% of it’s capability, means we are missing 90% of it’s function.


I'm not sure where people get this from, but it's a LIE!! One that has been debunked a long time ago...




5. The size of our head is not average by comparison to other life here on earth. In comparison to our body size, our head exceeds the compared percentage by anything else here on earth.


Except for the army ant who's head is a multiple of its body...yet we don't claim it's somehow "special" because of that. So yeah your "our head exceeds..." comment is nonsense...




6. Lloyd Pye reveals DNA findings that could also support the idea of us having disabled powers. The first is that our DNA has been tampered with, and the second is the inverted sections, the third is the dormant unrecognizable sections.


There's still a lot about DNA we don't understand...but nothing Pye presented is objective evidence to back up his claims. He's SPECULATING. Even worse, he doesn't even have a degree that would allow him to make any statements regarding DNA. He's an author who only cares about one thing: selling books to gullible people.




7. Heightened remaining senses. We are the only species that has sex for enjoyment, as just an example. There are many things about are existing senses that could be overly sensitive as a result of missing ability’s.


And lastly, you got this one wrong as well:



In short, you are clearly getting your information from pseudo-science rather than real science. I strongly suggest you start getting your information from reliable sources in the future



posted on Oct, 30 2011 @ 10:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by flyingfish
reply to post by bottleslingguy
 




"facts are clear" gimme a break what a cop out. why didn't you say this two posts ago? you jumped right into it before you got smacked with some reality.

No cop out, I have explained my position on the pyramids over and over again on the other threads, if you do a little research you will find all the info you need on these boards.
By the way I reject "your" reality- I still agree with me.

Back to the topic-


then please gimme a link to your pyramid thread



new topics

top topics



 
31
<< 40  41  42    44  45  46 >>

log in

join