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.
Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by Connector
OH ya right, because when you do have 49 out of 50 pieces of the puzzle it can't possibly be correct. Right dude.
This is not a discussion, it's a debate. If you make a claim, support it with veritable proof i.e. links, quotes, field of research. To make a claim and then respond " wow its been so long I have forgotten" is not acceptable and makes you and your claims look ridiculous.
So in other words ( thought you'd like that) you have NO PROOF other then your option
I have never read anything that conclusivly proves that evolution took place. There is only conjecture.
Then why isnt there any proof that we evolved, and that we are currently evolving?
Suddenly you can provide links so before I comment on your rediscovered ability and the links you have now supplied
Supply the source of the definition you claim to be for natural. Provide the quote from your original link (including the link) where it states ADHD changes DNA.
So as you can see ADHD alters genetics.
“We found that, compared with the control group, the children with ADHD have a much higher rate of chunks of DNA that are either duplicated or missing,” said Thapar.
Appetite suppression is a major one. Some friends of mine claim that it calms them down as well. Others clam they can think clearer after a cigarette.
Can you name any of the benefits that smoking can offer? Don’t forget to supply links and quotes
OMG I never said that smoking isn't bad for you, all I'm saying is that it has benefits.
So much for putting words in your mouth. That makes it true then. Forget the evidence from research that shows smoking is a killer not just bad for you. This is the best showcase of the way you approach this thread, subject yet, and how you form your one man fantasy religion. Bravo
Ya but he probably wouldn't have 20 years in a tank. Your comparing apples to oranges. Which you do often.
More signs you have very little education or at the very least have no ability to put it too use. Life expectancy of the Hawaiian Red Volcano Shrimp in its environment is 20 years, the longest of all shrimp. In a sealed globe 18 months, 2 years at best and you claim technically you have extended its life. Even you cannot actually believe that rubbish. How desperate are you?
True but when you have no evidence that we originated from here, you too are making an extraordinary claim.
(Extraordinary not extrodinary, supposed not suppose and you forgot the question mark after do?)
The process Evolution describes is not an extraordinary claim. It does have when compared to the other sciences an extraordinary amount of supporting evidence.
Claiming that 'We are not from here' & 'Aliens transported us as a punishment or as gold miners' and that diversity can be explained by 'a creator or maybe many creators using spare parts'. Now those are extraordinary claims for which you have no evidence at all.
Appetite suppression is a major one. Some friends of mine claim that it calms them down as well. Others clam they can think clearer after a cigarette.
You mean your answers fail to surface, I never got to see them. That would be nice.
You asked for one example of an animal which has a natural relationship with man. I give you a hundred, and it fails to suffice. I'd ask you what sort of proof would be sufficient, but that's the question that led to this answer in the first place. Fortunately, I'm so clever I put an answer to this response in the post you responded to:
But I tend to stick to one that is more accurate...
Once again I managed to answer this question with the post you were replying to. To refresh everyone, here is the definition of natural: dictionary.reference.com...
Which is fine, but the only problem is that man is not considered to be a part of nature. Now you can check this online and see its highly debated, but honestly you have to at least ask yourself why it would even be considered if we had evolved. It's because one definition goes along the belief of evolution while others don't.
In my post to which you were replying I helpfully linked this list of ten major extinctions: listverse.com...
A quick perusal shows the most common causes of such extinctions are climate change, volcanic eruptions, and tectonic movement. Are such things natural? Again, natural means this: (as per dictionary.com)
1. existing in or formed by nature ( opposed to artificial): a natural bridge.
2. based on the state of things in nature; constituted by nature: Growth is a natural process.
3. of or pertaining to nature or the universe: natural beauty.
4. of, pertaining to, or occupied with the study of natural science: conducting natural experiments.
5. in a state of nature; uncultivated, as land
I never said that volcanos weren't natural, but thats evolutionisim for you putting words in others mouthes.
Those darn unnatural volcanoes and land subsidences. And whats with the curious lack of human intervention during the Late Devonian Extinction? Also, all the others? But that's okay, we have your word, and Itsthetooth's word is good enough. I'm sure you know what you're talking about:
Well no its just that I don't just take anyones word for things without proof.
I assume you have good reason to state this. Some evidence that aliens or "they" or someone caused a million year long climate shift to wipe out a portion of the life on earth so they could colonize it with more life to wipe out 9 more times. I assume you are sure that all the other planets you've never seen are in good balance, or at least supposed to be. I assume you have some reason to state that earth was a least probably in balance when dinasaurs roamed the earth. I assume incorrectly, because of the 10 great extinctions in that list in the post you were replying to, the most recent one was that which wiped out the dinasaurs. I guess earth could have been properly balanced until those pesky flatworms threw a wrench in the works right before the End-Ediacaran Extinction 542 million years ago.
So, you have no idea what you are talking about. The fact that you have no idea what you are talking about doesn't stop you from pretending to know what you are talking about. And when someone presents you with actual information regarding the subject you are talking about, you ignore it. Willfull ignorance
I'm going to retract that because its very complicated.
I disagree with this statement. I don't believe that life cannot exist without target food. I don't believe that we are the only exception. But I can't prove this to you. There is no evidence, only your word. I and many others have tried to show you otherwise, with facts and examples and our own opinions, but you remain unassailable. But I have found someone who can show that you are wrong. I know he can, becasue he is never wrong. To counter your statement that life cannot exist without target food, I present Itsthetooth:
thats why I'm retracting it, because it really depends on if there is any other food that can be stolen from another species, then of course that species suffers.8
The unstoppable force meets the immovable object. You say life cannot exist without target food. You say life does exist without target foods, (just not as well). You've twisted your words so much they now completely contradict themselves. The only thing we know for sure is that your opinion and your word are worthless
Which is fine, but the only problem is that man is not considered to be a part of nature.
Well no its just that I don't just take anyones word for things without proof.
Nope. Not acceptable. You have been able to provide a link every time you think it supports you. Every time you are trying to hide something you leave out the source and hope it is overlooked or you link to google front page. No such thing as coincidence. Your very weak excuse is not accepted.
Ya there was a problem long before this thread with links not wanting to post correctly.
I don’t call it a process because I want to. Evolution describes a process end of. You say it looks like it has intelligence behind it because you wilfully refuse to understand it. Your problem.
Then just call it a process if you like, but the bottom line is it sure looks like it has intelligence behind it.
(Conclusively not conclusivly) Avoiding the point again with an unconnected answer. You claimed that people on this thread had told you all the things you listed, which is a lie. Address that.
I have never read anything that conclusivly proves that evolution took place. There is only conjecture
It does not matter how many times you demonstrate your denial and wilful ignorance you will not see the evidence until you look. You showcase here you are too cowardly to face the evidence and consider it honestly.
Then why isnt there any proof that we evolved, and that we are currently evolving?
Ah I see unsupported testimony from your friends, very scientific. So to loose weight your friends smoke. Exercise is a much better and more efficient way to loose weight with many other benefits. Smoking, ignoring the known health related issues prevents you exercising (shortage of breath).
Appetite suppression is a major one. Some friends of mine claim that it calms them down as well. Others clam they can think clearer after a cigarette.
The hell you didn’t:
OMG I never said that smoking isn't bad for you, all I'm saying is that it has benefits.
You do realise how easy it is to go back to your posts don’t you? So what version of the truth am I meant to accept as your answer? The one where manufacturers only tell the truth about their products or they misrepresent their products to maintain sales?
I have seen a lot of tobacco advertisements and have yet to see one that points out that smoking is bad for you.
Is that so? Based on your opinion to maintain your lie. The Red Hawaiian Volcano Shrimp
Ya but he probably wouldn't have 20 years in a tank. Your comparing apples to oranges. Which you do often.
Wiki on the Red Volcano Shrimp Volcano shrimp This one you have ignored before.
Sadly, this little shrimp is currently being abused by being sold in tiny, spherical, fully sealed glass containers widely called "ecospheres." It is claimed by the companies that sell them that they are selling a fully functioning ecosystem with the shrimp and the algae keeping each other alive. However, that is a sad and devious lie, which is being propagated by these companies for the sake of profits and to the detriment of these wonderful animals.
Again. You have made the extraordinary claim. You have to provide the extraordinary evidence.
True but when you have no evidence that we originated from here, you too are making an extraordinary claim.
Thats an option as it can be passed on through genetics, however the article about lead is clear that you can become ADHD through lead exposure.
ADHD does not change your DNA. The change is already there.
Only in your fantasy world
I use the same rules in my own beliefs so whats wrong with that?
No, it's just that you don't accept any proof full stop...that is, whenever it goes against your crazy mini-religion
That doesn't matter, its the truth.
Nope. Not acceptable. You have been able to provide a link every time you think it supports you. Every time you are trying to hide something you leave out the source and hope it is overlooked or you link to google front page. No such thing as coincidence. Your very weak excuse is not accepted.
Nope I understand it probably a tad better than you do, and it creates new life, and seems to have a plethora of intelligence behind it, in order to acomplish all that it does.
I don’t call it a process because I want to. Evolution describes a process end of. You say it looks like it has intelligence behind it because you wilfully refuse to understand it. Your problem.
As an example if you talking about speciation it was never listed with humans. If your talking about macroevolution, its never been witnessed. All of the theories inbetween those are listed as such, and clear about it.
(Conclusively not conclusivly) Avoiding the point again with an unconnected answer. You claimed that people on this thread had told you all the things you listed, which is a lie. Address that.
Thats just it, there is no denial here, just your misunderstanding of the position of the steps of evolution.
It does not matter how many times you demonstrate your denial and wilful ignorance you will not see the evidence until you look. You showcase here you are too cowardly to face the evidence and consider it honestly.
You still have not answered my question. Why do you infect this thread when you have no intention to debate and are so insistent on being dishonest?
This statement does not make sense logically or syntactically. ADHD does not make changes in your DNA. The change is already there.
Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by uva3021
Thats an option as it can be passed on through genetics, however the article about lead is clear that you can become ADHD through lead exposure.
ADHD does not change your DNA. The change is already there.
In case I didn't reply, ADHD is causing duplicate, and missing DNA in humans.
ADHD does not change your DNA. The change is already there.
No. This doesn't make any sense, and again is syntactically wrong. ADHD doesn't change DNA.
Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by uva3021
In case I didn't reply, ADHD is causing duplicate, and missing DNA in humans.
ADHD does not change your DNA. The change is already there.
ADHD victims are found to have duplicate and missing DNA sections, so it sounds good enough to me. How else are those changes getting there? EVOLUTION Ha Ha
So you supplied a link, well done. Shame it is not the original one but hey beggars cant be choosers. Your quote supplied from your link does not say ADHD causes changes in DNA, not even if you squint your eyes and wish very hard. Nowhere else in that article does it say ADHD changes DNA so you statement is wrong.
I'm sorry but that doesn't disprove the fact that some people are actually relying on them for such.
Ah I see unsupported testimony from your friends, very scientific. So to loose weight your friends smoke. Exercise is a much better and more efficient way to loose weight with many other benefits. Smoking, ignoring the known health related issues prevents you exercising (shortage of breath).
The carbon monoxide, nicotine poisoning and addiction may explain why your clear thinking friends are not thinking clearly at all.
I guess your confused, I know smoking is bad for you, some people still do it, and you don't wonder why?
The hell you didn’t:
I have seen a lot of tobacco advertisements and have yet to see one that points out that smoking is bad for you.
You do realise how easy it is to go back to your posts don’t you? So what version of the truth am I meant to accept as your answer? The one where manufacturers only tell the truth about their products or they misrepresent their products to maintain sales?
And that is someones opinion which I could care less about .
Ya but he probably wouldn't have 20 years in a tank. Your comparing apples to oranges. Which you do often.
Is that so? Based on your opinion to maintain your lie. The Red Hawaiian Volcano Shrimp
Sadly, this little shrimp is currently being abused by being sold in tiny, spherical, fully sealed glass containers widely called "ecospheres." It is claimed by the companies that sell them that they are selling a fully functioning ecosystem with the shrimp and the algae keeping each other alive. However, that is a sad and devious lie, which is being propagated by these companies for the sake of profits and to the detriment of these wonderful animals.
Well that supposed lie is how I found the sites to begin with. I googled eco balanced tank.
So far from comparing apples with oranges I base my opinion on evidence you construct yours around a lie.
True but when you have no evidence that we originated from here, you too are making an extraordinary claim.
Again. You have made the extraordinary claim. You have to provide the extraordinary evidence.
Originally posted by uva3021
This statement does not make sense logically or syntactically. ADHD does not make changes in your DNA. The change is already there.
Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by uva3021
Thats an option as it can be passed on through genetics, however the article about lead is clear that you can become ADHD through lead exposure.
ADHD does not change your DNA. The change is already there.
People vary in sequence of nucleotides. Because of this, they vary in how they respond to environmental factors, such as: exposure to cigarette smoke, lead, etc...
This has been said to you countless times by multiple posters.
You would not recognise the truth even if it came with a label attached.
That doesn't matter, its the truth.
(accomplish not acomlish) Just saying evolution creates new life shows you know nothing and are determined to stay that way. Why do you continue to post here?
Nope I understand it probably a tad better than you do, and it creates new life, and seems to have a plethora of intelligence behind it, in order to acomplish all that it does.
You also refuse to answer when you make incorrect claims. I asked you to explain your false list below. So how do you think the above is replying it:
As an example if you talking about speciation it was never listed with humans. If your talking about macroevolution, its never been witnessed. All of the theories inbetween those are listed as such, and clear about it.
If you cannot truly reply to why you have misrepresented this group with the lies above then why do you continue to post here?
The people on this thread are trying to convince me that evolution can perform the following...
Create new species.
Cause adaptations.
Cause speciation.
Cause natural selection.
Cause sexuall selection.
Alter our DNA without us knowing.
Cause mutations.
Not only is that sentence very poorly constructed all you are doing is denying your denial.
Thats just it, there is no denial here, just your misunderstanding of the position of the steps of evolution.