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: 453
31
<< 450  451  452    454  455  456 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 9 2012 @ 12:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by Connector
 





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
OH ya right, because when you do have 49 out of 50 pieces of the puzzle it can't possibly be correct. Right dude.


Tooth, you have ZERO "pieces of the puzzle" as every point you made (like that snake oil salesman Pye stuff) has been thoroughly refuted




posted on Jul, 9 2012 @ 12:59 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 





I have never read anything that conclusivly proves that evolution took place. There is only conjecture.



Wow, your ignorance knows no bounds


The reason you never read anything is because you SYSTEMATICALLY ignore all evidence that goes against your laughable mini-religion





Then why isnt there any proof that we evolved, and that we are currently evolving?


There is TOOOOOOOOONS of proof, you simply chose to ignore it. As for us still evolving, that's a FACT. You know, "facts", the stuff you love to ignore so much



posted on Jul, 9 2012 @ 01:02 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





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.


ADHD link


“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.

So as you can see ADHD alters genetics.




Can you name any of the benefits that smoking can offer? Don’t forget to supply links and quotes
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.




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
OMG I never said that smoking isn't bad for you, all I'm saying is that it has benefits.




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?
Ya but he probably wouldn't have 20 years in a tank. Your comparing apples to oranges. Which you do often.




(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.
True but when you have no evidence that we originated from here, you too are making an extraordinary claim.



posted on Jul, 9 2012 @ 01:05 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 





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.


Appetite suppression isn't a good thing, not even if you're overweight...mostly because you're fighting a major issue (being overweight) with a short-term highly harmful activity.

And of course smoking calms ADDICTS down because their bodies are craving the nicotine (and other chemicals tobacco companies put into cigs). And the same goes for thinking clearer.

I used to smoke, so I know. It has NOTHING to do with cigarettes being good in some way...it's just your body "calming down" after having its addiction satisfied



posted on Jul, 9 2012 @ 01:23 PM
link   
reply to post by mastermindkar
 





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:
You mean your answers fail to surface, I never got to see them. That would be nice.




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...
But I tend to stick to one that is more accurate...
Googles natural definition




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
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.




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:
I never said that volcanos weren't natural, but thats evolutionisim for you putting words in others mouthes.




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
Well no its just that I don't just take anyones word for things without proof.



posted on Jul, 9 2012 @ 01:28 PM
link   
reply to post by mastermindkar
 





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:
I'm going to retract that because its very complicated.

LIfe can exist provided there is other food to eat and that food can sustain that life. As is in our case. The problem is that it gets technical based on how much a species is going to be able to deal with it, and how many other similuar things there are to take its place.




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
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



posted on Jul, 9 2012 @ 01:31 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 





Which is fine, but the only problem is that man is not considered to be a part of nature.


Only in your fantasy world





Well no its just that I don't just take anyones word for things without proof.



No, it's just that you don't accept any proof full stop...that is, whenever it goes against your crazy mini-religion



posted on Jul, 9 2012 @ 02:29 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



Ya there was a problem long before this thread with links not wanting to post correctly.
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.


Then just call it a process if you like, but the bottom line is it sure looks like it has intelligence behind it.
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.


I have never read anything that conclusivly proves that evolution took place. There is only conjecture
(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.


Then why isnt there any proof that we evolved, and that we are currently evolving?
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?



posted on Jul, 9 2012 @ 02:30 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 
ADHD does not change your DNA. The change is already there.



posted on Jul, 9 2012 @ 02:43 PM
link   
Although many people would object to being considered sinners, the Bible puts the facts in proper perspective, saying: “Through one man sin entered into the world and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men because they had all sinned.” (Romans 5:12) The first human couple reaped the consequences of their own harmful course, but their offspring were affected too. (Galatians 6:7) Their progeny inherited imperfection, leading to death. Some find this more understandable when they consider the scientific fact that even now children may inherit diseases or defects from their parents. This can be so with hemophilia, thalassemia (Mediterranean anemia), coronary artery disease, one type of diabetes, and even breast cancer. The children are not personally at fault, yet they may suffer as a result of what they have inherited.



posted on Jul, 9 2012 @ 03:10 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 
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.


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.
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.


OMG I never said that smoking isn't bad for you, all I'm saying is that it has benefits.
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?


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.
Wiki on the Red Volcano Shrimp Volcano shrimp This one you have ignored before.

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.



posted on Jul, 9 2012 @ 03:17 PM
link   
reply to post by uva3021
 





ADHD does not change your DNA. The change is already there.
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.



posted on Jul, 9 2012 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 





Only in your fantasy world


As long as accepted definitions concur, then you must be bat crazy.

natural




No, it's just that you don't accept any proof full stop...that is, whenever it goes against your crazy mini-religion
I use the same rules in my own beliefs so whats wrong with that?



posted on Jul, 9 2012 @ 03:26 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





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.
That doesn't matter, its the truth.




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.
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.




(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.
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.




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?
Thats just it, there is no denial here, just your misunderstanding of the position of the steps of evolution.



posted on Jul, 9 2012 @ 03:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by uva3021
 





ADHD does not change your DNA. The change is already there.
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.
This statement does not make sense logically or syntactically. ADHD does not make changes in 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.



posted on Jul, 9 2012 @ 03:30 PM
link   
reply to post by uva3021
 





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.



posted on Jul, 9 2012 @ 03:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by uva3021
 





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.
No. This doesn't make any sense, and again is syntactically wrong. ADHD doesn't change DNA.



posted on Jul, 9 2012 @ 03:37 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





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.
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


No they have identified these sections specifically to ADHD.




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'm sorry but that doesn't disprove the fact that some people are actually relying on them for such.




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?
I guess your confused, I know smoking is bad for you, some people still do it, and you don't wonder why?




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.
And that is someones opinion which I could care less about .




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.
Well that supposed lie is how I found the sites to begin with. I googled eco balanced tank.

Explain that one.



posted on Jul, 9 2012 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by uva3021

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by uva3021
 





ADHD does not change your DNA. The change is already there.
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.
This statement does not make sense logically or syntactically. ADHD does not make changes in 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.


Weird how we all get it, and bravo you sir/madam for persevering.

I congratulate you on your ability to say the same thing many times and yet each time in a slightly different way.

(not a critiscim, and honest to goodness appreciation of your patience)...( spelling a little bad, might be drunk !!)



posted on Jul, 9 2012 @ 04:28 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



That doesn't matter, its the truth.
You would not recognise the truth even if it came with a label attached.


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.
(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?


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.
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:


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.
If you cannot truly reply to why you have misrepresented this group with the lies above then why do you continue to post here?


Thats just it, there is no denial here, just your misunderstanding of the position of the steps of evolution.
Not only is that sentence very poorly constructed all you are doing is denying your denial.



new topics

top topics



 
31
<< 450  451  452    454  455  456 >>

log in

join