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: 465
31
<< 462  463  464    466  467  468 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 16 2012 @ 02:12 PM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 





Tooth, you lost all credibility in this thread a loooooooooooooooong time ago. You keep on repeating the same nonsense, even after people have proven you wrong dozens of times. You are a prime example of an ignoramus

You typing "I've never been presented with evidence for evolution" after people have literally posted dozens of FACTUAL information is nothing but you trolling

But please, continue...entertain us
There is nothing factual that says we have identified evoltuion and witnessed it. There has never been anything of the sorts. No one has ever proven me wrong on this thread.
Target food was never beaten.
A relationship with a species was never found.

My list can go on but you have to remember that these were to try to find common ground which could prove we are from here, and no examples were offered that could do that. Unlike the anteater and ants.

One thing that has never been shy on this thread is opinions.




posted on Jul, 16 2012 @ 02:51 PM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


I'm curious what wouls strike people to buy into a recycled religion of evolution. Your claiming people have fronted me facts about evolution but none of the aleged facts offered any substantial proof. There is just simply oddles of proof that isn't there.

Throw in a ton of imagination and it will work. Darwin knew himself that his religion would not work if he was never able to produce fossil proof that ties two species together. Instead all we found was other species. This is why the term common ancestor was coined, it was a work around to get around the pesky fact that there never were any missing links found. MIssing links are still possible in the current idea of evolution but they are tossed out with the new phrase because no one is finding them. The reasons they aren't finding them isn't because evolution doesn't work that way, like they are leading us to believe, but rather that evolution doesn't exist at all.

Basically all they are saying is we have ALWAYS found common relitives (which there is no way to prove) so it must be common ancestors we are missing.

I have looked at all the aleged evidence and always found some very odd things within them like my favorite one stateing that evolution is a pluarity of theories and hypotheses. Now after reading that why would I have reason to believe otherwise?

There isn't anything that leads us to believe that the information in the bible is inaccurate, aside from our lack of understanding. Nothing in the bible claims it to be fantasy either. And the day that you have a supernatural book to compare it to, is the day you will understand.

Your claming that I was proven wrong many times yet back when I addressed these issues it was clear that wasn't the case. Are you perhaps eager to see me fail? Good luck, I have done my homework.



posted on Jul, 16 2012 @ 02:52 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 





There is nothing factual that says we have identified evoltuion and witnessed it.


You've been provided with dozens of examples. Again, prime example of an ignoramus completely ignoring facts





No one has ever proven me wrong on this thread.







Target food was never beaten.



Because it's a MADE UP WORD with a MADE UP DEFINITION!! We're talking about reality here, not fantasy land





A relationship with a species was never found.



Something you keep on repeating after being proven wrong dozens of times. Again, ignoring facts are we?





My list can go on but you have to remember that these were to try to find common ground which could prove we are from here, and no examples were offered that could do that. Unlike the anteater and ants.



Anteater?






One thing that has never been shy on this thread is opinions.



Yeah...only difference is, some of us actually bother backing up their opinions with facts, while others like you create their own bat# crazy mini-religions that have no basis in reality



posted on Jul, 16 2012 @ 02:56 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 
Ignoring your childish rant that was akin to a spoilt brat stamping its feet with its fingers in its ears screaming to the world 'There is a Santa' which really sums your approach to this subject and thread. This made me laugh:


One thing that has never been shy on this thread is opinions.
It is the only thing you had to offer and those opinions were based on your denial of the world around you.

Now I am still holding that door open for you (It has a sign above it 'EXIT')



posted on Jul, 16 2012 @ 05:29 PM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 





You've been provided with dozens of examples. Again, prime example of an ignoramus completely ignoring facts
As I provided as well, but when someones mind is closed its pretty hard.




Because it's a MADE UP WORD with a MADE UP DEFINITION!! We're talking about reality here, not fantasy land
It might be a made up term, but its still a very real occurance.




Something you keep on repeating after being proven wrong dozens of times. Again, ignoring facts are we?
No one proved me wrong once on this. The house sparrow doesn't have a relationship with the person but with the house. The bee has a relationship with the crops, not the farmers. The parasites that are indigenous to humans would qualify except that its possible they hitched a ride in our journey here.




Yeah...only difference is, some of us actually bother backing up their opinions with facts, while others like you create their own bat# crazy mini-religions that have no basis in reality
It's to bad that the author in your video never knew what significance they have in our kingdom. I never found anything backed up that wasn't in serious question, I guess thats why you guys dropped the ball through all of this. I never created any religion, its first of all not a religion, unlike evolution, and I didn't make it, I just read the bible and was able to see it for what it was. So there is your reality for you.



posted on Jul, 16 2012 @ 05:33 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





Ignoring your childish rant that was akin to a spoilt brat stamping its feet with its fingers in its ears screaming to the world 'There is a Santa' which really sums your approach to this subject and thread. This made me laugh:


One thing that has never been shy on this thread is opinions.

It is the only thing you had to offer and those opinions were based on your denial of the world around you.

Now I am still holding that door open for you (It has a sign above it 'EXIT')
I'm not the one in denial Colin. I'm the one going by the definitions I have offered. I'm the one going by the historical document of the bible, I think your the one in denial. I'm the one that offered a better explanation thorugh the idea of Target food, I'm the one that offered the example that there is no species that has a relationship with man and here you are the see no monkey, hear no monkey, speak no monkey.



posted on Jul, 16 2012 @ 06:45 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



As I provided as well, but when someones mind is closed its pretty hard.
You can say that again


It might be a made up term, but its still a very real occurance.



No one proved me wrong once on this. ....... The rest of this was censored to save the posters blushes ........




It's to bad that the author in your video never knew what significance they have in our kingdom.

Is this an example of your research. You do know:

Today Now!: TN is a parody of morning lifestyle and news programs such as NBC's Today and ABC's Good Morning America. Hosted by Jim Haggerty
The Onion Still who would have known. It looks so real



posted on Jul, 16 2012 @ 06:54 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 





I don't think church going folk will want to hear that aliens did it.


What makes you think we want to hear "aliens did it".
Your bankrupt get off your podium already. It's safe to say 99.9% of the posters on this thread have rejected your B.S.C ideas with zeal.



posted on Jul, 16 2012 @ 08:34 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





As I provided as well, but when someones mind is closed its pretty hard.

You can say that again
Oh Colin, my mind was very open until I read the opening statement on 29+ Evidences for Macroevolution. I have shared those and everyone is in denial about what it says.





The Onion Still who would have known. It looks so real
Ya but I know the onion is not real.



posted on Jul, 16 2012 @ 08:40 PM
link   
reply to post by flyingfish
 


Here is another good quiz I'll bet you can't come up with sufficiant answers for.

How come we evolved into using eathing utensils. I was just told on here that the advantages survived all else. So I honestly want to know what advantage is of using utensils.

It does seem a lot easier to just use our fingers, like we would back when we were related to apes.

I'll bet your clueless, speechless, and couldn't muster up an answer if your total reputation on this thread depended on it.

Yet it's such a simple question, I'm sure there is a logical answer.



posted on Jul, 17 2012 @ 02:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by flyingfish
 


Here is another good quiz I'll bet you can't come up with sufficiant answers for.

How come we evolved into using eathing utensils. I was just told on here that the advantages survived all else. So I honestly want to know what advantage is of using utensils.

It does seem a lot easier to just use our fingers, like we would back when we were related to apes.

I'll bet your clueless, speechless, and couldn't muster up an answer if your total reputation on this thread depended on it.

Yet it's such a simple question, I'm sure there is a logical answer.
It take it you mean eating as I have no clue what 'eathing' is.

As usual your understanding of evolution and the English language is appalling. We did NOT evolve into using cutlery.
As for applying logic you demonstrate no such ability. I often wonder if using it gives you pain.


Why do you think we use a knife and fork to eat our food? Don’t you cut up your food? Do you swallow huge lumps like a gannet? Eating soup or spaghetti would pose a problem wouldn’t you say?

Do you not think hygiene plays a part? Culture also has a hand in it. It is seen in the west to be unsophisticated to eat most foods with the hands. Many other rituals have grown around it to enforce class difference.

The Chinese use chop sticks. Their food is prepared already in mouth sized chunks.

There are many other cultures that use their fingers to eat to this very day but I must admit your glowing ignorance has again left me speechless but has shown you to be the clueless one



posted on Jul, 17 2012 @ 02:47 AM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



Ya but I know the onion is not real.
Yeah right that is why your response to the video was:


It's to bad that the author in your video never knew what significance they have in our kingdom.



posted on Jul, 17 2012 @ 03:01 AM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


We did not "evolve into using utensils" as you put it. We evolved until we had the means and ability to invent tools, and then we started inventing in addition to evolving. Inventions are not adaptations, though we do use inventions to adapt to our environment.
The dictionary helpfully labels the definitions of adaptation specific to biology in order to prevent misunderstandings:
dictionary.reference.com...

Inventions, having nothing to do with evolution, are not bound by its strictures and do not need to confer any advantage (though they frequently do. It could also be argued that even unhelpful inventions like cigarettes can enrich and thus enhance the inventor). Mankind did not invent the xbox 360 for the survival advantage it grants.

Silverware has been introduced at various times for various reasons. Knives were first, perhaps the first tools invented by our ancestors. The survival advantages offered are significant. As a weapon, an early stone knife was (and is) far better than fists and teeth, and stabbing/cutting have advantages over simple clubs. The ability to cut food into manageable chunks also makes it easier to transport and helps to prepare various nuts, fruits, and vegetables which are protected by their shells and coverings. Early knife users had a much greater ability to defend themselves from predators as well as hunt and kill prey, dramatically increasing their ability to survive.

The concept and practice of eating purely using utensils was not introduced until quite recently in our history, and then out of convenience and social practice rather than necessity. I don't know the details, but I'd hazard that spoons were introduced shortly after soup, and forks grew in popularity when knife technology became hazardous to fingers.



posted on Jul, 17 2012 @ 05:01 AM
link   
No wonder tooth is confused if he takes Onion clips seriously



posted on Jul, 17 2012 @ 11:39 AM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





It take it you mean eating as I have no clue what 'eathing' is.

As usual your understanding of evolution and the English language is appalling. We did NOT evolve into using cutlery. As for applying logic you demonstrate no such ability. I often wonder if using it gives you pain.

Why do you think we use a knife and fork to eat our food? Don’t you cut up your food? Do you swallow huge lumps like a gannet? Eating soup or spaghetti would pose a problem wouldn’t you say?

Do you not think hygiene plays a part? Culture also has a hand in it. It is seen in the west to be unsophisticated to eat most foods with the hands. Many other rituals have grown around it to enforce class difference.

The Chinese use chop sticks. Their food is prepared already in mouth sized chunks.

There are many other cultures that use their fingers to eat to this very day but I must admit your glowing ignorance has again left me speechless but has shown you to be the clueless one
Your hitting some good points, but still missing the facts, on why I'm bringing this up.

So the good ones you came up with were...

Obviously to cut up our food.
Hygene DOES play a part.

It's a fact that the mechanics of the food we eat require us to use some utensils. Most of the time a fork is required to cut up food into bite sized portions. I'm not sure if hygene plays a role all of the time but we usually do cook or burn food to the point of making sure that everything about it is dead as to not pass on the possibility of infection.

There is a reason why I was bringing all this up to begin with. There are clues here that prove something is seriously wrong.
I'm starting with the idea that we share a common ancestor (the ape) that doesn't use any utensils to eat. We allegedly share a common ancestor yet we share nothing with him, down to the eating habbits. I understand this might not mean anything to mainstream evolution, but it does prove we weren't close at all with them.

We are showing redundant signs in eating habbits when we use utensils. Our hands were suppose to be the only tools we would need to eat, and we find ourselves living otherwise. The fact that we need to have tools to cut up our food before we eat it, is proof that it's not our food. Food specifically intended for us would not require redundant tools in order for it to be processed. You have to remember that anytime we are going to great lenghts to make anything work, there is probably something very wrong. The fact is, tools are used almsot all the time in our eating agenda, which is yet another clue that all of our food is wrong.

On the other note, about hygene, why would hygene be a problem when its suppose to be our food to begin with. We should be able to use our hands with no implications. If your still going on the mind set that food isn't that technical and we are suppose to just eat what ever we can, then you have to ask yourself why it is that other animals don't usually need utensils to eat, and why they never developed such things, like we have.

Our eating agenda is just one giant epic fail. There is nothing that ties us to this planet when it comes to the food we eat, or how we eat. Again, not to be confused with the fact that we are eating something that is just allowing us to get by. The closest thing we have to intended food is fruit that grows on trees, but none that we have are special to us.



posted on Jul, 17 2012 @ 11:57 AM
link   
reply to post by mastermindkar
 





We did not "evolve into using utensils" as you put it. We evolved until we had the means and ability to invent tools, and then we started inventing in addition to evolving. Inventions are not adaptations, though we do use inventions to adapt to our environment.
The dictionary helpfully labels the definitions of adaptation specific to biology in order to prevent misunderstandings:
dictionary.reference.com...
I need to address this as I failed to do so for Colin. There is no reason to EVER adapt when one has evolved. To evolve means that a species has changed to fit his or her enviroment. To adapt means that we find a way to work around a problem as a result of failing to evolve. So they are contradictions in each other, as they are the same. Having the ability to adapt is redundant when we are supposedly evolving. My point is that it proves we are NOT evolving, which is why we need to adapt so much. At times we are even found to be going backwards in evolution, so I say we are de-evolving.

Here is the master of all questions. If evolution ensures that the advantage wins, then please explain to me what the advantage is for relying on utensils to eat is? We had to go through the trouble of manufactureing them, and also washing them for each use. They must hold great importance, and I'm not talking about the fact that we can't eat food without them. I want to know why we needed them to begin with. It makes no sense, the only thing that does make sense is that we aren't eating food that was intended for us.




Inventions, having nothing to do with evolution, are not bound by its strictures and do not need to confer any advantage (though they frequently do. It could also be argued that even unhelpful inventions like cigarettes can enrich and thus enhance the inventor). Mankind did not invent the xbox 360 for the survival advantage it grants.
Inventions are forms of adaptation, we only make them, as we need them to survive on a planet that wasn't made for us. Trust me if this were our planet we would not be faced with such problems. Our intended planet would actually accomodate us.




Silverware has been introduced at various times for various reasons. Knives were first, perhaps the first tools invented by our ancestors. The survival advantages offered are significant. As a weapon, an early stone knife was (and is) far better than fists and teeth, and stabbing/cutting have advantages over simple clubs. The ability to cut food into manageable chunks also makes it easier to transport and helps to prepare various nuts, fruits, and vegetables which are protected by their shells and coverings. Early knife users had a much greater ability to defend themselves from predators as well as hunt and kill prey, dramatically increasing their ability to survive.
Anytime that we have to redundantly adapt, its proof that something is not right. We shouldn't have to go through such lenghts. This isn't an issue of life being hard, or me being lazy, what this all does is place more work and burden on us to achieve something that we need. You can see from the wiki definitinon about evolution that adaptation is also listed in there as being a part of evolution. The fact is that is false. If evolution were present we wouldn't have to adapt, because things would be getting changed on a molecular level to support the efforts. So either there is no evolution, or we only have the ability to adapt because evolution failed us.




The concept and practice of eating purely using utensils was not introduced until quite recently in our history, and then out of convenience and social practice rather than necessity. I don't know the details, but I'd hazard that spoons were introduced shortly after soup, and forks grew in popularity when knife technology became hazardous to fingers.
The question is more about why would, we or should we need them at all. Other animals don't use utensils to eat.



posted on Jul, 17 2012 @ 11:58 AM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 





No wonder tooth is confused if he takes Onion clips seriously
That would be bat crazy, like I just stated, I know that the onion is not real.



posted on Jul, 17 2012 @ 12:34 PM
link   
I too have wondered about God, the universe, evolution and even about some alien race genetically altering us to what we are now. It's enough to drive a person insane, mostly because we have the answers to nothing (unless you believe what has been written in the bible), and probably never will.
As far as how the universe got here . . . I don't know. What was it before the big bang? An atom? A grain of sand? A tennis ball? Was there even a big bang? Where did God come from? Was he the first man? A monkey? I don't know. Then it occurred to me . . . It doesn't matter. The fact is that they are here, who cares how it all came to be, it just is.
What if everybody is right in their own way? God is the universe. Everything is/was created by (or within) him/her and all the necessary building blocks of life with it. From there, with God watching over, evolution happened. Not just here on Earth, but everywhere in the universe. Eventually, on Earth (fast forwarding past dinosaurs and such), came the first homo-sapiens. A native species to this world. Years down the road an alien race, from a different part of the universe, made it's way here and decided it would be a nice place to live too, so they stayed. And maybe more aliens from different places heard about Earth and decided to come and stay too. Thus the reason for different cultures of people.
The point is, not everything has to be one way or the other. Could it be? Well sure, but it doesn't have to be. Don't get stuck on one path. One path rarely holds all of the answers.

*Edit: We should be less concerned about how we got here and where we came from and more concerned about where we are going.
edit on 17-7-2012 by moonlightpale because: Wanted to add something



posted on Jul, 17 2012 @ 01:19 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



It's a fact that the mechanics of the food we eat require us to use some utensils. Most of the time a fork is required to cut up food into bite sized portions.
Do you? I use a knife to cut mine and hold it with the fork


I'm not sure if hygene plays a role all of the time but we usually do cook or burn food to the point of making sure that everything about it is dead as to not pass on the possibility of infection.
We cook food for many reasons. To kill bacteria. To cause chemical change te enhance taste or make more digestible. To prolong storage life of the food


There is a reason why I was bringing all this up to begin with. There are clues here that prove something is seriously wrong.
Oh dear I knew you would spoil things.



I'm starting with the idea that we share a common ancestor (the ape) that doesn't use any utensils to eat.
What tripe and tripe you repeat when a 2 second search would show you are wrong. Chimps using tools The chimps in this case are using a stick as we use a spoon. There are countless other examples and not just limited to primates so you base everything on a concept easily shown wrong and backed up with evidence.


We allegedly share a common ancestor yet we share nothing with him, down to the eating habbits.
You know, you repeat this nonsense ignoring all the things that show we have more in common with other primates than any other creatures on this planet. The only reason you continue to deny the multitude of common traits, habits and interaction with each other and our environment is because each time it shows how wrong you are. It's called DENIAL.


I understand this might not mean anything to mainstream evolution, but it does prove we weren't close at all with them.
Now how do you justify calling your opinion proof when I have so easily shown you to be wrong with a 2 second search?


We are showing redundant signs in eating habbits when we use utensils.
Oh dear. You just used the magic word 'redundant' that stops all discussion. Not to worry though as all that followed is utter nonsense.


On the other note, about hygene, why would hygene be a problem when its suppose to be our food to begin with.
Because it is also the food of other things we call bacteria. Because the world we live in is full of bacteria. How can you not know this?



We should be able to use our hands with no implications.
We directly interact with the world around us with our hands which is why you mother tells you or at least should have told you to wash your hands before meals.



If your still going on the mind set that food isn't that technical and we are suppose to just eat what ever we can, then you have to ask yourself why it is that other animals don't usually need utensils to eat, and why they never developed such things, like we have.
Apart from all the animals that do you mean
Your reasoning above, and I use that term very loosely is something I would only expect an infant to ask and even then I would ask it to think about it, use its eyes and tell me its answer.


Our eating agenda is just one giant epic fail. ........... Been answered ........... Not based on reality .......... Boring .... fell asleep



posted on Jul, 17 2012 @ 01:24 PM
link   
reply to post by moonlightpale
 


Intervention agrees with just about everything, from what I can tell, except evolution.

The fact is there is no way we could have evolved here, if we aren't from here.




top topics



 
31
<< 462  463  464    466  467  468 >>

log in

join