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: 493
31
<< 490  491  492    494  495  496 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 24 2012 @ 07:25 PM
link   
reply to post by idmonster
 





DO NOT take any lessons from this person on evolution....this person DOES NOT understand ANy evolutionary processes at all.
Ya don't listen to me, as I learned from the other people on this thread.




posted on Aug, 24 2012 @ 07:34 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





If you honeslty believe that cows milk was supposed to be our source of calcium, then you also would have to believe that each person is supposed to own their own cow, as the mass processes are not natural.
Dear god do you ever stop?

Go rant about milk somewhere else. Your argument has been destroyed so often it has become mouldy old cheese.

The fact that we don't have a natural supply of calcium, is an eye opening dilemma. Scientists have known for many years now, what our calcium intake should be at, but have failed to produce an idea on how we are suppose to get it from any natural source. So what we have been relying on is processed versions of cow products, like processed cheese, or processed yogurt. However you still need about 4 servings a day even with those. I guess evolutionitsts don't care much for health.




You do not want to debate diversity without referring to evolution so go away to somewhere that wants to talk endlessly about milk.
As I have said many times over, diversity can be explained by a creator. A creator could have made all the life we see, its that simple. It could have been several creators as well. I notice how people run and hide when I say this like having a creator is a bad word or something. The fact is evolution has never proven diversity, and if it does, then evolution is obviously a creator anyhow.




BTW you have not started your thread about how it is unnatural to bake bread. Do that
I don't make threads for colin, I make them for me.



posted on Aug, 24 2012 @ 07:37 PM
link   
reply to post by idmonster
 





And you do of course have proof of the statements made above?

The only document you recognize as historical is the bible and that refers to humans farming and hunting throughout.

So....proof please that farming has never been an instinctive part of human behavior!
I never said we shouldn't farm. You have this preconcieved notion that I'm saying drinking milk is what not to do, or farming is what not to do. You better do them, as this is all we have to stay alive. What I'm saying is we would not be dependant on such things in our intended lifestyle.



posted on Aug, 24 2012 @ 07:46 PM
link   
reply to post by idmonster
 





The fact that he can only spend a few minutes at each nest as he can not put up with the bites and stings.
The fact that he has to visit in up to 200 nests daily in order to meet his calorific intake.

200 a day, lets give him 1.5 minutes at each before he has to run away =300minutes....wow 5hours a day just eating....then there's the time spent searching for the nests, lets be generous and give him an average of 5mins between nests, that's a further 1000minutes.

Seems to me Mr Anteater spends nearly all his waking hours searching for, and eating insects.

Doesnt sound very efficient to me.......

Bad Design....Bad Designer...
The bottom line is he is still an ant hunting and eating machine. Who cares how long he spends eating, he was cut out for it for sure. In fact even with all of your super human adaptability, and technology I'll bet there is a single thing you could think of that could help him advance in his endevors. He has it all, he has the best. The only think I can think of is ant detecting radar, if there were only such a thing. I guess you could give him two mouths so he could eat more.


And BTW, you were wrong, according to this article I found Anteaters are effecient...


The Giant Anteater Is Built for Efficiency
The giant anteater is built for effeciency



posted on Aug, 24 2012 @ 07:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Barcs
 





If your answer is yes, as made obvious from the fossil record, then why do they feed on seals in many cases as their primary food? Sharks were never meant to eat land animals! Seals didn't exist as long as sharks, so clearly sharks must not be from planet earth, since they have no target food. Are you telling me seals were INTENDED to be eaten by sharks? Megaladon was brought here in a marine spaceship 260 million years ago. The whole target food / milk debate is nonsense. Milk is natural. Humans drink it because it's a good source of calcium, just like white sharks feed on fatty seals because they can give them enough energy for weeks. Simple. You should watch shark week and see how cool these creatures really are and how silly your concept of target food is. Nature is a constant battle for survival. Nothing is ever intended easy food as you suggest.
You honestly believe that? What if in the future all remaining animals had to spend every waking moment for food. Is that normal as well. Because thats where they are headed.



posted on Aug, 25 2012 @ 03:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by Barcs
 





If your answer is yes, as made obvious from the fossil record, then why do they feed on seals in many cases as their primary food? Sharks were never meant to eat land animals! Seals didn't exist as long as sharks, so clearly sharks must not be from planet earth, since they have no target food. Are you telling me seals were INTENDED to be eaten by sharks? Megaladon was brought here in a marine spaceship 260 million years ago. The whole target food / milk debate is nonsense. Milk is natural. Humans drink it because it's a good source of calcium, just like white sharks feed on fatty seals because they can give them enough energy for weeks. Simple. You should watch shark week and see how cool these creatures really are and how silly your concept of target food is. Nature is a constant battle for survival. Nothing is ever intended easy food as you suggest.
You honestly believe that? What if in the future all remaining animals had to spend every waking moment for food. Is that normal as well. Because thats where they are headed.


What, Like the Anteater does?

Besides, most animals do spend most of their waking hours searching for food, there are notable exceptions, primarily animal that live in and around heavily populated human habitations. This is due to there being plenty of food available that humans discard, Think urban foxes/badgers/deers.

A lot of these animals that scavenge on human discard have become tamer than their country counterparts, with foxes and badgers quite happily playing in gardens while humans sit and watch, country badgers would run and hide before you even knew they were there.

A recent BBC documentary showed on family of foxes that begged at an old ladies window, and even "sat" on command in anticipation of their treat. These are still wild animals though.

Wow, just read what I wrote above, sounds rather familiar. Grey Wolf --->---->--->--->Dog

edit on 25-8-2012 by idmonster because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 25 2012 @ 07:51 AM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



The fact that we don't have a natural supply of calcium ...... BLAR BLAR BLAR
Ignoring you do not know what a fact is. What part 'Go rant about milk somewhere else.' Dont you understand?


As I have said many times over, diversity can be explained by a creator. ..... BLAR BLAR BLAR
What part of your opinion does not interest me do you not understand? You have said a lot of nonsense a load of times but have yet to supply any evidence to back up any of your ignorant opinions.


I don't make threads for colin, I make them for me.
Really then why in this post HERE on the failed 'target food proves evolution wrong' did you post:


Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by HappyBunny
 





Toothy, I can't believe you started a thread on this.

Really?
Colin told me to
Do you ever make a statement that you have not contradicted elsewhere?


edit on 25-8-2012 by colin42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 25 2012 @ 07:57 AM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



The bottom line is he is still an ant hunting and eating machine. Who cares how long he spends eating, he was cut out for it for sure. In fact even with all of your super human adaptability, and technology I'll bet there is a single thing you could think of that could help him advance in his endevors.
Barrier cream for the stings, a bicycle for the trips between nests and a vacuum kit to save all that licking.



posted on Aug, 25 2012 @ 08:01 AM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



You honestly believe that? What if in the future all remaining animals had to spend every waking moment for food. Is that normal as well. Because thats where they are headed.
Most herbivores do spend every waking moment eating and searching for food. ID has show that is exactly what the anteater does as well.

Humans have leisure time because we use our technology and that includes farming. Jeeze you must live like a monk. Closed off from the world you live in



posted on Aug, 25 2012 @ 11:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
You honestly believe that?

It's WELL documented and sharks are one of the most commonly found fossil specimens.


What if in the future all remaining animals had to spend every waking moment for food. Is that normal as well. Because thats where they are headed.


What if in the future, anteaters eat different food? Is that normal as well? We can talk hypothetical speculation all day, it proves nothing.



posted on Aug, 25 2012 @ 01:54 PM
link   
reply to post by idmonster
 





What, Like the Anteater does?

Besides, most animals do spend most of their waking hours searching for food, there are notable exceptions, primarily animal that live in and around heavily populated human habitations. This is due to there being plenty of food available that humans discard, Think urban foxes/badgers/deers.

A lot of these animals that scavenge on human discard have become tamer than their country counterparts, with foxes and badgers quite happily playing in gardens while humans sit and watch, country badgers would run and hide before you even knew they were there.

A recent BBC documentary showed on family of foxes that begged at an old ladies window, and even "sat" on command in anticipation of their treat. These are still wild animals though.

Wow, just read what I wrote above, sounds rather familiar. Grey Wolf --->---->--->--->Dog
Ya as I said before, species on scavenger diets are obviously missing target food.



posted on Aug, 25 2012 @ 02:09 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





The fact that we don't have a natural supply of calcium ...... BLAR BLAR BLAR

Ignoring you do not know what a fact is. What part 'Go rant about milk somewhere else.' Dont you understand?
When will you ever realize just how wrong you are, then you toss the facts off to the sideline but hoping it just disappears. I guess thats how evolution works, anything that proves it to be wrong should be rejected and thrown to the side.




As I have said many times over, diversity can be explained by a creator. ..... BLAR BLAR BLAR

What part of your opinion does not interest me do you not understand? You have said a lot of nonsense a load of times but have yet to supply any evidence to back up any of your ignorant opinions.
You must be suffering from selective amnesia again as this was a documented event.




Really then why in this post HERE on the failed 'target food proves evolution wrong' did you post:
Just because I made a thread with your suggestion doesn't mean it was made specifically for you. But I can totally see why you would make that assumption seeing how narcissistic you are.




Most herbivores do spend every waking moment eating and searching for food. ID has show that is exactly what the anteater does as well.

Humans have leisure time because we use our technology and that includes farming. Jeeze you must live like a monk. Closed off from the world you live in
Well of course, things would take much longer if we didn't have our technology, but they wouldn't take as long as they do now if we were in our natural enviroment.



posted on Aug, 25 2012 @ 02:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Barcs
 





What if in the future all remaining animals had to spend every waking moment for food. Is that normal as well. Because thats where they are headed.


What if in the future, anteaters eat different food? Is that normal as well? We can talk hypothetical speculation all day, it proves nothing
No it wouldn't be normal. The fact that they appear to have an assigned diet proves that, which also proves evolution to be wrong.

Evolution will never be able to explain how it is that a species can have what appears to be as an assigned diet without the idea of intelligence being involved. And anytime there is intelligence involved, it blows evolution out of the water.



posted on Aug, 25 2012 @ 11:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
Evolution will never be able to explain how it is that a species can have what appears to be as an assigned diet without the idea of intelligence being involved. And anytime there is intelligence involved, it blows evolution out of the water.


The funniest thing about that is that the ant eater is solid proof of how creatures evolve to the their surroundings. It's one of the slam dunks in evolutionary science. You've been arguing for evolution this entire time without even realizing it.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 12:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Barcs
 





The funniest thing about that is that the ant eater is solid proof of how creatures evolve to the their surroundings. It's one of the slam dunks in evolutionary science. You've been arguing for evolution this entire time without even realizing it.
First off there is no proof that he ever evolved, its just speculation.

Second, even if he did evolve, there is no explanation as to why humans were just sitting around twiddeling their thumbs while this was going on. We never evolved the way the anteater did, why is that?

Remember, I'm an equal opportunity believer, and your not lending equal possibility to humans, as to why we don't have a nitch.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 01:09 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



When will you ever realize just how wrong you are, ... blar blar ...... more ignorance display by you
I will admit I am wrong when you supply evidence proving I am wrong. My guess that will be sometime never.

Now stop your tizzy at being badly beaten here and in your own thread. Dry your eyes and either start supplying that evidence of go bore someone else.

Jeeze I hate spoilt empty headed kids. Dont they teach you anything at school nowadays?


Rest of your empty, ignorance and lies DISMISSED



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 01:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
First off there is no proof that he ever evolved, its just speculation.

Now I could have sworn there is no proof that he was created. Does he not pass down genes to his offspring?


Second, even if he did evolve, there is no explanation as to why humans were just sitting around twiddeling their thumbs while this was going on. We never evolved the way the anteater did, why is that?

Here's a hint. It's in bold. Ant eaters evolved long before humans did, and obviously lived in a much different environment.


Remember, I'm an equal opportunity believer, and your not lending equal possibility to humans, as to why we don't have a nitch.

Equal opportunity? You've been ignoring and dismissing all evidence that doesn't go perfectly with your made up concepts. How many times have I told you that our niche is intelligence and craftiness with our hands? It's completely ignored every time, despite the mountains of evidence that support it. Humans didn't just show up and then all of a sudden there were skyscrapers, supplements and processed food. We lived off the land for 180,000+ years, which is the majority of our existence. No target food for humans, yet we survived that long without technology and science. Also how do you know that a human's "target food" didn't go extinct? Everytime somebody's pointed out the millions of creatures that don't have it, that's your excuse, yet it doesn't apply to humans, why?



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 01:49 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





I will admit I am wrong when you supply evidence proving I am wrong. My guess that will be sometime never.

Now stop your tizzy at being badly beaten here and in your own thread. Dry your eyes and either start supplying that evidence of go bore someone else.

Jeeze I hate spoilt empty headed kids. Dont they teach you anything at school nowadays?

Rest of your empty, ignorance and lies DISMISSED
I have never once given anyone reason to believe that I feel beaten, but thats probably you stretching the goal posts again. If you want proof its in my OP and in the thread.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 01:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Barcs
 





Originally posted by itsthetooth
First off there is no proof that he ever evolved, its just speculation.

Now I could have sworn there is no proof that he was created. Does he not pass down genes to his offspring?
Well of course he does, but there is no proof that process creates new species.




Here's a hint. It's in bold. Ant eaters evolved long before humans did, and obviously lived in a much different environment.


Remember, I'm an equal opportunity believer, and your not lending equal possibility to humans, as to why we don't have a nitch.

Equal opportunity? You've been ignoring and dismissing all evidence that doesn't go perfectly with your made up concepts. How many times have I told you that our niche is intelligence and craftiness with our hands? It's completely ignored every time, despite the mountains of evidence that support it. Humans didn't just show up and then all of a sudden there were skyscrapers, supplements and processed food. We lived off the land for 180,000+ years, which is the majority of our existence. No target food for humans, yet we survived that long without technology and science. Also how do you know that a human's "target food" didn't go extinct? Everytime somebody's pointed out the millions of creatures that don't have it, that's your excuse, yet it doesn't apply to humans, why?
If we didn't use it every step of the way, I would probably believe you. The problem is that some species on this planet also have some smarts, just not as much, so how would you explalin that? They just werent' supposed to live I guess.

We know our target food didn't go extinct as there would be documentation of what this food used to be. In addition the new food we are eating would be listed as such and such food to replace such and such food which also hasn't happened. How is it we can have documentation about how we supposedly got here but nothing about food missing.

I get that you think our ability to adapt is our purpose in life. Abilitys are just like seeing or hearing, they should be considered natural in their correct einviroment, but we are not in our correct enviroment.

I'm sorry but you haven't produced any evidence against target food, in fact you have helped prove the point.


edit on 26-8-2012 by itsthetooth because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 03:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by colin42
 





I will admit I am wrong when you supply evidence proving I am wrong. My guess that will be sometime never.

Now stop your tizzy at being badly beaten here and in your own thread. Dry your eyes and either start supplying that evidence of go bore someone else.

Jeeze I hate spoilt empty headed kids. Dont they teach you anything at school nowadays?

Rest of your empty, ignorance and lies DISMISSED
I have never once given anyone reason to believe that I feel beaten, but thats probably you stretching the goal posts again. If you want proof its in my OP and in the thread.
You did not write the OP for this thread. Again an inacurate statement.

You have again offered no evidence. End of story which is all you ever offer. Childish stories. Go back to your thread and write more nonsense about milk.
Children




top topics



 
31
<< 490  491  492    494  495  496 >>

log in

join