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: 60
31
<< 57  58  59    61  62  63 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 09:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth

Originally posted by MrXYZ
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


Do you believe the bible is 100% correct? Because if you do, I can show you at least 10 things that are DEMONSTRABLY wrong...and I'm talking about major flaws, not some minor things


Please, oh yes, all 10.


1) People surviving in whales => Nonsense
2) Exodus of the Jews => Nonsense
3) Humans popping up on earth in their current form => Nonsense
4) Talking burning bushes => Nonsense
5) People parting the seas => Nonsense
6) Astronomy => Nonsense (in fact, that one's comically wrong)
7) Anatomy of insects => totally wrong
8) Pi => got that one wrong too
9) Planetary formation => beyond wrong
10) Noah's arch => comedy gold, just like that silly global flood

In short, there's so many demonstrably wrong things, you'd have to be brainwashed from childhood to believe in it without question




posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 09:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrXYZ

Originally posted by itsthetooth

Originally posted by MrXYZ
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


Do you believe the bible is 100% correct? Because if you do, I can show you at least 10 things that are DEMONSTRABLY wrong...and I'm talking about major flaws, not some minor things


Please, oh yes, all 10.


1) People surviving in whales => Nonsense
2) Exodus of the Jews => Nonsense
3) Humans popping up on earth in their current form => Nonsense
4) Talking burning bushes => Nonsense
5) People parting the seas => Nonsense
6) Astronomy => Nonsense (in fact, that one's comically wrong)
7) Anatomy of insects => totally wrong
8) Pi => got that one wrong too
9) Planetary formation => beyond wrong
10) Noah's arch => comedy gold, just like that silly global flood

In short, there's so many demonstrably wrong things, you'd have to be brainwashed from childhood to believe in it without question


Some of which I caught myself as well. I'm not familliar with all of them, but I can say that "intervention" does solve the ones I know of.
Intervention with advanced technology can make all of this happen.
A global flood is possible if you have the right power, technology, and know how. I totally believe that intervention is the answer to all 10.
The burning bush was a radio device, just like the arc of the covenant. God hid his face from us because our race knew his race. There is simply no other answer. It's all part of understanding that we were abducted and placed here. The abductor didnt want to show his face. Thats what aliens do, they abduct people. Wikipedia says there are over 4 million reports of people claiming to be abducted. Some reports are obviously fake, but some are disturbingly detailed.

Planatary formation, well I don't think we as evolving humans specialize in this. We struggle just watching what we eat to keep our weight down. We simply don't know everything. Probably the oddest belief I have is that UFO's might be able to travel past the speed of light. I think most people would agree with this, but with our current technology, it shouldn't even be something that is possible. It all goes back to the fact that we don't know everything.



posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 09:43 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


Yet you still haven't provided the slightest evidence for intervention...you are speculating...whereas scientists aren't speculating, they KNOW evolution is right because they are actively using it in modern medicine


So to get back on topic: What's your proof that evolution is wrong? We're still waiting



posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 09:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrXYZ
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


Yet you still haven't provided the slightest evidence for intervention...you are speculating...whereas scientists aren't speculating, they KNOW evolution is right because they are actively using it in modern medicine


So to get back on topic: What's your proof that evolution is wrong? We're still waiting


I think the best proof I have that evolution is wrong, actually came from you. Every link you have given me so far clearly indicates that the ideas are either inconclusive or in debate.



posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 09:51 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


That just shows you haven't bothered reading the links


On a side note, I just found out that the guys on godlikeproductions think I'm a paid disinfo agent. Given that you're kinda on their side, can you tell me where I can cash out?



posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 09:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrXYZ
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


That just shows you haven't bothered reading the links


On a side note, I just found out that the guys on godlikeproductions think I'm a paid disinfo agent. Given that you're kinda on their side, can you tell me where I can cash out?


No I'm not impressed.
Not only did I read the links but I copy and pasted the parts showing they are inconclusive.



posted on Nov, 9 2011 @ 01:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
Ya it was so massive that we seem to be missing all of the massive amounts of proof, like bones and fossils. WHERE ARE THE BODYS ?????????????????

We can't even link what few finds of aleged transistion. Something is not working here. Not to mention that our overall presence here on earth went from living harmoniously in the wild to simply not fitting in.

Again, if we evolved, we DE-EVOLVED. We were better off as primates for sure. Look at how sickly we are. We can't even live past puberty without medical intervention, but we evolved right.

Honestly the ONLY positive think I can thing of thats come out of our aleged evolving is we are no longer part of any food chain. In fact we aren't part of anything.

Get a clue people, just like it says in Hebrews in the bible "Earth is not our home"...
gspcsermons.blogspot.com...
edit on 8-11-2011 by itsthetooth because: k


Man. So many incorrect things in one post. But the most incorrect which you religious lot just don't seem to get is that, WE ARE PRIMATES!



posted on Nov, 9 2011 @ 01:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth

Originally posted by MrXYZ

Originally posted by itsthetooth

Originally posted by bottleslingguy

Originally posted by TamtammyMacx
Parts of the evolution theory seem credible like mutations , heredity, within a species. One species evolving into another seems unlikely without intervention. Also, how does evolution describe the split between animal organisms and plant life?


right????


there are too many important things that don't fit. Intervention is the simplest answer.

So far science says 10% of the planets we discover in other solar systems could harbor life. That translates to greater odds of us being seeded here by older, much more technologically advanced species than evolving from slime. The universe is most likely teeming with life that we have no way of detecting. poor us!!!


Exactly right. We are so behind the times. Take a look at sodom and gamora in the bible. That was an atomic bomb. If aliens had atomic bombs back in biblical times, imagine what they have today. Occam's razor would suggest that intervention is the correct answer ... en.wikipedia.org...'s_razor
edit on 8-11-2011 by itsthetooth because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-11-2011 by itsthetooth because: (no reason given)


Zero proof for an atomic bomb...but let's state is as fact anyway. Who cares about facts anyway, right?


Well don't take my word, or von danikens, read it for yourself... www.halexandria.org...



Von daniken was a tool. His research was lazy at best and he often ignored facts that didn't go with his beliefs. He made money selling ideas to other lazy thinkers who lived only on crap like that.. Yes I do have some of his stuff and I still read it when I don't want to stimulate my mind.
edit on 9-11-2011 by steveknows because: Typo



posted on Nov, 9 2011 @ 01:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by MrXYZ

Originally posted by itsthetooth

Originally posted by MrXYZ
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


Do you believe the bible is 100% correct? Because if you do, I can show you at least 10 things that are DEMONSTRABLY wrong...and I'm talking about major flaws, not some minor things


Please, oh yes, all 10.


1) People surviving in whales => Nonsense
2) Exodus of the Jews => Nonsense
3) Humans popping up on earth in their current form => Nonsense
4) Talking burning bushes => Nonsense
5) People parting the seas => Nonsense
6) Astronomy => Nonsense (in fact, that one's comically wrong)
7) Anatomy of insects => totally wrong
8) Pi => got that one wrong too
9) Planetary formation => beyond wrong
10) Noah's arch => comedy gold, just like that silly global flood

In short, there's so many demonstrably wrong things, you'd have to be brainwashed from childhood to believe in it without question


There is one thing about it that is truth. The babble-on



posted on Nov, 9 2011 @ 04:12 AM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 

I think you cut and pasted the wrong person's reply to you into the wrong post. I never posted anything about the truth melting away.



posted on Nov, 9 2011 @ 04:27 AM
link   
reply to post by MentorsRiddle
 

You're not actually reading this thread, are you? You're just spouting off at this point. I know this because your question about "where are the bodies" was just asked within the last page or so by another user and answered. In fact, it was asked previously to that, by the same user, and answered then as well. Of course, the answers go ignored because the facts are inconvenient to your case.



posted on Nov, 9 2011 @ 06:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by iterationzero
reply to post by MentorsRiddle
 

You're not actually reading this thread, are you? You're just spouting off at this point. I know this because your question about "where are the bodies" was just asked within the last page or so by another user and answered. In fact, it was asked previously to that, by the same user, and answered then as well. Of course, the answers go ignored because the facts are inconvenient to your case.


Spoken by a true tool for the main stream science cadre. I think the answers get ignored because we all know science has made mistakes in the past and when they conflict and argue so much amongst themselves the rest of us go off to find our own answers.



posted on Nov, 9 2011 @ 06:44 AM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


I noticed you may not have read far enough in my post to see this, would you please reply to it? It should be easy for someone so smart and able to apply "scientific" reasoning.

I said earlier:
Here's your chance to school me on how science is done: explain to me how those people over seven thousand years ago knew that gold could be suspended in an atmosphere? Could they have nailed it just by coincidence? What a preposterous thing to "just make up" and be absolutely correct! How does your reply match Occam's scrutiny?



posted on Nov, 9 2011 @ 06:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by bottleslingguy
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


I noticed you may not have read far enough in my post to see this, would you please reply to it? It should be easy for someone so smart and able to apply "scientific" reasoning.

I said earlier:
Here's your chance to school me on how science is done: explain to me how those people over seven thousand years ago knew that gold could be suspended in an atmosphere? Could they have nailed it just by coincidence? What a preposterous thing to "just make up" and be absolutely correct! How does your reply match Occam's scrutiny?



If you don't mind my asking, do you have a source for the translation which says that these people knew about particulate suspension within the atmosphere? I know that Sitchens was good at embellishing, such as in his book, "Book of Enki," when he was describing the creation of the so-called face on Mars, which was shown to simply be a trick of the light caused by a natural formation.



posted on Nov, 9 2011 @ 07:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by bottleslingguy
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


I noticed you may not have read far enough in my post to see this, would you please reply to it? It should be easy for someone so smart and able to apply "scientific" reasoning.

I said earlier:
Here's your chance to school me on how science is done: explain to me how those people over seven thousand years ago knew that gold could be suspended in an atmosphere? Could they have nailed it just by coincidence? What a preposterous thing to "just make up" and be absolutely correct! How does your reply match Occam's scrutiny?



You can throw gold grains up in the air...and either way, they also believed the universe is a massive dome surrounded by saltwater with the earth being the centre of this dome. We know for a fact that's not the case, and given that we've known about this for hundreds of years, you can't really claim they're super advanced by today's standards after getting it wrong



posted on Nov, 9 2011 @ 07:26 AM
link   
Darwin. Einstein. Shakespeare. Very good entertainers. I heard 2 of the 3 were frauds...Thank God for Darwin though. No one would have ever figured out what goes up must come down. Except gasoline of course. Hard to believe the world was once flat. Glad they solved that problem. Thinkers. You gotta love 'em. Don't think, know. Too bad there are still so many unknowns out there. Oh, how we try. How long before the question mark (?) is banned? God forbid there be a question without an answer. That would make us stupid and unknowledgable. I will sleep soundly tonight, knowing that science is engraved in stone, never changing, the one constant we can rely on, and always be se-wait a minute-is it still called the Theory of Evolution? Theories. Gotta love 'em. I have a theory. It's an equation, a simple one: theory=opinion+anus°. And the earth is still flat. Did I miss something? Oh wow! I get it. The simians we see today were too lazy to evolve. Or never got the memo. So sad. That explains my craving for bananas.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Nov, 9 2011 @ 07:27 AM
link   
reply to post by iterationzero
 


No, sir – I’m following this thread very well, thank you.

The question has not been answered, and your attempt to flip the tables on me is weak at best.

I will not be swayed, nor will I relent in my questions – because they are questions you , nor anyone else can answer.

I am not spouting off at the mouth, I have made very valid points – if anything, the bible bashers out there are the ones spouting off at the mouth. Its funny how we can talk about science, and debate it, and magically the concept of God pops up. Then the games begin.

You did not even attempt to comment about my post, but decided the better tactic would be to bash my character and integrity; even my competence in following a simple thread.

No sir – you are the guilty one. I believe you may have read my post, but with a closed mind and an unwillingness to address the issues at hand.

I have considered the theory of evolution, and found it wanting.

What makes me mad, as a creationist, is that schools and academia teaches the theory of evolution as if it is fact, when it is not.

There is no proof for it, nor will there ever be.

Your kind believes my kind is trapped in a brain washed bubble – but I say it is you who lives in a tiny miniscule world, which has no wonder or mystery. For when there is mystery you make up your little ideas that hold no water – and get red eyed angry at those who don’t conform to your tiny world that you have limited yourself in.

You are a prisoner to your own way of thinking, with no chance for escape through any method of your own.

Now, I’m sorry if I have offended you – but don’t challenge me unless you want me to respond.



posted on Nov, 9 2011 @ 07:35 AM
link   
reply to post by MentorsRiddle
 


Have you never considered that perhaps the 7 days of creation were metaphorical for an indeterminate amount of time? After all, God had to create the concept of time before humans came about. What if the world was created, and all the life in it sprang naturally through the laws he created?

And yes, evolution has ridiculous amounts of proof. I really urge you to read "The Ancestor's Tale," by Richard Dawkins. It explains this in great detail. If I must, I currently have a copy here, and I can quote from his arguments about why we don't even need fossils to prove that evolution is true, and that fossils are a bonus that allows us to see what earlier forms of organisms were.



posted on Nov, 9 2011 @ 07:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by DoNotForgetMe
Darwin. Einstein. Shakespeare. Very good entertainers. I heard 2 of the 3 were frauds...Thank God for Darwin though. No one would have ever figured out what goes up must come down. Except gasoline of course. Hard to believe the world was once flat. Glad they solved that problem. Thinkers. You gotta love 'em. Don't think, know. Too bad there are still so many unknowns out there. Oh, how we try. How long before the question mark (?) is banned? God forbid there be a question without an answer. That would make us stupid and unknowledgable. I will sleep soundly tonight, knowing that science is engraved in stone, never changing, the one constant we can rely on, and always be se-wait a minute-is it still called the Theory of Evolution? Theories. Gotta love 'em. I have a theory. It's an equation, a simple one: theory=opinion+anus°. And the earth is still flat. Did I miss something? Oh wow! I get it. The simians we see today were too lazy to evolve. Or never got the memo. So sad. That explains my craving for bananas.


I often wonder if people such as yourself are serious, or if you post like this completely in jest.

Science is not static. It is quite up for challenge if you can provide a reason for the challenge. The theory of evolution is our best description of the process that happens. Like the theory of gravity or the theory of thermodynamics, it is our best description of how the process works. The theory has changed over the years to accommodate new information, which is why we no longer use Darwin's theory in modern practice. It is merely a starting point for research, because it is where the foundation for the idea came from.

When you wrote "The simians we see today were too lazy to evolve," you show your basic misunderstanding of evolution. Evolution does not mean making an organism better. It means making sure an organism survives, and even then, some creatures become less geared to survive through evolution. All evolution is, is change through time by the spread of genes and the processes of selection undergone by environment and interaction with other organisms.

The phrase, "Survival of the Fittest" does not apply to evolution. That is a myth, and is why there are a lot of creatures out there that die when coming in contact with other creatures. Take them out of the habitat they evolved in, and most of the time, the creatures will go extinct. When creatures do survive a major change, usually only a small percentage survive, and so selection becomes rapid as the gene pool is smaller. Humans are an exception to the rule, but not exempt from it, because we have developed the ability to literally build our own habitat anywhere. We can wear artificial skins that protect us from cold, and we have houses that protect us from weather.

We are actually more naturally designed for hot weather, because we naturally sweat a lot, and we have the ability to run for extremely long periods of time, often waiting out the death of a creature in order to scavenge it. This is a result of evolving primarily in Africa, and then spreading across the world rapidly because of our development of tools, which lets us cross water easily and survive in almost any environment.



posted on Nov, 9 2011 @ 07:50 AM
link   

Have you never considered that perhaps the 7 days of creation were metaphorical for an indeterminate amount of time? After all, God had to create the concept of time before humans came about. What if the world was created, and all the life in it sprang naturally through the laws he created?

And yes, evolution has ridiculous amounts of proof. I really urge you to read "The Ancestor's Tale," by Richard Dawkins. It explains this in great detail. If I must, I currently have a copy here, and I can quote from his arguments about why we don't even need fossils to prove that evolution is true, and that fossils are a bonus that allows us to see what earlier forms of organisms were



Yes, I have considered that many times.

I would be in 100% compliance with that – and the bible doesn’t really counter your argument. It is possible – but the bible doesn’t say that either.

I believe there are more things to heaven and earth than any man knows about – especially concerning the mind of God.

I am not saying that evolution is a bad theory – I am saying that there are gaping holes in the theory, which present questions that can’t be answered.

I get angry when people pass it off as fact, and then proceed to bash other peoples beliefs when they disagree. That is the essence of arrogance, which I can’t stand and will always rebel against.


You know how agnostics say they are willing to believe the concept of God if they have 100% proof – then I’m an evolution agnostic. I’ll believe when I have 100% proof.

I will say that I believe, if evolution does exist, that it may all be a part of God’s creation process.

I have not read the book you mentioned, but I’ll write it down and try to pick up a copy from the book store this week when I go – after I read the new Eragon book HAHA.




top topics



 
31
<< 57  58  59    61  62  63 >>

log in

join