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: 67
31
<< 64  65  66    68  69  70 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 12 2011 @ 03:28 AM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


So you decided not to answer Hole 1

If, we dont know everything was your answer you again fail because for your belief not to have holes then you must know everything.

For your idea to hold water you need evolution to work. Gene manipulation is man trying to use evolutions mechanics. 30 years of study should have at least resulted in that knowledge.

Hole 1 Unanswered

Hole 2

It appears that you believe we were either changed here or was brought here from elswhere. (thats a hole by the way).

If we, Humans were brought here explain the connection/relationship we have with all life on THIS planet.


edit on 12-11-2011 by colin42 because: Punctuation




posted on Nov, 12 2011 @ 05:11 AM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


Oh I have a few. IMO intervention isn't a question, it does nothing but provide answers.

It provides no more answers than a typical "god of the gaps" fallacy. It's predicated on the existence of beings for which, you've already agreed, we have no objective evidence. Then you have to provide objective evidence that they travelled here, which you haven't. Then you have to provide objective evidence that they altered our DNA, which you haven't. So there's three questions that you can't answer objectively right at the start.


When I see strong clues in the bible, our DNA and in sumerrian text telling us that intervention is what happened to us, it shocks me how people are struggling so hard to try to make sense of evolution.

Because evolution is science. In science, you can't just say "we don't know how this happened so it must have been aliens" or "we don't know how this happened so it must have been God". Science requires evidence, unlike interventionism.


You can probably convince yourself of anything if you work hard enough at it.

I suggest you read this statement to yourself regularly.


It reminds me of star child with Lloyd Pye. The DNA results proved that the mtdna was human but that the mother and father DNA was cohearant and not human.

You're showing how little you understand about genetics again. If the mtDNA, which comes from the mother, is human, than the mother is human. Even Pye has fessed up to that at this point. He's holding out hope that there will be enough ambiguity in the contributions from the father that he can claim the skull isn't wholly human. Keep in mind that he's already had tests performed that said that father was human, but he didn't like that answer so he kept submitting samples to labs until he got the answer he wanted.



posted on Nov, 12 2011 @ 05:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth

Originally posted by Varemia

Originally posted by itsthetooth
Humans have less chromosomes than primates. Does this really need explanation.
If you disagree, please explain what we gave up and how much less we became than primates.
I guess we lost our tails.


This I already explained to you, but I'm somewhat versed in the knowledge, so I'll repeat.

The reason humans have 46 chromosomes while all other apes have 48 is because we have a single fused chromosome. In other words, it is 2 chromosomes in one. That is how the genetic data was able to allow for our species to continue breeding.

Now, if I need to explain this further, we have 23 unique chromosomes, each with a double. One of these is very large and has "ends" of chromosome markers in the center. This is directly indicative of a fusion of two chromosomes. Boom, you have one species with 46 and one with 48.

Now, will you learn from this, or will you ignore it and continue being the ignorant fool you keep acting like?


Aside from yourself believing it to be fact is there any sources or links, because Lloy Pye says the opposite.


Who gives a rat's ass about Pye??? He's an AUTHOR and has no qualifications to support his claims (or evidence for that matter)



posted on Nov, 12 2011 @ 08:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by colin42
reply to post by bottleslingguy
 


You looked at videos that someone puts in the link offers nothing but a message of that's it?

I he cannot be bothered to discuss I certainly wont take time to view. Its a bit like leaving a book, telling people this is the truth and then leaving them to read into it what they wish.

How would that work in real life?



I get what I get and you get what you get after watching it. Why would you want someone contaminating your view of something like that? I thought the Genetic Entropy video had precisely to do with something I was working on in my head for the last few days regarding entropy proving evolution wrong and voila these videos pop up! Actually if you watched the videos you'd realize what Sanford is talking about is exactly what this thread is about. I disagree with his final thought though.



posted on Nov, 12 2011 @ 08:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by MrXYZ
Who gives a rat's ass about Pye??? He's an AUTHOR and has no qualifications to support his claims (or evidence for that matter)


this comment will go down in infamy as one of the dumbest comments ever. Have you read EYKIW? What evidence doesn't he have?



posted on Nov, 12 2011 @ 08:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by iterationzero

It provides no more answers than a typical "god of the gaps" fallacy. It's predicated on the existence of beings for which, you've already agreed, we have no objective evidence.


this is so untrue and indicative of the mindset that is destined to not adapt



posted on Nov, 12 2011 @ 09:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by bottleslingguy

Originally posted by iterationzero

It provides no more answers than a typical "god of the gaps" fallacy. It's predicated on the existence of beings for which, you've already agreed, we have no objective evidence.


this is so untrue and indicative of the mindset that is destined to not adapt


If it were untrue, you'd be able to present objective evidence...which you still haven't



posted on Nov, 12 2011 @ 09:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by bottleslingguy

Originally posted by MrXYZ
Who gives a rat's ass about Pye??? He's an AUTHOR and has no qualifications to support his claims (or evidence for that matter)


this comment will go down in infamy as one of the dumbest comments ever. Have you read EYKIW? What evidence doesn't he have?


For one, he claims the skull is a human-alien hybrid...when DNA tests clearly show it's 100% human


The problem is, Pye doesn't have any qualifications that would allow him to make any of the claims he's making...which is why he mistook hydrocephalus for something "alien".


But yeah, continue believing a guy who's DEMONSTRABLY wrong as DNA tests show...doesn't make any sense, and it's beyond irrational, but it's a free country, people are allowed to believe in fairy tales

edit on 12-11-2011 by MrXYZ because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 12 2011 @ 09:39 AM
link   
reply to post by bottleslingguy
 


I see no reason to read or view anything on a discussion forum posted by someone that submits one post and then says they will take no further part.

If you got something from it good for you. What I got from it was bad manners from the poster.


edit on 12-11-2011 by colin42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 12 2011 @ 09:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by colin42
reply to post by bottleslingguy
 


I see no reason to read or view anything on a discussion forum posted by someone that submits one post and then says they will take no further part.

If you got something from it good for you. What I got from it was bad manners from the poster.


edit on 12-11-2011 by colin42 because: (no reason given)


that's called willful ignorance or cutting off your nose to spite your face. good luck with that



posted on Nov, 12 2011 @ 09:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by MrXYZ

Originally posted by bottleslingguy

Originally posted by MrXYZ
Who gives a rat's ass about Pye??? He's an AUTHOR and has no qualifications to support his claims (or evidence for that matter)


this comment will go down in infamy as one of the dumbest comments ever. Have you read EYKIW? What evidence doesn't he have?


For one, he claims the skull is a human-alien hybrid...when DNA tests clearly show it's 100% human


The problem is, Pye doesn't have any qualifications that would allow him to make any of the claims he's making...which is why he mistook hydrocephalus for something "alien".


But yeah, continue believing a guy who's DEMONSTRABLY wrong as DNA tests show...doesn't make any sense, and it's beyond irrational, but it's a free country, people are allowed to believe in fairy tales

edit on 12-11-2011 by MrXYZ because: (no reason given)


Your reply is demonstrably ignorant and based on earlier data. There is updated information from '10. Again though you can believe what you want.



posted on Nov, 12 2011 @ 10:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by MrXYZ

Originally posted by bottleslingguy

Originally posted by iterationzero

It provides no more answers than a typical "god of the gaps" fallacy. It's predicated on the existence of beings for which, you've already agreed, we have no objective evidence.


this is so untrue and indicative of the mindset that is destined to not adapt


If it were untrue, you'd be able to present objective evidence...which you still haven't


It's right in front of your eyes and you guys STILL believe it's not there.



posted on Nov, 12 2011 @ 10:07 AM
link   
watch this video and by the end of it you will be demonstrably shown how it proves evolution wrong (actually he mentions one of my ideas at around 3:15).




posted on Nov, 12 2011 @ 10:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by bottleslingguy

Originally posted by MrXYZ

Originally posted by bottleslingguy

Originally posted by MrXYZ
Who gives a rat's ass about Pye??? He's an AUTHOR and has no qualifications to support his claims (or evidence for that matter)


this comment will go down in infamy as one of the dumbest comments ever. Have you read EYKIW? What evidence doesn't he have?


For one, he claims the skull is a human-alien hybrid...when DNA tests clearly show it's 100% human


The problem is, Pye doesn't have any qualifications that would allow him to make any of the claims he's making...which is why he mistook hydrocephalus for something "alien".


But yeah, continue believing a guy who's DEMONSTRABLY wrong as DNA tests show...doesn't make any sense, and it's beyond irrational, but it's a free country, people are allowed to believe in fairy tales

edit on 12-11-2011 by MrXYZ because: (no reason given)


Your reply is demonstrably ignorant and based on earlier data. There is updated information from '10. Again though you can believe what you want.


So the tests Yale University made are wrong, and the newer ones done by Trace (who specialize in DNA analysis on ancient samples) is wrong as well? How about you post that "2010 information"? I hope it's not some random blog post or Pye's word...but rather objective evidence


For those who don't know what we're talking about, it's about that crazy starchild skull stuff, where a few authors mistook malformed skulls for aliens, when in reality it's clearly from a disease called "hydrocephalus". LINK
edit on 12-11-2011 by MrXYZ because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 12 2011 @ 10:39 AM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 

who am I to "prove" anything to you? It's up to you to find and believe the truth



posted on Nov, 12 2011 @ 10:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by bottleslingguy
watch this video and by the end of it you will be demonstrably shown how it proves evolution wrong (actually he mentions one of my ideas at around 3:15).



Not that guy again


He also believes the earth is less than 100k years old when we have PROOF that isn't the case. He's one of those guys who looooove mixing science with his personal belief and then somehow claiming because his science is correct, his belief is too



posted on Nov, 12 2011 @ 11:22 AM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


it's not HIS science and instead of him linking this to the messages of Christ he needs to realize the Old Testament comes from earlier much more ancient writings from the time when the Annunaki walked/flew around the Earth. THEY are the ones who installed this genetic entropy in us. It's one of the reasons why blood lines were so important to them, keeping the genetic record from decomposing. It raises myriad question from me yet people who think like you just ignore it.

You can't prove the human species is getting more fit genetically unless we (or somebody else) use technology to tamper with our genome and hopefully we ARE going to get help but not from who Dr Sanford thinks. I bet it's the ones who put the code in there to begin with and I hope they have the compassion to not allow us to go the way of the Neanderthals (who were more genetically "fit" than we are now) but that seems unlikely.



posted on Nov, 12 2011 @ 11:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by bottleslingguy
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


it's not HIS science and instead of him linking this to the messages of Christ he needs to realize the Old Testament comes from earlier much more ancient writings from the time when the Annunaki walked/flew around the Earth. THEY are the ones who installed this genetic entropy in us. It's one of the reasons why blood lines were so important to them, keeping the genetic record from decomposing. It raises myriad question from me yet people who think like you just ignore it.

You can't prove the human species is getting more fit genetically unless we (or somebody else) use technology to tamper with our genome and hopefully we ARE going to get help but not from who Dr Sanford thinks. I bet it's the ones who put the code in there to begin with and I hope they have the compassion to not allow us to go the way of the Neanderthals (who were more genetically "fit" than we are now) but that seems unlikely.



Um, here:

www.weirdcrap.com...

That site will answer your questions. The idea that the genome will degrade over time is simply bad science.



posted on Nov, 12 2011 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Varemia

Originally posted by bottleslingguy
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


it's not HIS science and instead of him linking this to the messages of Christ he needs to realize the Old Testament comes from earlier much more ancient writings from the time when the Annunaki walked/flew around the Earth. THEY are the ones who installed this genetic entropy in us. It's one of the reasons why blood lines were so important to them, keeping the genetic record from decomposing. It raises myriad question from me yet people who think like you just ignore it.

You can't prove the human species is getting more fit genetically unless we (or somebody else) use technology to tamper with our genome and hopefully we ARE going to get help but not from who Dr Sanford thinks. I bet it's the ones who put the code in there to begin with and I hope they have the compassion to not allow us to go the way of the Neanderthals (who were more genetically "fit" than we are now) but that seems unlikely.



Um, here:

www.weirdcrap.com...

That site will answer your questions. The idea that the genome will degrade over time is simply bad science.


uhhh that website gave no science whatsoever as far as debunking anything it talks about in pt1. It just says entropy can loosely be linked to the way our genes work, that it's being applied in the wrong way. And that's not much evidence. You should show demonstrably how you are correct. How is our genome getting more fit to adapt without technology?

and actually part 7 about the Neanderthal bones being so different than ours actually supports not only Pye's assertion that we have been engineered through Intervention Theory but also his claim that the Starchild Skull is actually a full alien implanted in a human surrogate. Not only the chemical makeup of the skull is completely different than human it is also physiologically different having half the thickness uniformly, strange fibers thoughout the matrix, red reside inside the cavities, no sinus, brow, or anything correlating with a human skull morphology. Even has different muscle attachments than a human. It is not a human skull period.

That article said "other later fossils of Neanderthal man lack these diseases. The bones of a Neanderthal skeleton are so radically different from that of a modern man's that there is no way you could simply call them deformed humans. The devil is in the details. Most people know about Neanderthal's skull, since that is the most dramatic part of the skeleton, with it's raised brow-ridge, huge nasal cavity, and thick jawbone. It has very ape-like features. But that is only the beginning. In Modern human anatomy, the bones of our arms and legs have a very distinct triangular shape, with the corners of the triangle having thicker bone than the sides. In Neanderthal bones, the shape of the bones is round; they are evenly round all sides, and are twice as thick as modern man's bones, as well as twice as strong. Their bodily proportions are slightly different than ours, not due to bone disease, however. "

so that is using the same science to prove the author's point. Are you posting links to psuedo-science?



posted on Nov, 12 2011 @ 12:11 PM
link   
reply to post by bottleslingguy
 


Alright, here's a more scholarly article.

2ndlaw.oxy.edu...

Seriously. I've actually handled the bones and studied the fossils. I know that evolution is real. There is no other reasonable explanation, since there's no way to prove intervention, and evolution works in predicting the outcome of future genetics.




top topics



 
31
<< 64  65  66    68  69  70 >>

log in

join