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: 72
31
<< 69  70  71    73  74  75 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 14 2011 @ 11:45 AM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 

As I said, the finches remain finches, although they diversified according to need.. ie, the crossed bill of a breed that ate nuts developed a beak to accommodate the need to open the nuts. for someone looking for an intelligent response, I must say, yours was feeble! Whatever I think about Darwin, & to be fair, he hasn't wasted much of MY time., What he reasoned was theory. God doesn't become a theory because you choose not to believe in him. They is diversity because God is imaginative in his creations. There, Does that make you feel superior? I'm of the 'don't give a toss what anyone thinks' brigade, so you can condescend all you like. It makes no difference to my existing because God has permitted it (not Darwin), whether you think I am stupid for not believing what you believe. I think you are stupid for putting credence in a man who recanted his own observations, but I only say it to make a point. The observations of Newton didn't mean he discovered gravity. It just gave us a basis for tangible measurement of what he observed. Darwin could be construed in the same way... As a basis for other observations, & on occasion, scientific fact. I don't believe him less because this didn't happen with what he claimed to discover..It has NEVER been proven, & even HE admitted to his mistakes I just know that God is superior to Darwin just on the basis that God created him, & not the other way around..




posted on Nov, 14 2011 @ 12:06 PM
link   
reply to post by honestyblaze
 


Again. All you have said has been answered many times. I have not called you stupid just uninformed because the statements you made in your original post and this one shows a complete lack of understanding of evolution.

I am not about to jump through the same hoops again trying to explain evolution to those that have made up their minds it is wrong.

What I have asked for is a discussion on what the explanation is for the diversity we see around us without using evolution. Surely someone from your group must be able to achieve this.



posted on Nov, 14 2011 @ 12:37 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 

How can there BE any understanding of Evolution when it has not been proven as scientific fact? You are not looking for answers that a curious analytical mind would look for... Your just looking for a pissy argument that has no basis in REAL reality. It is a THEORY. Perhaps you should look that word up & start your own theorizing about whether you are ignorant, or is it the rest of the world. I read my comments again. They were reasonable, in that you did not dispute my points, & they were intelligent compared to your own replies. Think on genius. One of us is ignorant, but it is not the one with the open mind & panoramic vision. I believe in Darwin but I don't believe what he says, because after reconsideration, neither did he! God has made no such mistake so I have no reason to not believe him until he does. Peace out.



posted on Nov, 14 2011 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by honestyblaze
reply to post by colin42
 

How can there BE any understanding of Evolution when it has not been proven as scientific fact? You are not looking for answers that a curious analytical mind would look for... Your just looking for a pissy argument that has no basis in REAL reality. It is a THEORY. Perhaps you should look that word up & start your own theorizing about whether you are ignorant, or is it the rest of the world. I read my comments again. They were reasonable, in that you did not dispute my points, & they were intelligent compared to your own replies. Think on genius. One of us is ignorant, but it is not the one with the open mind & panoramic vision. I believe in Darwin but I don't believe what he says, because after reconsideration, neither did he! God has made no such mistake so I have no reason to not believe him until he does. Peace out.


Ok, you don't believe in evolution. So please provide evidence to suggest your theory. That's the purpose of this thread, not to make generalizing blanket statements about a field of scientific study that you know nothing about. Your points are not valid and have been answered several times in this thread. It is you that needs to look up the difference between a scientific theory and a hypothesis. God is not even a theory, he is a hypothesis since there is no objective evidence to suggest he exists. If you have it, lets hear it, without the condescending tone, please.



posted on Nov, 14 2011 @ 01:34 PM
link   
reply to post by honestyblaze
 


I am sorry that you feel miffed by my refusal to jump through hoops to show you where you are in error so that you can make your argument relevant. It has already been done in this thread and many others.

I know your group see this as the role we (Evolution supporters) should play and have great sport endlessly repeating the same misconceptions but not in this thread, at least not by me.

So you have no explanation of the diversity we see around us today without refering to Evolution.

I find it mind bogling that so many know for a fact Evolution is wrong but can give no other explanation in its place. Not even come close to giving an explanation and most astounding of all appear to avoid it at all costs.



posted on Nov, 14 2011 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 

I explained the diversity. you are reading without thinking. get your head out of the box you have it crammed in. YOU don't make me feel or do anything. you are insignificant so why would I be miffed? You are not important to me, you do not know me, you opinion is irrelevant to me. I responded to what I thought was a reasonable discussion, but it (or you), have no substance. You are not looking for REASONABLE discussion. You just want someone to make you feel superior. You are not... You were created equal to the rest of us. You did not 'evolve' into something superior, & I have no need to soothe your fragile ego. I know WHO I am. You still need proof of who you are. you picked a bad topic for a thread when you can't get past 'explain the diversity you creationists. So, God is imaginative. Doesn't THAT explain it enough for you? Do you have a better, provable explanation? No you don't. Your opinion has no better foundation than mine. God backs my opinion if you think about it. Darwin didn't even back his own by the time he died. So I'll leave you to your pomp & ignorance. I have established reasonableness. You have not the intellect for a 2 sided discussion, or the rationale to consider that another opinion MIGHT just have some credibility worthy of further debate. & Darwin's THEORY is always going to be just an unprovable theory. You want to beat a dead horse, do it without me. & try to EVOLVE, will you?



posted on Nov, 14 2011 @ 03:47 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





Did you even read what you replied to?

Yes and I believe I quoted you too.



Nobody said that using graphics was new. What I said was when evolutionists use it they are called fake

He proved nothing was alien teeth or anything else. Certainly not a different species. Same goes for jaw muscle


Sorry I don't remember anything using the word graphics. Well the jaw has a much smaller radius than a humans. The adult teeth have additional adult teeth waiting to come down. I don't know how many sets of teeth you think humans get but I only get one adult set. If you can grasp this, I'll explain. We are most likely supposed to get many sets of teeth. It's clear that in the bible we are suppose to live 1000 years but after many punishments through our DNA we were sentanced to 120 years. There is no way we would make it on one set of adult teeth for 1000 years. We had to have more sets on the way. This alien skull was obviously an older being, and he was past his second set of teeth.




The reason why the name of the 'person' who would refuse to look even if 10,000 differences were shown likely only exists in Pye's mind. Until he can produce this person that is the only conclusion. Pye is lying.
I don't think anyone would run themsselves in circles like this. I think it's clear it wants this to be laid to rest just like when he told the owners it should take about 3 months and its been 12 years.




I wont labor the point because you seem unable to accept that even Pye says clearly ONE HUMAN MOTHER.


Yes one of the three people involved to make this person was a human. This is the whole significance. The only human mother was impregnated with an alien baby. I'm sorry your not getting this but its the highlight of the whole deal here.




Pye stated geting DNA from something so old would be hard. Then claimed mischief from labs. So Pye again uses his version of the truth which is in plain language deception.
I think it was pretty clear that the first lab couldn't have had the technology to prove or dissprove it as alien. All they could do was prove it to be human, if that was the case. If they had ONLY looked at the mtDNA I can see where things went astray. This is a special case where the mother and carrier of the child are NOT one in the same which your having a problem understanding. Of course its all explained in the first video and quite well.




He stated that no matches were found on this planet which is a leading statement to make one think alien and it has worked with you it seems.

Yes I believe that it might be a problem to obtain alien DNA to compare it to, I dunno why this sounds odd.




What was easy to test with regards the GNOME? He has not found it. He was guessing and requesting funding, from people like you. Why cant he fund it out of the money from one of his books? If he is so sure he will make millions out of his next.
I guess he would have to sell a hell of a lot of books to get a quarter mill.




Lingo cleared. He challenges evolution that has overwhelming evidence with nothing and then preaches about his idea which has no evidence at all.
I don't think he challenges evolution, I think he clearly lays it to rest.
There is no way in hell we could have evolved with all the findings we have.

Your making an assumption that he has a prejudice to his decision and would much rather claim the skull as an alien even if its not true. I have to ask is there something you specifically know about the skull that seems to prove it to not be alien.
I would gather you have seen a real alien skull before so you know for sure.
The skull has an alien mother, an alien father and a human carrier.
He would have been just as happy to find that it was only a mutation of sorts.
Keep in mind that if he was so bent on making everything out to be an alien than why was he willing to accept the other skull as human?
I think he's being honest and straight forward and he was very carful in his choices on getting it tested. The only problem is that the technology he needed in the begining didn't exist yet.
So if you think its not alien, what do you think it is?
edit on 14-11-2011 by itsthetooth because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 14 2011 @ 03:47 PM
link   
reply to post by honestyblaze
 


You're seriously confusing belief with knowledge


The bible isn't objective evidence for anything but what people BELIEVED, and that includes that creation hypothesis. Even worse, we can show that this creation hypothesis is DEMONSTRABLY wrong.

No need to get angry about it, sometimes the facts hurt


What baffles me even more is people claiming a human female can serve as the surrogate for 2 aliens. That's like trying to make a woman give birth to roses and shows an incredible lack of basic medical knowledge. For crying out loud, take 2 random dolphin species and they can't breed...yet somehow you claim humans can serve as surrogates to something so alien it's not from this planet? That leaves 2 options:

a) The person believing that nonsense simply doesn't have a good enough understanding of medicine and biology...which isn't bad in itself, not knowing something isn't a crime or bad.

b) That person refuses to look at facts, and ignorantly spews crap that's demonstrably wrong.

Given that it should be blatantly obvious why saying humans can give birth to aliens is nonsense, I'm afraid this thread is full of type-b posters





The skull has an alien mother, an alien father and a human carrier.


Yes, and humans can give birth to wombats and kangaroos

edit on 14-11-2011 by MrXYZ because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 14 2011 @ 03:49 PM
link   
Evolution is a very broad term for many avenues of discussion , which many evolutionist hide behind to not address many simple questions.
Evolutionists demand answers from those who oppose their ideas .
When posed with simple questions , the subject changes and is usually followed by an attack.
When pressed on questions evolutionists can't even agree on their own facts and will ignore facts that don't agree with their beliefs.
Simple questions like ....
How old is the earth ?
When did modern man come into existance?
Where did modern man begin ?



posted on Nov, 14 2011 @ 03:55 PM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 





You're seriously confusing belief with knowledge

The bible isn't objective evidence for anything but what people BELIEVED, and that includes that creation hypothesis. Even worse, we can show that this creation hypothesis is DEMONSTRABLY wrong.

No need to get angry about it, sometimes the facts hurt


You know it just cracks me up when someone is SOOO sure to discredit something they know very little about. The bible is actually a book of intervention. Of course I wouldn't hold this against you for not knowing especially how religion is teaching it to be otherwise.
It's not your fault but I have explained many times in the past that the bible matches in a lot of ways with Sitchen.

Don't be so quick to discredit something you had a wrong understanding with to begin with, your at fault first. Have a little open understanding that its just been read and preached wrong. As far as it being a fairy tale, well there are way to many people involved in the making of the bible so it really happened. Or is everyone wrong and your right?



posted on Nov, 14 2011 @ 03:58 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


Please start applying some basic logic


There's so much demonstrably wrong in the bible, blindly believing the rest is ludacris. The exodus of the Jews demonstrably never happened as told in the bible because there is NO ARCHEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE, that global flood didn't happen because there is no GEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE for a global flood (only local ones), and our DNA fully confirms that we have a common ancestor with today's primates...all stuff that's demonstrably RIGHT, and in direct contradiction to the bible.

It's beyond nonsense to claim the bible is infallible and always right given basic biology and science today. I mean, comon', are you seriously going to claim people can survive inside whales?? Really??? Please don't make me spill my drink laughing



posted on Nov, 14 2011 @ 04:09 PM
link   
reply to post by OLD HIPPY DUDE
 


Nope. Not hiding. You on the otherhand are putting anything in the way of addressing the main question. If not evolution then describe the diversity we see without it.



posted on Nov, 14 2011 @ 04:14 PM
link   
reply to post by honestyblaze
 


You sound miffed to me to be honest.

I read your original post again and no way do you explain the diversity we see today.



posted on Nov, 14 2011 @ 04:14 PM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 





Please start applying some basic logic

There's so much demonstrably wrong in the bible, blindly believing the rest is ludacris. The exodus of the Jews demonstrably never happened as told in the bible because there is NO ARCHEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE, that global flood didn't happen because there is no GEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE for a global flood (only local ones), and our DNA fully confirms that we have a common ancestor with today's primates...all stuff that's demonstrably RIGHT, and in direct contradiction to the bible.

It's beyond nonsense to claim the bible is infallible and always right given basic biology and science today. I mean, comon', are you seriously going to claim people can survive inside whales?? Really??? Please don't make me spill my drink laughing
That archeological evidence may have been removed from this earth because of intervention. Thats what this is all about, and why you miss so many things. We are the only planet that we are aware of that has plate techtonics. This happened because water was added to this planet after the planet was created. Come to think of it, thats in the bible as well. You need to realize that once again, intervention caused this as well. He shouldn't have done this. Lack of evidence of flood is everywhere and really depends on how much water was used. Our DNA does NOT confirm we are related to primates, that is whats called overlap. We are 97% the same as primates and 70% the same as rats, and about 50% the same as the alien skull. That 3% is a big difference. If you don't agree than how much do you think we have in common with rats? I too have found many contradictions in the bible as well, and was able to clear all of them up realizing that intervention had been overlooked.



posted on Nov, 14 2011 @ 04:17 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


Forget the bible. It is not the question in this thread. A few pages ago you said hands prove we are not from this planet but failed to respond to my reply or any of the other points I raised.



posted on Nov, 14 2011 @ 04:26 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 





That archeological evidence may have been removed from this earth because of intervention.


For that to be true, you'd have to show clear, objective evidence that a) all archeological evidence WAS indeed removed (you haven't done that), and b) explain why exactly they hid that archeological evidence (and only that, because we have tons of other archeological remains).

You haven't done either, so I call bull****





Thats what this is all about, and why you miss so many things.


No, you can't just make stuff up without providing evidence...which you haven't





Lack of evidence of flood is everywhere and really depends on how much water was used.


Show proof that this happened, objective evidence...and NOT subjective quotes from the bible





Our DNA does NOT confirm we are related to primates, that is whats called overlap. We are 97% the same as primates and 70% the same as rats, and about 50% the same as the alien skull.


That proves we have common ancestors if you go back far enough. As for that skull, until that crook Pye allows peer reviews of his findings, and officially publishes the study instead of just making claims on his blog-like website and in his books, claiming it's only 50% human is beyond crazy. Especially given Yale University as well as Trace both found out that both DNA, and mDNA is 100% human. Pye CLAIMS that's not the case, but hasn't presented any proof...just like guys selling snake oil as "healing potion"


The main issue is, you haven't presented any credible evidence of intervention, and neither has Pye. He did 2 studies from independent 3rd party organizations, and both attested that that skull is 100% human and simply a poor kid who suffered from hydrocephalus. His other claims are 100% worthless until he presents his SOURCED data, which he hasn't. For 2 years, he's claimed his source is in the process of publishing the data...we're still waiting. Meanwhile, he continues to make claims that don't agree with peer reviewed data.

If you want to believe in a snake-oil salesman, be my guest, but please stop dumbing down other people on this forum


Also, in case you bother looking at facts, here's a link explaining common descent. Saying DNA doesn't support it is beyond nonsense



posted on Nov, 14 2011 @ 04:31 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





Forget the bible. It is not the question in this thread. A few pages ago you said hands prove we are not from this planet but failed to respond to my reply or any of the other points I raised.
I must have missed it, I would love to answer any you have.



posted on Nov, 14 2011 @ 04:31 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 


What Mr XYZ said and you may want to look at Mars and Venus re plate tectonics. Even the moon shows its affects albeit way back in the past.

paul-a-heckert.suite101.com...



posted on Nov, 14 2011 @ 04:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by colin42
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


Please try to post correctly. Posting the way you have your arguments become even harder to understand.



I don't think so, I think when people claim they have been abducted by aliens, and we do have people dissapearing all over the globe, I think it explains the possibilitys.


Your asking for a bit of a leap of faith here and that with a belief that has no holes is a poor start

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




I think where you are missing the ball is that intervention could be the missing link to all of these creations. All life that we know of on this planet did not evolve from one another. Even if we did come from primates, who made the other life?


That is the question you need to answer. You are the one saying 'We know life did not evolve from one another'. I am asking you to explain how if not evolution do we see the diversity around us.




There are planets out there that are forming from gasses right now, and when they are done forming, there will be life on those planets.That life would all know how there existance came into being without any question. If you ever have to ask yourself how we came into existance there is only one valid answer for sure, your not from here. There is NO WAY you could NOT know where you are from unless your not from here.This is why I keep saying you guys are digging to deep while the answers should just be on the surface and everywhere.


That makes no sense at all and I have read it a few times so what point you are trying to make is lost on me




According to a program I watched on the history channel, planets seem to just form from out of nowhere. A joke once mentioned last I wrote about this is that there is a giant celestial squid named trevor, pooping out planets. All hail to trevor.


I suggest you choose programs you watch with more care.




Anyhow, I like to use the example of the anteater. The anteater is well equiped to function on this planet. He has fur to keep him warm, a long snout to sniff out ants, long claws to tear up ant hills, and a long sticky tounge to catch ants. There is no question that this critter is an ant eating machine. If he ever grew a brain one day do you think he would have any problem figureing out what his purpose is in life? Not at all. Now look at humans. Our hands would have specific purposes in design, what is that exactly, we don't know because its not here on earth.


I disagree. If an anteater evolved the ability to reason he would definitely ask 'why am I here and what is my purpose' what your saying in effect is would he know his diet and that is completely different.

Hands dont have a specific purpose in design????

Our hands are probably the keystone of our success. Why hands are proof that we came from off world in your opinion leaves me agog.


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


Here you go



posted on Nov, 14 2011 @ 04:46 PM
link   


For that to be true, you'd have to show clear, objective evidence that a) all archeological evidence WAS indeed removed (you haven't done that), and b) explain why exactly they hid that archeological evidence (and only that, because we have tons of other archeological remains).

You haven't done either, so I call bull****

All I'm trying to say is maybe they didn't want that proof left behind.



Show proof that this happened, objective evidence...and NOT subjective quotes from the bible
Your asking trivial things that were taught in first grade. Everyone knows most of the earth has signs that it was under water at one point. Are you seriously in doubt of this?



That proves we have common ancestors if you go back far enough. As for that skull, until that crook Pye allows peer reviews of his findings, and officially publishes the study instead of just making claims on his blog-like website and in his books, claiming it's only 50% human is beyond crazy. Especially given Yale University as well as Trace both found out that both DNA, and mDNA is 100% human. Pye CLAIMS that's not the case, but hasn't presented any proof...just like guys selling snake oil as "healing potion"
I'm sure that old technology was looking that way simply because of overlap. I agree with Pye they did it to just get rid of him. And I understand why, he was asking them to check if its alien, and the technology would not allow it. But they didn't want to lose a customer right? Why would you say Pye is a crook, do you know something we don't? No lab 424 proved it to be alien, you need to watch the more current video.



The main issue is, you haven't presented any credible evidence of intervention, and neither has Pye. He did 2 studies from independent 3rd party organizations, and both attested that that skull is 100% human and simply a poor kid who suffered from hydrocephalus. His other claims are 100% worthless until he presents his SOURCED data, which he hasn't. For 2 years, he's claimed his source is in the process of publishing the data...we're still waiting. Meanwhile, he continues to make claims that don't agree with peer reviewed data.

Aside from the first low end technology test, I'm not aware of anyone saying it wasnt alien. Are you sure your not talking about the second skull that is part of the story. One is human, and the other is not. As far as hydrocephalus, that was ruled out, and it was clear. no 424 is in the spotlight and I didn't pull that out of my @$$




If you want to believe in a snake-oil salesman, be my guest, but please stop dumbing down other people on this forum

Also, in case you bother looking at facts, here's a link explaining common descent. Saying DNA doesn't support it is beyond nonsense


I have to tell you that in everything you have presented to me in terms of evolution and how it works, and what little I have read about, You might as well just toss DNA out the window. From what I'm able to gather nature can change DNA, nature can bend DNA and nature can alter DNA.

You might want to let anthropologists and our legal centers know that DNA is absolutly useless for anything, because if DNA can do all the things that evolution claims it can, its 100% useless.
You have to admit that evolution has stumbled over DNA so many times that its ruined.
So I guess proving DNA on next of kin is out the window too, after all nature might have changed the DNA

edit on 14-11-2011 by itsthetooth because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
31
<< 69  70  71    73  74  75 >>

log in

join