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.

 

Evolution happens. That's a fact.

page: 12
28
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 23 2012 @ 12:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by AwakeinNM

Originally posted by SpearMint

Originally posted by AwakeinNM
reply to post by Lionhearte
 


Very thoroughly explained and referenced. Much more so than the OP. Unfortunately, you have a cross as your avatar, so the OP will simply disregard your post as religious zealotry. Pity he's so ignorant.




edit on 23-5-2012 by AwakeinNM because: (no reason given)


Ignorant? I'm probably one of the most open minded people in this thread, not once have I accused someone of being wrong without evidence to back it up.


"open-minded" does not mean "well-informed".


No. But "closed-minded" shows is an incredibly strong corollary to "ignorant".




posted on May, 23 2012 @ 12:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Daemonicon
reply to post by samaka
 


Denisova hominin
H. antecessor
H. cepranensis
H. erectus
H. ergaster
H. floresiensis
H. gautengensis
H. georgicus
H. habilis
H. heidelbergensis
H. neanderthalensis
H. rhodesiensis
H. rudolfensis
H. sapiens idaltu
H. sapiens sapiens (modern humans)


Those are all intermediates in the path of evolution for humans. Which one was the missing link required?


Ummmm do you know what those look like???? Those look like COMPLETE bilogical working creatures, again your ASSUMING that those creatures are chained link to one another.... that's not evidence that's assumption.



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 12:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Daemonicon
 


What are you not understanding the so-called evidence is an assumption of RAW data. Men made that data turned into evolution, it's not evidence. It's more logical and rational to think we were designed to be randomly created because mathematically speaking numbers are not on evolution side...



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 12:10 PM
link   
reply to post by samaka
 


Please elaborate if you will, because that has no ground in logic.



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 12:22 PM
link   
reply to post by SpearMint
 


Yeah Yeah, the milk excuse did you know it's also said that we couldn't drink water here on earth either it used to kill us when we drank it because our bodies wasn't evolved enough. Yet here we still are survived without water

Evolution does not happen to humans, the only thing that evolves for us is technology. We might grow immune to a certain bacteria or disease if you want to call that evolution go right ahead knock yourself out.



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 12:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Daemonicon
 


No logic???? This is nothing but pure logic and reasoning. Where do you get this from?? You need to look how evolution became evolution today how it was built on interpretation of data, and that data can be anything for instance chickens and a dinosaur share 99% dna (which is not accurate i'm just giving an example) but there's NO REAL hard evidence of that so they assume they a linked together because they shared similar traits and that's how interpretation evolution came about and they keep piling on top of more assumptions thus making it a belief system.

So what are you not getting what's not logical ? Do you think it's logical to assume something and create more theories off something that has no REAL hard evidence for?



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 12:43 PM
link   
reply to post by The Old American
 


well yes we are part plant if evolution is to be believed ! chlorphyl comes from plant material and the slug is replicating it ! so therefore its part plant part animal !



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 12:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Kryom
 


This is not a difficult concept. I'll try to give you an example; let's say the DNA is an information storage system, much like the hard drive in your computer. Both are subject to deterioration. Let's take a HD full of data with a stable lifespan of 30 years, now what do you do before the HD expires? You buy a new HD and copy your data there. Another 30 years, repeat the process. New medium, same data. Compare this to DNA and consider your entropy problem solved...

What happens to the "copied hard drive" if errors occur? Unlike DNA the hard drive copy process has error correction. In DNA, the cell only divides once the copy is complete, but if error already exists in the original, then the error is passed on. Usually a mutation. And mutations are always debilitating. Unless of course a plethora of cancers and birth "defects" are your idea of "improvement".



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 12:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Kryom
 


How the hell does cell know to replicate? Who gave it instruction? Who set the variables for chemicals to react one with one another? How did random chemical reactions created the DNA strand with myriads of information and data and a complete working molecules that depend on each other to work? How does anyone think that it's possible with out a designer is beyond me and more mythical than anything else.
edit on 23-5-2012 by samaka because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 12:56 PM
link   
Not only is evolution an undeniable fact, its a scientific principle. Sadly people who do not care about evolution do not want to actually seek out the evidence and therefore say, "it's just another theory". We share 70% of our genome with a sea sponge. We have a few of the same functional enzymes that are found within Ecoli. We observe the evolution of these same enzymes throughout the animal kingdom.

Oh well, at the same time there needs to be people to argue against theory's that are right so they can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Otherwise we would believe everything that is said to be true like people who watch fox news.



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 12:59 PM
link   
reply to post by SpearMint
 


Why would the physical decay of a system, as you put it, affect the spread of DNA in it's offspring? You're not really making sense.

Example. Put an original in a copier machine and reproduce it. Then copy the copy over and over until it is so fuzzy you can no longer read it. Each replication of DNA over millions of years (if you like) induces errors in the Genome. Those mutations are debilitating, period. The copies will never be as good as the original.

The bodies healing processes stave off the eventual decline of the body but only for so long. Thats why we grow old, become diseased and die. Same goes for all the diseases and birth defects in the world today. The list of "mutations" is endless and ever growing. Nowhere, anywhere do I see a natural "mutation" that cures cancer or Leukemia or prevents a million other defects in the genome from occurring. We are "devolving" from the original.
Does not conflict at all with the Department of Entropy.



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 01:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by chuckfeezzy
Not only is evolution an undeniable fact, its a scientific principle. Sadly people who do not care about evolution do not want to actually seek out the evidence and therefore say, "it's just another theory". We share 70% of our genome with a sea sponge. We have a few of the same functional enzymes that are found within Ecoli. We observe the evolution of these same enzymes throughout the animal kingdom.



What you just pointed out is just data, no one here is arguing that the data doesn't exist it's on how you interpreted that data. Just because we share similar traits dna doesn't mean we derived from that creature. Evolutionist only take certain facts of dna to fit their assumptions but there are MANY other facts of dna that proved otherwise. Why is that SOME amphibians have 5x more DNA than mammals but amoebae has more than 1000x dna they never bring that up, is that critical thinking to you?


"the really significant finding that comes to light from comparing the protiens' amino acid sequences is that it is impossible to arrange them in any sort of evolutionary series... there is little doubt that this is molecular evidence had been available a century ago... the idea of organic evolution might never have been accepted."
- Michael Denton
edit on 23-5-2012 by samaka because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 02:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrptr
reply to post by Kryom
 


This is not a difficult concept. I'll try to give you an example; let's say the DNA is an information storage system, much like the hard drive in your computer. Both are subject to deterioration. Let's take a HD full of data with a stable lifespan of 30 years, now what do you do before the HD expires? You buy a new HD and copy your data there. Another 30 years, repeat the process. New medium, same data. Compare this to DNA and consider your entropy problem solved...

What happens to the "copied hard drive" if errors occur? Unlike DNA the hard drive copy process has error correction. In DNA, the cell only divides once the copy is complete, but if error already exists in the original, then the error is passed on. Usually a mutation. And mutations are always debilitating. Unless of course a plethora of cancers and birth "defects" are your idea of "improvement".

A difficult concept after all and a sort of a bad analogy, I realize now. But correct me if I'm wrong, I thought there actually are some repair and error correction functions involved when a DNA is being copied? And I'm not sure what you mean by mutations always being harmful? Of course they mostly are, but many are neutral, and a rare few might turn up useful in a way or another, see AIDS immunity for example. Anyways, guess I need to do some further reading...



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 02:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by samaka
reply to post by Kryom
 

How the hell does cell know to replicate? Who gave it instruction? Who set the variables for chemicals to react one with one another? How did random chemical reactions created the DNA strand with myriads of information and data and a complete working molecules that depend on each other to work? How does anyone think that it's possible with out a designer is beyond me and more mythical than anything else.
edit on 23-5-2012 by samaka because: (no reason given)

Yup, if I only knew, I've been after answers for those questions for a long time now. After watching many instructional videos about dna transcription or the whole protein synthesis, ribosomes, RNA. What ever, I just felt like WTF how the hell could this all just be chemical reactions. Then I started to wonder why these 'chemical reactions' behave the way they do. I mean "who" decided to make it work like this.
Haven't found an answer yet... (no, it's not god)
Blarghgagrh, cant even concertrate on typing anymore, gonna head to bed...



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 02:32 PM
link   
reply to post by SpearMint
 


S&F OP.

Can't tell you how happy I am to have evolved to a place where I can enjoy cheese!


Khar



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 02:49 PM
link   
reply to post by chuckfeezzy
 


It's an incomplete theory full of discounted evidence that doesn't fit. The basics are ok but it's a work in progress.



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 03:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Kryom
 


Anyways, guess I need to do some further reading...

Yah, me too. Know enough about most things to be dangerous. Its all good. And you are right. There is some error correction in cell division. Some only come out periodically, like blond hair or freckles. Some benign or repressed until one day, whoops cancer again. "It runs in the family". Or specific to ethnicity like sickle cell anemia, etc.



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 03:24 PM
link   
reply to post by SpearMint
 


Major problem with the evolutionist perspective: adaptation and 'evolution' are not interchangeable.

If the example you provided was indeed proof of evolution,. then by all means these Africans SHOULD be more or less than 100% human. Yet all you've done is proven that even as a result of adaptation, the subjects remain EXACTLY the same species. Unless of course your point is to prove how some races are superior to others due to some acquired traits.

Pride/Arrogance much?
edit on 23-5-2012 by GambitVII because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-5-2012 by GambitVII because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 03:26 PM
link   
reply to post by SpearMint
 


I'm not going to give you a "pile of crap" as one rude poster put it.

You make the assumption that those who believe in a Creator are all illiterate and don't believe in Evolution?

I'm a Christian and I believe in evolution as does most Christians I know.

In our Faith all we are told is we are created from the dust. Evolution assumes we are created from the dust does it not? The only true difference is that I believe it was by design. Evolution and the only statement in the Bible regarding Creation are in perfect harmony and agreement.

You will find that many if not most Christians believe in both. You will also find the education level among practicing Christians to be very high, even in the sciences. Many are likely more knowledgeable on Evolution than you appear to be.

I say this because of the tone of your OP.



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 03:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Kryom
 


Haven't found an answer yet... (no, it's not god)

Not the religious one you are right. But maybe a better word would be a creator somewhere. I mean, you know... when you see a jumbo jet fly overhead, you know that somebody designed and built it. But they are not "God" either, right? Life is that special quality apart from all the suns and rocks and elements and stuff. That rare jewel in the Universe... life.

If I told you to go find a diamond in the ground, you would have to search the whole planet almost to find one in the ground. All that earth and just a few diamonds. Same with life. Start searching star by star; as rare as a diamond.

But once dug up, cut and polished, there are a lot of them overall.



new topics

top topics



 
28
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join