It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Evolution Now Dead. 30 Papers Suggest DNA is Encoded Intelligently

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

log in


posted on Oct, 2 2012 @ 11:29 PM
"As real science continues to advance, evolution looks more like the magical fairytale that it is"

I honestly think he said it backwards...

Did someone forget to tell the guy that said that that the "modern scientists" he thinks are disproving evolution actually have a great amount of evidence that evolution is very factual?

In September 2012, the project released a much more extensive set of results, in 30 papers published simultaneously in several journals, including six in Nature, six in Genome Biology and a special issue with 18 publications of Genome Research.[17] The most striking finding was that the fraction of human DNA that is biologically active is considerably higher than even the most optimistic previous estimates. In an overview paper, the ENCODE Consortium reported that its members were able to assign biochemical functions to over 80% of the genome.[9] Much of this was found to be involved in controlling the expression levels of coding DNA, which makes up less than 1% of the genome.

This proves god? No.

That video in the OP was absolutely embarrassing. He talks about the research papers, scientists, and junk DNA. He doesn't mention a word of god through the entire video then all of sudden, out of nowhere, what these scientists proved was that we were created? Wrong. Nothing in those research papers even remotely suggest an absurd claim like that.

I truly don't see how you could get "god" from these papers.

Here is some information about the evidence of evolution straight off Wikipedia. It takes about 3 seconds to find.

If you need something more simplified, this happened in a few decades. ion.html

By the way, stop replying to people who don't want to have intelligent conversation.
Quoting bible versus and talking about how science is dumb and evolution is faith
based because you have no knowledge whatsoever on the subject is childish.
Provide you're proof and I'll provide mine.

posted on Oct, 2 2012 @ 11:32 PM
reply to post by VaterOrlaag

The Eugenics plot is induced by mass media indoctrination:

To alter the behaviour of people:

In order to alter the breeding patterns:

To produce a population that is dumber, and thus easier to manage, control, manipulate, etcetera...

posted on Oct, 2 2012 @ 11:37 PM
reply to post by EnochWasRight

The unprecedented number of functional elements identified in this study provides a valuable resource to the scientific community as well as significantly enhances our understanding of the human genome. Our analyses have revealed many novel aspects of gene expression and regulation as well as the organization of such information, as illustrated by the accompanying papers (see for collected ENCODE publications). However, there are still many specific details, particularly about the mechanistic processes that generate these elements and how and where they function, that require additional experiments to elucidate.

This is the first paragraph of the concluding remarks.

Did you read the whole research paper? I think you watched the video in you're OP and since the person speaking was apart of your "group" you simply copied and pasted his words and links.

I won't be able to reply anymore tonight as I have important things to do, but please, do me a favor and give out valid information next time.

edit on 2-10-2012 by Vandettas because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 2 2012 @ 11:43 PM
HERESY !! you dare ago against the established dogma!!!

YOu must be purified by FIRE!!!!
edit on 2-10-2012 by votan because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 01:05 AM

Originally posted by winofiend

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
Here is a link to ENCODE Project where the information can be found: ENCODE PROJECT

Link to Papers / Journal of Nature

A Creator is becoming impossible to deny. As John 1 states, we are created with WORD.

John 1

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome[a] it.

edit on 1-10-2012 by EnochWasRight because: (no reason given)

“Blessed are the destroyers of false hope, for they are the true Messiahs - Cursed are the god-adorers, for they shall be shorn sheep!”

Ask your god why then, does the human body fail? Why do we break, get cancer, disease, grow old, weak, senile, and die?

So much for your god and his creation. Doesn't even last 100 years most of the time. I'd get a refund.

Just want to reply to this. Why would the human body be designed to live infinitely? To me, you are using pre school logic to try and debate and unrelated issue.

Think carefully of how the human body works. Why do we get disease? There are many reasons, but to sum up, disease is caused by disharmony between two or more working parts. In other words, something causes disorder to the body , and the hundreds of systems within the body.

To answer your question why the human body , which comes from the Earth, goes BACK to the Earth....well, why WOULDN'T it?

Now, although I most definitely believe in intelligences that are not just human , I don't necessarily believe in a human Creator, nor do I deny the possibility of one. But you should ask yourself, if there IS a creator of physical life and/or the human.....what was the intent, the purpose?

Perhaps the human body was designed merely as a vehicle, just like we design cars....a vehicle which allows the spirit/soul to experience third dimensional reality.

It is already proven that a human being can pass away, DIE, without any disease or disharmony. Although not common, there have been thousands upon thousands of examples of people , elderly , passing in their sleep. When their bodies are autopsied, all organs were in a natural state, not diseased. They simply left their physical vehicle after it got old and worn.

Let us say a Creator does exist. Lets say his intention is to create a vehicle, for spirits to experience one form of reality. How would YOU do the human body differently? Would you make it so disease and death NEVER occured? Why or why not? perhaps disease exists for a reason.....If you study ecological science, even parasites and bacteria have their place. Everything functions together within an ecosystem.

posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 01:30 AM
reply to post by smilesmcgee

No I have known about DNA for some time .DNA is a relatively new discovery why is this only now being understood that life starting on earth was not a random event . It's just that a lot of people have never considered that DNA might ever relate to how life on earth started . Most people still think Carl Sagan and his billion years he threw in for good measure had the answer that life was a spontaneous event from nature .Even more couldn't care less .

posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 01:56 AM
How can evolution be dead, when DNA itself is an evolving molecule? It may be originally encoded intelligently, but it was obviously intended to continuously evolve. So what really changes here?

posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 02:05 AM

Originally posted by EnochWasRight

Originally posted by Barcs
reply to post by EnochWasRight

Evolution is dead? Ha. Could you please point me to the conclusion of the paper cited that claims DNA was designed or that evolution is wrong? So far I can't find it.
edit on 2-10-2012 by Barcs because: (no reason given)

Journal of Nature

Lead Research Paper that Carl Quotes in the Video
edit on 2-10-2012 by EnochWasRight because: (no reason given)

Yes...and Carl is a CLOWN because no where in that article does it claim an intelligent designer did it

His ridiculous clownish videos have been debunked dozens of times and he's flat out lying at this point.

posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 02:08 AM
reply to post by charlyv

The topic might have read DNA proves the theory of Creationism . The thought that we evolved from a single single celled amoeba that somehow spontaneously assimilated from amino acids has been disproved . That suspected single celled germ from what I read has more genetic information than we have per cell . Go figure .

posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 02:11 AM

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
reply to post by rhinoceros

If you are gaining your information from 2010. In 2012, we know of older galaxies. Either way, it's old. 6 days is not just what the Bible says, but matches the transitional states science states as the six stages of our planet.

That's because you are randomly assigning random periods to those days...and they aren't even of the same length

Complete...and utter...NONSENSE!!

posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 02:12 AM
reply to post by ErtaiNaGia

I saw your post and you know, you're on to something.

Look at the morons that breed nowadays!

posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 02:30 AM

Originally posted by EnochWasRight

Originally posted by Barcs
reply to post by EnochWasRight

[The unprecedented number of functional elements identified in this study provides a valuable resource to the scientific community as well as significantly enhances our understanding of the human genome. Our analyses have revealed many novel aspects of gene expression and regulation as well as the organization of such information, as illustrated by the accompanying papers (see for collected ENCODE publications). However, there are still many specific details, particularly about the mechanistic processes that generate these elements and how and where they function, that require additional experiments to elucidate.

The large spread of coverage—from our highest resolution, most conservative set of bases implicated in GENCODE protein-coding gene exons (2.9%) or specific protein DNA binding (8.5%) to the broadest, most general set of marks covering the genome (approximately 80%), with many gradations in between—presents a spectrum of elements with different functional properties discovered by ENCODE. A total of 99% of the known bases in the genome are within 1.7 kb of any ENCODE element, whereas 95% of bases are within 8 kb of a bound transcription factor motif or DNase I footprint. Interestingly, even using the most conservative estimates, the fraction of bases likely to be involved in direct gene regulation, even though incomplete, is significantly higher than that ascribed to protein-coding exons (1.2%), raising the possibility that more information in the human genome may be important for gene regulation than for biochemical function. Many of the regulatory elements are not constrained across mammalian evolution, which so far has been one of the most reliable indications of an important biochemical event for the organism. Thus, our data provide orthologous indicators for suggesting possible functional elements.

Importantly, for the first time we have sufficient statistical power to assess the impact of negative selection on primate-specific elements, and all ENCODE classes display evidence of negative selection in these unique-to-primate elements. Furthermore, even with our most conservative estimate of functional elements (8.5% of putative DNA/protein binding regions) and assuming that we have already sampled half of the elements from our transcription factor and cell-type diversity, one would estimate that at a minimum 20% (17% from protein binding and 2.9% protein coding gene exons) of the genome participates in these specific functions, with the likely figure significantly higher.

The broad coverage of ENCODE annotations enhances our understanding of common diseases with a genetic component, rare genetic diseases, and cancer, as shown by our ability to link otherwise anonymous associations to a functional element. ENCODE and similar studies provide a first step towards interpreting the rest of the genome—beyond protein-coding genes—thereby augmenting common disease genetic studies with testable hypotheses. Such information justifies performing whole-genome sequencing (rather than exome only, 1.2% of the genome) on rare diseases and investigating somatic variants in non-coding functional elements, for instance, in cancer. Furthermore, as GWAS analyses typically associate disease to SNPs in large regions, comparison to ENCODE non-coding functional elements can help pinpoint putative causal variants in addition to refinement of location by fine-mapping techniques78. Combining ENCODE data with allele-specific information derived from individual genome sequences provides specific insight on the impact of a genetic variant. Indeed, we believe that a significant goal would be to use functional data such as that derived from this project to assign every genomic variant to its possible impact on human phenotypes.

Where's the part about evolution being wrong and the part about the intelligent designer? That is copied from the conclusion. I don't see what exactly you guys are talking about. Could you please show me how any of this is saying that there is a designer?
edit on 2-10-2012 by Barcs because: (no reason given)

Let the lead researcher for the Genome project speak for himself.

Do you even watch the videos you post? Because he CLEARLY says he can't prove the existence of god and he's merely stating his BELIEF without backing it up with facts and evidence

posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 02:55 AM
reply to post by intrptr

Don't forget abou' Lillian.
What if she never left; here to stay for the while, reincarnate,, many times her 'special-ness'.....though still imperfect and 'aware' though/and still loved?

Should be obvious to few. Wahah?
Uhh? lOl. fa-real folks.

Not to mention any names ear though any ideas?
Hint; what if a Soul had amnesia at the introduction of it's first spArk in the heart though still had it's unique pOtentialities at the spring of beeing?

If you have the same name I have in mind, U2oh me; rogue NSA folks don't apply, cheat-as. They know who they are though not so sure of the content.
Looking forward. This should be interesting.
Truth Is Stranger than fiction.

edit on 3-10-2012 by Bluemoonsine because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 03:17 AM
reply to post by charles1952

True, I've always believed scientists are learning what God already knows, it's a shame scientists are busy trying to disprove God rather than prove God.

posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 03:44 AM

Originally posted by ErtaiNaGia
reply to post by apushforenlightment

I am sorry but it only works when people are open minded and really are seeking understanding/knowledge without preconcieved notions on what to expect and unfortunaly not all scientist or speakers for science are as open minded as they think they are or say they are.

Let me get this straight....

You don't have "Faith" in the scientific method, because HUMANS are fallable?

Do you also not trust roads, since humans made them?

Your assertion is baseless, biased, and infantile given that you are discussing HUMAN failings, as opposed to the failings of the scientific method.

And to answer your next post:

Why do you have faith in faith, since humans... those fallible and biased creatures (the same ones that do science), also follow faith?

Your entire post is a biased assertion.

Your are from my point of view under the assumption that my thoughts/views are based on faith and not experiances of things that unfortunalty many people have not yeet experianced. I wish it was the other way around. It is easier being told what to belive than to seek for yourself. But it is true that my views will not be 100% true since i have to litte information and perception to understand everything.

I am sorry that you are annoyed by me pointing out my views on your prophet Dawkins and the unfortunate less than open mindedness that exists in part of the science community creating a duality against anything spiritual/unknown that does not fit in the box. But I hope that all people get over that stagnation fast and start to accumalate knowledge based on observation and experiance wherever it may lead them.
edit on 3-10-2012 by apushforenlightment because: spellchecking

posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 06:08 AM
reply to post by EnochWasRight

I have never denied the existence of a creator, I just deny the relevance of a book that has stories that were hand-picked in order to further the agenda of a certain group.
I believe that a creator gave man the genetic information that would allow him to evolve over time, which means evolution isn't done and dusted as man is still evolving, but man was more than likely created by an off world being or beings, which would make them ALIENS.
We were created in his image right, so more than likely these Aliens have planted the seed of life on many worlds and if we had the capability to travel through space we could probably visit our long lost cousins.
The Universe is a huge place and we are very small and insignificant in the grand scheme of things.
I wonder how the Christian God feels about so many innocent people being killed in his name?
Aren't we all Gods children?
When you Bible thumpers don't have an answer you spout scripture as though that's the answer to everything. Well its not, people over the world are dying in the name of religion and your answer would be "Well the Lord works in Mysterious ways".
What does that mean?
I'll answer that, it means you havent got a F*cking clue as the bible hasn't an exact answer either.
Think for yourself, look internally for the answers not in some mouldy book written 2000 years ago in a completely different language and translated many times before getting to the English it is now.
I think Gnosticism has far more going for it and more relevance than the current form of Christianity.
You shouldn't be able to buy your way into heaven but they'll have you believe that you can.
How many times does the plate come around in a Catholic Church?, why do TV evangelists pray on people's gullibility in order to amass small fortunes, Why should I pay the church a tithe?
Why does God need my money, surely if he needs it he can create it out of thin air?
The banksters can and are still doing it, and as Gods omnipotent he doesn't need money.
But his evil employees do and sadly organised religion is all a scam.
Buddhism is the closest to the real truth.It makes more sense and has a purpose. And those with evil intent are punished, but are given an opportunity to redeem themselves through Karma.
If you do wrong in Christianity you rot in hell, what can you learn from that?
And what is the purpose of going to heaven? You can sit on a cloud and worship Gods feet while listening to Angelic choruses. There has to be more to it.
Methinks its time for the Messiah to come back and update the story a bit I fear a lot has been lost in translation.

posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 06:22 AM
reply to post by SimonPeter

So what if God created the single celled amoeba with the genetic capabilities to EVOLVE into a higher life form over time.
I think the real answer is somewhere in between Evolution and Creation, Creation implies he has made Man out of thin air. Poof ! I've created Man, and next from his rib I'll create Wo - Man.

But what if he using his own Genetic signature and some existing chemicals on the planet left over from the big bang, he created Man and splicing DNA from the rib section created Woman.
Then we have Creation and as God may be himself an evolving being, the capability of evolution.
As for animals, maybe there were a few failures along the way. Maybe for a food source or to help set up the environment, Maybe all of those reasons.Maybe for reasons we just dont know yet but will learn when we evolve a bit more.

posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 07:00 AM
So, in the end, the OP twisted the scientific community's words, to try and make a religious argument, which was easily debunked by simply reading the article.

How many times does this exact same scenario have to play out on ATS, in school and in the media, etc., before religious people stop lying about science, to prove some unproveable point about their faith?

Believe what you want guys, but stop lying to try and convince others that your "faith" is rational. Faith ISN'T rational; that doesn't mean it's wrong for you to have it, but it does mean you're not gonna find scientific evidence for it in math and science books.

posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 07:55 AM
I'd hate to ruin OPs party- but you do know this debate doesn't have to be "creator or no creator"

Evolution leaves plenty of room for an original creator. You can believe both.

posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 08:24 AM

Originally posted by Egyptia
reply to post by EnochWasRight

Science is only beginning to catch up to the things that will truly dumbfound them. They have no idea of what is next in their discoveries. The world of science will be shaken. The discoveries are going according to HIS Will but it must coincide with HIS plan for the end of days and the tribulation. There is only so much that HE will allow to be truly discovered in order to fulfill the great day of accountability in the final chapter of HIS Perfection for us.

Why can it not be THEIR WILL, or SHE or HER? After all, if we were made in their image........... Would it not be possible? But that is an argument for another arena I guess. Your avatar gives the first impression of Goddess Energy, not the christian energy....

As far as tribulation or end times, if thoughts are things and energy is never destroyed would it not be possible then to think that with so many people believing in something, it could create the event? Like for example, prayers, no matter what religion, takes on the energy of that prayer and manifests in the material world...just food for thought, and not trying to offend.

new topics

top topics

<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in