It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by iterationzero
reply to post by Lazarus Short
I do not think that word means what you think it means.
How would you know what I think it means?
I see that you still steady your opinions on their pedestals in the face of 75 irrefutable propositions.
Originally posted by Lazarus Short
6. Science, as defined by the American public school system, excludes supernatural explanations.
7. Science depends upon the “Scientific Method” for determining truth.
8. The Scientific Method involves testing hypotheses using repeatable experiments.
9. If there is a scientific explanation for the origin of life, it must depend entirely on natural, repeatable processes.
10. If life originated by a natural process under certain specific conditions, it should be possible to create life again under the same conditions.
16. The theory of evolution depends upon abiogenesis as the starting point.
17. If the theory of abiogenesis is false, then the theory of evolution is false.
18. The American public school system teaches that somehow the first living cell formed naturally and reproduced.
19. There is no known way in which the first living cell could have formed naturally.
26. According to the theory of evolution, single-celled life forms evolved into multi-cellular life forms.
35. There is no satisfactory explanation how complex systems such as these could have originated by any natural process.
36. According to the theory of evolution, an invertebrate life-form evolved into the first vertebrate life-form.
37. Vertebrates have, by definition, a spine containing a nervous system.
38. The nervous system detects stimuli and reacts to them.
39. There is no satisfactory explanation for how the simplest nervous system could have originated by any natural process.
The evolution of nervous systems dates back to the first development of nervous systems in animals (or metazoans). Neurons developed as specialized electrical signaling cells in multicellular animals, adapting the mechanism of action potentials present in motile single-celled and colonial eukaryotes. Simple nerve nets seen in animals like cnidaria evolved first, followed by nerve cords in bilateral animals - ventral nerve cords in invertebrates and dorsal nerve cords surrounded by a notochord in chordates. Bilateralization led to the evolution of brains, a process called cephalization.
40. According to the theory of evolution, some of the first vertebrates were fish, which have eyes and a brain connected by a nervous system.
41. There is no satisfactory explanation how optical elements (typically including a lens, an iris and light sensors) could have assembled themselves by any natural process.
43. If the theory of evolution is true, then every characteristic of every living thing must be the result of a random mutation.
51. Artificial selection is more efficient than natural selection.
56. The fact that one individual was born later than another individual died is not proof that the later individual is a biological descendant of the earlier one, especially if they are of different species.
58. There is disagreement about hominid lineage because the “evidence” is meager and highly speculative.
61. Explanations for how apelike creatures evolved into humans are fanciful speculations without experimental confirmation.
64. There is no evidence that if apelike creatures sometimes stand upright to see over tall grasses, it will increase the brain size of their children.
68. The concept of geologic ages is based upon the evolutionary assumption that the kinds of fossils buried in sedimentary layers are determined by time rather than location.
72. “Dark matter” and “dark energy” were postulated to explain why astronomical measurements don’t match predictions of the Big Bang theory.
there's an ongoing experiment in Russia. For like 50 years they've been practicing what id call forced natural selection. Total contradiction I know. They keep breeding nice foxes with other nicer foxes. Over time they've ended up with a very docile people friendly version if the arctic fox. It's hair growth has changed and they are starting to see physical changes in them. Granted its still a fox but its only been 50 years. The point wad to take a wild animal and breed it into a domestic animal. While not a new species an almost certainly different breed. From just one breed to start with.
Originally posted by LightWarrior11
Why does the bible need to come up every single time someone wants to point out inconsistencies with evolution?The OP didnt even mention anything about religion and responses are already shoving this thread in the direction of that sort of debate. Id rather see this thread discuss ways of reproducing the characteristics of evolution...like the mutations and adaptations, or even find what has been tested and the results of that. But alas it's not my thread, but I feel like I can see where this thread is going already...and can we stop that? Plz.
Originally posted by Lazarus Short
reply to post by Barcs
Thanks for your input, but (once again) I am not going to debate with you - that is not really my purpose here. I only wanted to bring this material to people's attention. Be aware.