Science against evolution

page: 18
12
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 03:38 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



Everyone knows that visitors from other worlds once occupied our planet, is this ground breaking news to you? Who do you think built the pryamids?

Ancients Egyptians built the pyramids. They were a lot smarter than the twits that say it was aliens.




posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 03:41 PM
link   
reply to post by john_bmth
 



I haven't frequented this forum in about 6 months and tooth is still going on about "target food"? Would I be right in assuming that not a single reference to "target food" has been found outside of tooth's imagination yet?

You are correct despite the obvious and overwhelming evidence against.

Tooth is simply being a creationist. Every creationist lecture I have attended, and there have been several, involve little science, but lie after lie after lie after lie to a bunch of bible thumping fools that was to be less educated. I am not sure if there was ever been anyone else at these lectures that was not feverishly flipping through the bible trying to follow the lecture.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 03:53 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



I don't have to, all of the proof and evidence is allready listed in all of the diets you can look up and the details.

Actually, I've shown you many times that you were wrong. I showed you that the diet you listed for deer was wrong. I did the same for squirrels, abalone, and many other animals. What is clear is that you are constantly making false statements to support a failed idea.


The fact is animals don't experiment with food unless they are starving.

That is a well known lie. I've already presented strong evidence that deer experiment with food. Squirrels, skunks, racoons, and many other animals experiment.


There is obvious proof that choices are automatically made as a species, as a whole, all of the time. What this means in case you can't grasp your one line come backs around this, is that first of all you are wrong.

What this means is that you are a close minded creationist that will tell lies whenever they can and have no shame about repeating lies.


Species appear to know what they are suppose to be eating, and they don't experiment to learn of this. Second they are all choosing the same choices.

More lies. No surprise. Herbivores from cattle to beetles eat whatever is around. There is no target food.


This means that intelligence was shared with them so that they would know what to eat, as they don't have cell phones to tell each other what to eat, and they don't hold meetings.

Even more lies.

You should be a creationist lecturer if not already one. Same style and tactics and it is all rubbish.


Well excuse me but it appears to be you that has more questions that answers. You are unable to provide proof that I share a common ancestor with apes. Your unable to prove that a species actually can change into another species instead of this joke of an idea you call specieation. Your also unable to provide any proof that all of any changes are part of this grand sceme called evolution. If you ask me, you just assume a lot and have no answers here.

Evidence already posted.


Posting info about speciation is not proof that a species can change into another species, your fooling yourself and in the process trying to dumb down fellow ATS members.

Evidence already posted.


Aside from wiki, Pye has never had anyone challenge his work so you are obviously wrong.

There you are wrong since the wiki references two studies saying he is wrong.


Relying on relative isolation to determine if something is a different species is just as lame as it gets. I allready proved earler that we have very good reason and proof of why we can't rely on such rubbish. We have non matching species that are able to sucessfully breed with one another, like the horse and the donkey, and the wolf and the dog, and the cat and the rabbit. We also have same species life that is not able to breed. Like my neighbor is unable to get pregnant and doctors have checked out her husband and everything about her and have no answers. This obviously is not proof that she has speciated. Evolutionists would obviously assume otherwise.

That has got to be the lamest thing I have ever heard for figuring out if a species has changed.

Take a basic biology course when you get to high school to learn why you are wrong.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 04:00 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



No you took it out of context, what I said was the post by wiki regarding star child is a false page. It's not written by Pye and wiki refuses to take it down even though Pye is not authorizing its contents.

That's lame. Wikipedia does not have to get approval.


It's clear that you don't understand what Target food is or how it works. A diet as for example will not and cannot prove target food to be wrong. And if you think it can, then it just goes to show your lack of understanding what it is and how it works.

Your claims have all been shot down repeatedly. Still you continue to post the issues after they have been shown to be false. That changes a mistake into a lie.


I understand the theory, but it contradicts every diet ever written.

False.


OFT is obviously false, there is no way it could be possible with species having an afixed diet. Don't take my word for it, look up the diet of any species and you will find we have afixed one. Random foraging is never mentioned in any of them.

So OFT shows target foods to be false. Not a surprise to anyone.


Every diet I have postet supports the phase of hunger and abalone supports target food, so again your wrong.

Already showed that your claim for the abalone diet was wrong.


It does, you can look up the eating habbits of any species and you can see there is no evolutionary connection there.

Hard to understand your statement when you do not and will not learn the meaning of evolution as used in science.


There is no stacks of information the prove Target Food false, there is nothing that proves it wrong. If target food is wrong then so must all of the diets that are listed.

That is a bald-faced lie. Deer experiment with food at all times of the year.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 04:06 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



Target food has evolved since you were last on.

It changed from a demonstrably wrong idea to a demonstrably wrong idea.
edit on 23-1-2013 by stereologist because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 04:06 PM
link   
since my post has been ignored, does that mean there are no objections to it? kinda wish idmonster were here...he was at least sensible
edit on 23-1-2013 by Bob Sholtz because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 04:47 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



Generaly no, there is always the posibility of food going extinct and also season diets like with the squirrel. But we still have a pegged diet.
You cannot show proof target food exists so how can you assume a possibility of it going extinct? Pegged diet. Do you ever get tired of making ridiculous and uninformed comments?


Optimum foraging is false, if it were true, species would never go hungry as they would always leave food behind.
I asked you what the hell random foraging was. I already know you don’t have a clue about optimal foraging and that your denial means you don’t intend to.


Then you know its false, the squirrel alone proves it false.
Your link to the squirrel has been shown to prove YOU wrong so many times now I am convinced you are so dishonest you couldn’t even pee in a straight line.


Hey I'm easy, I'm asking YOU for answers.
Again I remind you. target food fantasy is your construct. YOU provide the answers which we all know you cannot. Science major indeed. Another tall tale with no evidence.


No I get it, to optimize energy.
So you don’t understand what optimal foraging is.



Mule deer have found a balance in their foraging behaviour which limits their interactions with predator species. While more abundant food sources are found at the edge of the forests, mule deer typically forage in open meadows, protecting themselves from the large cats and bears that prey on them from the cover of the forest


Now ask how did the deer make this decision? Experimentation, trial and error, following the lead of a more experienced member of the herd. All the things you deny and why you claim the link does not work.


The abalone eats sea weed or kelp, that is the target food for that species. There is nothing else
I refer you to stereo's post in your failed thread.


True but the example you gave didn't apply because it was a deer starving in the winter, nice try though.
The example I gave? I thought the link was broken? So you lied. If you had bothered to read past where you realised how wrong you are you would find no mention of winter was made. See above.


And this proves my case...

As you can see its only in special cases to kill more than they eat.
So you chose to ignore where it talks about different populations having different strategy’s and prey. Another demonstration of your selective reading then.

But hey. Explain why a lion kills more than he can eat if this was his target food.


None of that made any sense. It sounds like your so overwhelmed with your faith that you actually think its responsible for everything.
Of course you would claim it made no sense. I see all you are left with is denial. If food has no bearing on evolution as you claim
1. Tell me why a cheetah runs fast
2. Explain why a flower is shaped to allow only one type of animal to pollinate it
3. Explain why the basking shark has no teeth and such a large mouth


Target food is already an observation, I don't get what you are claiming.
You cannot provide one valid example of an observation that backs up your claim which is why you provide none.


You haven't presented me with anything that claims target food can't exist.
All you have is denial and dishonesty


He used outdated science, and got outdated results.
Are you really that unable to read. I don’t care. Again:

I could really care less about pye and his refusal to present his evidence for scientific scrutiny. Again the point I was making is that YOU are cherry picking again what you want to believe and what you refuse to understand. You continually display ‘Optimal Ignorance’


Read the info from his new site and see for yourself.
Jeeze. As far as I am concerned the starchild has been done to death and until pye opens his evidence to scientific scrutiny there is nothing to talk about. Got it yet?



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 05:19 PM
link   
reply to post by stereologist
 





Ancients Egyptians built the pyramids. They were a lot smarter than the twits that say it was aliens.
Thats funny because the way I understood it was, they "were" aliens.




Actually, I've shown you many times that you were wrong. I showed you that the diet you listed for deer was wrong. I did the same for squirrels, abalone, and many other animals. What is clear is that you are constantly making false statements to support a failed idea.
And you still don't get it. I can see that you don't have a clue about what is going on. It never was about getting a diet correct, I pulled that diet off of wiki, just like anyone else can do. If you had the diet right and I was off, I'm still correct, because its about his diet whatever that may be. Your just 20 carts behind the horse.




That is a well known lie. I've already presented strong evidence that deer experiment with food. Squirrels, skunks, racoons, and many other animals experiment.
The ONLY thing I have been presented with to date is the squirrel diet, and it CLEARLY states that his diet changes when he is hungry. So your wrong again. The deer was clearly starving, and even if I'm wrong, then its just part of his diet and I'm still correct. You just don't get it.




What this means is that you are a close minded creationist that will tell lies whenever they can and have no shame about repeating lies.
I never claimed to be a creationist, you just assumed that. Assuming is a common trait amongst evolutionists. I believe in intelligence. Take that however you choose to see it.




More lies. No surprise. Herbivores from cattle to beetles eat whatever is around. There is no target food.
There may not be any target food around for them at this time, but thats not proof that there never was at on time. This is why I keep saying that enviroment can change this, or if they were brought here from another planet like the bible states, would also leave them in the predicament.




Even more lies.

You should be a creationist lecturer if not already one. Same style and tactics and it is all rubbish.
I don't have or believe in a faith so how is that going to work






Evidence already posted.
Speciation is not proof of anything related to this. Your fooling youself, where is your proof?




Evidence already posted.
Where are the bones of all of the inbetween species for all of the species here on earth?




There you are wrong since the wiki references two studies saying he is wrong.
And who are you going to trust in this matter, the person that actually holds the skull and pays to have it tested, or the 3rd party that gets their own idea of it and writes up a wiki column?




Take a basic biology course when you get to high school to learn why you are wrong.
If I need high school, you need preschool. You just don't get that you can't make a theory out of nothing. Evolution isn't even a scientific theory, it fails the litmus test for that. It's not predictable, if it was we would know what species we are evolving into right now, and we don't. Evolution is not testable because you cant predict if or when its going to happen.

Get a better faith
.




That's lame. Wikipedia does not have to get approval.
True, but in that case the work becomes an opinion by someone not involved in the work. So what your telling me is that you will take someones 3rd party opinion over the work of the owner of the skull. It's obvious to me that your more concearned with the result rather than the truth.




Your claims have all been shot down repeatedly. Still you continue to post the issues after they have been shown to be false. That changes a mistake into a lie.
Target food has NEVER been proven to be a lie, and if it was, I wasn't here to address it. There is no evidence against it. I have however been told by an ATS member that they can't believe I made up this theory and they were certain I stole the work from someone else, and they would find out from who. So happy hunting.




False.
Species have a clear motivation to choosing specific food, which is also why they all choose the SAME food.




So OFT shows target foods to be false. Not a surprise to anyone.
Oh OFT was probably recently written by a discruntled ATS member that hates Target Food, no doubt. It has no merrit, no proof and there isn't a shred of it in any diet you can find.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 05:26 PM
link   
reply to post by stereologist
 





Already showed that your claim for the abalone diet was wrong.
You keep saying that but I have yet to see anything that proves that kelp is NOT the target food for abalone. But please by all means, bring it on, I want to know for myself as well. But I think you will fail like everyone else has done.




Hard to understand your statement when you do not and will not learn the meaning of evolution as used in science.
I think if everyone accepted evolution the way you do at this point, doctors would have been telling women that are unable to bare children that it is possible they have speciated. Of course this has never happened and if it did, someone would get sued.




That is a bald-faced lie. Deer experiment with food at all times of the year.
Well I don't consider them eating any and all plants a form of experimening, this is why the diet claims they are an herbivore.




It changed from a demonstrably wrong idea to a demonstrably idea.
So you agree that I'm no longer wrong, cool.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 05:50 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



Thats funny because the way I understood it was, they "were" aliens.

You asked a question and I stated an answer. Now you pretend that the words mean something else. You really should be one of those creationist lecturers that are so dishonest with their audience.


And you still don't get it. I can see that you don't have a clue about what is going on. It never was about getting a diet correct, I pulled that diet off of wiki, just like anyone else can do. If you had the diet right and I was off, I'm still correct, because its about his diet whatever that may be. Your just 20 carts behind the horse.

Actually, you repeatedly lied about the content of the wikipedia.

TF is a complete failure.


The ONLY thing I have been presented with to date is the squirrel diet, and it CLEARLY states that his diet changes when he is hungry. So your wrong again. The deer was clearly starving, and even if I'm wrong, then its just part of his diet and I'm still correct. You just don't get it.

This is just like creationism. You begin with an idea, even one as ludicrous as TF and then you simply claim everything matches perfectly. When you are dead wrong such as claiming that deer do not experiment you make up lies like the deer was starving although the deer was experimenting in a lush environment. You really should be one of those creationism lecturers.


I never claimed to be a creationist, you just assumed that. Assuming is a common trait amongst evolutionists. I believe in intelligence. Take that however you choose to see it.

Not an assumption. I am saying you act like a creationist.


There may not be any target food around for them at this time, but thats not proof that there never was at on time. This is why I keep saying that enviroment can change this, or if they were brought here from another planet like the bible states, would also leave them in the predicament.

Now that is an assumption which is obviously wrong.


I don't have or believe in a faith so how is that going to work

I never claimed that the lecturers were in a faith or had faith. I simply reported that they constantly lie.


Speciation is not proof of anything related to this. Your fooling youself, where is your proof?

Evidence already posted.


Where are the bones of all of the inbetween species for all of the species here on earth?

Take a basic biology course when you get to high school.


And who are you going to trust in this matter, the person that actually holds the skull and pays to have it tested, or the 3rd party that gets their own idea of it and writes up a wiki column?

The reports were from the lab.


If I need high school, you need preschool. You just don't get that you can't make a theory out of nothing. Evolution isn't even a scientific theory, it fails the litmus test for that. It's not predictable, if it was we would know what species we are evolving into right now, and we don't. Evolution is not testable because you cant predict if or when its going to happen.

Take a biology course and learn why this is nonsense.


True, but in that case the work becomes an opinion by someone not involved in the work. So what your telling me is that you will take someones 3rd party opinion over the work of the owner of the skull. It's obvious to me that your more concearned with the result rather than the truth.

The reports were from the labs.


Target food has NEVER been proven to be a lie, and if it was, I wasn't here to address it. There is no evidence against it. I have however been told by an ATS member that they can't believe I made up this theory and they were certain I stole the work from someone else, and they would find out from who. So happy hunting.

I proved it showing deer experiment with food. TF is an obvious lie.


Species have a clear motivation to choosing specific food, which is also why they all choose the SAME food.

Another lie.


Oh OFT was probably recently written by a discruntled ATS member that hates Target Food, no doubt. It has no merrit, no proof and there isn't a shred of it in any diet you can find.

No one hates TF. It's a joke. It's humor. It's nothing to hate.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 05:53 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



You keep saying that but I have yet to see anything that proves that kelp is NOT the target food for abalone. But please by all means, bring it on, I want to know for myself as well. But I think you will fail like everyone else has done.

There is no such thing as TF. I already showed you that abalone eat more than kelp.


I think if everyone accepted evolution the way you do at this point, doctors would have been telling women that are unable to bare children that it is possible they have speciated. Of course this has never happened and if it did, someone would get sued.

Take a biology course and learn why is nonsensical.


Well I don't consider them eating any and all plants a form of experimening, this is why the diet claims they are an herbivore.

Deer experiment with food.


So you agree that I'm no longer wrong, cool.

Sorry about the typo. TF is a lie promoted by 1 person.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 05:55 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





You cannot show proof target food exists so how can you assume a possibility of it going extinct? Pegged diet. Do you ever get tired of making ridiculous and uninformed comments?
The abalone is perhaps the best example.


The larvae are lecithotrophic (i.e. feed off a yolk sac). The adults are herbivorous and feed with their rhipidoglossan radula on macroalgae, preferring red or brown algae. Sizes vary from 20 mm (Haliotis pulcherrima) to 200 mm (or even more) (Haliotis rufescens).


abalone wiki

They eat macroalgae, thats it.




I asked you what the hell random foraging was. I already know you don’t have a clue about optimal foraging and that your denial means you don’t intend to.
Can you find a specific diet that includes OFT?




Your link to the squirrel has been shown to prove YOU wrong so many times now I am convinced you are so dishonest you couldn’t even pee in a straight line.
There isn't anything that linking to he squirrel could make me out to be dishonest over? I have no idea what your talking about.




Again I remind you. target food fantasy is your construct. YOU provide the answers which we all know you cannot. Science major indeed. Another tall tale with no evidence.
I'm not going to play the colin repeat game with you.




Now ask how did the deer make this decision? Experimentation, trial and error, following the lead of a more experienced member of the herd. All the things you deny and why you claim the link does not work
Simple, they learned what not to do.




The example I gave? I thought the link was broken? So you lied. If you had bothered to read past where you realised how wrong you are you would find no mention of winter was made. See above.
Your links don't work in this part of the country Colin, no big shocker.




So you chose to ignore where it talks about different populations having different strategy’s and prey. Another demonstration of your selective reading then.

But hey. Explain why a lion kills more than he can eat if this was his target food.
Oh I can guess a multituide of reasons.
one is that he may not have weighed the animal correctly before hunting it. Another is that he might be used to feeding a pack, another might be that it was the closest choice for him at the time, it could also be that the kill is NOT his target food so he could be off on all of this.




Of course you would claim it made no sense. I see all you are left with is denial. If food has no bearing on evolution as you claim
1. Tell me why a cheetah runs fast
To catch his prey of course.




2. Explain why a flower is shaped to allow only one type of animal to pollinate it
It's not that I know of.




3. Explain why the basking shark has no teeth and such a large mouth
obviously to process his food in a different way.




You cannot provide one valid example of an observation that backs up your claim which is why you provide none.
Abalone clearly provides evidence for actuall target food, the squirrel diet provides phase one and two of the hunger.




All you have is denial and dishonesty
There is no denial, I welcome anyone that can prove it wrong to please do so.




Are you really that unable to read. I don’t care. Again:

I could really care less about pye and his refusal to present his evidence for scientific scrutiny. Again the point I was making is that YOU are cherry picking again what you want to believe and what you refuse to understand. You continually display ‘Optimal Ignorance’
Well duh, I think when you present a skull for alien testing it is to be for scientific scrutiny.




Jeeze. As far as I am concerned the starchild has been done to death and until pye opens his evidence to scientific scrutiny there is nothing to talk about. Got it yet?
You mean like how he presented it to...
Bold in 1999 or to trace genetics in 2003 or nuclear DNA in 2010 Nuclear DNA in 2010 also did the mtDNA on the skull and foxp2 did a fragment recovery in 2012.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 05:57 PM
link   
reply to post by stereologist
 
If tooth wants to make take advantage of typos mabe you should remind him of this one he made




At least I invested some time into learning about evolution, and while you might not agree with my understanding of it all, you can disprove my view of it.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 06:17 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



The abalone is perhaps the best example.
How many more times. Your example was poven not to support your argument. You failed again


Can you find a specific diet that includes OFT?
Learn what optimal foraging means and you will see how stupid your question is.


There isn't anything that linking to he squirrel could make me out to be dishonest over? I have no idea what your talking about.
You have been shown the link to the squirrel actually showed you wrong yet you ignore it and continue to post it. Dishonest


I'm not going to play the colin repeat game with you.
You're not going to provide supporting evidence either. Dishonest to a fault


Simple, they learned what not to do.
You have stated many times they dont learn, they know what their target food is. So you lied then


Your links don't work in this part of the country Colin, no big shocker.
Does not stop you from getting informed or does education not work in your part of the country? Still does not answer how you can claim my link talked about winter when you claimed not to be able to open it.


Oh I can guess a multituide of reasons.
I dont want your guess I want your answer with evidence


To catch his prey of course.
Yes. Antelope are fast. Its an arms race so the antelope shapes the cheetah and the cheetah shapes the antelope. Food plays a big part in evolution


It's not that I know of.
Dont know very much do you. Flowers of some plants ensure they are ferilised by producing nectar that only one type of animal can reach. The humming bird is one example. The bird is shaped by the flower and the flower the bird. Their relationship has played a big part in their evolution based on food.


obviously to process his food in a different way.
So again food has shaped and played a part in the evolution of the basking shark.

So your nonsense remark has been shown to be just that.


Abalone clearly provides evidence for actuall target food, the squirrel diet provides phase one and two of the hunger.
Your claim has been shown to be false. Try again


There is no denial, I welcome anyone that can prove it wrong to please do so.
Target food does not exist, there is nothing to prove wrong. You can though and have been on every occassion


Well duh, I think when you present a skull for alien testing it is to be for scientific scrutiny.
You really are that dense. Maybe you dont cherry pick. Maybe you really cant comprehend what you read.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 09:29 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





How many more times. Your example was poven not to support your argument. You failed again
What are you talking about, its a prime example of target food. It's one food first of all, and it provides all the necessary nutrients the abalone needs, there is no other food in the picture. So your obviously wrong.




Learn what optimal foraging means and you will see how stupid your question is.
I allready read it, and it doesn't apply to anyones diet that I can think of.




You have been shown the link to the squirrel actually showed you wrong yet you ignore it and continue to post it. Dishonest
No the squirrel is in a phase one and phase two of hunger. There is nothing to be proven wrong.




You're not going to provide supporting evidence either. Dishonest to a fault
I don't know if your OCD or ADHD but I'm not playing the repeat game with you anylonger.




You have stated many times they dont learn, they know what their target food is. So you lied then
There is a big difference between what to eat and where or when to eat.




Does not stop you from getting informed or does education not work in your part of the country? Still does not answer how you can claim my link talked about winter when you claimed not to be able to open it.
I was referring to an older talk we had about a deer eating bark from a tree.




I dont want your guess I want your answer with evidence
Then don't ask such trivial questions.




Yes. Antelope are fast. Its an arms race so the antelope shapes the cheetah and the cheetah shapes the antelope. Food plays a big part in evolution
I don't think so. Not any more than my neighbor next door smoking cigerretts shaping evolution.




Dont know very much do you. Flowers of some plants ensure they are ferilised by producing nectar that only one type of animal can reach. The humming bird is one example. The bird is shaped by the flower and the flower the bird. Their relationship has played a big part in their evolution based on food.
So you think that because there is this obvious relationship between them, it must be because of evolution. There couldn't possibly be intelligence involved which makes a hell of a lot more sense. This evolution is smarter than any combined life I have ever heard of.




So again food has shaped and played a part in the evolution of the basking shark.

So your nonsense remark has been shown to be just that.
Ya but you could say that about anything with all the credit that your giving to this process of evolution. My other neighbor likes to do drugs, you could say that is from evolution as well. He has evolved in a society where peer pressure has forced him to abuse his body. Evolution is not peeking around every corner, evolution does not have its doings in everything that we see. That is just fantasy and its speculation to boot, where is your proof?




Your claim has been shown to be false. Try again
I'm not going to repost the abalone and squirrel diets, as I have allready a few times. If you fell asleep its probably because of the weight of evolution pouring down upon you.




Target food does not exist, there is nothing to prove wrong. You can though and have been on every occassion
Then what is the preprogrammed instinct species have to locate food?




You really are that dense. Maybe you dont cherry pick. Maybe you really cant comprehend what you read.
Pye welcomes resistance about the skull, he wants to get to the bottom of it just like anyone else does. Besides you have no right attacking him if you have failed to at least read his reports. All you ever complained about was how he had never gone public with his findings and now that he has you refuse to read them. Bad.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 10:16 PM
link   
* INTERMISSION*




Your wrong there is no phase of starvation! the cult of Foamy the squirrel is real and his target food of bagels is plentiful.
Bow down to the squiiiirrrrel Foamy!




posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 10:32 PM
link   
So far tooth has shown an inability to:
1. learn what science means by evolution
2. post any scientific evidence against evolution
3. learn that the bible is a good part fiction



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 11:44 AM
link   
reply to post by flyingfish
 


I used to like foamy. If he had a target food I think it would probably be coffee.



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 12:23 PM
link   
reply to post by stereologist
 





So far tooth has shown an inability to:
1. learn what science means by evolution
2. post any scientific evidence against evolution
3. learn that the bible is a good part fiction


There is no science in evolution. The only thing they have uncovered is that species stop breeding, which is not proof that I share a common ancestor with apes
.

I have seen assumptions that evolution is proof of diversity, but there is no proof, only assumption.
I have seen assumptions that a species can change into another species, again just assumption with no proof.
I have seen assumptions that any and all changes are all working together to organize this process known as evolution.

The sites I have been sent to by former ATS users, all explain that assumptions are made for this process to work. It would have been nicer if they actually worked off facts rather than assumptions.

Target Food proves that intelligence was present for the instinct that all species have, its just that evolution makes no claims about how this instinct gets transfered to any of them. The instinctive nature is present in every single diet observed. Species not only know what to eat, but they also know what not to eat, to make it even stranger, they all eat the same thing. So there is no way that a higher intelligence isn't at work in this. There is no power of evolution that can explain or afford these events without intelligence present.

I have never seen any part of the bible that claims its contents to be fiction, sorry. I think your working off the master code of evolution, which is assuming.

A lot of the things that evolution claim to happen, do actually happen, there is just no proof that there is any connection to it and this process known to be evolution. The only proven connection is the author.

The authors of evolution just liked to find some patterns and claim them to be part of evolution, in that case you might as well say that everything is part of evolution, with no proof.

Target Food would say other wise. It's common sense that if the life on a planet dies out, the planet dies. Our planet is in its 6 largest mass extinction right now looking at a total loss of 98% of life. It's common sense that a planet would normally be structured to support life to grow, not die out. Evoluton claims that this is all part of the master plan of evolution. That not only can evolution create new species, but can also render early death. It appears to be more of an issue that somone noticed these events and simply claimed them to all be part of the normal process with no proof.

Now here is proof about Target Food. Since it is hard to find on this planet and Abalone seems to be the best I have done so far, perhaps you might better understand this looking at it from a different angle. It makes the most sense that every species is suppose to have specific food to eat that renders the most nutrients for that species. Now you can assume that the way our planet is currently functioning is correct but anytime a species has to eat something that wasn't intended for it, there is a compramise in the health and the integrity of that species. Let me explain better. Lets say I like to eat pizza, and you like to eat a lot of different things. I decide to only eat pizza, I will surly live an unhealthy life and die sooner. You will live longer based on the fact that you eat more of a round diet. I know this to be fact, I have watched enough "Freaky Eaters" to know this is true, and in fact one was about a obligore pizza eater.

Now this may not seem like proof at first, but if not then you believe in chaos and no order to things. Lets set aside our differences for a moment about who is correct in evolution versus creation. Lets only go by what we know, since that is the fairest way. When we look at DNA do we see order and comformity or do we see chaos? We see order and comformity. So its stands to reason that our existence is suppose to also have order and comformity, but it doesn't. The reason is because someone placed all this life together on this planet that doesn't belong together, just like it says in the bible.
edit on 24-1-2013 by itsthetooth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 12:31 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


I have seen assumptions that evolution is proof of diversity, but there is no proof, only assumption.

You still don't understand the difference between evidence and proof. Why should anything you say be taken the least bit seriously when you can't even grasp that most basic concept of science?





new topics
top topics
 
12
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join