Science against evolution

page: 65
12
<< 62  63  64    66  67 >>

log in

join

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





I've shown you wrong over a hundred times.

The onus is on you to support tooth's folly. No has to show you wrong, but we all do it nearly every post.
You mean like how you assume a species is experimenting with food when not a single diet claims so.


I guess you got me didn't you.




posted on Feb, 19 2013 @ 05:20 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



That would be because one term can have many different meanings.

That would be a duhhhh. I've been pointing that out to you tie after time after time.

The issue is to get you to pick a meaning because of that situation.


Either way you slice it, it always comes back to the fact that he doesn't have Target Food.

Meaningless drivel.


Animals DO NOT experiment with food, if they did you would be able to pose some proof of it.

Posted many times.


Notice how they didn't use the words test or experiment, YOUR WRONG.

Yawnnnn. Evidence posted many times. You're only posting excuses as to why tooth's folly is failure.


I can tell your just really super confused. There is a big difference between what they want to eat and what they have to eat, and what they end up eating.

More pointless excuses about why tooth's folly is a failure.


I get nutrients from food, not from rocks.

Second graders know what rock they eat on a regular basis. I can't believe that you have not figured out what rock you eat probably every day.


Congratulations, you have identified the difference between phase one of hunger and phase two.

False. Diet is for an individual, not a species. You agreed to that.



posted on Feb, 19 2013 @ 05:21 PM
link   
I'm still on the fence about everything that evolution teaches.
It doesnt really explain everything that we think we know about nature. Every year there are new dicoverys



posted on Feb, 19 2013 @ 05:22 PM
link   
You've been telling a big lie this entire thread.

You stated that one species can turn into another. Her is the link where you say one species can change into another.

www.abovetopsecret.com...
What I wrote.

Caterpillars eat leafy material, but butterflies drink nectar. Are both part of their diets or neither is part of their diet?

Your response.

Obviously his diet changes when he changes species.



posted on Feb, 19 2013 @ 05:24 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 
Classic tooth again. Boy are you on a roll. Look up cecotrope. You have had this gifted to you and obviously do not understand it still. Time you worked for it.

Jeeze even first grade school kids can grasp this.



posted on Feb, 19 2013 @ 05:25 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



It would appear you have made a mistake, the article says NOTHING about him eating poop, just that these cecotropes happend to come from his anus.


You lie. Here is the wiki definition
en.wikipedia.org...

Cecotropes[pronunciation?], also caecotrophes or night feces, ...



posted on Feb, 19 2013 @ 05:27 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



You mean like how you assume a species is experimenting with food when not a single diet claims so.

According to your definition a diet would not include experimentation. Your definitions make it abundantly clear that almost every animal experiments with food.

Don't be a doofus and pretend otherwise.



posted on Feb, 19 2013 @ 05:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lifespan
I'm still on the fence about everything that evolution teaches.
It doesnt really explain everything that we think we know about nature. Every year there are new dicoverys
Sorry friend. This thread stopped being about evolution when tooth started spamming it. Its all about tooth denies the world. This thread has nothing of value for you or anyone else I'm afraid unless you enjoy watching a car crash.
edit on 19-2-2013 by colin42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 19 2013 @ 09:09 PM
link   
reply to post by stereologist
 


So what have we established at this point.

OK, all species eat feces, and all species experiment with what they want to eat.

You have failed at producing this proof but made a lame attempt at presenting Gerbils, Rabbits, and Dung beetle as prime examples that we all eat feces.

Now where is you lame excuse for proving that we all experiment with food.

Oh you gave that too. Based on the fact that diet is a habitual thing, anything thats not habitual must automatically mean its experimentation.

Man your making me laugh , please give it up.



posted on Feb, 19 2013 @ 09:24 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



OK, all species eat feces, and all species experiment with what they want to eat.

No one has claimed that all species eat feces. No one has claimed that all species experiment with food.


You have failed at producing this proof but made a lame attempt at presenting Gerbils, Rabbits, and Dung beetle as prime examples that we all eat feces.

A really lame attempt at a straw man argument.


Oh you gave that too. Based on the fact that diet is a habitual thing, anything thats not habitual must automatically mean its experimentation.

That is based on your definitions.


Don't be a doofus and pretend otherwise.

You are being a doofus.



posted on Feb, 19 2013 @ 09:29 PM
link   

Please quote the wiki for me. I believe you are telling a lie.

I asked you to quote the wiki and you lied about the contents. Typical.

I wrote.

You have stated many times that no one has ever observed a species changing into another species.

But you now claim that when a caterpillar changes into a butterfly it changes into another species.


Your reply was.

I guess there is always an exception to the rule.


So you repeatedly lied when you stated that no one has observed a species turning into another species.

I believe this qualifies you as a hoaxer and are in violation of the T&C of ATS.



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 03:12 AM
link   
reply to post by stereologist
 

tooth wrote

OK, all species eat feces, and all species experiment with what they want to eat.

You have failed at producing this proof but made a lame attempt at presenting Gerbils, Rabbits, and Dung beetle as prime examples that we all eat feces.
Tooth Your idiots guide to denial is complete. No one has said ALL animals eat feces and you know it. You denied any do and challenged anyone to provide even one example. We all did, loads of them

I noticed you slipped up. You finally acknowledged the dung beetle even though you refused to address the posts I made or even mention it as the dung beetle alone poves you wrong. It eats poo, lives in poo, lays it eggs in poo. So I take it you changed species. Troll into chicken

Hi Stereo

Do you really think tooth is capable of giving you any definition? In my opinion he showcases he has not got the honesty needed to provide a definition of his understanding of diet as that would mean he has to debate and he has not got the guts to play an honest game he knows will expose his fantasy further.

I could be wrong. Maybe he is just the most stupid person on the planet that has no ability to learn, absorb information, string together a coherent sentence and understand the words or the language he abuses. This leaves him unable to understand the world around him at even the most basic level.

Or it could be as simple as

He Is A Worthless Troll

This one has my vote

edit on 20-2-2013 by colin42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 04:07 AM
link   
Maybe it would help to recap how tooth’s fantasy has changed during this thread alone

1. Previous claim: Only man (and a few helpers like chickens) are not from here which meant he was not natural and anything he did was not natural

His new claim: No organic life is from this planet except maybe bacteria. This means no organic life on this planet is natural and according to his logic anything organic life does on this planet is not natural

Conclusion: All of his favourite topics based on his fantasy opinions fail

2. Previous claim: This planet had a balanced eco system that was destroyed by man being dumped on this planet

His new claim: All life except maybe bacteria was wiped out by a biblical flood. This planet was artificially prepared for the introduction of life from other planets. There was no eco system or balance

Conclusion: All of his favourite topics based on his fantasy opinions fail

3. Previous claim: No one has ever seen one species change into another species so evolution must be wrong.

His new claim: A caterpillar and the resulting butterfly are two different species (
I know but this is what he believes
)

Conclusion: Many people have watched the metamorphism of caterpillar to pupa to butterfly. They have even filmed it. According to tooth Evolution exists because speciation has been observed. His arguments fail.

4. Previous claim: Only man does not have target food as he is not from here. This results in man having so many illnesses that he would not live past puberty without medical intervention.

His new claim: Still claims the same thing but until he can show how all the other animals live past puberty without medical intervention this particular fantasy does not even get off the ground. Case closed.

When tooth’s claims are tested against tooth's golden rule target food fails every time.

Summary: These are the main changes that have occurred in this thread alone but have been more than enough to see his whole sorry house of cards collapse. So unless tooth can come up with something new is there any point in continuing kicking a dead dog?

As I wrote in my previous post. Tooth's 'Idiots Guide To Denial' is complete and nearing a 1000 pages of examples is enough for any guide book.

I think we have enough evidence to show he will never enter into honest dialog. He has not got enough confidence in his fantasy to take it to the debate forum so the only result of continued interaction with him on this topic (evolution) is more pages of his inane drivel, lies and denial.

edit on 20-2-2013 by colin42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 11:34 AM
link   
reply to post by stereologist
 





No one has claimed that all species eat feces. No one has claimed that all species experiment with food.
So then you agree its only when they are starving.




That is based on your definitions.
But I didn't write the definition for the term Diet, Google did.




You are being a doofus.
So you issue weak excuses, but I'm the lame one.




So you repeatedly lied when you stated that no one has observed a species turning into another species.

I believe this qualifies you as a hoaxer and are in violation of the T&C of ATS
You were a hoaxer long before I was.



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 11:42 AM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





Tooth Your idiots guide to denial is complete. No one has said ALL animals eat feces and you know it. You denied any do and challenged anyone to provide even one example. We all did, loads of them

I noticed you slipped up. You finally acknowledged the dung beetle even though you refused to address the posts I made or even mention it as the dung beetle alone poves you wrong. It eats poo, lives in poo, lays it eggs in poo. So I take it you changed species. Troll into chicken
It's still not proof that its his intended food. Nice try though.

I don't know how many times I have to tell you, but I realize now that I have told you over a dozen times, and you just ignore me, making yourself out to be a troll. Target Food is a relationship between the consumer and the food NOT THE PLANET AND THE FOOD. You are a serious troll.



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 12:09 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



So then you agree its only when they are starving.

A nitwit statement. Animals experiment with food regardless of the abundance of food.

Not only that, but YOUR definitions make that clear.


But I didn't write the definition for the term Diet, Google did.

That's a lie. You posted a definition for diet.

You repeatedly posted a lie when you stated that no one has witnessed a species turning into another species. It was a lie because you stated that a caterpillar turning into a butterfly is an example of a species turning into another species. That means you have been knowingly perpetrating a hoax at ATS.

Your own posts demonstrate that. Anyone reading your posts knows that you have repeatedly and purposely lied. You are a hoaxer.



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 12:12 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


By your definition for diet tooth's folly is a nonsense claim of no merit.

Your own definitions and statements show that:
1. Animals experiment with food
2. Diet is a matter of the individual, not a specie
3. Evolution has been observed



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 01:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by colin42
 





Tooth Your idiots guide to denial is complete. No one has said ALL animals eat feces and you know it. You denied any do and challenged anyone to provide even one example. We all did, loads of them

I noticed you slipped up. You finally acknowledged the dung beetle even though you refused to address the posts I made or even mention it as the dung beetle alone poves you wrong. It eats poo, lives in poo, lays it eggs in poo. So I take it you changed species. Troll into chicken
It's still not proof that its his intended food. Nice try though.

I don't know how many times I have to tell you, but I realize now that I have told you over a dozen times, and you just ignore me, making yourself out to be a troll. Target Food is a relationship between the consumer and the food NOT THE PLANET AND THE FOOD. You are a serious troll.
Looks at dead dog. Checks for life. Finds the dog is indeed dead. Goes to kick the dead dog one final time. Decides kicking a dead dog is a wasted effort.

Leaves the dead dog to rot.

Epitaph: Here lies tooth. Spent his life chasing his tail and barking at the moon. All that knew him agreed he was truly barking. RIP



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 02:13 PM
link   
reply to post by stereologist
 





By your definition for diet tooth's folly is a nonsense claim of no merit.

Your own definitions and statements show that:
1. Animals experiment with food
Can you define what context, I'm not aware my definitions state that.




2. Diet is a matter of the individual, not a specie
Then how is it we have all diets based on specie?
Nothing in the diet ever makes claims that the diet will vary from individual to individual, and none of the make the statement that would prove they experiment with food.

You would just like to see that because it fits your fantasy. Now post me some diets clearly showing that someone experiments with diet, or accept it the way it is.




3. Evolution has been observed

Thats not evolution its adaptation, big difference.

Again adaptation is an ABILITY. Evolution would happen in molecular changes. Abilitys don't happen in molecular changes.



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 02:14 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





Looks at dead dog. Checks for life. Finds the dog is indeed dead. Goes to kick the dead dog one final time. Decides kicking a dead dog is a wasted effort.

Leaves the dead dog to rot.

Epitaph: Here lies tooth. Spent his life chasing his tail and barking at the moon. All that knew him agreed he was truly barking. RIP
He was a slow learner, his name was Colin.





new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 62  63  64    66  67 >>

log in

join