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.

 

A blow to evolution - Gene Regulation

page: 8
10
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 11 2013 @ 01:50 PM
link   
reply to post by stereologist
 





Once again we have to tell the person that admits to posting lies that species evolve, not individuals.

The post where tooth admits to posting lies.
And you lie again, even the wiki on speciation clearly states that they start out with a group of species that are seperated and causes speciation. But I guess you missed that.




Ya and I'm the first to fall for it right, I mean after all I'm even the person that coined the term cabbit.

That is a lie. You are not the one that coined that term.
Exactly, then why would you act like I was





A doctor doesn't ever tell a patient that evolution has caused relationship isolation with them because IT CANT.

Evolution happens to species, not individuals.

You rely on lies. You admit to telling lies. You in essence admit to posting hoaxes at ATS.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Dont be such a gidget, if that were true we woudln't have sub species. I obviously know more about evolution than you do.




So now whats your excuse why Allopatric speciation doesn't apply to humans

It does apply to the human species, not human individuals.
Your understanding doesn't allow evolution to evolve and leave remaining species to exist. In other words, if humans were the last thing to have evolved, we would be the ONLY species in existence by your understanding.




There is nothing false about the statement, NO doctor has ever made the claim that allopatric speciation is the reason why they can't produce offspring.

That's because these issues apply to species not individuals.
Your understanding does NOTHING for the explanation of diversity.




Allopatric speciation is dead, or it at least died when it comes to humans. There is simply to much proof that says its false.

This opinion of yours is based on an argument from personal ignorance. You do not understand the issue and have demonstrated that quite well. On the other hand it could be that this is just another case in which you are purposely posting falsehoods. You've admitted to doing that in this very thread.
With your claims there NEVER could have been a common ancestor between us and apes, and they all would have speciated to become humans. Only problem is we have both apes and humans present today.




Individuals do not "speciate."

You argument is wrong as it is based on an argument from personal ignorance. It is also possible that you have purposely misrepresented the situation as you have claimed to have done before.

All you have shown so far is that your argument has nothing at all to do with allopatric speciation.
Individuals can speciate, what do you think causes the speciation to begin with...

There are four geographic modes of speciation in nature, based on the extent to which speciating populations are isolated from one another: allopatric, peripatric, parapatric, and sympatric. Speciation may also be induced artificially, through animal husbandry, agriculture, or laboratory experiments. Observed examples of each kind of speciation are provided throughout

speciation wiki
So as you can see, you are WRONG. The individuals of a populas become seperated from the original group and change.
I'm not understanding why this is such a hard thing for you to understand. This of course would leave behind the original species and create a new species.

Class dismissed.




posted on Mar, 11 2013 @ 01:56 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





And you avoided the same question for 3 times now because you don't have an honest answer.

Nope. I answered your question 4 times but you don’t understand the answer obviously. I will give it to you again

I suggest you learn its meaning or give up using it.
And you lie, you never once addressed them.




And for the 4th time now you have managed to deflect my question and pose the problem back on me. My understanding is not the problem here, the false claims made about Allopatric speciation are.

And that false claim is yours because you have no idea what you are talking about.

As for me telling you where you are wrong. Been there, done that, you are just as ignorant. I suggest you learn its meaning or give up using it.
aside from you saying that I'm wrong, let me know when you have some proof.




Now are you going to be serious and address that, or are you going to chicken out again and deflect the question?

I am serious. I suggest you learn its meaning or give up using it.
Your not an honest guy, all you do is reflect the question.




According to Allopatric speciation a rule is made that if a species stops producing offspring, its because it has changed enough that its now a different species.

You have no idea do you? I've changed my answer to better suit your level of understanding. I suggest you give up using it.
Your the only guy on here that is firm that I'm wrong when all I'm doing is quoting a wiki page.




I'm proving that false as we have non matching species, the horse and the donkey that are able to produce offspring.

Also been there, done that and you don’t understand it. Your ignorance is not my responsibility, it is yours and yours to correct.
In other words, I stand uncorrected.




The very fact you do not understand I have given you my answer already showcases you have no idea what you are talking about and have not got the knowledge to allow you to understand what others are telling you.

Again Your ignorance is not my responsibility, it is yours and yours to correct.

Now you answer something. What has any of this to do with the OP 'A blow to evolution - Gene Regulation' you are supposed to post on topic you know.
I wasn't the one that brought it up. If you don't like the answer, don't ask the question.



posted on Mar, 11 2013 @ 01:58 PM
link   
reply to post by rhinoceros
 





Of course there is proof. There's so much proof that it's an undeniable fact. You really need not look further than genes. If you want something more concrete look at ring species. Only reality refusalists and brain washed fundies deny facts such as these. Which one are you
There is no proof in evolution. As I have proven many times, and most recently in the quote about speciation. Using words like "it appears" is just another way of them indicating they are unsure. It would be nice if this theory was based on facts rather than speculation.



posted on Mar, 11 2013 @ 02:23 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



And you lie, you never once addressed them.
Like I told you already. You do not have the education to understand you have had your question answered.

You do not understand the term you are using. It is that simple but as usual you dont try to learn and you tell me I am a liar. Again your ignorance is not my problem it is yours and it appears you are determined to remain so.


aside from you saying that I'm wrong, let me know when you have some proof.
I have. You have shown in your use of Allopatric speciation that you have no idea it means and again you do not have the education to understand the answer.


Your not an honest guy, all you do is reflect the question.
You are not a very educated guy as I have answered you but you fail to understand the answer


Your the only guy on here that is firm that I'm wrong when all I'm doing is quoting a wiki page.
You certainly are NOT quoting the wiki on Allopatric Speciation . As usual you are quoting some weird tooth version of what you think you read. Like I said already, your ignorance is not my responsibility. It is for you to address.


In other words, I stand uncorrected.
Nope. The correct description is: You remain purposely ignorant.


I wasn't the one that brought it up. If you don't like the answer, don't ask the question.
Quite. Remember that when reading the answers you receive instead of calling me a liar.



posted on Mar, 11 2013 @ 02:34 PM
link   
Considering us humans now have reached a time where we know how to manipulate Genes, it's not hard to surmise that sometime in the past, there was an advanced civilization that arrived here, and manipulated the Chimp DNA to create Humans.

They'll never find the missing link cause there isn't one. We are genetic modifications by an advanced civilization.



posted on Mar, 11 2013 @ 02:48 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



Now you answer something. What has any of this to do with the OP 'A blow to evolution - Gene Regulation' you are supposed to post on topic you know.


I wasn't the one that brought it up. If you don't like the answer, don't ask the question.
Which of course is easily proved false by looking at your posts in this thread. None of which have been on topic. This Post


What a crock, are you trying to say there isn't a generation between us and apes?
This post


Your use of the word somehow is what shocks me. I'm suprissed your not instantly claiming that evolution did it.
And now we move onto the opening posts you always use to kill a thread on this subject This Post


Just like the wiki on the 10% brain myth, they are sure that its only a myth but turn around and claim that we know very little about the brain.
This Post


I understand that evolution rests on a belief that would be less probable than a 747 reconstructing itself in a hurricane, that doesn't mean its possible in my eyes.
And here we have This Post from you showing without doubt you are the only liar here


It has to do with allopathic speciation.
and so it has gone on. Off topic post after off topic post. Your same drivel that has been shown incorrect many times yet you claim as usual you have never been shown to be wrong.

So again Now you answer something. What has any of this to do with the OP 'A blow to evolution - Gene Regulation' you are supposed to post on topic you know.



posted on Mar, 11 2013 @ 05:49 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





nd you lie, you never once addressed them.

Like I told you already. You do not have the education to understand you have had your question answered.

You do not understand the term you are using. It is that simple but as usual you dont try to learn and you tell me I am a liar. Again your ignorance is not my problem it is yours and it appears you are determined to remain so.
Well thats just an easy way to pass the buck because you know that your wrong.




aside from you saying that I'm wrong, let me know when you have some proof.

I have. You have shown in your use of Allopatric speciation that you have no idea it means and again you do not have the education to understand the answer.
I understand Allopatric speciation just fine, its just your lame excuse because you know that your wrong and don't want to admitt it.




Your not an honest guy, all you do is reflect the question.

You are not a very educated guy as I have answered you but you fail to understand the answer
You don't have to be very educated to understand allopatric speciation, its pretty simple really.




Your the only guy on here that is firm that I'm wrong when all I'm doing is quoting a wiki page.

You certainly are NOT quoting the wiki on Allopatric Speciation . As usual you are quoting some weird tooth version of what you think you read. Like I said already, your ignorance is not my responsibility. It is for you to address.
Your correct, it wasn't a quote in the begining, I was actually copying and pasting.




In other words, I stand uncorrected.

Nope. The correct description is: You remain purposely ignorant.
So again I stand uncorrected.




I wasn't the one that brought it up. If you don't like the answer, don't ask the question.

Quite. Remember that when reading the answers you receive instead of calling me a liar.
I wasn't the one that chose the subject, sorry I was just answering to questions that were fired at me.



posted on Mar, 11 2013 @ 05:51 PM
link   
reply to post by dominicus
 





Considering us humans now have reached a time where we know how to manipulate Genes, it's not hard to surmise that sometime in the past, there was an advanced civilization that arrived here, and manipulated the Chimp DNA to create Humans.

They'll never find the missing link cause there isn't one. We are genetic modifications by an advanced civilization.
That would seem to be inline with what Lloyd Pye claims. At least that humans are GMO's.

I agree totally.

The majority of those on this thread however would argue with you and claim that Pye is a total fraudster and offer no proof of such.



posted on Mar, 11 2013 @ 05:57 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Mar, 11 2013 @ 06:07 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Mar, 11 2013 @ 06:08 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 
Never expected you to own up to your lies as you never do. Everyone else can see you for what you are though.



posted on Mar, 11 2013 @ 07:49 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





I understand Allopatric speciation just fine, its just your lame excuse because you know that your wrong and don't want to admitt it.

Nope you really don’t. You denying your ignorance wont change that.
My ignorance is nothing more than a fabrication on your part, to give you something to hide behind.




You don't have to be very educated to understand allopatric speciation, its pretty simple really.

And yet too complex for you to understand. Now that is just sad.
I understand it perfectly fine, thats just your way of coming to terms of knowing that you have been proven wrong.




Your correct, it wasn't a quote in the begining, I was actually copying and pasting.

You don’t understand what quoting is either Classic
I know what quoting is, I also know what "natural" is, and you clearly refuse to accept the definition layed out by google.




So again I stand uncorrected.

Nope you remain ignorant
So again I stand uncorrected.




I wasn't the one that chose the subject, sorry I was just answering to questions that were fired at me.

I already showed that to be a lie.
A link to an entire page on a thread doesn't tell me what section your referring to, and the problem with you is that it could be anything not even related.



posted on Mar, 11 2013 @ 07:50 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





Never expected you to own up to your lies as you never do. Everyone else can see you for what you are though.
You mean like the time that you tred to claim that a house sparrow is following people, when he's actually having the relationship with the house and not the person? Please if anyone needs to own up to lies, you would be at the front of the line for lying and trying to move goal posts.



posted on Mar, 11 2013 @ 08:55 PM
link   
Closing briefly so members can read the following......

ATTENTION



We expect civility and decorum within all topics - Please Review This Link.

You are responsible for your own posts.

Go After the Ball, Not the Player!

Failure to post civilly and on topic will result in post removals and may result in temporary Posting Bans.
edit on Mon Mar 11 2013 by DontTreadOnMe because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 11 2013 @ 10:30 PM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 


Originally posted by Astyanax
I suppose you are older than eight or nine years?


Originally posted by itsthetooth
I wouldn't know...

All right, then. I shan't trouble you further.



posted on Mar, 11 2013 @ 11:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Astyanax
 





All right, then. I shan't trouble you further.
Another perfect example of people changing the truth, just to suit their fantasy. That isn't what I said and you know it. I love how you edited it to suit your fantasy. At least I don't have to live in a fantasy.



posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 12:14 AM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



And you lie again, even the wiki on speciation clearly states that they start out with a group of species that are seperated and causes speciation. But I guess you missed that.

The wiki article specifically states that species evolve, not individuals. You even point out that is the case.


Exactly, then why would you act like I was

Never stated that. You claimed that cabbits were real and defended that ludicrous position as pointed out by links to your posts.


Dont be such a gidget, if that were true we woudln't have sub species. I obviously know more about evolution than you do.

Species evolve, not individuals. Your subspecies statement is illogical.


Your understanding doesn't allow evolution to evolve and leave remaining species to exist. In other words, if humans were the last thing to have evolved, we would be the ONLY species in existence by your understanding.

Illogical gibberish.

Allopatric speciation does apply to the human species, not human individuals.


Your understanding does NOTHING for the explanation of diversity.

Another instance of the logical fallacy called arguing from personal ignorance. Species evolve, not individuals.


With your claims there NEVER could have been a common ancestor between us and apes, and they all would have speciated to become humans. Only problem is we have both apes and humans present today.

Illogical gibberish unrelated to anything I posted.


Individuals can speciate, what do you think causes the speciation to begin with...

False. Species evolve, not individuals.


So as you can see, you are WRONG. The individuals of a populas become seperated from the original group and change.
I'm not understanding why this is such a hard thing for you to understand. This of course would leave behind the original species and create a new species.

Read and comprehend. The individuals do not change. The specie changes.

Evolution deals with gene pools. Gene pools change over time. The individuals do not evolve. The species evolve. Can't make it any simpler.



posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 12:21 AM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



And you lie, you never once addressed them.

Colin42 has addressed the issue many times, directly, and clearly.


aside from you saying that I'm wrong, let me know when you have some proof.

That has been done numerous times.


Your the only guy on here that is firm that I'm wrong when all I'm doing is quoting a wiki page.

That too is a falsehood. Everyone on this thread points out you are wrong. The issue is not quoting a reference, but clearly misrepresenting that article.


In other words, I stand uncorrected.

The issue is showing a clear lack of understanding or more likely a purposeful effort to misrepresent the following concepts and others: evolution as used in science, specie, and allopatric speciation.

These are simple terms to understand.



posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 12:34 AM
link   
reply to post by itsthetooth
 



I have never posted that I stated lies. Your just reading into things that aren't there which if very common amongst evolutionists.

Actually you did.

In fact you stated that you thought a caterpillar changing into a butterfly was an example of a species turning into another species. When given the chance to back off of that statement you followed up with a statement reaffirming that position.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Then you posted some cheesy statement that you posted a lie.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

You made some wishy washy statement about not believing in what you posted. That is the same as stating that you posted a lie.

You knowingly posted what amounts to a hoax and that is against the rules at ATS. You posted something you knew to be untrue. You stuck by what you posted after I let you know that what you posted was wrong. I gave you the out and you refused to budge. Now you say you posted something you knew was not true. That's posting a hoax.



posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 06:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by colin42
 





Never expected you to own up to your lies as you never do. Everyone else can see you for what you are though.
You mean like the time that you tred to claim that a house sparrow is following people, when he's actually having the relationship with the house and not the person? Please if anyone needs to own up to lies, you would be at the front of the line for lying and trying to move goal posts.
Do you ever plan to post on topic?


edit on 12-3-2013 by colin42 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join