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.

 

Darwinism; What a Fake

page: 15
13
<< 12  13  14    16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 1 2013 @ 09:58 PM
link   
reply to post by boymonkey74
 


why should I consider your evidence better than Earth's evidence?




posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 12:00 AM
link   
reply to post by FreedomCommander
 


Uh, no. Evolution, in that case, means that when you change environments, you stay in the new environment. Look at the Nene Goose in Hawaii. It started as a Canadian Goose, but within a few more generations, it won't be able to swim anymore. Their webbing is receding to the point it will be useless for swimming. Just because you start on land doesn't mean that you can live in both. Then they'd be amphibians, not mammals.



posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 01:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by FreedomCommander
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


They didn't. Never did.

If they did, they would be able to come back to land.

IF evolution was correct, then we would be the ones swimming forever.

But it is not. Because it would be like building a tall skyscraper on a very old foundation with too many cracks.


Right. This post confirms what we've all been suspecting for some time now. You have no idea what you are talking about. You have no interest in debating people who come here bearing scientific facts. You just keep repeating yourself whilst sticking your fingers in your ears and ignoring said scientific facts.



posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 07:32 PM
link   
reply to post by AngryCymraeg
 


Are you saying that your scientific evidence is better than Earth's evidence?



posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 09:02 PM
link   
reply to post by FreedomCommander
 


I won't speak for AngryCymraeg, but whatever tenants of wisdom you bring to the table, and I respect your efforts to dispel commonly held truths, but whatever tenants of truth you bring, you have lost this battle as you only argue the personal issues dismiss facts that can be proved. Why?

CJ



posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 09:52 PM
link   
reply to post by ColoradoJens
 


Lost is not what I have, Won is not what I seek. Truth is all that is left in the battlefield of lies.



posted on Aug, 3 2013 @ 03:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by FreedomCommander
reply to post by AngryCymraeg
 


Are you saying that your scientific evidence is better than Earth's evidence?


I don't know what you mean by 'Earth's evidence'. If you mean 'evidence in a big book written by a bronze age people who had no idea at all about science' then that's not evidence, that's myth. I'm talking about factual, testable, actual evidence. Science in other words.



posted on Aug, 4 2013 @ 06:11 PM
link   
reply to post by AngryCymraeg
 


I'm pretty sure that "earth's evidence" for him means anything that is not actually verifiable through the scientific method and which he also agrees with and therefore proves his point. Also possible is selected quote mines from "science" that support him, and controversial proposals that are less than widely accepted but since they support him (or he thinks they do) are therefore true.

Aw heck - let's just cut to the chase - it's anything he thinks supports whatever his idea du jour is, regardless of source


I'm prepared to be wrong......but I'm not too worried that I will be.



posted on Aug, 13 2013 @ 03:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 


So it's sheer coincidence that fish, whales and dolphins have bones that match up perfectly with land dwelling animals then.


No, it's a matter of a good design.


Originally posted by Zaphod58
There is an almost complete fossil record of whales evolving from land based animals to entirely ocean dwelling animals.

www.talkorigins.org...


Nonsense. There are various species lined up to CLAIM there is some progression, that is utterly unproven, as is the case with every single such claimed "evolutionary line". NO forms in between the various species are ever presented.



posted on Aug, 13 2013 @ 03:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by AngryCymraeg

Originally posted by FreedomCommander
reply to post by AngryCymraeg
 


Are you saying that your scientific evidence is better than Earth's evidence?


I don't know what you mean by 'Earth's evidence'. If you mean 'evidence in a big book written by a bronze age people who had no idea at all about science' then that's not evidence, that's myth. I'm talking about factual, testable, actual evidence. Science in other words.


Actual evidence? Science? Those two don't even go together never mind all the "scientific" theories. Saying that a stone is x billion years old, doesn't make it that old. Pure guessing is what science is. Nothing more.



posted on Aug, 13 2013 @ 05:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Hellas
 




The motto of this place is "Deny ignorance" - not demonstrate it.



posted on Aug, 13 2013 @ 05:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by Hellas
 




The motto of this place is "Deny ignorance" - not demonstrate it.


Oh really? And your posts in this thread are what exactly? Just because you like to go cry with the wolves doesn't mean that ignorance goes one way only



posted on Aug, 13 2013 @ 08:52 AM
link   
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 


I forgot creationists are so much smarter than scientists. You can look at a complete fossil record, clearly see links between the creatures, and still say "no you're wrong." Hell, you can watch the species changing, as in the case of some Hawaiian species, and still say they're wrong.



posted on Aug, 13 2013 @ 01:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hellas

Originally posted by AngryCymraeg

Originally posted by FreedomCommander
reply to post by AngryCymraeg
 


Are you saying that your scientific evidence is better than Earth's evidence?


I don't know what you mean by 'Earth's evidence'. If you mean 'evidence in a big book written by a bronze age people who had no idea at all about science' then that's not evidence, that's myth. I'm talking about factual, testable, actual evidence. Science in other words.


Actual evidence? Science? Those two don't even go together never mind all the "scientific" theories. Saying that a stone is x billion years old, doesn't make it that old. Pure guessing is what science is. Nothing more.





I think that you need to buy a dictionary and look up some definitions. If you think that science is 'pure guessing' then you are about as wrong as it's possible to get.



posted on Aug, 13 2013 @ 01:46 PM
link   
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 


The Fossil Record called and it wants a word with you.



posted on Aug, 13 2013 @ 04:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hellas

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by Hellas
 




The motto of this place is "Deny ignorance" - not demonstrate it.


Oh really?


Yes - that is actually the motto of ATS.


And your posts in this thread are what exactly?


Denying ignorance.


Just because you like to go cry with the wolves doesn't mean that ignorance goes one way only


The evidence does tho - and you have provided a great deal to support the contention that you demonstrate ignorance - for example by not knowing the motto of this forum, and for thinking that science is not about evidence and is all about "imagination"



posted on Aug, 13 2013 @ 11:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 


I forgot creationists are so much smarter than scientists. You can look at a complete fossil record, clearly see links between the creatures, and still say "no you're wrong." Hell, you can watch the species changing, as in the case of some Hawaiian species, and still say they're wrong.


Don't you believe it's a bit arrogant to assume that someone who believes in creation isn't capable of being a scientist? We have never seen a species change to some other species. Adaptation is NOT evolution.


Originally posted by AngryCymraeg
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 


The Fossil Record called and it wants a word with you.


Nothing in the fossils proves evolution, and no real scientist believes otherwise. Evolution cannot be tested, or observed, and is unproven.



posted on Aug, 13 2013 @ 11:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes

Don't you believe it's a bit arrogant to assume that someone who believes in creation isn't capable of being a scientist?


No one has said that is the case - lots of people who believe in creation believe in evolution.


We have never seen a species change to some other species.


Yes we have. Examples have been given in this thread, however it seems that the creationists "debating" in here do not actually understand what they are talking about when using the word "species"


Adaptation is NOT evolution.


congratulations on getting that right at least.



Originally posted by AngryCymraeg
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 


The Fossil Record called and it wants a word with you.


Nothing in the fossils proves evolution, and no real scientist believes otherwise.


which shows that you have as little understanding of the meaning of "science" as you have of "species"


Evolution cannot be tested, or observed, and is unproven.


Evolution has been tested and has been observed - and the examples have ben given in this thread.

No amount of sticking your fingers in your ears and saying you don't believe it will change that.
edit on 13-8-2013 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 14 2013 @ 12:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes

Don't you believe it's a bit arrogant to assume that someone who believes in creation isn't capable of being a scientist?


No one has said that is the case - lots of people who believe in creation believe in evolution.


Actually, that was said, on this page -


Originally posted by Zaphod58
I forgot creationists are so much smarter than scientists. You can look at a complete fossil record, clearly see links between the creatures, and still say "no you're wrong." Hell, you can watch the species changing, as in the case of some Hawaiian species, and still say they're wrong.



Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
We have never seen a species change to some other species.


Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
Yes we have. Examples have been given in this thread, however it seems that the creationists "debating" in here do not actually understand what they are talking about when using the word "species"


No, we have seen examples of adaptation.


Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
Adaptation is NOT evolution.


Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
congratulations on getting that right at least.


Since you agree, why defend adaptation as evolution?


Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
Evolution cannot be tested, or observed, and is unproven.


Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
Evolution has been tested and has been observed - and the examples have ben given in this thread.



The scientific method is the best way yet discovered for winnowing the truth from lies and delusion. The simple version looks something like this:
1. Observe some aspect of the universe.
2. Invent a tentative description, called a hypothesis, that is consistent with what you have observed.
3. Use the hypothesis to make predictions.
4. Test those predictions by experiments or further observations and modify the hypothesis in the light of your results.
5. Repeat steps 3 and 4 until there are no discrepancies between theory and experiment and/or observation.

source

Evolution doesn't pass the test. It cannot be observed, and it cannot be predicted, it cannot be tested. A mosquito, lizard, primrose, etc. that remains a mosquito, lizard, primrose, etc., isn't proof of evolution.


Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
No amount of sticking your fingers in your ears and saying you don't believe it will change that.
edit on 13-8-2013 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)


No amount of doing that will make evolution any more proven. I look at evidence, at data, and form logical conclusions.



posted on Aug, 14 2013 @ 01:16 AM
link   
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 


(Facepalm) No. Just.... no.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 12  13  14    16 >>

log in

join