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.

 

Evolution Vs. God

page: 40
22
<< 37  38  39    41  42  43 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 17 2013 @ 02:48 PM
link   
reply to post by UnifiedSerenity
 


Ok where to begin first i guess will discuss Lucy aka Australopithecus afarensis well they have a cousin Australopithecus sediba. Both are very similar both show transition stages the problem with species that appear to be part of transitional stages: which side of the line do you place them? Well of course Dr Bergers the person excavating the site where sediba was discover of course believes he found the missing link and it wasnt lucy. Berger has put the new hominin in with the australopithecines rather than as an early member of Homo. But he points out that the new skeletons share several key traits with Homo that are not found in Lucy's species, citing the precision grip and reorganization of the brain. "We're not saying this is the direct ancestor, but if you start weighing this all, it will end up as the most probable ancestor," he claims.

So now the problem for him the skeletons and their analyses convince few other researchers that Au. sediba was a direct ancestor of humans.But none the less its possible. You do realize however this further strengthens evolution dont you? One of the key features of Au. sediba is there hands with short fingers, a long thumb that may be used for precision gripping. More like Homo Erectus then Australopithecus. However i suspect Lucy may stay in the human family tree since they only found about 60 percent of Au. sediba but who knows there still digging.

So guess what were just replacing one with another if its done but i suspect they just found a group in transition from Lucy to human we shall see.




posted on Sep, 17 2013 @ 02:53 PM
link   

UnifiedSerenity
Why don't you try to deal with Lucy issue instead of turning this into an interrogation of me. I notice you all do like to do that.

Starts a thread on ATS and then gets upset when people takes them to task.

We all are sorry that your proof didn't become truth despite you repeating it throughout the thread.



posted on Sep, 17 2013 @ 02:56 PM
link   
reply to post by dragonridr
 


Thought id add this since we are talking about our evolution there is definitive proof we evolved from apes. Apes have 48 chromosomes vs 46 for humans. How can we only have 46 and our closest relatives have 48? that is and was a quandry until someone discovered telomeres. Telomeres are found at the ends of the arms of chromosomes. Telomeres are interesting for many reasons including the fact that they are somehow involved in the aging process. As we age telomeres get shorter. so why are Telomeres important in this discussion. It seems that on of our Human Genes is actually a spliced pair of great ape genes. Scientists were able to find evidence of telomeres insides IIRC Chromosome 1. Telomeres are never supposed to be found in a chromosome only on the ends. so this tells us the reason we have 46 is a genetic mistake didnt really effect the outcome in the end but is is proof we descended from apes since the information is there just fused together.



posted on Sep, 17 2013 @ 02:57 PM
link   
reply to post by UnifiedSerenity
 


First of all, Lucy does prove (as all other fossils) evolution as fact, proven theory. As you can see, Lucy's kind is part of human family tree, we share common ancestors and genes with all of them.

Second, no I don't intend to study Bible, nor I am interrogating you. I am just asking simple questions. If you don't believe Bible word for word, what do you believe?! Isn't one of greatest accomplishments follower can do is to spread 'his' word to non-believers? Why are you givin' up so easily?

Take it easy...

With this abrupt quits you just prove my feeling that you are trying to share something that you are starting to question yourself.



posted on Sep, 17 2013 @ 03:08 PM
link   

UnifiedSerenity
reply to post by peter vlar
 


No, it shows another whole species. Just like we have Gibbons, Baboons, Apes, Chimps, we had Lucy's. Transition would show a continued change and she is not a change to human anymore than an Orangutan is or didn't you see that science has said "Lucy" is not part of the human evolutionary tree?


Im going to cut you some slack since i see science is not your strong suit i answered your questions in a post i made read it please. That way you wont make any more mistakes and make claims which are untrue.



posted on Sep, 17 2013 @ 03:22 PM
link   

UnifiedSerenity
reply to post by peter vlar
 


No, it shows another whole species. Just like we have Gibbons, Baboons, Apes, Chimps, we had Lucy's. Transition would show a continued change and she is not a change to human anymore than an Orangutan is or didn't you see that science has said "Lucy" is not part of the human evolutionary tree?


You're entitled to your own opinion but not your own interpretation of facts. You can trace the differences in the various members of the genus Australopithecus. This is particularly evident when looking at preanthropus remains( A. afarensus[Lucy],A. Anamensis, and A. Bahrelghazali) and paranthropus remains ( P. Aethiopicus, P. Boisei and P. Robustus) and the other australopithecines such as A. Africanus. A. Garhi and A. Sediba. Science called nad wants its cell phone back because you keep using it to make the claim that "Science" has stated the A. Afarensis is not part of our family tree. What lucy is not is a hominid, she is a hominoid/prehominid. she has many transitional features that you simply will not address. If she was just like a chimp or Gibbon why then does A. Afarensis walk upright? Lucy is 1, just 1 of over 300 remains found of that particular subset of australopithecines. Explain to me why the angle of A> Afarensis foramen magnum is such that it precludes quadrapedalism as a full time occupation whereas chimps, orangutans, bonobos and gorillas have a drastically different angle of the foramen magnum and pelvis than either Lucy or any other bipedal organism?
edit on 17-9-2013 by peter vlar because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 17 2013 @ 06:22 PM
link   

dragonridr
reply to post by dragonridr
 


Thought id add this since we are talking about our evolution there is definitive proof we evolved from apes. Apes have 48 chromosomes vs 46 for humans. How can we only have 46 and our closest relatives have 48? that is and was a quandry until someone discovered telomeres. Telomeres are found at the ends of the arms of chromosomes. Telomeres are interesting for many reasons including the fact that they are somehow involved in the aging process. As we age telomeres get shorter. so why are Telomeres important in this discussion. It seems that on of our Human Genes is actually a spliced pair of great ape genes. Scientists were able to find evidence of telomeres insides IIRC Chromosome 1. Telomeres are never supposed to be found in a chromosome only on the ends. so this tells us the reason we have 46 is a genetic mistake didnt really effect the outcome in the end but is is proof we descended from apes since the information is there just fused together.


Stop using all that fancy science talk, it makes gods ears hurt!



posted on Sep, 18 2013 @ 07:03 AM
link   
You cannot quote the Bible to prove that there is a god. If you can do that then i can say Spider-Man is real because it's a book.



posted on Sep, 18 2013 @ 09:13 AM
link   
reply to post by SuperFrog
 


No, evolution is a theory, not a fact. It's what I call a calculated approximation. It's not an exact answer, but evidence strongly suggests that it is in the ballpark of the actual answer. As a theory, it means that we have amassed enough evidence to believe that it is our best working hypothesis to date. Which means that if we want to teach our children anything about how this world came to be what it is today, our most productive gamble would be to teach them evolution.

I mean, the alternative is this:



If this is what you would prefer our future leaders to learn during their most impressionable years, your priorities need some serious reevaluation.

edit on 18-9-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2013 @ 12:14 PM
link   
reply to post by UnifiedSerenity
 


How about this, instead of me watching a YouTube video that
is a bunch of BS, we look at the fact that religion has no claim
at all that is even 1/10000000th as promising as evolution so
far as evidence goes, then we will look at the fact that religion
actually does have a conspiracy to force science to lie in its
favor, why else would they be demanding science classes
teach intelligent design when there is no proof.....

Basically what im saying is i have no doubt large enough in
me to desire watching your YouTube video, science is open
to all comers, if they had evidence that evolution was not
true, i see absolutely no reason science would not acknowledge
this, there are many scientist who are both honest and
religious, yet they side with evolution.

Not to mention that when religion deals with this issue at
all it has an extreme bias to be correct, science does not
need evolution if they can find the other correct answer....



posted on Sep, 18 2013 @ 12:33 PM
link   

AfterInfinity
reply to post by SuperFrog
 


No, evolution is a theory, not a fact. It's what I call a calculated approximation. It's not an exact answer, but evidence strongly suggests that it is in the ballpark of the actual answer. As a theory, it means that we have amassed enough evidence to believe that it is our best working hypothesis to date. Which means that if we want to teach our children anything about how this world came to be what it is today, our most productive gamble would be to teach them evolution.

I mean, the alternative is this:



If this is what you would prefer our future leaders to learn during their most impressionable years, your priorities need some serious reevaluation.

edit on 18-9-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)


Couple pages back there is Webster definition of word theory.

Evolution is proven concept, theory. Scientists have many times prove evolution with experiments that emulate earlier earth and beginning of life.

You can call it all you want, it will not change facts...



posted on Sep, 20 2013 @ 07:12 AM
link   
Speaking of evolution latest find - Legless lizard discovered near LAX



Scientists have discovered four new species of legless lizards in California, including one species that lives beneath the sand dunes near LAX. But before we go on, let's get one thing straight: Yes, a snake is a legless lizard, but not all legless lizards are snakes. Throughout the history of lizard evolution, several lizard lineages have lost their legs, explains James Parham of Cal State Fullerton. Snakes are the best-known and most diverse of these lineages, but more than 200 other types of limbless lizards exist throughout the world. Here in California, a total of five legless lizard species have been identified, all of them part of a group called Anniella. Four of these legless lizards are new to science, and were recently described in the journal Breviora, a publication of the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard University.


Interesting how evolution can work in different ways...



posted on Sep, 20 2013 @ 10:46 AM
link   
reply to post by SuperFrog
 



Couple pages back there is Webster definition of word theory.

Evolution is proven concept, theory. Scientists have many times prove evolution with experiments that emulate earlier earth and beginning of life.

You can call it all you want, it will not change facts...


Did you know gravity is a theory as well? The most observable force on the planet is still just a theory. You wanna know why? Because they don't know everything about it yet. That's why evolution is a theory.


the·o·ry
noun \ˈthē-ə-rē, ˈthir-ē\

: an idea or set of ideas that is intended to explain facts or events

: an idea that is suggested or presented as possibly true but that is not known or proven to be true


I suggest you review your list of scientific terminology. You apparently don't know what theory means.



posted on Sep, 20 2013 @ 11:16 AM
link   

AfterInfinity
Did you know gravity is a theory as well? The most observable force on the planet is still just a theory. You wanna know why? Because they don't know everything about it yet. That's why evolution is a theory.

Thank you for pointing it out. Yes, proven theory, we know how it reacts, we are able to observe it, and we all know how to calculate gravity pulls of object. Good job!



AfterInfinity
the·o·ry
noun ˈthē-ə-rē, ˈthir-ē

: an idea or set of ideas that is intended to explain facts or events

: an idea that is suggested or presented as possibly true but that is not known or proven to be true


I suggest you review your list of scientific terminology. You apparently don't know what theory means.

Good job again. Yes, idea that explains facts or events, that is exactly what theory of evolution is. Every day brings new findings and proves theory correct, but still it is theory.

Glad you got it at least now right!

Great job!

edit on 20-9-2013 by SuperFrog because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2013 @ 11:23 AM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


"Gravity" is both a Law and a Theory.

Laws rarely change and provide formulas for calculations. Newton's Law of Universal Gravitation allows us to calculate the gravitational force between two objects if their mass is known.

Theories provide explanations as to why things occur. And you're right to say that the description of the force behind gravity is a theory. Einstein's Theory of General Relativity is used to describe the force of gravitation. It's safe to say that this theory has been tested... lol...

In order to become a theory, a hypothesis is tested over and over, it must be an accurate, predictive description. Theories often change as new information is brought to light.


So... if you're talking about gravity in scientific terms, you can talk about the Law that describes the attraction between two objects or you can talk about the Theory that attempts to explain the force(s) behind that attraction.

edit on 20-9-2013 by Blarneystoner because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2013 @ 11:24 AM
link   
you are not going to convince "god" believers or change their minds....however, we here in America have the absolute right to NOT have legislation that forces others to obey religious laws



posted on Sep, 20 2013 @ 11:26 AM
link   

jimmyx
you are not going to convince "god" believers or change their minds....however, we here in America have the absolute right to NOT have legislation that forces others to obey religious laws


Really? I believe in God... and I think the theory of evolution is accurate.



posted on Sep, 20 2013 @ 11:29 AM
link   
reply to post by SuperFrog
 



Thank you for pointing it out. Yes, proven theory, we know how it reacts, we are able to observe it, and we all know how to calculate gravity pulls of object. Good job!


No one knows what causes gravity. That was part of the hype over the Higgs Boson, which was supposed to help explain where mass comes from, which is a small piece of the gravity puzzle. So yes, thank you for that unnecessary condescension.


Good job again. Yes, idea that explains facts or events, that is exactly what theory of evolution is. Every day brings new findings and proves theory correct, but still it is theory.

Glad you got it at least now right!


Apparently, you are unable to discern the difference between knowing a fact and explaining a fact. The sky is blue. Why is the sky blue? There's your difference. Now drop the attitude.



posted on Sep, 20 2013 @ 11:39 AM
link   
Y'all need to get over this "it's just a theory" BS.

A theory isn't just a guess or a hunch. Theories are tested over and over.

The Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection is our best explanation for the fact of evolution. Yes... evolution is fact. evoltion happens just like gravity. It's been tested, documented, predicted, observed, manipulated, and scrutinized over and over and over.

Theories are never "promoted" to Laws.

When someone says.. "oh it's just a theory" I hear, "I don't know the meaning of words"



posted on Sep, 20 2013 @ 11:54 AM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 

First of all, there are different theories about gravity, and we are as you pointed out more and more learning all little details about it by studying it. Using gravity we were able to predict where Neptune is for example, which is the same as prediction in evolution for so called missing links.

Theory of gravity is based on set of rules and out studying of those. Same goes with evolution.

Glad you moved toward learning meaning of word 'theory'.




top topics



 
22
<< 37  38  39    41  42  43 >>

log in

join