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.

 

Evolutionists ! Explain this and make sense at the same time.

page: 16
20
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 13 2013 @ 09:54 PM
link   

UnifiedSerenity
reply to post by LightOrange
 


And I can say the same regarding what you are saying. We are not going to agree, so I let those who have open minds examine the evidence and they can tell what the valid points are. I will post as much evidence supporting what I say as I like. You are welcome to do the same.

Evolution is really losing it's grip on the minds of the people, and no amount of ridicule from pro-evolutionists will stop those seeking the truth.


Don't be silly, It is easy to demonstrate how you are wrong and that you are lying. All your so called evidence and arguments have been examined and ripped to pieces multiple times in this thread and all the others you post in. People are not stupid, you are insulting our intelligence If you continue to use them knowing they have been refuted.
Better you use something new from real evidence and stay away from creationist propaganda.
edit on fFriday1328910f280710 by flyingfish because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 14 2013 @ 02:33 AM
link   
reply to post by flyingfish
 



flyingfish
People are not stupid, you are insulting our intelligence...

Intelligence?

Is that supposed to be some kind of joke?

I find it extremely ironic that you accuse others of "insulting our intelligence" while you yourself spew nothing BUT insults.

You are insulting your OWN intelligence and credibility by spreading hate, childish obnoxious insults, and ridicule.

Accusing others of lying does absolutely nothing but make yourself look extremely foolish and suspicious at the same time.

If you ever expect people to take you seriously, you need to ditch the hate and the personal insults.

They are doing absolutely nothing for your own credibility.

You are being treated like a third grader simply because you are acting like one.

One day you will learn that accusing everyone that disagrees with you of being a liar has absolutely nothing to do with intelligence.


“I believe that one day the Darwinian myth will be ranked the greatest deceit in the history of science.” Søren Løvtrup, Darwinism: The Refutation of a Myth

“Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are great con-men, and the story they are telling may be the greatest hoax ever. In explaining evolution, we do not have one iota of fact.” Dr. T. N. Tahmisian

"The Darwinian theory of descent has not a single fact to confirm it in the realm of nature. It is not the result of scientific research, but purely the product of imagination." ~ Albert Fleischmann



posted on Sep, 14 2013 @ 02:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Murgatroid
 


oh my, your quotations are some of the poorest attempts at appealing to authority i have ever come across.



posted on Sep, 14 2013 @ 02:54 AM
link   
reply to post by UnifiedSerenity
 


The man in that video clearly has no understanding of biology...does he even know about genetics or morphology...No...because he is not a scientist, he is a numbers man, and mathematicians, if you have ever read a university prospectus,do not have to study any science at all.



posted on Sep, 14 2013 @ 03:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Cypress
 


i wonder how the bible talks about north south east west...when those terms were invented by germanic peoples 200 years after the death of jesus. I would like to know the real translation...it probably says.."the wind goes towards the sun" or something.



posted on Sep, 14 2013 @ 03:15 AM
link   
reply to post by UnifiedSerenity
 


i'm afraid the coelacanth of today is still a lot different from the fossil one, it evolved a heck of a lot even morphologically.



posted on Sep, 14 2013 @ 11:21 AM
link   
reply to post by peter vlar
 





Excellent. I'm glad that finally has been cleared up. I guess it's time to file suit to recompense what I've spent on education since its all been authoritatively debunked.



Ah, come on Peter, must you be so rash at the expression of an opinion. No judgement was intended.



posted on Sep, 14 2013 @ 11:29 AM
link   
reply to post by randyvs
 


I was being sarcastic, no harm no foul.



posted on Sep, 14 2013 @ 11:44 AM
link   
reply to post by NoRulesAllowed
 





Do you understand what I am saying? Do you see WHY your mathematical arguments are silly?



Yes I can even see the words that are coming out of your mouth.
I understand each character intimately.
I am the Creator of the reply.
Now, I also understand, the concept of a Creator for you, is truly incalculable.



posted on Sep, 14 2013 @ 11:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Murgatroid
 


Your pathetic ravings are not actually a response to any of my cited posts either.
So what do you do? you show up pretending to be a knight in shining armor and prove my point with fallacy's?

None of you creationist have supported your position, I and many others have repeatedly shown you why.
You are trying to appropriate the methods of science then pervert them to your own ends. That's because creationism is nothing but religion, and all your fiction won't change that.
Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

When you set yourself up for ridicule then there's nothing left to do, but shoot.



posted on Sep, 14 2013 @ 12:27 PM
link   

Murgatroid

“I believe that one day the Darwinian myth will be ranked the greatest deceit in the history of science.” Søren Løvtrup, Darwinism: The Refutation of a Myth

“Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are great con-men, and the story they are telling may be the greatest hoax ever. In explaining evolution, we do not have one iota of fact.” Dr. T. N. Tahmisian

"The Darwinian theory of descent has not a single fact to confirm it in the realm of nature. It is not the result of scientific research, but purely the product of imagination." ~ Albert Fleischmann


Of your 3 examples, Lovtrup doesn't actually disbelieve evolution he just thinks Darwin wasn't 100% on how it worked. He is a proponent of NONDarwinian evolution.
Tahmisian wasn't a biologist in any sense of the word. He worked for the Atomic Energy Commision. What are his credentials relating to biology or anthropology? I'll give you a hint... He has none.
Fleischman was the only legitimate biologist of the 3 you quote mined. But a little further digging shows many discrepancies in the frequent quote mining of previously quote mined statements. It's essentially the creationist version of telephone. Flieschman was a creationist who's sole goal was to show that science could be discredited and thus so too would evolutionary theory. None of them were remotely open minded or unbiased. They all had agendas from the outset. While some proponents of evolution too may be of a similar mind set the far greater amount of people working in these fields are open minded and are constantly reevaluating the evidence at hand. If your god ever provides evidence you can be sure that scientists will fill you in on it. Until then the data to back up evolution far outweighs out of context quote mined statements that provide no supporting data.
edit on 14-9-2013 by peter vlar because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 14 2013 @ 12:48 PM
link   
reply to post by flyingfish
 





Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence,


Because all evidence, scientific or otherwise, can without argument, equate to a lie.
Do you not see the problem with this everyday, in our justice system ? Evidence can
put an innocent man away for life.
Do you not ?
Answer the question !

My point is, the way you adhere to your facts and evidence argument.
Would be immediately abandoned like a red headed step child in a venue
right next door to the one you serve here.


When you set yourself up for ridicule then there's nothing left to do, but shoot.


Universally correct.
Even for thos about the ROCK.



edit on 14-9-2013 by randyvs because: (no reason given)

edit on 14-9-2013 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 14 2013 @ 01:43 PM
link   
reply to post by peter vlar
 


Oh please give me a break on "He's not a biologist". Neither was Darwin and yet everyone ran with is NO PROOF ideas of "we come from common ancestors because bird beaks change"! There is nothing in the fossil record that Darwin thought would be there. You all have scoured the earth looking of those transitional fossils and since you can't find them, now many claim all fossils are transitional, what a joke! "Look we have legs and they have legs, SEEE that proves Darwin was right!"

More and more people are waking up to the fact that adaptation does not equate to evolution of change from one kind to another, but you all harp on it and because 8 of you all pound it on every evo thread, you think you have proved your points, when in fact you are all just repeaters and not offering any proof.



posted on Sep, 14 2013 @ 01:46 PM
link   
reply to post by robin22391
 


It's still a coelacanth... Darwin's finches were still finches. You all just won't admit there are NO transitional fossils. Why hasn't that darn fish turned into an amphibian by now?



posted on Sep, 14 2013 @ 01:58 PM
link   
reply to post by UnifiedSerenity
 

And a handful of creationists stick their fingers in their ears and say "that's not proof", in every evo thread as well.

Evo threads usually started by someone claiming to have proof that evolution is a lie, wrong or something along those lines.
edit on 14-9-2013 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 14 2013 @ 02:56 PM
link   

UnifiedSerenity
reply to post by peter vlar
 


Oh please give me a break on "He's not a biologist". Neither was Darwin and yet everyone ran with is NO PROOF ideas of "we come from common ancestors because bird beaks change"! There is nothing in the fossil record that Darwin thought would be there. You all have scoured the earth looking of those transitional fossils and since you can't find them, now many claim all fossils are transitional, what a joke! "Look we have legs and they have legs, SEEE that proves Darwin was right!"

More and more people are waking up to the fact that adaptation does not equate to evolution of change from one kind to another, but you all harp on it and because 8 of you all pound it on every evo thread, you think you have proved your points, when in fact you are all just repeaters and not offering any proof.


When will you get it through your mind that there's a huge chasm of different between there not being any evidence and you not understanding the evidence? More Nd more people are not waking up to your bizarre assumptions of how things work. Your childish delight in reiterating the same exact noncontextual quotes that are taken and twisted to such a bizarre extreme that they don't resemble the original intention of the person attributed to them. I called out 3 separate individuals and all you've got on me is that neither was Darwin a biologist? Darwin actually did field studies and had a ton of data to back up his original assertions. Like many hypothesis Darwin's original thesis has been updated as new information and new discoveries present. Something religion or god has never and will never do. You're acting like my son when someone in school let it slip that there is no Santa. Everyone else knows its true but you refuse to accept empirical evidence at far value. There really is no arguing with someone who doesn't wish to learn but instead preach under the facade of discussions. It really is the textbook definition of trolling but I don't think you know you're doing it though. The hypocrisy you wield though is sad. Every tactic you accuse the "pro evo" crowd of you yourself not just imitate but initiate. When you guys are misquoting people because you copy and paste something off of a creationist website, how often do you engage in due diligence? Do you know what it is to do so? Wy do you hate punctuated equilibrium? Ad finally why do you consistently ignore real date and harp on the one tiny detail you think puts the ball back in your court? I've heard better arguments from community college students.



posted on Sep, 14 2013 @ 02:58 PM
link   

UnifiedSerenity
reply to post by robin22391
 


It's still a coelacanth... Darwin's finches were still finches. You all just won't admit there are NO transitional fossils. Why hasn't that darn fish turned into an amphibian by now?


Tell me how Lucy is not transitional when she has multiple morphological features in common with Chimps that modern humans do not share and many morphological features possessed by modern humans such as the angle of the pelvis, angle of the foremen magnum, the femurs... It is a classic example staring you in the face. It could sit on your lap and you still would deny it.


(post by flyingfish removed for a manners violation)
(post by flyingfish removed for a manners violation)

posted on Sep, 14 2013 @ 04:49 PM
link   
ATTENTION

The personal attacks, insults and otherwise T&C violations end now.

Posting bans will be issued for further violations.

~Tenth
ATS Mod



new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join