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.
I think your just mad because for the first time you realizing that evolution is not cracked up to be what you thought it was.
Seriously, you expect people to take anything say seriously?
Your ass should be bounced out of here ASAP!
All your trying to do is pollute the waters, you bring nothing objective to table.
GO AWAY!!
Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by flyingfish
I think your just mad because for the first time you realizing that evolution is not cracked up to be what you thought it was.
Seriously, you expect people to take anything say seriously?
Your ass should be bounced out of here ASAP!
All your trying to do is pollute the waters, you bring nothing objective to table.
GO AWAY!!
It's not my fault your so incredulous.
Originally posted by itsthetooth
And your understanding is a result based on assumptions. Your assuming that speciation can happen in humans and there is nothing to prove that.
Easy, its a theory that has never been witnessed or recreated in a lab, its not real.
If you want to be prejudice rather than informed thats your problem.
Further more if I'm incredulous for not falling for BS- then so be it.
How can anyone be so stupid.
And where exactly is that evidence? Speciation doesn't even prove anything related to humans. If you ask me its a big stretch in imagination.
Your an idiot, I'm not mad at all. If anything you have proven evolution by forcing others to pile the overwhelming evidence upon your ignorant head.
Thats an easy assumption to make aside from that fact that a species dies when enough changes occur. Aside from that how are you going to get around that pesky little fact that its never been observed in humans and only been observed in a few select species?
My understanding is based on logical conclusions. You can make it illogical by finally proving that 'micro' accumulation can't result in 'macro' (this is all you have left).
True but we still have fossils and bones to compare to, and they have never announced to have witnessed microevolution in humans. The whole idea of it happening to slowly to see was just a sham to get peopole to buy into it. If they can detect it some species, then trust me, they would also be able to detect it in humans. At least then you have would have a chance but they aren't saying that.
The obvious reason why 'macro' has not been observed in a laboratory is because it takes time measured in geological time spans (seriously, even children understand this). This does not in any way prove that it doesn't happen. There's a mountain of 'indirect' evidence of macro having happened. So again, prove that 'micro' (undeniable fact) accumulation doesn't result in 'macro'.
Originally posted by itsthetooth
Thats an easy assumption to make aside from that fact that a species dies when enough changes occur.
Aside from that how are you going to get around that pesky little fact that its never been observed in humans and only been observed in a few select species?
True but we still have fossils and bones to compare to, and they have never announced to have witnessed microevolution in humans. The whole idea of it happening to slowly to see was just a sham to get peopole to buy into it. If they can detect it some species, then trust me, they would also be able to detect it in humans. At least then you have would have a chance but they aren't saying that.
Originally posted by itsthetooth
You expect me to believe that just all of a sudden we bounced into life around biblical times from apes, bringing nothing to the table with us. What a sham, at least I can see there is something amiss.
It was allready covered in this thread a long time ago. It said that in a lab, I believe it was fruit flys, would die off quick anytime that severe changes occured. It's the same thing that speciation says in wiki without the dying part. Anyhow, its fact to this day, anytime someone or something is born with some type of big change, we call it a defect, and depending on how severe it is, will cause death quickly.
Prove this claim. I don't agree with it.
Lactose is nothing more than a reaction to something we aren't suppose to be consuming to begin with.
Lactose tolerance is great example of micro in humans. So is the color of skin, and tolerance of malaria or HIV among some sub Saharan people (HIV among prostitutes). Different environments. Different needs. What now?
Oh sorry...
Many lines of text, but no proof what so ever that a lot of gradual 'micro' accumulation isn't in fact 'macro'. I'll just keep copy&pasting the following until you answer it properly (or admit that you're wrong):
So again, prove that 'micro' (undeniable fact) accumulation doesn't result in 'macro'. Understand, that the only way such can happen is, if there's some force that deliberately prevents gradual accumulation of change from an earlier type. Even then, you would still have to explain the fossil record, I mean, if there was some mechanism that prevented gradual accumulation of too much change, then where are the 100 million year old fossils that are nearly identical to present day life?
Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by flyingfish
If you want to be prejudice rather than informed thats your problem.
Further more if I'm incredulous for not falling for BS- then so be it.
How can anyone be so stupid.
Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by flyingfish
And where exactly is that evidence? Speciation doesn't even prove anything related to humans. If you ask me its a big stretch in imagination.
Your an idiot, I'm not mad at all. If anything you have proven evolution by forcing others to pile the overwhelming evidence upon your ignorant head.
I still wait for something that tells us that evolution is not a postulate, or hypothetical theory.
If you want to believe in it, thats up to you. I'm not going to condone anyone for what they believe in or don't believe in. I would just say to use some common sense and look at the facts in front of your eyes. There is nothing, NADA, that says evolution has happened to us aside from that in your imagination.
You expect me to believe that just all of a sudden we bounced into life around biblical times from apes, bringing nothing to the table with us. What a sham, at least I can see there is something amiss.
I didn't say that, but I'm glad you brought it up. There is something golden that I think you should read for yourself to better understand what is going on. If you look up mitochondrial DNA on wiki and read the entire article, you will notice that they claim to have mapped the entire genome. You will also notice that they are making a claim that we have a common ancestor 200,000 years ago. Whats funny is that they are also bolding admitting that this obviously rules out religion and adds more credibility to the idea of evolution. Then they turn around and say that they need to look to more pioneering ideas to come up with final answers.
Biblical times, really? You think evolution claims that our species is but a few thousand years old?
Originally posted by itsthetooth
It was allready covered in this thread a long time ago. It said that in a lab, I believe it was fruit flys, would die off quick anytime that severe changes occured. It's the same thing that speciation says in wiki without the dying part. Anyhow, its fact to this day, anytime someone or something is born with some type of big change, we call it a defect, and depending on how severe it is, will cause death quickly.
If speciation were happening with all life here on earth we would have one hell of a melting pot with a lot, I mean a hell of a lot of species being close to the same as other species but still different enough. We don't have that.
If we are honestly related to apes, why would it be under such strong debate, why wouldn't people just accept it as fact.
Well here, read it for yourself.
Again you fall on the argument from ignorance.
WEAK SAUCE.