Evolution happens. That's a fact.

Originally posted by robhines
I think we've devolved, not evolved, and I don't believe the accepted version of hi-story, because almost everything else pushed at us is a lie anyway. So why not lie about one of the most important things? Or true history is likely hidden from us.

There is no such thing as de-evolution. It can't happen, evolution is always moving forward.

reply to post by SpearMint


Romans 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; 19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. 20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are CLEARLY SEEN, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that THEY ARE WITHOUT EXCUSE 21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful ; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened . 22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became FOOLS

reply to post by SpearMint

There is no such thing as de-evolution. It can't happen, evolution is always moving forward.

Then we can strike the 2nd law of thermodynamics? God luck with that. Everything is wearing out. The thing about life systems is that they hold back the second law for a time but eventually...

Originally posted by intrptr
reply to post by SpearMint

 

There is no such thing as de-evolution. It can't happen, evolution is always moving forward.

Then we can strike the 2nd law of thermodynamics? God luck with that. Everything is wearing out. The thing about life systems is that they hold back the second law for a time but eventually...

What are you talking about? De-evolution can't happen, time moves forward. Even if something were to lose features, that's still evolution.

Another common misconception is cross-breeding. You can mix a husky and a shephard, and you can get longer legs, or longer hair, but it is a product of selective breeding, not evolution.

reply to post by getreadyalready


Humans successfully cross breeding varieties to produce more milk, hardier animals, longer legs, thicker hides, better wool, etc. You could call it selective breeding.
Arguably I think you can call it INTELLIGENT DESIGN.

Originally posted by SpearMint
There is no such thing as de-evolution. It can't happen, evolution is always moving forward.

We're not moving anywhere if we're not in touch with our true nature. And with the polluted foods we eat, conditioning from being kids and little access to the truth for most people unless they search around enough, you can pretty much call that devolution.

Try asking Monsanto, Fox News, the people who run the education systems, and most governments and major corporations of the world who keep the truth from us. I'd bet they'd be pretty happy with the idea of devolution of they gave a truthful answer. Keeping us devolved keeps their profits moving along nicely.

If there's evolution there's devolution. You can't have one without the other.

I personally think it's temporary, don't get me wrong, I'm not doom and gloom. But currently I think most of us have devolved and it's been happening for thousands of years.

Originally posted by milominderbinder

Originally posted by TruthSeekerMike
reply to post by SpearMint

 

Species evolve but they remain the same species. That is indeed evolution. I have never seen one shred of evidence that evolution leads to new species or that all life originated from nothing and slowly became everything that has ever been.

You haven't been looking very hard...have you?

There's TONS of evidence that adaptation and evolution happen all the time, but a duck out of water has yet to become a turkey.

Perhaps not...but we have established that chickens still carry dinosaur DNA...so there goes that whole idea, huh?

As to your first answer, pretend we haven't been looking. Show us the absolute evidence of one species becoming another. Not wolves to beagles, but sheep to birds.

As to your second, dinosaur DNA hasn't been recovered, so how can it be proven that what is in chickens is dinosaur DNA? Their skeletons look alike, but so do snakes and legless lizards, which are different species.

So there goes that whole idea, huh?

/TOA

Originally posted by robhines

Originally posted by SpearMint
There is no such thing as de-evolution. It can't happen, evolution is always moving forward.

We're not moving anywhere if we're not in touch with our true nature. And with the polluted foods we eat, conditioning from being kids and little access to the truth for most people unless they search around enough, you can pretty much call that devolution.

Try asking Monsanto, Fox News, the people who run the education systems, and most governments and major corporations of the world who keep the truth from us. I'd bet they'd be pretty happy with the idea of devolution of they gave a truthful answer. Keeping us devolved keeps their profits moving along nicely.

If there's evolution there's devolution. You can't have one without the other.

I personally think it's temporary, don't get me wrong, I'm not doom and gloom. But currently I think we've devolved.

edit on 23-5-2012 by robhines because: typo

No, you're not getting it. Evolution is the process of changing over time, you can't UNchange. De-evolution is not a thing, if we were to change in to primitive cave man like beings over time it would still be evolution, even though it's backwards from where we are now. De-evolution does not exist, that's not an opinion, it can't happen.

Just a final note SpearMint : you could say evolution is returning to what we're supposed to be, and that devolution is a dip until we shoot forwards (or return.) again. The fact that things have been so bad for so long could indicate that we're about to, as a balance to what we've gone though, face a massive leap forwards. Which would confirm both of our theories. Temporary devolution until your idea of evolution carries on moving along.

edit : Just seen your last post. You have what I think of as devolving also as evolution. Strange theory, maybe we'll have to agree to disagree.

Originally posted by robhines
Just a final note SpearMint : you could say evolution is returning to what we're supposed to be, and that devolution is a dip until we shoot forwards (or return.) again. The fact that things have been so bad for so long could indicate that we're about to, as a balance to what we've gone though, face a massive leap forwards. Which would confirm both of our theories. Temporary devolution until your idea of evolution carries on moving along.

edit : Just seen your last post. You have devolving also as evolution. Strange theory, maybe we'll have to agree to disagree.

edit on 23-5-2012 by robhines because: added

...De-evolution is not even a word. It can't happen because it doesn't make sense! You can't un-mutate. No such thing. Time moves forward as does evolution. Think of them in the same way.

Originally posted by robhines
edit : Just seen your last post. You have what I think of as devolving also as evolution. Strange theory, maybe we'll have to agree to disagree.

Ok then.

Originally posted by SpearMint
...De-evolution is not even a word. It can't happen because it doesn't make sense! You can't un-mutate. No such thing.

I'm thinking of it like this :

Devolution, de-evolution, or backward evolution is the notion that a species can change into a more "primitive" form over time. Devolution presumes that there is a preferred hierarchy of structure and function, and that evolution must mean "progress" to "more advanced" organisms. This may include idea that some modern species that have lost functions or complexity accordingly must be degenerate forms of their ancestors.

Devolution (biology) - Wikipedia

OP ! if you can stop wiggling for a minute ? Would you agree with this statement ?

. 99% of all species that have lived on earth have gone extinct.

If so, seeing that the alligators and crocodiles have survived unchanged for 65 million years. Doesn't that say in some way that evolution didn't really work out so well for the 99% ? You know survival of the fittest and all ?
Evidently evolution didn't naturally select anyone of any of them to survive by growing wings or whatever ?
Putting them in a secure habitat so they wouldn't need to evolve or.....man this stuff just thick doesn't it ?

Originally posted by robhines

Originally posted by SpearMint
...De-evolution is not even a word. It can't happen because it doesn't make sense! You can't un-mutate. No such thing.

I'm thinking of it like this :

Devolution, de-evolution, or backward evolution is the notion that a species can change into a more "primitive" form over time. Devolution presumes that there is a preferred hierarchy of structure and function, and that evolution must mean "progress" to "more advanced" organisms. This may include idea that some modern species that have lost functions or complexity accordingly must be degenerate forms of their ancestors.

Devolution (biology) - Wikipedia

Ok, I see what you're saying, however it is still evolution. I was thinking you meant literally the opposite of evolution, which doesn't make sense. I don't think that scenario would actually happen since beneficial mutations are the ones that spread due to the advantage, but of course it is possible.

Originally posted by randyvs
OP ! if you can stop wiggling for a minute ? Would you agree with this statement ?

. 99% of all species that have lived on earth have gone extinct.

If so, seeing that the alligators and crocodiles have survived unchanged for 65 million years. Doesn't that say in some way that evolution didn't really work out so well for the 99% ? You know survival of the fittest and all ?
Evidently evolution didn't naturally select anyone of any of them to survive by growing wings or whatever ?
Putting them in a secure habitat so they wouldn't need to evolve or.....man this stuff just thick doesn't it ?

edit on 23-5-2012 by randyvs because: (no reason given)

That's not a statement it's statistic (fact).

First of all, I don't know if it's true that they are completely unchanged, but let's assume they are.

Evolution doesn't HAVE to happen, it's based on chance. Crocodiles and alligators do very well in their environment, this may suggest that necessity does, or can in fact play a part. That is unlikely though. It could also have something to do with their breeding habits, if they don't produce a lot of offspring then the process will take a lot longer. I think the most likely explanation is that they are so well adapted to their environment that beneficial mutations are so rare that they simply do not give them an advantage in life and don't necessarily spread.

reply to post by randyvs


no it says the environment changed so much those extinct species could not survive it.

dinos ruled the earth for hundreds of millions of years. Until the environment changed so much and so drastically it could no longer support them.

the fact complex life is still here on earth is a testament to evolution by natural selection and how robust it is.

reply to post by yeti101

no it says the environment changed so much those extinct species could not survive it.

Why didn't they just evolve ?

Lets see:
Crocodiles and aligators for 65 million years. Dinosaurs for hundreds of millions of years. Wow ! those are some whopp'in ass numbers guys.

reply to post by randyvs


they did that's why we have birds now.

Originally posted by randyvs
reply to post by yeti101

 

no it says the environment changed so much those extinct species could not survive it.

Why didn't they just evolve ?

You can't willingly evolve. and it's a SLOW process. Assuming the meteor (comet? I forgot the definitions) was the cause of their extinction, it cause the climate to change drastically in a short period of time. For evolution to take place you need MANY generations. Like the above post said, birds evolved from dinosaurs. I'm not sure why they survived and the majority didn't though, something to do with their diet and where they live I guess. Towards the end dinosaurs had feathers, we know the tyrannosaurus did due to fossils.

What you say about milk is true. Some cultures that consumed milk evolved to be able to drink it later in life. Our process of homogenizing the milk breaks down the cells and releases all the lactose at one time though, making even the people who can drink it have problems. All these problems just so we don't have to shake the carton.

Our evolution to eat new foods has been pushed to the max by the sciences. A protein isn't just a protein as they tried to tell us in the past. Everyone hasn't developed the ability to eat some things, the Plants defense system is something we have to build resistance to. I have an allergy to bananas that only bothers me when I eat too much or eat root veggies at the same time. I cough when I eat bananas and if I disregard the symptoms I get allergic to my underwear. I doubt if my ancestors were monkeys.

We are an animal that can evolve within a generation to a certain extent. Pushing evolution causes problems. Eating anything within reason is allowable but eating processed foods can cause many problems unless we have been eating it for many generations. It's the stuff they preserve food with that our ancestors didn't get used to that causes problems. It's a genetic specific problem that the medical field profits from extensively. Green leafy veggies aren't good for everyone either, some people have problems with the non-hemi iron they contain. The stuff they put on our veggies to keep them fresh for longer is causing people to get porphyria and allergic to the sun.

Simple spices can overload our systems and poison us. Garlic and onions are antidotes but over consumption can cause problems with blood building. Some people need veggies cooked because of problems with agglutination while others can eat them raw. This has a lot to do with blood type. We are all different and have different cravings. If we have poisoned ourselves we will be hungry until the antidote is consumed and often get fat. Their calorie intake charts are a big lie, we are being slowly poisoned by the food that they say is safe. Organic foods are allowed to be treated with stuff as long as it is organic. Humans have more organic based allergies than inorganic. We eat less when we eat organic though, probably because of cost and because there are less attractants added. This means we aren't poisoned nearly as much. There are a lot of growers of organic who do not treat their foods at all unless they need it. Commercial growers treat even though they do not need it. I know a potato farmer who says that it is required that he treat all potatoes in his fields once with antisprouting agents to qualify them for sale to market. I like to buy them with the sand on them instead of washed and sprayed but I have to suffer with one treatment anyway.

We have been lied to that not being evolved to eating all foods is a genetic flaw. If they make us feel inferior and damaged than we will not challenge the medical fields. We are led to believe we have sinned against our bodies and that is the reason our health is bad. Our health is bad because our food has been designed to not be edible and get all the nutrition that is needed from it. We need to eat more food to turn off the hunger and then imbalances occur. Not many people have evolved to eat this new chemistry we have created and it is shutting down our immune systems at different points. This same reason is why past generations have targeted witches and alchemists in the past. Nothing has changed, deceit and shifting of blame has been done throughout history. Making people feel inferior because they cannot eat spinach is evil. I think their is an overall conspiracy here, one which has evolved over many years.

Everyone's fruit of the tree of life is different. We are not all the same. If we try to eat like our spouse we will have problems also because men and women are different. My wife wouldn't like it if I turned gay like if I ate too much estrogenic foods but wouldn't like me if I ate a lot of testosterone producing foods either. You see, food can make a big difference in our perception. Seems like people now adays think that there are only two important hormones in the body. Seems like people all want to be young and dumb. Foods can allow that but at a cost. We may not be able to extend our life eating foods that are genetic specific but we can experience a happier and more fulfilling life.

We evolved alongside monkeys and apes, breaking off before monkeys were monkeys and humanoids were humanoids. We are related more to cromagnum and neanderthal and another missing link than monkeys and apes. The splitting of humanoids from humans was millions of years ago. It's also possible monkeys and apes were a splitoff of Humanoids. I don't think it's important where we came from because we cannot live off of bananas anyway. Lets focus on exposing the truth

Too long?

As a believer in Creation and God, I do not believe in evolution for starters. As Christianity in the Post Christ era was subject to political upheavals and political interference the Bible was changed, with exclusions and additions, most notably by the Catholic church. Therefore some of the New Testament text has not been kept intact from the original authorship of the disciples. In that case authors like Josephus and actual history can be traced and examined against changes made by religions. There are, however newer discoveries like the dead sea scrolls and other manuscripts with which to correct back to the original texts of the Old Testament, thus deleting all or most of the modifications by Religions by default. The New testament would not be involved in any of evolution though. I believe you can have a fairly authentic original gospel with the Torah being pretty well kept it intact throughout history, so what I'm saying is the truth of the history as indicated in the Bible can be pretty accurate if investigated properly.

The one stumbling block seems to be the 'Missing Link', those remains that transition from primate to modern man. With all the archeology going on over the last couple centuries and study of migrations and also origins of particular 'races', there still has been no 'link' to be found. As far as Extraterrestrials 'seeding' the Earth, that has been another story in a vain attempt to discredit Creation.

Selective breeding is also not evolution, simply the survival success of particular traits that thrived in environmental eras by virtue of having existing attributes which complemented climate.

I don't think in the strictest sense that evolution can be demonstrated. I do believe traits that allowed an advantage in a given environment or climate would in fact thrive, and that those without the advantageous traits would largely be unsuccessful and diminish. As Darwin demonstrated that the long and short billed birds he encountered that thrived or diminished due to droughts or bountiful weather patterns.

Evolution is an antiquated concept without any definitive merit. It cannot be demonstrated beyond theory. The only thing evolving is the 'theory'.