Evolution backed up by Hoaxes and Desperate Lies

Originally posted by UnifiedSerenity

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by edmc^2

 

Do you usually let other people decide your opinions for you? I'm guessing that's what just happened, seeing as how you didn't provide any reasons for agreeing with the OP, or really anything besides, "Yeah, you go man!" Oh, and I don't know if you are aware, but the standard for posting on ATS forums is that you need to CONTRIBUTE, not just scratch someone's back.

Please keep that in mind.

edit on 13-8-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)

When are you going to take these sorts of replies to task?

useless comments

I thought I did. In any case let me please continue.

AfterInfinity - it's of my opinion that the foundation of Evolution Theory is very weak if not, non-existent. As such, it's riddled with hoax and pure fantasy created from the minds of gullible humans.

Of course scientists they are but still humans prone to mistakes and gullibility. As indicated in the hoaxes perpetrated in the name of science, many gullible people like yourself willingly accepted it hook line and sinker! "Yeah, you go man!"

Now if "scientist" of such high calibre were easily duped back then by such hoaxes - is it any better today?

I doubt it.

Let the report speak for themselves:

“Do Scientists Cheat?”


“After the initial inquiry by this [congressional] committee into this subject, the committee has had growing reason to believe that we are only seeing the tip of a very unfortunate, dangerous, and important iceberg.”—NOVA broadcast on PBS (Public Broadcasting Service) on October 25, 1988.

“Two New Studies Ask Why Scientists Cheat”

“It was an innocent enough question: how do scientists behave when no one is looking? But it has produced an incendiary answer: not too well, reports a paper this month in the British journal Nature.”—Newsweek, February 2, 1987.

“A Nation of Liars? Scientists Falsify Research”

“A study published last month accused 47 scientists at the Harvard and Emory University medical schools of producing misleading papers.”—U.S.News & World Report, February 23, 1987.

The above are just a minute examples of the fraud going on in the scientific community.

Here's some more:

“NIH Sees Plagiarism in Vision Paper”

“Panel says researcher took data from paper he peer-reviewed and used it for his own work; . . . NIH [National Institutes of Health] recommends debarment proceedings.”—Science, July 14, 1989.

“The Case of the ‘Misplaced’ Fossils”

“A prominent Australian scientist has examined two decades of work on ancient Himalayan geology and alleges it may be the greatest paleontological fraud of all time.”—Science, April 21, 1989.

Now up to you to decide if these reports are not damming enough that they were left unchallenged.

In any case here's some more:

Fraud becoming rampant in scientific research papers, study shows Monday, August 12, 2013 by: J. D. Heyes

(NaturalNews) Researchers say it's still rare, but fraud in scientific research is climbing at an alarming rate nonetheless. What's more, according to a new study which has documented the trend, researchers can't say why it's happening. An examination of retractions in medical and biological peer-reviewed publications and journals found the percentage of studies withdrawn due to fraud or suspected fraud has increased dramatically since the mid-1970s, The Associated Press reported recently, citing data from the study. In 1976, there were fewer than 10 fraud retractions for every one million studies published; by 2007, fraud retractions had grown to 96 per one million, the study found. Learn more: www.naturalnews.com...

Although:

The authors said fraud in life sciences research is very infrequent, being committed by just a few dozen cheats. But that can cause big problems nonetheless, said Arturo Casadevall, a professor of microbiology at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York.

Because...

... when they do it, they are doing it in areas that are very important," Casadevall said. "And when these things come out, society loses faith in science." ...

anyway read the rest here:
www.naturalnews.com...


What do these reports show?

It demonstrates the simple fact that the "honor system" in science has its limitations and that not all members of the scientific community are equally ready to abide by it.

Of course, mainstream religion has failed miserably on this too.

reply to post by TinfoilTP


Taxonomy is actually quite complicated, if you don't understand it.

Even extant birds *should* be classified as reptiles. See: Interordinal relationships of birds and other reptiles based on whole mitochondrial genomes.

To answer your question: The bible talks about Angels being created prior to the universe as beings of light. Then the universe was created as their playground, so they have the ability to become physical and non-physical (spiritual) at will. The Lucifer led rebelion prompted God to destroy earth (which was Lucifer's headquarters at the time) and restore it in 6 days to make if formitable for Adam and Eve. After expulsion from the garden of eden, the rebel angels intermarried with man to create human-angel hybrid. This is supported by almost all mythologies. This intermingling happened before and after the flood of noah per Genesis 6. So there must be evidence of alien intrusion into our species.

Rh negativity sticks out like a sore thumb. If Rh negativity is a mutation, then why are humans the only primate carrying the mutation. It appears that the Rh negative gene is often accompanied by vividly colored eyes, extra ribs, fingers, toes and sometimes a tail. And most people with Rh negativity have superiory immune systems...sometimes too strong, causing the body to reject itself. The negative Rh factor would only be one gene from a multitude of possibly alien genes, so its possible that Rh negative people and carriers of the gene and other genes are mostly human, but partly angel.

The bible says God created man from the elements of the earth. If that is the same for all animals, it wouldnt suprise me if humans shared genes with apes. But it doesnt mean we have common ancestry, just that we are made from the same lump of clay.

reply to post by UnifiedSerenity


First of all, chill the hell out. You don't need to be so offensive and aggressive with me when I'm just trying to get a straight answer out of you. My question is simple: you say we're being lied to, so what's the truth? If you don't believe in evolution, what's your alternative theory?

Your technique of revealing a deception without offering a truth is very poorly thought out.

reply to post by UnifiedSerenity


You spelled genius incorrectly.

evolution.berkeley.edu...

Also see: Taking Wing: Archaeopteryx and the Evolution of Bird Flight
www.tinyurl.com...

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by UnifiedSerenity

 

First of all, chill the hell out. You don't need to be so offensive and aggressive with me when I'm just trying to get a straight answer out of you. My question is simple: you say we're being lied to, so what's the truth? If you don't believe in evolution, what's your alternative theory?

Your technique of revealing a deception without offering a truth is very poorly thought out.

Here is the problem with your question. If I answer it then I have gone off topic and I believe that is your goal. We will have page after page debating my views of life on earth. So, I am asking you to stick to the topic. Start your own thread on your topic and I might share my thoughts, but NOT on this thread.

I am very tired of religion and Christianity being used as the counter-argument to the proofs I offered in this thread. If you cannot deal with the topic then you can always stop replying and then I will stop asking to to stay on topic. Fair?

Originally posted by ravenshadow13
reply to post by UnifiedSerenity

 

You spelled genius incorrectly.

evolution.berkeley.edu...

Also see: Taking Wing: Archaeopteryx and the Evolution of Bird Flight
www.tinyurl.com...

edit on 8/13/2013 by ravenshadow13 because: (no reason given)

Thank God spelling is not a requirement for truth. My apologies on committing the spelling sin.

reply to post by AfterInfinity


Watch out the OP will cry that he/she is being bullied again
Oh and also topics do "evolve" you were told this last time by the mods.

I too would like to know but I think I already do...God did it.

We have seen evolution in action in as little as 30 years, we have transitional fossils which show when fish first started going on land. The Tiktaalik, has both lungs and gills.
All the OP has done is show some fraudsters and lumped every scientist with them.
Face it you just don't like the fact that our evolutionary cousins are Great Apes,New world monkeys, old world monkeys,gibbons and that you are in fact a member of the great ape family
Oh and why don't you just goto this thread

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Plenty to prove evolution in there.

Originally posted by BELIEVERpriest
it wouldnt suprise me if humans shared genes with apes. But it doesnt mean we have common ancestry, just that we are made from the same lump of clay.

I don't think that you understand genetics. Genes and inheritance go hand and hand, regardless of whether you believe in evolution.

Here's a good website:

rarediseasesnetwork.epi.usf.edu...

Originally posted by boymonkey74
reply to post by AfterInfinity

 

Watch out the OP will cry that he/she is being bullied again

Oh and also topics do "evolve" you were told this last time by the mods.

I too would like to know but I think I already do...God did it.

We have seen evolution in action in as little as 30 years, we have transitional fossils which show when fish first started going on land. The Tiktaalik, has both lungs and gills.
All the OP has done is show some fraudsters and lumped every scientist with them.
Face it you just don't like the fact that our evolutionary cousins are Great Apes,New world monkeys, old world monkeys,gibbons etc etc.

edit on 13-8-2013 by boymonkey74 because: (no reason given)

Personal attacks are against T&S. You did this on my Custodian's thread, and mods had to remove comments by some for the typical derailment behavior. Are you and your fan boys lining up to do it again? Mods, please remove his comment as it's nothing but a personal attack and attempt to start a fight.

reply to post by UnifiedSerenity

Here is the problem with your question. If I answer it then I have gone off topic and I believe that is your goal.

How is answering my question off topic? You are attempting to debunk evolution, and I asked you for an alternative theory, and at that point, my question is off topic enough for you to avoid validating your position in the debate. You could easily propose a truth that would prove just how ridiculous the standard evolutionary theory is, but instead of making yourself look good, you avoid the question by declaring it off topic. I don't want to go off topic, I want a good god damn answer to my perfectly legitimate question. And you don't have one, I guess.

We will have page after page debating my views of life on earth. So, I am asking you to stick to the topic. Start your own thread on your topic and I might share my thoughts, but NOT on this thread.

No, I am giving you a golden opportunity to prove that the theory you are attempting to debunk is NOT the best one available. You, on the other hand, are steadfastly refusing to seize that opportunity because evidently, you have nothing better to offer. You want to criticize and criticize and criticize, but it all boils down to one reality: as flawed as the evolutionary theory is, it's STILL the best one we have.

Unless you can prove me wrong?

I am very tired of religion and Christianity being used as the counter-argument to the proofs I offered in this thread. If you cannot deal with the topic then you can always stop replying and then I will stop asking to to stay on topic. Fair?

No. Answer my question or concede that you don't have a good answer.

Oh and OP in this thread

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Very interesting video about how evolutionists proved they are correct and backed up by law....I wonder why no creationists commented on the vid......I know because they can't refute any of the science or facts.

reply to post by UnifiedSerenity


If you have any problems interpreting that textbook linked to in the tinyurl you just let me know, okay?



I'd love to discuss it with you if you have any questions about analogous structures and the likelihood of similar taxa to develop certain morphologies due to mutations that affect gene expression during development.

Or basically how related things can look the same because it's more likely that they will develop the same way, due to genetics.

reply to post by UnifiedSerenity


Kinda proved my point
Stop crying....
Also one last point....God and evolution can go hand in hand, the only people wanting to start a fight is the religious people, evolutionists don't need to fight because they have science to back them up, so the creationists just make stuff up.
Been proved in court and the law.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity


No. Answer my question or concede that you don't have a good answer.

Stop it. Make your own thread and we can discuss all kinds of theories of how life began. Stop trying to change the topic of this thread. I will not respond to anymore of this sort of behavior from you. You prove nothing by my unwillingness to bow down and do as you request. I have suggested an alternative and apparently you are incapable of starting your own thread, so who is being dishonest? If you want to arguments, then start your own thread on that topic.

reply to post by UnifiedSerenity


That post is technically against T&C too. And you are still avoiding our request: if evolutionary theory is so terrible and built on such blatant lies, give us a better alternative. Give us the truth. Or is your truth strictly limited to the falsification of evolutionary theory? If so, you really haven't done us much of a favor.

Edit: Well, ATS, looks like UnifiedSerenity is doing his/her absolute best to avoid doing anything other than falsifying the evolutionary theory. From where I'm sitting, though, the evolutionary theory is still the best theory we have to date. So thanks for the effort, Serenity, but it looks like you're fighting a losing battle. Unless, of course, you have an alternative theory to offer. In which case, we're all listening.

reply to post by UnifiedSerenity


You don't differentiate how life began, and evolution. They're two different topics. You keep saying how science is wrong on evolution, then there must be something better to explain things like whales. There's an entire fossil record from land to water evolution for whales, showing how they evolved into water creatures. So how do you explain that?

reply to post by UnifiedSerenity


Why don't you start the thread? You're the one who has a problem with the standard theory of evolution. You picked the fight, you finish it. You have the initiative to expose a lie but not expose a truth? Oh, that's admirable.

reply to post by Zaphod58


Mmm, mmm, mmm!! That's the sound that I make when I get excited about whale evolution.

reply to post by Zaphod58


Ah, look. Evidence of evolution that ISN'T falsified. Hmm...smells like a score to me. Just more evidence that the standard theory is still the best one. Not perfect, but the best to date.