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.

 

The Gullibility of Evolutionists

page: 19
21
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 4 2008 @ 07:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by dbates
If men really evolved from apes

They didn't. We have a common ancestor to chimps.



around for 100,000 years or more, then why are we just now populating the entire western hemisphere of this planet?

Good question, but you seriously can't think why? Some ideas for you:
- If you had no concept of language, how could you communicate with others? How long do you think it would take to establish a good language that enables abstract thought? We know that language puts limits on our ability to think.
- How long would it take to develop written language, and get enough people to learn it? This would require infrastructure, spoken language etc.
- How long would it take to master the environment? Any advanced society has to master the environment (stop hunter gatherer behavior, start crops, farming, stop nomadic behavior), so how long would this take? It obviously takes a while because there are STILL nomadic cultures around!
- How long would it take to understand the basics of science? It has taken us centuries of building on previous work.

The progress of the last 100 years might seem amazing, but remember we are building upon tens of thousands of years of human innovation.



No, all evidence points towards the facts that men are relatively new to this planet. Evolutionist blindly ignore the fact that we have gone from riding horses, to visiting the moon in less than 100 years.

If you honestly believe you are smarter than thousands of scientists who are paid to think about this all their lives, you are deluded kind sir. There is no blind faith in this process at all. We even replicate others results to check they are telling the truth, we are a population of skeptics after all!



Where are the ancient cities of steel? What held us back for so long? Perhaps we haven't been here that long after all. What else explains the supposed 100,000 years of living in caves as we're taught?

If you actually stop and think about it, this point is answered. If you still need help, why did the aborigine, polynesian or indians not have the same technological advancedments as the white man?



Clearly humans have taken a fantastic jump that not even evolution can account for.

Fail.



If you won't subscribe to the thought that there might be a God, could you at least look at the evidence before you.

I am looking and the pot is empty.



We're being played with and tweaked. The belief that we just "evolved" to make rockets that can reach the moon or orbit the sun is complete ignorance and denial. Why haven't monkeys even started making fire yet?


We are evovling. The belief that we just magically made rockets that can reach without discovering spoken and written communication, domestication, farming, infrastructure, building, travel, critical thinking, science and are building on thousands of years of theory and technology is just plain stupidity. Why hadn't nearly every indigenous population come close to the level of advanced societies?

Oh there is one reason why things take so long to do for us - a belief that magic is all there is to it, its nothing to do with gradual progression as a species!



posted on Mar, 4 2008 @ 07:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Lokey13
 


and where are your facts?...



posted on Mar, 4 2008 @ 07:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Lokey13
 

Oh, the Gilgamesh tablets....
My bad.

Babylon not found?
Are you skipping school today? You should be learning history.
Babylon, Iraq
Ishtar gate

[edit on 4-3-2008 by Clearskies]



posted on Mar, 4 2008 @ 08:02 AM
link   
reply to post by encoder
 


I did not say chimps are as able as men in any sense of the word. I did although say that our dna sequence is 98% compatible, maybe the extreme 2% went to human brain mass(you might want to use some of yours sometime and give a better answer then an insult). Apes are very able creatures as well, they have some of the best communities and communication of the animal world; I would say apes are very able indeed. As able as humans: no, but still more capible then many other animals. An to answer your insult, your saying I have things in common with apes; I know a few chimps that can spell better then youand probably have better manners; are you the missing link?



posted on Mar, 4 2008 @ 08:04 AM
link   
reply to post by encoder
 


Your trying to prove the fairy tale, I've offered factual information. You've offered beliefs.



posted on Mar, 4 2008 @ 08:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Clearskies
 


What I'm saying is that Babylon, was not called Babylon; maybe it is today but only cause we call it that. It's centralized in the middle east and I'm no speach expert but "babylon" doesn't sound arabic to me. The name Babylon and the stating of it's kings recalling a story of a flood, is given to your flood story to add substance. Where are your facts stating what these babylonian king's truthfully said about this matter; and I don't want it in english on some site: I want to see the original writings and I'll decode them myself.



posted on Mar, 4 2008 @ 08:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lokey13
Hahahaha your reply was laughable, your comparing a man-made item with a living organism; geez we don't completely understand how cars work or anything right? So what your saying is that God made us look so much like chimps because he made chimps too. Hmm so why don't we look like birds, or fish, or dogs, or cats?


Well we do, sorta. Some people have slanted eyes that look cat like.
Some people have bird like noses. Fish would be the harder thing to compare us to, I think, but some amphibians and lizards would be easier and even some dinosaurs would be easier.

Isn't there a theory that we have stereo pairs of all our senses because of the way the physical universe is constructed? Would you happen to know the theory behind this?



posted on Mar, 4 2008 @ 08:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Lokey13
 


The Errors of The National Academy of Sciences


The Claim That Human and Ape Genomes Are 98 Percent Similar Is Misleading

Another claim put forward by evolutionists on the genetic similarity between man and ape is that there is a 98% similarity between the genetic make-ups of man and chimpanzee. However:

1) As was made clear in the preceding pages, work on the chimpanzee genome is not yet complete. Therefore, it is not possible to make a reliable comparison of the human and chimpanzee genomes.

2) Moreover, as mentioned above, the results from molecular comparisons generally conflict with evolutionists' expectations; for this reason the existence of a molecular similarity between two species cannot be regarded as sufficient reason to accept an evolutionary relationship between them.

3) Another point requiring clarification, apart from all the above considerations, is the fact recent analyses have shown that the genetic difference between man and the chimpanzee is three times greater than previously believed. Research on this subject states that, contrary to the allegations in some evolutionist publications, the genetic similarity between man and chimpanzee is not 98% at all, but rather is really no more than 95%. An article titled "Humans, chimps more different than thought," which appeared on the CNN website on September 25, 2002, reported the results of this research in these terms:





posted on Mar, 4 2008 @ 08:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Clearskies


If a slightly wider study is made of this subject, it can be seen that the DNA of much more surprising creatures resembles that of man. One of these similarities is between man and worms of the nematode phylum. For example, genetic analyses published in New Scientist have revealed that "nearly 75% of human genes have some counterpart in nematodes-millimeter-long soil-dwelling worms."292 This definitely does not mean that there is only a 25% difference between man and these worms! According to the family tree made by evolutionists, the Chordata phylum, in which man is included, and the Nematoda phylum were different to each other even 530 million years ago.

.... ad nauseam

www.nih.gov...

Sorry.

For those that don't click the links here are the first few lines:
New Genome Comparison Finds Chimps, Humans Very Similar at the DNA Level

The first comprehensive comparison of the genetic blueprints of humans and chimpanzees shows that our closest living relatives share perfect identity with 96 percent of our DNA sequence, an international research consortium reported today.

Clearskies is quoting old information, and ignoring the fact that the chimpanzee genome HAS ALREADY BEEN SEQUENCED.

Regardless (even if he doesn't believe this), give it 10 years and we should be able to sequence a genome in 24 hours or less. Time's running out for the arguments clearskies... first the earth was round, then we orbitted the sun... what's next, you believe pi is wrong and the biblical version is correct?

[edit on 4-3-2008 by sufusci]



posted on Mar, 4 2008 @ 08:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lokey13


What I'm saying is that Babylon, was not called Babylon; maybe it is today but only cause we call it that. It's centralized in the middle east and I'm no speach expert but "babylon" doesn't sound arabic to me. The name Babylon and the stating of it's kings recalling a story of a flood, is given to your flood story to add substance. Where are your facts stating what these babylonian king's truthfully said about this matter; and I don't want it in english on some site: I want to see the original writings and I'll decode them myself.


Bab meant water and gate. El meant god. So Babel meant gate of the water god. Babylon meant gate of the gods and wasn't in the same place as the location of the Tower of Babel. Babel was also called Eridu. The Tower was called NUN.KI, E.NUN and was named after Enki's E.ABZU. Later it was called the Etemenanki.
You're speaking my lingo now! I love this subject.

[edit on 4-3-2008 by undo]



posted on Mar, 4 2008 @ 08:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Lokey13
 



Here

That's the best I can do, right now,



posted on Mar, 4 2008 @ 08:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Lokey13
 


sry again. i used my little brain to come to a quick abstraction..


so you know something about programing, at least have a little insight, and i dont feel the need to tell you that DNA is a far more complex system of information holding and management. holographic in nature.
if you take a complex code of, lets say about 100 000 lines and add another 2000. needless to say that it has the potential to mess up the whole program. think what this will do to a holographic one (it has been done).

dont remember the exact name of the scientist but it built something that displayed some dots on the screen in order of some simple rules (very simple). he managed to create some fairly complex propagations, and even some stuff that was able to replicate itself. and it was monodimensional plus the timeframe (after Einstein's theories you may call it 2D).

my question to you. from what did the primates evolve from???
if god created the word this would be the joke of the creation.



posted on Mar, 4 2008 @ 08:25 AM
link   
I can't believe the close minded non-pragmatic thinkers who have revealed themselves in these last few pages. This has turned from open minded thread to a kindergarten arguement. no wonder there's so much violence today. If any one would open their eyes long enough they would see it is possible for both sides to be right. Don't believe me if you are a die hard creationist read the Bible again and you will find plenty of evolutionary evidence. In Genisis it speaks of how we were much like the animals at one time until Eve ate an unfamiliar fruit from the tree of knowledge and we became something different. It also speaks that we will learn much and become God like in knowledge. In revelation it speaks of the endtimes with you will know I am coming when you can speak and someone at a distance can hear; When my devices and God's ways become known then look for me. Could this be just that.

Einstein and Darwin both believed they were learning God's ways and we've come to the pinnacle of knowledge, on the cusp of understanding all ways of the universe, but we can't even have a civilized conversation without everyone getting mad!? I have no doubt if each of you had a gun in your hands you would be shooting at each other!

If you are a die hard evolutionist look to the Bible for evidence of this, it is there to be found for the true knowledge seekers. How did they predict all these things in there so long ago. The Bible speaks of beast that walked the earth, you could equate that with the dinosaurs.
Noone person knows exactly what created us and has proof of it, end of story, I do have my beliefs and what I think happened but it is an everchanging theory which is my own evolution. I'm tired of trying to get everyones opinion on this subject, and am very intrested in it, but I'm afraid I can't do it with people shoving insults down my throat. If you belive evolution believe you have evolved enough to hold a conversation and your tounge at the same time. If you are a creationist and christian or of faith how can you sleep at night knowing you are talking to people this way, can you look at your own posts and not blush, if so I don't believe you are truely religious or have missed all the lessons
Sorry if anyone is offended but someone needs to but their foot down in the name of knowledge. I will provide evidence for both theories if it will get everyone to calm down!



posted on Mar, 4 2008 @ 08:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by undo
Isn't there a theory that we have stereo pairs of all our senses because of the way the physical universe is constructed? Would you happen to know the theory behind this?


I'm not sure if this is what you are talking about, but it's fascinating nonetheless -- Key To Life Before Its Origin On Earth May Have Been Discovered

 


I see my previous questions remain unanswered.


Originally posted by Beachcoma
Okay, so if ID is a science, what are the predictions that it makes? Where are the lab reports?

Again, serious question. They don't teach any of this where I'm from.


Lab reports. That's what I want. That and scientific predictions that ID has to offer. Not pseudo-scientific articles cobbled together from a smattering of other scientific articles which have been cherry-picked (or selectively quoted) to support the thesis. Not opinion-based refutations of existing scientific knowledge. If it must be a refutation, then let it be a refutation based on an experiment that can be replicated by others. In other words, proper science.

And no deflection talking about something unrelated.



posted on Mar, 4 2008 @ 08:27 AM
link   
reply to post by sufusci
 

This site says it's 93%. It's from 2007.
Here

An international team of more than 170 scientists has now sequenced the genome of the rhesus macaque monkey and compared it to both the chimpanzee and human genomes. Their analysis reveals that the three primate species share about 93% of their DNA.


[edit on 4-3-2008 by Clearskies]



posted on Mar, 4 2008 @ 08:27 AM
link   
(azblack, just for an aside, we weren't like the animals, we were "uncivilized". and considering what civilization tends to bring with it, i ain't convinced which position is the better of the two over the long haul.



posted on Mar, 4 2008 @ 08:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lokey13
We have been very fortunate to have discovered a major item in the past 200 years otherwise we'd all still be in the dark and u'd still be burning witches.

But why just the last 200 years? Why not sooner? There is no good reason that this couldn't have happened 5,000 years ago. Isn't it just remarkable that North America, one of the most resource rich land-masses is only now being populated by large groups of people.

You have no reason except for, "we evolved". That is an unverifiable guess and stab in the dark at the truth. It's as empty and shallow as most evolutinary answers. "Why do birds fly? Well because the ones that didn't died off." Then I guess that we evolved to reach the moon because the humans that couldn't reach the moon died off.


I suppose the Cambrian Explosion happened because only the algae that instantly turned into trilobites with eyes, taste buds and an exoskeleton survived sucessfully. Go ahead. Ignore this too but we all know that the *poof - life* that happend during the Cambrian period can't be explained with "it evolved". Like I said, that's just a shallow generic answer that really doesn't answer anything at all.



posted on Mar, 4 2008 @ 08:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Clearskies
 


Yes, but if you click on 'Author' (link at top of page) what do you find exactly? Not really a man with a balanced view on the subject matter really. More someone with an agenda in refuting evolutionary science...

J.



posted on Mar, 4 2008 @ 08:31 AM
link   
reply to post by jimbo999
 

Which post are you talking about? Which link?



posted on Mar, 4 2008 @ 08:34 AM
link   

so you know something about programing, at least have a little insight, and i dont feel the need to tell you that DNA is a far more complex system of information holding and management.

The basic code is pretty simple, its the multiple-layer, complex system of it that is hard to grasp. This is just the same as the genetic algorithm techniques of evolving new hardware, which are much better than any designer can design.
An example:
www.apollon.uio.no...

Evolution is so elegantly simple, yet amazingly effective it would be ludicrous to NOT utilize it.



if you take a complex code of, lets say about 100 000 lines and add another 2000. needless to say that it has the potential to mess up the whole program.

Same thing can be said for removing 2000. Or adding a comma. Programs are only brittle BECAUSE they are designed rather than evolved.



dont remember the exact name of the scientist but it built something that displayed some dots on the screen in order of some simple rules (very simple).
conway? We are a lot further along than that now! Play with one yourself if you want (repast.sf.net) is a good example and is easy to setup and run as a non-programmer.


my question to you. from what did the primates evolve from???

www.google.co.nz...
Do some research.



if god created the word this would be the joke of the creation.

No. Evolution says nothing about creation. God still could have used evolution. Much more impressive creation act if you ask me.

Either evolution is correct OR god faked it to look like it.

//sufu sci



new topics

top topics



 
21
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join