This Is What Evolution Is

Stumbled up this essay as to why teaching non science is wrong.

Basically when science is left to non scientists -- we make dumb choices about sciency stuff

"The conservative attack on science is old and driven by many factors: religious opposition to reason, Barry Goldwater-style anti-intellectualism, corporate muscle, and straight-up Nixonian lies. Nixon liked to play the role of philosopher king, privately conceding that the Vietnam War was unwinnable but declaring the American people unworthy of knowing so. There are some who resist science because of sincere if misguided religious belief, and others who consciously manipulate facts for economic gain. The result, however, is always the same: a stupider America less well-prepared to make good decisions."

www.alternet.org...

reply to post by purplemer

remember science is a philosphy. it has by its nature limitations. it creates a model of the universe.

No, SCIENCE does not have limitations... WE have limitations, try to remember that.

try representing the universe in lego bricks and you will get the idea.

And this statement has absolutely no bearing on any point in discussion.

no it is what we make it.

No, it *IS* what *IT IS*....

I know you think that you can change reality just by clicking your heels together 3 times in a row... but that is not how reality has *EVER* worked.

IT's a shame that you even believe that.

try looking at it this way... a rock is no different..

A rock is not a photon.

A crystal is not a virtual particle.

If you are going to use Scientific theories as the underpinning for your arguments, the LEAST you could do is to understand that theories that you are trying to shoehorn into your religious rant.

no i am saying the act of observation creates our world.

That's pretty sad, actually... since the world predates our observational capacities, and thus, your entire point has been refuted by REALITY.

are you not traveling through time atm.

No, we are not *Traveling* through "Time" because "Time" is not a location, or position in space.

One cannot travel through the IDEA of cyclic movement, in the same way one travels forward 50 feet.

You are applying terms incorrectly.

has your perception of time ever changed. ever been in a slow motion car crash for example. some food for thought...

So, you are saying that by perceiving time as having been slowed down, we are IN ACTUALITY, traveling slower through time.

That is freaking hilarious, and you are grasping at st6raws.

time is a dimension and all dimensions are an epiphonoma of mind...

This is not actually the case....

Time is the abstraction of movement of objects and forces over distance, and how "Long" it takes things to occur...

Distance, (the other three dimensions) in the X-Y-and Z axis is a measure of spacial separation.

Now, one could say that ALL dimensions are just part of the mind, in the exact same way that I could say that YOU are just a part of MY mind.... and it would be JUST as true.

So, in essence... you are saying absolutely nothing in the most complicated possible way that you can find.

no it is not. do you see atoms with your eyes

We see photons that reflect off of atoms with our eyes, and the atoms thusly change the photons in appearance, frequency, and energy according to what kinds of atoms they were reflected off of.

We can actually OBSERVE these effects...

Your "A crystal isn't in a rock until we see it" philosophy is as unscientific and WRONG, as the flying spaghetti monster....

It's just hyperbole.

That is what science deals with. Not God, Not Religion...

ofc, would you care to explain the difference between the moment before the big bang and a universe created by god. they both create something from nothing...

Of course!!! it all makes sense now...

Your religion tells us what happened before the beginning of the universe, and so you automatically *BELIEVE* that science is claiming this also.

Do me a favor... find me ONE scientific article where they say WHAT existed before the big bang....

Go ahead... I dare you.

Science is not a Religion.

it is a beleif system too, just a different one. once you had the
spirit of gravity, now you have the theory of gravity, nothing in it

No, it is not a BELIEF system, it is a KNOWLEDGE system.

Listen, I'm going to go ahead and spell this out for you because I don't think you are going to understand it any other way.

The computer that you are typing on, and posting to the Internet, the electricity that powers all of this.... This does not run off of FAITH, or BELIEF.

It runs off of Well understood scientific principles that we have OBSERVED about reality, materials, and forces of the universe.

We don't just look at a rock, Pray to the gods, and get a Computer.

I know that is how you think Science WORKS, I'm just trying to tell you that you are SO WRONG, that you are embarrassing yourself.

It's a Tool. It's a way of looking at the world

yep just like religion

Religion is not a way of looking at the world... Religion is a way of looking at a world that we can't actually SEE, Prove, or interact with in any meaningful way.

and you cant explain why science works, so you're not even explaining anything.

Are you being Ignorant on purpose?

Or Do you actually WANT me to respond to this particular statement, and thus CRUSH your entire argumentative position?

I'll do it.... Just ask.

i meant were are the laws of co-operation to balance the laws of competition....nature gives

Most civilized societies already have laws that protect cooperation, since society is a fundamentally cooperative act, while NATURE, is almost WHOLLY competitive.

knowledge is only one branch of understanding.

You are just straight up ignorant.

That's your problem.


Understanding *IS* the process of accumulating KNOWLEDGE about an area of study.

considering classic science works on a subject / object orintation could you please submit just one paper to me that proves the subject exists. cas you wont find any. a weak foundation for a house of cards..

Using big words to express your "Superior Intellect" only works as an argumentative tactic if you are not completely and totally full of [snip]

Try to remember that.

reply to post by ErtaiNaGia


Again thank you for reply.... We seem to be in disagrement here a bit. All fair in love and war...

No, SCIENCE does not have limitations... WE have limitations, try to remember that

Science does have limitations. We have invented tools like language and math to help us understand and communicate better. Language by its very nature is an abstract, when we try and describe the universe with an absrtact we will always fall short. It allows to make limited models of the world around us. They are however just models not the world itself.
Science is a philosophy. It sets a definition of rules to allow us to understand the universe.These rules work within parameters and these parameters define what we can and cannot understand.
In some instances this works well. look at which sciences work well and which dont.
If you admit your above staement to be true, that we as humans have limitations, then it would be far to deduce that we the inventors of science have presribed limitations on science. Through are very nature.

no it is what we make it.
No, it *IS* what *IT IS*....

Well i guess we differ to agree. It is what me make it and it is what it is. That is a paradox, but it is balanced. The ying and yang. The joining of opposing truths into the same energy. Paradoxs by nature can define logic. Does that make them any less valid..?

A crystal is not a virtual particle.

Are you so sure a crystal is not a virtual particle...

Quantum physics confounds the mind because it proves that without an observer, reality as we know it would not exist. Known as The Observer Effect, it implies that not only did an observer precede all known phenomena that we think of as reality, but that the act of observing brought that same reality into existence. This of course leads to a profound but obvious conclusion: being that observation is an act of consciousness, consciousness therefore must have pre-existed before anything else.

and if it did exist before anything else then the crystal can be nothing but a virtual particle. A creation of consciousness.
This is difficult to grasp as it requires a massive paradigm change in thinking. It is not an off beat idea it is the core of neoscience.

Frank Herbert observed " most physicists agree that the results of measurements are truly real." In other words no one can dispute the findings of quantum physics because the pure science of math required to prove the theories doesn't lie. So if the math is correct, we are forced to conclude: the substance of the universe is consciousness

and has a shared belief system among many very prominent physicists.

Marx Planck Founder of Quantum Theory "All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter." Anton Zeilinger Quantum Physicist "What is real is dependent upon whether I look and the way I look. This is not a philosophical question we can see this in experiment. " John Hagelin Quantum Physicist " The ultimate inseparability of the observer from the observed." Neils Bohr Quantum Physicist "Everything is possibility until an observer observes and then things come into being." Amit Goswami Theoretical Nuclear Physicist "The meaning of quantum physics gives us a new world view ... consciousness is the ground of our being....Quantum physics enables us to see directly that we can make sense of the world only if we base the world on consciousness.".

www.consciousnessquantum.com...

The above contradicts your below statement. Your view is what is taught .
.

That's pretty sad, actually... since the world predates our observational capacities, and thus, your entire point has been refuted by REALITY.

So, you are saying that by perceiving time as having been slowed down, we are IN ACTUALITY, traveling slower through time.

That is exactly what i am saying. Time is relative and your perception can be vaslty different to mine. Time is a percpeption and when i view time in a slower rate i have slowed by perception of time down and therefore time itself.
The universe is far more fluid than we are taught to belief. Dont rely on knowledge to tell you that. Instead use your own percpetion. Knowledge is in many repsects a hinderence. Have you ever tried doing something without using your knowledge and ego. If not maybe you should give it a try....

Now, one could say that ALL dimensions are just part of the mind, in the exact same way that I could say that YOU are just a part of MY mind.... and it would be JUST as true. So, in essence... you are saying absolutely nothing in the most complicated possible way that you can find.

Yes and you would be true in what you said. I am apart of your mind and you are a part of my mind. Reality is relative. I am not trying to say things in compicated ways i am trying to talk about things that can be hard to put into words because reality is full of logical contradicitons and paradoxes that defy rational thought.

your religion tells us what happened before the beginning of the universe, and so you automatically *BELIEVE* that science is claiming this also

It is not my religon. I am not a religous person. I was not trying to claim that science is claiming also. I was just trying to point out that really when it comes to the big questions there is not much diffrence between the two.
Religion would say something like this infinite being that is far beyond our understanding created the world and universe from nothing. Science might say some infinite bang created the universe from nothing and before that point we have no understanding. An event horizon. Strip them bare are they really that different...

No, it is not a BELIEF system, it is a KNOWLEDGE system.

So as a scientist you may belief the world is round. Where as someone else may belief it to be flat. Remember all truth is relative. You may say i can prove the world is round and show me a picture of a round earth and you would be correct or i could walk outside onto my beach and say look it is flat and i would be correct too.
The above kind of misses the point of what i am trying to convey. The belief system we have in place for science creates the reality of science around us. We as a collective create what we collectively belief in. Not meaning to get all mystical here but try looking at the universe as a mirror. We create what we see through are thoughts and language.
If you read the vedic scriputes for example you will see that have ritual spells for all sorts of things. We could look at them today and think they dont work and they probably wont. But has it occured to you that they may well have worked and they dont work now. Because our belief system has changed so radicaly. We are redefining our reality

Religion is not a way of looking at the world... Religion is a way of looking at a world that we can't actually SEE, Prove, or interact with in any meaningful way.

Religion is based on spirtituality which is something you can see and interact with in a very meaningful way. It is something an individual can experience on a personal level, but something that cannot be seen with the tools of science and therein lies the limitation of science...

kx)

reply to post by Dashdragon


thank you for your elegant reply. I dont have time answer to all your points this evening. I have replied to another post on this thread. But here is a few

Well, first off, Religion isn't a tool in the same sense as one would typically think of a tool. It's a system of control both mentally and morally

and science is any different. does not the allow the more efficent control of people through technology. Does scientific belief by its very nature not affect the morality of human beings. Will your belief system on how you are created and what this world is not affect our moral judgement.

The question about the act observation and its effects on the natural world are speculative. Did the crystal exist in the rock before we broke it open and observed it being there? This is no different than asking if a tree fell in the woods and no one was around to hear it, if it would make a sound. The obvious answer to both is Yes

Are you sure it is yes. Maybe it is in a state of superpostition. They both happens and do not happen unitil the observer collapses the position to create the reality. Just like the cat.

The simple fact is that with both scenarios, even though you do not witness it as it occurs, and therefore have no direct observation, you can witness the effect afterwards. The damage from the fallen tree, the rock itself, both are conclusive evidence of the test criteria without requiring direct observation.

The act of obervering the aftermath of the fallen tree would have the same affect. It would collapse the superposition to create the affect. The intersting question is who chooses wether the tree has fallen or not.Where does that choice take place.

In regards to direct observation, there are certain quantum experiments that seem to suggest that Direct observation affects the results, but this is at the quantum level only

No not just quantam level look at my post above.

n order to attempt to equate Science with Religion, the simplest comparison is if we had no Religion and only Science...how would the world be changed?

How about imagining a world without science and religion.... and ask yourself how the world would be changed..

i got to cut there i need to go sleep.

kx

reply to post by purplemer


Well... I can see that *THIS* is going to be Lots of Fun.

Again thank you for reply.... We seem to be in disagrement here a bit. All fair in love and war...

But *NOT* Truth.

Because Truth IS, despite your "Unfair Play", as it were.

Science does have limitations. We have invented tools like language and math to help us understand and communicate better.

Science does not mean what you think it means.

Science is not a religion... it is a PROCESS of Understanding REALITY.

Language by its very nature is an abstract

An abstraction of Ideas and concepts... yes, verbalized so that we may communicate them...

This does not mean that Reality is NOT Reality.

when we try and describe the universe with an absrtact we will always fall short.

Fall short of what?

It allows to make limited models of the world around us. They are however just models not the world itself.

So... you are saying that Science was *not* already BUILT around this Idea?

I think you are treating Science like a Religion, instead of the pursuit of knowledge that it is.

I believe that you are projecting your religious perspective onto a logical pursuit of knowledge that you have codified as an enemy by the name of "Science"

Science the word, is just an abstract verbalization of THE CONCEPT, of finding knowledge about reality and Understanding it.

You are attacking, the pursuit of knowledge, and education.... as YOUR ENEMY.


Honestly... Who would ever take you seriously?

Science is a philosophy.

Yes:

1. philosophy, philosophical system, school of thought
2. the rational investigation of questions about existence and knowledge and ethics

wordnetweb.princeton.edu...

It sets a definition of rules to allow us to understand the universe.

Yes:

Scientific method refers to a body of techniques for investigating phenomena, acquiring new knowledge, or correcting and integrating previous knowledge.[1] To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry must be based on gathering observable, empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning.

en.wikipedia.org...

These rules work within parameters and these parameters define what we can and cannot understand.

No, these parameters are what we have OBSERVED.

In some instances this works well.

It works well in most all instances, actually.

look at which sciences work well and which dont.

There is only ONE "Science", everything that you are thinking of are merely applications *OF* the scientific Method.

"Science" the word, refers to the PROCESS of gathering evidence, making observations, asking questions, and arriving at conclusions based upon the rules of Logic and Rational.

If you admit your above staement to be true, that we as humans have limitations, then it would be far to deduce that we the inventors of science have presribed limitations on science.

This is actually the exact opposite of the truth in this instance.

Because humans will BELIEVE, [snip] near ANYTHING that you tell them with conviction.

THAT....



is why Science only allows what we can observe, and what we have evidence to prove.

BECAUSE we, puny humans *ARE* flawed in this capacity.

Science is a way of looking at the universe, correcting for the unfortunate distortions of Social BIAS.

Through are very nature.

Indeed.

no it is what we make it.

No, it *IS* what *IT IS*....

Well i guess we differ to agree.

And this is where you are WRONG.


Make the Sun STOP in the sky, By Your WILL.

Just BELIEVE that it's not there.

Go ahead.

I'll be WAITING.



Reality EXISTS, despite you observing it.

You do not observe *ALL* of reality... but you *ARE QUITE DEFINITELY* observing something that is more substantial than Mere electrical signals in your brain.


Because the Photon that strikes your retina in your eye, and sets off a cascade of neuro-chemical reactions in your brain, delivering the information to the seat of your awareness.....

You see, that PHOTON, was actually emitted as latent Heat energy from the Glowing Upper Photosphere of the Sun that our planet ORBITS AROUND.

This implies (both the existence, and the observation of the Photon from the sun) that there is a LARGE ball of fire about 93 million miles away from us... Whether you observe it or not.

Reality is REAL.

That is a paradox, but it is balanced. The ying and yang.

Sooooo.... You are saying that Us "Disagreeing" is some sort of "Cosmic Balance" of the universe?

Pardon me for a moment while I laugh up my own lungs.

A crystal is not a virtual particle.

Are you so sure a crystal is not a virtual particle...

.......
.......
.......

.......
.......
.......

Are you freaking Kidding me?

Crystal: a solid formed by the solidification of a chemical and having a highly regular atomic structure

Virtual Particle: In physics, a virtual particle is a particle that exists for a limited time and space, introducing uncertainty in their energy and momentum due to the uncertainty principle.


Here.... is an article about Crystals:

en.wikipedia.org...

And one about Virtual Particles:

en.wikipedia.org...


Now, when you can tell me, what could POSSIBLY make you think, that these two words, refer to anything even REMOTELY similar.....

Quantum physics confounds the mind because it proves that without an observer, reality as we know it would not exist........

and if it did exist before anything else then the crystal can be nothing but a virtual particle. A creation of consciousness.

So, are you talking about virtual particles, and quantum mechanics, or are you talking about those things that we have to mine underneath the ground, because we haven't yet found a way to "Observe" them into existence, except by following old volcanic activity that brought compressed crystalline carbon up from the pressure cooker of the upper mantle, and deposited it in the old cones of some volcano's?

Because that is some stuff that we *KNOW*, I.E. Things that are actually REAL in this reality, that we can go down to the store and PURCHASE, if we were so inclined.

Real things.... that actually happen.... this is what Science is about.

This is difficult to grasp as it requires a massive paradigm change in thinking. It is not an off beat idea it is the core of neoscience.

Yes, and the *REASON* that your concept is difficult to grasp, is because it is fundamentally WRONG.

The paradigm change in thinking that you are expressing, is called "Ignorance"

Frank Herbert observed

and has a shared belief system among many very prominent physicists.

Frank Herbert was an Author of Fantasy Novels.

"We must assume the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind."

That's real Scientific there.

The above contradicts your below statement. Your view is what is taught.

Hardly.

They are speaking of the poor scanning resolution we have in our instruments, due to them being made out of Giant, and Clunky Atoms.

That is exactly what i am saying. Time is relative and your perception can be vaslty different to mine.

So... you are saying, that the electrons in your body are orbiting the nucleus at a different speed of mine?

You should tell "Science" because that would be a REALLY groundbreaking fundamental discovery.

You know.... Willing time to slow down, and all.... as opposed to just "Perceiving" it differently....


With your squishy brain.....

Time is a percpeption and when i view time in a slower rate i have slowed by perception of time down and therefore time itself.

So, if YOU slowed down *time*... why didn't Anyone else in the entire UNIVERSE notice it but you?

Go ahead.... Answer the question

The universe is far more fluid than we are taught to belief. Dont rely on knowledge to tell you that. Instead use your own percpetion.

Perceiving is a FORM of Knowledge acquisition.

You are really just throwing words out for emotional appeal, aren't you?

Knowledge is in many repsects a hinderence.

I am apart of your mind and you are a part of my mind.

Reality is relative.

point out that really when it comes to the big questions there is not much diffrence between the two. (Between Religion and Science)

Remember all truth is relative.

or i could walk outside onto my beach and say look it is flat and i would be correct too.(About the world being Flat)

YOU Sir, Are Stating that *IGNORANCE* is preferable to KNOWLEDGE.


I'm pretty sure that particular viewpoint is... *FROWNED UPON* here at Above Top Secret.



Good *DAY* to you.

edit on 11-5-2011 by ErtaiNaGia because: coding

And this is what happens when you ignore the some of the more structured scientific thinking. It flabbergasts me that is a world that has growm more and more dependent on science that we as a population become more and more ignorant.

Florida has outlawed sex.

www.southernfriedscience.com...

This thread blows my mind, I don't understand how someone in our modern era can be so ridiculously stupid. This is why the world is so screwed up for all of us, because some of you just don't get it no matter how obvious it is. Of course science offends religion, everything offends religion.

Tell me what you are going to do when science does something like:

- Allows the average person to live past the age of 50.

- Allows humans to travel in space.

- Allows us to grow food to feed the world.

- Gives us the knowledge to build shelter for ourselves.

- Allows us to peer across entire galaxies and detect planets orbiting other stars.

- Provides methods for defeating relentless illnesses.

- Allows us to transverse the entire world in a day.

- Speak to someone on the other side of the planet almost instantaneously.

- Create synthetic life and bring back extinct species!

- Harness the power of the atom.

- Illuminate our surroundings

- Place us at the very top of the food chain.

- Fly.

- Create substances and materials unprecedented on this planet.

- Give prosthetic limbs and grown organs to the handicapped and ill.

- Give us a massive database of knowledge available to all that proves sciences own validity!

Oh wait, we already did all that stuff. Now, what does religion do for us again? You don't understand, religion is on the losing team and we will not progress past a certain point until it is abandoned. Evolution IS science and you can observe it with your OWN eyes.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Evolution = State Sponsored Religion.

I am driven with a mission from God. God would tell me, 'George go and fight these terrorists in Afghanistan'. And I did. And then God would tell me 'George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq'. And I did. And now, again, I feel God's words coming to me, 'Go get the Palestinians their state and get the Israelis their security, and get peace in the Middle East'. And, by God, I'm gonna do it.
- George W. Bush Jr.

Originally posted by purplemer
it (science) is a beleif system that like magic cocreates our reality...

What?

Thanks for the laugh, it's just sad that your serious about this stuff.

reply to post by RSF77


Who I just had a flash back -- probably a leftover from that night in Sept. in 1969.

God is the internet!!!

reply to post by Tephra


BRAVO SIR! Look everyone someone that can actually think for themselves! That's 1 out of about an octillion give or take!

reply to post by Griffo


Yes it is(evolution) a religion. You believe it in faith. Please produce the "missing link" ? Even the highest ups know that evolution isn't true based on hidden science that tells us that other dimensions exist. And if they do exist than we are much more than just a machine (the whole basis upon which modern science is built). So the burden of proof is still on you "evolutionites". But you will produce no proof because around 12,000 years ago we had our DNA interfered with and an entire new species emerged that science "thinks" was due to evolution. What a serious mistake and to see all of you "true believers in evolution" parrot this stuff like it's fact shows the amount of control and programming in place. You so entirely wrong it's not funny. Carry on...with your venom now...

reply to post by RSF77


And I'm laughing at you all. See my answer to the other guy here

Originally posted by firegoggles
reply to post by Griffo

 

Yes it is(evolution) a religion. You believe it in faith. Please produce the "missing link" ? Even the highest ups know that evolution isn't true based on hidden science that tells us that other dimensions exist. And if they do exist than we are much more than just a machine (the whole basis upon which modern science is built). So the burden of proof is still on you "evolutionites". But you will produce no proof because around 12,000 years ago we had our DNA interfered with and an entire new species emerged that science "thinks" was due to evolution. What a serious mistake and to see all of you "true believers in evolution" parrot this stuff like it's fact shows the amount of control and programming in place. You so entirely wrong it's not funny. Carry on...with your venom now...

Evolution is not a religion and if you can't understand that, then you really have no place debating the veracity of its findings. Religion is a belief of "I (or we) want this to be true, so we are going to believe it is" Evolution is what we have been able to find and have tested regarding the diversity of life on our planet. It's not a belief or system of moral laws pertaining to an almighty being, but simply "this is what we have found, and this is what it suggests to have happened."

The ridiculous part of it really is that it would be much simpler for religions to just accept that perhaps their God decided to do something even more profoundly complex by allowing his creations to evolve and become better adapted to the changing facets and conditions of the world than to ridicule it just because they feel it contradicts their man-made book's descriptions and are afraid it is an attempt to debunk their God.

reply to post by firegoggles

Yes it is(evolution) a religion. You believe it in faith.

I don't take it on faith, I've been studying evolution for years, starting in secondary school and even now in university, and there has never been anything to disprove the fact of evolution. Even without the fossil record there is enough DNA and genetic evidence to irrefutably confirm that evolution is scientific fact.

Please produce the "missing link"?

Here's one here. It's pretty pointless though, because after this, you're going to say, "But what about the next missing link, what about the one after that..." If you've seen Futurama, there is a classic scene which shows this. It isn't on youtube but it's in the episode entitled "Evolution Under Attack"

Even the highest ups know that evolution isn't true

Proof

based on hidden science that tells us that other dimensions exist.

How does the existence of extra dimensions disprove evolution?

And if they do exist than we are much more than just a machine (the whole basis upon which modern science is built).

You can't just make wild assumptions like that

So the burden of proof is still on you "evolutionites". But you will produce no proof

Observed instances of speciation
Some more observed instances of speciation

because around 12,000 years ago we had our DNA interfered with and an entire new species emerged that science "thinks" was due to evolution.

So, what you're saying is evolution is true? But not in the case of humans? In any case, proof that it was aliens who changed our DNA and not a random mutation causing the fusion of chromosomes. Here's my proof, I await yours

Human Chromosome 2

What a serious mistake and to see all of you "true believers in evolution" parrot this stuff like it's fact shows the amount of control and programming in place.

That's because it is fact

You so entirely wrong it's not funny. Carry on...with your venom now...

Ohh how nice, an insult. That's usually the sign of a weak argument

Like I said in the OP, please provide me with some, any, evidence that refutes one or more of the fourteen points. (Protip: you aren't going to find any)

reply to post by firegoggles

Originally posted by firegoggles
reply to post by Griffo

 

Yes it is(evolution) a religion. You believe it in faith. Please produce the "missing link" ? Even the highest ups know that evolution isn't true based on hidden science that tells us that other dimensions exist. And if they do exist than we are much more than just a machine (the whole basis upon which modern science is built). So the burden of proof is still on you "evolutionites". But you will produce no proof because around 12,000 years ago we had our DNA interfered with and an entire new species emerged that science "thinks" was due to evolution. What a serious mistake and to see all of you "true believers in evolution" parrot this stuff like it's fact shows the amount of control and programming in place. You so entirely wrong it's not funny. Carry on...with your venom now...

Yea I already read what you call an "answer".