Can you prove evolution wrong

Oh come on Itera. Now YOUR sayng we de-evolved which is what I have been saying

There is no such thing. If ancient humans possessed technology similar to or better than what we have today, it doesn't mean we de-evolved. If there was an extinction level event that destroyed most of their civilization (the end of the ice age), and their knowledge was lost, then what exactly would happen to future generations? They would have to start over, and learn everything again, which doesn't happen over night. It's possible this cycle may have happened more than once in our past. The truth is we don't really know. You aren't saying anything that has anything to do with evolution in the least.

Liar. I never said the truth is the last thing I'm going to share. See, that's the issue with you people. You are dishonest in your arguments. Using strawmans and red herrings all the time, and then you even dare to claim that you possess the truth, while everything is a bunch of fallacies woven together. Believe whatever you want to believe, but I don't have to go about by your imaginary authoritarian rules.

What lie did he tell? This thread is about showing evidence for the diversity of life on earth in any other way but evolution. Practically every single person that has come into this thread has ignored the main purpose of the thread, including you.

reply to post by Barcs

Evolution talks about how life started as a single celled organism and changed into the diversity we see today. It has nothing to do with slime. You need to go post in an abiogenesis thread. This is about evolution. Please stick to the topic.

Primordial Slime is just as real as evolution, I'm suprised you never heard of it, its part of evolution.

agora.lakeheadu.ca...

You can't say "IMO they are accurate". Either they are accurate and can be backed up by equations or they are pure guesswork on your part. Just like the statement you made about it taking trillions of years for man to evolve from ape like ancestors. Or your statement about a 747 emerging out of tornado or cars evolving It's completely false, fabricated guesses about probability and nothing more. You're just throwing big numbers out there and dropping your jaw in awe.

They are accurate IMO. The trillions of years I allready stated it was a guess but I still believe it to be accurate within the constraints of speciation.
The tornado was one taken from another page offering the explanation, and I saw a simular one with a dog having a hammer tied to his tail and walking though a pile of unassembled array of house debris and magically assembling a home.
Even if I'm wrong and it takes 10 million years per species, there isn't enough time on earth to cause it to happen. Unless its possible to have paralell brances of speciation. Keep in mind if this is whats going on then there should be oddles of proof left in bones and current species evolving. We have nothing.

You aren't understanding what I'm saying. You need provide evidence, or your guesses are nothing more than guesses. "Well I think I'm accurate". Well that's nice, but that's not evidence or proof of your standpoint. You are speculating about what you don't understand. Supernatural doesn't only mean aliens. It could mean a variety of things that we do not yet understand.

No thats not the definition I read, its pretty clear. I know listen to Katy perrys sont ET. She explains the definition pretty good.

We are intelligent and we haven't separated ourselves from the planet, we just dont directly live off our own efforts in nature anymore.

Well we never did, are you able to produce a diet that used to be balance and meant for us? And if you say the primated diet THEN WHY WOULD WE EVOLVE AWAY FROM IT? Now your seeing the picture.

We still survive by eating plants and animals, building tools and shelter, and using our intelligence to troubleshoot and problem solve. Again this is just your opinion. Why won't you provide evidence? You seem to be dodging every question asked of you and doing nothing more than speculating. Read the OP again. Everything you post here is off topic.

No I think I have done a pretty good job proving that evolution simply can't exist.

I didn't just step in. I've been posting in here for a while, but most of my posts were ignored. You haven't provided objective evidence of anything. You've just explained why you have your personal views. I don't care what you believe, it's just not fact by a long shot.

How do you know that Mother Goose wasn't actually an alien and the story doesn't go back to ancient times? No distinct writer can be found, so there's just as much evidence for this as the bible

I see, its just that you cant disprove them right?

Originally posted by Barcs
What lie did he tell? This thread is about showing evidence for the diversity of life on earth in any other way but evolution. Practically every single person that has come into this thread has ignored the main purpose of the thread, including you.

edit on 11-12-2011 by Barcs because: (no reason given)

If you're doing the same thing, what right do you have to tell me that I did something wrong? It was also asked for evolution supporters to refrain from posting, but, that didn't stop you, now did it? Stop being hypocritical.

reply to post by Barcs

How does DNA itself prove aliens?

Well its real simple and common sense but I think your not the only one missing this so I better explain this.

Our DNA has been tampered with. All humas here on earth have proof in there DNA that someone has gone in and made changes. Now it's only been recently that we have even learned how to do this type of work ourselves. So how is it possible that all humans new old and dead back from thousands of years ago, all test to have the same DNA changes. Alien technology. Unless you think we were advanced, then de evolved then re evolved.

I'm well aware of all that, but again we can only speculate since we don't know the actual answer. Ancient humans simply could have been advanced or had a technology boom similar to the one we've had in the past 1000 years, 50,000+ years ago. It's a really cool concept, but I there's no objective evidence unfortunately and it still has nothing to do with the fact that is evolution. Instead of trying to downplay it, acknowledge it for what it is and use it to help you formulate a legitimate hypothesis. That's the main issue. You are arguing against evolution but using arguments about aliens as evidence. You need to use science as evidence.

Well thats not true either you see we do have a missing link taking us to the fact that it was an alein or aliens. I think when the bible explains a ufo flying down to visit us, I'm pretty sure it's guided by an ET. Now I could be wrong, but I always understood that aliens fly ufos.
Now the most important part I forgot to mention is in that same section in the bible, god is accompianed by a four headed creature of lion ox eagle and man. It just has DNA work all over it. More like mad scientist

reply to post by Barcs

There is no such thing. If ancient humans possessed technology similar to or better than what we have today, it doesn't mean we de-evolved. If there was an extinction level event that destroyed most of their civilization (the end of the ice age), and their knowledge was lost, then what exactly would happen to future generations? They would have to start over, and learn everything again, which doesn't happen over night. It's possible this cycle may have happened more than once in our past. The truth is we don't really know. You aren't saying anything that has anything to do with evolution in the least.

So you think we were thriving in an ice age, more than we do now not in an ice age ???<

So there knowledge was lost but not there lives ???? After all we have continued right, we are here.
And just like you tell me, its a nice story but do you have some proof to back this up?

What lie did he tell? This thread is about showing evidence for the diversity of life on earth in any other way but evolution. Practically every single person that has come into this thread has ignored the main purpose of the thread, including you.

Thats not true at all, every page I have comjmented on asking questions that you guys refuse to answer. I'm assuming because you can't.

reply to post by vasaga

I asked for the pro evolution group to not post for a while and for the greater part they did. Unfortunately no one from the anti evolution side took up the offer of explaining diversity without it. Still have not.

You said earlier you were not angry but that is not the impression I get. If you do not want to discuss an alternative to evolution that explains diversity that is fine, move on.

I cannot understand why so many from your side avoid sitting in the chair you expect the pro evolution group to sit in and avoid it like the plague. Well actually that is a lie because I guess that they wont take that seat as they have nothing to sit down with.

BTW again you post with no intention of addressing the OP.

reply to post by HappyBunny

I'm not saying they weren't smart or incapable of thought. I'm saying you can't work stones of that scale with rope and sticks. You can't physically do those things that are required to not only cut and shape the stone but move the stone. Besides the ancients say literally that they had help. Gobekli Tepe goes back over ten thousand years ago and according to today's science they had no metal so that leave rocks, sticks and maybe some sort of rope. The stones there are + or - 16 tons and someone needs to demonstrate how you cut stones of that scale, carve them and move them in place using those tools otherwise they are chasing their tails.

reply to post by itsthetooth

Unless its #4001. He doesn't actually give us a list by name.

So he's making a claim without providing the evidence to back it up. Glad we finally got the center of that little shrubbery maze.

I dunno man I'm reading about genetic innoculation.
en.wikipedia.org...

This is an excellent window into your reading comprehension skills. The genetic inoculation section of the page you linked has nothing to do with our DNA or herpes being a genetic defect in the way you have defined it via Pye to this point. You googled herpes, clicked on a link, saw the words "genetic inoculation" and assumed it must support your stance without reading or understanding the content. Bravo.

If herpes were a genetic defect, it would be possible for a person to have herpes without ever being exposed to the virus, which doesn't happen. Once again, you're making things up to support your case with no facts to support them.

Are you ever going to get tired of telling lies?

reply to post by HappyBunny

looking up is one thing, these people described them and we couldn't confirm the truth until we sent probes out which validated the ancient descriptions. How did they know about the compass directions thousands of years before the compass was invented? Not only did they specific knowledge of planets and stars but they actually say people from other worlds came down here and helped them build a civilization. You don't sound like you've spent any time looking into the details that are out there.

Originally posted by bottleslingguy
reply to post by HappyBunny

 

looking up is one thing, these people described them and we couldn't confirm the truth until we sent probes out which validated the ancient descriptions. How did they know about the compass directions thousands of years before the compass was invented? Not only did they specific knowledge of planets and stars but they actually say people from other worlds came down here and helped them build a civilization. You don't sound like you've spent any time looking into the details that are out there.

These people survived by using the stars as a calender do you think it beyond them to notice one star remains in position. The polar star?

Also you assume Aliens when another world could just as easily mean another advanced culture.

I still cannot see what this has to do with evolution though or an alternative to describe diversity.

Originally posted by bottleslingguy
reply to post by HappyBunny

 

looking up is one thing, these people described them and we couldn't confirm the truth until we sent probes out which validated the ancient descriptions. How did they know about the compass directions thousands of years before the compass was invented? Not only did they specific knowledge of planets and stars but they actually say people from other worlds came down here and helped them build a civilization. You don't sound like you've spent any time looking into the details that are out there.

They didn't get our solar system right for crying out loud!! Sitchin completely misinterpreted the ancient texts. Take the Berlin seal for example, he got that one completely wrong

So enlighten us, what's your proof that the were visited by aliens? Because the Sumerians for sure didn't talk about any aliens. Don't believe me? You can search every single translated Sumerian text for free thanks to Oxford University: LINK

Show me one single sentence that would prove aliens visited them.

reply to post by iterationzero

So he's making a claim without providing the evidence to back it up. Glad we finally got the center of that little shrubbery maze.

You mean the same way evolutionists aren't able to back up microevolution and macroevolution in humans, ya I'll agree. On the other hand 4000 is a big list and I'm not concearned about breaking it down so that I know the details, I think the point is that whoever did it, either didn't know how to handle DNA or did it on purpose to make us sick. Which once again shows me that you completly missed the whole point.

This is an excellent window into your reading comprehension skills. The genetic inoculation section of the page you linked has nothing to do with our DNA or herpes being a genetic defect in the way you have defined it via Pye to this point. You googled herpes, clicked on a link, saw the words "genetic inoculation" and assumed it must support your stance without reading or understanding the content. Bravo.

Oh well call me stupid I guess I made an assumption that DNA was linked to genetics.

If herpes were a genetic defect, it would be possible for a person to have herpes without ever being exposed to the virus, which doesn't happen. Once again, you're making things up to support your case with no facts to support them.

OMG, you totally missed whats going on here. Are you sure you aren't on some remote island kept from the population? Herpes and HPV which you totally ignored, were just examples, PYe never gave a list silly goose.

Are you ever going to get tired of telling lies?

Well as soon as I tell one please fell free to correct me. I'm still waiting.

reply to post by itsthetooth

You mean the same way evolutionists aren't able to back up microevolution and macroevolution in humans, ya I'll agree. On the other hand 4000 is a big list and I'm not concearned about breaking it down so that I know the details, I think the point is that whoever did it, either didn't know how to handle DNA or did it on purpose to make us sick. Which once again shows me that you completly missed the whole point.

So you don't care about the facts. Good to know.

Oh well call me stupid I guess I made an assumption that DNA was linked to genetics.

Read it again and explain how it says that herpes is a genetic defect, as defined by you via Pye, and that we all carry the genes for it and the rest of the 4000 genetic defects.

OMG, you totally missed whats going on here. Are you sure you aren't on some remote island kept from the population?

Missed what? That you're making things up to try and support your case?

Well as soon as I tell one please fell free to correct me. I'm still waiting.

Go back and read my replies to you posts. I've pointed out several times in the last couple of days where you're simply making things up i.e. telling lies.

reply to post by itsthetooth

You mean the same way evolutionists aren't able to back up microevolution and macroevolution in humans, ya I'll agree.

Your denying of facts is becoming rather silly

Plenty of scientific links completely debunk your above statement. Yet you continue to post your nonsense.

reply to post by MrXYZ

Your denying of facts is becoming rather silly

Silly or what ever, your still not able to provide a reason why its never been observed in humans.

Plenty of scientific links completely debunk your above statement. Yet you continue to post your nonsense.

There has never been a statement made on any of the pages I was directed to, saying that this has been witnessed in humans.

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by MrXYZ

 

Your denying of facts is becoming rather silly

Silly or what ever, your still not able to provide a reason why its never been observed in humans.

Plenty of scientific links completely debunk your above statement. Yet you continue to post your nonsense.

There has never been a statement made on any of the pages I was directed to, saying that this has been witnessed in humans.

But we HAVE observed evolution in humans for crying out loud. What are you talking about???

And the old macro vs micro evolution argument has been debunked so many times, I can't believe you still bring it up when it's a complete and utter nonsense argument: LINK

Of course you're going to ignore those links and facts, just like you continue to ignore anything that goes against your irrational BELIEF.

reply to post by iterationzero

So you don't care about the facts. Good to know.

Just because you were interested in facts that werent presented, does not mean there werent any facts at all.

Read it again and explain how it says that herpes is a genetic defect, as defined by you via Pye, and that we all carry the genes for it and the rest of the 4000 genetic defects.

.Well again Pye never stated herpes was part of the list, it was an example on my part, just like HPV.

Missed what? That you're making things up to try and support your case?

No I think once again is your just pissy that Pye doesn't share the ONLY facts that you have an interest, in other words the video wasn't made to fit YOUR needs.

Go back and read my replies to you posts. I've pointed out several times in the last couple of days where you're simply making things up i.e. telling lies.

I see, so you probably believe that since Pye hasn't shared the things your interested in, he's lying too. Its all about you Itera.

reply to post by MrXYZ

But we HAVE observed evolution in humans for crying out loud. What are you talking about???

And the old macro vs micro evolution argument has been debunked so many times, I can't believe you still bring it up when it's a complete and utter nonsense argument: LINK

Of course you're going to ignore those links and facts, just like you continue to ignore anything that goes against your irrational BELIEF.

I know the OP was can you prove evolution wrong, And I think I have done more than a fair job here. I have asked over a dozen times for someone to explain to me why evolution has never been observed in humans and why we have never found one shred of bones or species that prove transgression. I'm not able to get anyone to touch this, and I think I know why. There is no answer.
Probably just like there has never been an author debunking the whole idea of god being a space alien, or that we have been visited before by other life.
The silence says it all.

reply to post by itsthetooth


We have supplied numerous times examples of transitional species fossils. What exactly are you looking for, a fossil of one species giving birth to another? Also, if you had actually read the OP you would know he was asking for people to provide an alternative explanation to the diversity of species. For some reason the title got changed to "Can you prove evolution wrong?*" That is not the OP's title, it does not convey the purpose of the thread, and it has caused its fair share of problems in this thread. All of this you would have know if you had actually read anything in the thread before posting.

reply to post by itsthetooth

Just because you were interested in facts that werent presented, does not mean there werent any facts at all.

You have yet to present the facts that support your claims of interventionism.

Well again Pye never stated herpes was part of the list, it was an example on my part, just like HPV.

By all means, keep confirming that you've repeatedly just made things up like you are here.

No I think once again is your just pissy that Pye doesn't share the ONLY facts that you have an interest, in other words the video wasn't made to fit YOUR needs.

Pye hasn't produced the facts that support his claims, either.

I see, so you probably believe that since Pye hasn't shared the things your interested in, he's lying too. Its all about you Itera.

So when he makes a claim, it's up to his discretion as to whether or not he presents evidence to support that claim, but we're supposed to believe him anyway? Ludicrous.