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.
Actually its your faut for bickering and no keeping by the title. So much so that you even took it upon yourself to rename Target Food.
How would you know its MY PERSONAL ignorance, if you know about it?
Its just a prime example of your childish way to try to cope with being defeated. Because you surely cant win an argument through conventional methods, so you have to create alternate ways to cope with the truth.
Tooth's Folly is an appropriate name and the preferred name for an idea that makes no sense at all and is based on willful lies by its only believer.
But how would you know, its MY ignorance. I take it this is to in depth for you to understand.
It's your ignorance that is the basis of your arguments.
You either did not read the link or were not able to understand the content.
As an example, you stated that Deer experiment with food while your unable to produce any diet that indicates so. You have made an assumption based on your own ignorance, that Deer experiment based on the contents of the diet. The problem that you have totally overlooked is the fact that if anything is listed in a diet, period, its proof that its not experimentation unless its specifically stated. So again you are WRONG.
You also listed that the bear has alternate diets. The problem is that you need to first ask yourself how you came into posession of this knowledge. The fact is that you looked it up. Which means its already known, which means its all standard part of their diet, which means that your once again WRONG. I had already indicated that demographics can alter diet based on whats available and whats not, however given the choice, the species would eat the same thing, and thats a fact jack.
But how would you know, its MY ignorance. I take it this is to in depth for you to understand.
Deer experiment with food regardless of the abundance available to them.
Then the question becomes what exactly do you mean by experiment. And where did you learn of this? From a magazine, the bible, the internet? Whats experimenting to you? Is it because he eats such a large selection of different things? Or is it that he takes a small bite out of one thing and then trys another?
The point is simple and I will repeat it for you since you refuse to learn. According to you definition of a diet, eating anything in a diet would not be experimenting. I've pointed that out repeatedly. Thanks for repeating what I have been saying. Here you admit that your question is nonsense.
Deer experiment with food regardless of the abundance available to them.
Hoax hell. I have always posted that demographics can limit the choices of a diet. How on earth would you expect a bear to eat salmon if he doesn't live around any water? DUH.
False. Here you lie. You admitted that not all bear have the same diet.
Why the constant lying? The answer is that Tooth's Folly is a lie. You are posting a hoax at ATS which is against the T&C.
Evolution is clearly a hoax. No one has ever produced evidence that a species changes into another species. No one has ever produced evidence that we share a common ancestor with apes. It's such a cheap crock, and you buy it, hook line and sinker.
Clearly, the link was over your head. Too bad, but if you try again you might be able to learn the material.
That would be because no one has proven me to be lying about anything, and in fact I have owned up to providing enough valuable information that proves my point to be the truth.
TOOTH, YOU ARE RUINING THIS SUB-FORUM FOR THE MANY READERS OF ATS.
MODS - I AM SURPRISED YOU ALL CONTINUE TO ALLOW TOOTH TO LIE, AND LIE, AND LIE, AND LIE SOME MORE.
Please clean up this forum, mods.
I don't care if you put a dirty diaper out there and they eat it, there is an obvious difference between domesticated animals, or animals that we feed, versus what they eat in the wild.
Just because I'm able to get my parakeet to eat top ramon doesn't mean hes experimenting with food.
Due to the fact that you know what the deer eat, that means its in his known diet, moreso that its probably in the fact that hes an herbivore, which usually means they eat most things in that group. Simply means we know that he eats these things, therefore hes not experimenting.
I don't know if you have caught on at this point what this exactly means, but unless an animal is starving, we always know what he typically eats, therefore there can't be such a thing as an experimental diet. Epic fail.
Again I can feed my parakeet top ramon, that first of all doesn't mean that its food that is good for him, or that its food he prefers, or that its a second choice by any means. All it means is that I introduced it to him, probably at a time that he was hungry, and he tried it. But I had to practically put it in his mouth otherwise he had no interest in it.
If you dictate what a animal eats, that by no means indicates that its his target food. If he chooses what your offerng over his typicall food that either means that the new food is closer to his target food, or your introducing it at a time that he is hungry. The only reason an animal would quit a regular diet for new food and refuse to go back to the old food is because the new food is closer to his target food.
Animals will automatically choose the closest food they can find to whats suppose to be thier target food. This is also why a starving animal will eat just about anything, out of desperation they still have an order in what they are looking for.
Then the question becomes what exactly do you mean by experiment. And where did you learn of this? From a magazine, the bible, the internet? Whats experimenting to you? Is it because he eats such a large selection of different things? Or is it that he takes a small bite out of one thing and then trys another?
Hoax hell. I have always posted that demographics can limit the choices of a diet. How on earth would you expect a bear to eat salmon if he doesn't live around any water? DUH.
Evolution is clearly a hoax. No one has ever produced evidence that a species changes into another species. No one has ever produced evidence that we share a common ancestor with apes. It's such a cheap crock, and you buy it, hook line and sinker.
There isn't even any evidence that a species could change into another species if it wanted to.
If species evolved the way you believe they do, our DNA would sure in the hell look a lot different than it does and we would have proof in that DNA of evolving from other species, but we don't.
For example humans have a rare blood type that isn't found on any other living thing on this planet. Where the hell did that come from. Are you going to tell me that blood types evolve too. Cause if you are, you need to rush down to your local hospital and inform them that while we have never had any new emerging blood types your sure it was evolution that caused this.
We have to many species that had to have evolved correct the first time with no mistakes, with changes that clearly couldn't have happened with one ancestor. It's just not possible.
In addition we would see new species popping up all the time, but since we have been on the look out, aside from some basic changes in viruses, and small organisims, that can easily be understood through adaptation not evolution.
Evolution would have to be a super intense master mind to make the changes to life that it does. Or if you want to go with the thought that its not a living being, its just a process, there is no proof that all said changes are all a part of this giant theory known as evolution, there is simply no proof, other than in the authors mind.
Evolution has the ability to create over a billion species, but its not called a creator, ya right, what you smoking?
Evolution has the ability to make changes to DNA which is actually a tricky process even by todays standards, and requires lab technicians with sophisticated equipment, along with the know how, but evolution knows how to do it all naturally with no brains behind it, right, what you smoking?
That would be because no one has proven me to be lying about anything, and in fact I have owned up to providing enough valuable information that proves my point to be the truth.
Who in their right mind would make such a claim, you do know I was being sarcastic?
You lied about species not being able to change into other species.
You claimed that a caterpillar changing into a butterfly was an example of a species changing into another species. You stated that while being adamant that no one had ever observed a species changing into another species.
That has to be one of the most amazing lies.
It's no longer on me once you started to answer about it. Besides I never wrote anything called Tooth's Folly.
The onus is on you to clarify Tooth's Folly. You tell us what you mean by experiment.
So as a first hand observer, your claiming to have a preconcieved diet about all the species your talking about, so much so that you just automatically know what they are suppose to eat. I call BS on this.
Where did I learn about animals experimenting with food? First hand observation. You have zero first hand knowledge of these issues, which is why you are 99.9999% wrong.
I'm not working with or making any claims about anything called Tooths folly.
You still need to provide the first piece of evidence to support Tooth's Folly.
I don't have a folly. All units of a species do eat the same food, and just because male and female mosquitoes don't first of all doesn't mean I'm wrong, thats why I said all units of a species, as in male units or female units. Your welcome to go back and read what I wrote and see for yourself. Even if I was wrong, which I'm not, mosquitoes don't speak for the rest of all species as they do. Again your wrong.
Thus you admit that you repeatedly lie about your folly. You have repeatedly stated that all members of a specie eat the same food. That is a lie, not a mistaken because right here you show that you are aware of this.
You are promoting a hoax.
Evolution might be falsly used by science but I'm not aware of anything.
Once again you demonstrate that you do not know what evolution is as used by science.
Thats such a loaded crock of crap, DNA does NOT support the theory of evolution, if it did, you and I wouldn't be having this discussion right now. There is NO PROOF that any changes EVER found are part of an organised process called evolution.
More unsubstantiated gibberish about the DNA being different. There is ample evidence in DNA of evolution.
Your evolution is sounding more and more like a replacement for what would be a god.
More argument from personal ignorance. Humans evolve. Part of that change can be blood types.
Because their DNA never indicates so.
New species are discovered all of the time. How do you know those are not newly evolved species?
The only realm that evolution has in science is in the pretend corner.
Again you show that you have no idea what evolution is according to science.
I know evolution better than you do, and IMO, it would have to be a super genius to pull off the miracles that it does.
Again you show that you are clueless as to what evolution is.
Evolution is not used in science other than it being mistaken for adaptability.
Clueless with each part of the post. Please take the time to learn the meaning of evolution as used in science to avoid posting long winded meaningless nonsense.
Forcing a parakeet to eat ramon is not the same as experimenting, I can see why you totally don't get this.
Of course the parakeet is experimenting with food if they eat ramen. That would be an instance of experimenting when NOT starving. You proved yourself wrong. Not the first time you've done it.
Nope, it just tells me that you didn't understand it in the begining, and that you still don't. Don't try to tell me I have my own definition wrong, YOU DIDNT MAKE IT UP, I DID.
You are violating your own definition of diet. Not surprised. You continue to lie in almost every post.
Only in your mind, because you would honestly think that force feeding an animal would be the same as him choosing the food. I can see now why your so off on all of this. You don't have a clue.
Your own parakeet example proves you are wrong.
Which happens to be the epic fail in your belief that species will just eat what ever. You should be starting to realize now not only that your wrong, but the biggest reason that proves you wong.
Animals cannot tell if food is good them. I doubt you can tell if it is good for the parakeet.
Thats because you failed to understand something else I pointed out weeks ago, and that is that any species that is not eating target food, is in a phase of hunger. There is a reason why its called a phase of hunger, can you figure it out.
So now you have no idea if the parakeet was hungry or not? Now you want to back out of your little story. Why bring it up in the first place? It seems that you just want your little tale to end up being a meaningless tale. That matches what you normally write.
I don't have, nor have a written a folly, thats all in your imagination, something that evolutionists frequently over use. Target Food is not in abundance on this planet, thats for sure.
There is no such thing as target food.If you think there is you need to present at least one piece of evidence. Right now all we have is your folly, Tooth's Folly.
Who in their right mind would make such a claim, you do know I was being sarcastic?
Species don't change into another species but it has to be your best example so far.
So from this point forward I'm going to hold you responsible for trying to present it as though they change into another species.