A debate for all....

[Ameeratul Layl]

:sl:


So, how many of you believe that we evolved from chimps?

What are your reasons?


:w:
Sr Ameeratul layls friend.

[Nawal89]

I do not beleive we evolved from chimps. I came from Adam and Hawwaa. :p

[habibee]

I do not beleive we evolved from chimps. I came from Adam and Hawwaa. :p

yeah neither do i, agree with the sister above.:)

[Ameeratul Layl]

:sl:

For those of you who are non muslims and do believe in this chimp business. Why is it then that the chimps that are out there now...jumping from tree to tree have not become humans yet?

:w:
Ameeratul layls friend

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[Ameeratul Layl]

:sl:

Please remember to state ur reasons. JazakAllah.
:w:
Ameeratul layls friend

[Silver Pearl]

Sister it is a big misconception held that we come from chimps. The theory says nothing of such thing, instead it poses that both humans and chimps have a common ancestor that does not mean that humans have originated from chimps. So this idea of humans coming from chimps is false anyways and is refuted by the theory itself. No one in their right mind would claim such absurdity seeing as they would have no evidence or anything to ‘back’ them up.

:wasalamex

[czgibson]

Greetings,

So, how many of you believe that we evolved from chimps?

No-one, as far as I can tell. So, apparently the debate is over.

It's remarkable how many people on the forum seem to have that misconception. Hopefully Silver Pearl's comment will help to set that straight, but I've got to be honest, I reckon someone will probably say it again within a week or so.

Peace

[The Ruler]

No-one, as far as I can tell. So, apparently the debate is over.

nope it is not over yet....because if humans and chimps have the same ancestors, it is sort of like evaluatimg from them isnt it?

like for example, years and years later, i would obviously become an ancestor right? and im sure that the generations after me would not become some other species. for my genes are carried on and mutation could happen but that is quite unlikely....even if mutation does occur, i dont think it would make a great change as to make a human turn into a beast.

:w:

[j4763]

Well i think we came from chimps/apes.

Why haven't chimps evolved into humans... well because of there environment of course. Why do you think blacks have dark skin and whites have light skin... because of there evironment!

[The Ruler]

Well i think we came from chimps/apes.

Why haven't chimps evolved into humans... well because of there environment of course. Why do you think blacks have dark skin and whites have light skin... because of there evironment!

so u mean dat environment can create a big change in generations to come? :confused:

the matter of black and white skin is not because of the environment because you will find that african people that have lived in the UK for...say...1 generation, still have not managed to get fair skin. (im not tryin to b offensive) :rollseyes

:w:

[j4763]

Oh no this change in skin colour hasn't occurred over a mere 100 years or so. Im talking about over 100,000 years.

Why esle would we have different skin colours?

[czgibson]

Greetings,

I reckon someone will probably say it again within a week or so.

I was overestimating massively - it only took five minutes. Oh well.

Peace

[j4763]

People found living in hot countries have darker skin to help them protect themselves from the sun, people living in colder countries have lighter skin and need less proctection from the sun. Same as if you take a load of chimps and place them in a flat area, over many (1000's) of years they will (i beleave) start to walk more up right.

[The Ruler]

Oh no this change in skin colour hasn't occurred over a mere 100 years or so. Im talking about over 100,000 years.

Why esle would we have different skin colours?

hmmmm... doesnt science say that our skin colour is in our genes??:rollseyes

:w:

[azim]

As-salamu alaykum bro's and sisters.

Although this is a good topic of debate, it's a bit improper. The debate of evolution really lies in complex biology, and if we're going to fairly discuss evolution, we have to discuss the complex biology.

My own view regarding evolution is that it is possible in Islam (bar humans, since we are from Adam and Eve as stated in the Quran). So animals could have evolved from simpler animals etc... That said, there are major flaws in the theory of evolution that prevent it from being completely proven (in its current form), which is why scientists have such a hard time from creationists. As muslims, we don't have the full truth on the issue and are not really experts of it in any sense - thus, rather than trying to disprove it (which is beyond our capacity to do), we should rather make people aware of the flaws in the theory of creation. This then awakens people to the fact that evolution isn't a done and dusted deal where scientists have proven God doesn't exist, rather it is a theory that tries to explain how complex organisms exist on Earth, but in no way or form, cuts God out of the picture.

Insha'Allah I'll post some threads where the flaws have been discussed soon.

Salam.

[DaNgErOuS MiNdS]

how come some chimps r r still chimps???

[j4763]

hmmmm... doesnt science say that our skin colour is in our genes??

Well sure they are but them genes had to develope from somewhere. Or did Adam and Eve had children of different colours?

how come some chimps r r still chimps???

Why haven't chimps evolved into humans... well because of there environment of course.

(well these are my views anyway :okay: )

[The Ruler]

Well sure they are but them genes had to develope from somewhere. Or did Adam and Eve had children of different colours?

mutation duh!! :rollseyes

:w:

[j4763]

mutation duh!! :rollseyes

:w:

Well what is mutation if its not evolution duh! :rollseyes

[The Ruler]

i said mutation but i didnt mean dat we cud actually turn 4m monkeys into humans thru mutation :rollseyes

:w:

[j4763]

Why not, if we can "change colour" through mutation. What are the set limits to human/animal mutation?

[The Ruler]

mutation is occured by ultra violet rays rite? dat cums 4m da sun...

so sciece says dat da ozone layer is der to stop dose rays...

now dat the ozone layer is thinnin its a different story. but dose billion years ago, im sure it was thick enuf to protect da world....a slight rays could change da body features, but to change a monkey into a man!?!

:w:

[root]

perhaps you should think about evolution this way, 10% of Europeans are immune to HIV (Aids) so this 10% cannot contract the disease & the mutated gene is known as CCR5-D32. The mutation is beleived to occur in response to pestilences such as the Great Plague of London in 1665-66.

This 10% base figure will over time increase as the subsequent generations pass on this HIV blocking gene. If each holder of this gene goes forth and multiplies then the 10% figure will increase amongst the population. (this is evolution evolving right now)

Now consider an hypothosis. If aids was as deadly as it is but could infect humans as easily as the common cold,

1. Would it force man into extinction?

2. Would anyone be surprised if all humans in 1000 years time "ALL" carried this gene under this given hypothosis?

Further, if you think about it your DNA will not match 100% other human beings (for a start you probably do not have the gene that these 10% of europeans have) and you may well have a closer genetic match with a chimpanzee than to me or (my chimpanzees)!!!!

[Mainul_Islam]

root, that is a weak arguement

please explain how single-celled organisms evolved into such complex living beings with the mind of its own. u may be able to explain some concepts with theories u dont have an explanation for everything of evolution

can u tell me what was the need to evolve into mammals from reptiles? if it was something important, why dont other reptiles evolve too? why are some creatures exactly the same as their ancestors were millions of years ago? can u name some species (animals) that is going thru the process of evolution (having features different from the rest of their kind)? most importantly, how did the VERY FIRST living thing come into being?

[j4763]

mutation is occured by ultra violet rays rite? dat cums 4m da sun...

so sciece says dat da ozone layer is der to stop dose rays...

now dat the ozone layer is thinnin its a different story. but dose billion years ago, im sure it was thick enuf to protect da world....a slight rays could change da body features, but to change a monkey into a man!?!

So do you beleive that these minor rays also help change the way certain race's look (face features). Black people tend to have wider nose's, thicker lips. White's have thinner lips and thinner hair. Chinise/Jap's have narrow eye's.
Were all these to do with the sun's rays and evolotion played no part?

[Mainul_Islam]

mutation always comes out as a bad result... i've never seen or even heard of anything that mutated into a more advanced and better life form... mutation only distorts the genes and makes the creature abnormal, so u can eliminate mutation as being a possibility

[j4763]

Brings us back to evolution then (regarding skin colour).

[alishba]

i think we werent chimps or monkeys

[azim]

Brings us back to evolution then (regarding skin colour).

Changing skin colour is adapating, not evolution. Evolving means to gain abilities and traits that the predecessors did not have. Darker skin colour is not evolution, because skin is still skin whether black or white. It would be evolution if people living in hotter countries actually had something that people living in cooler countries didn't have that was substantial enough to class them as two different species.

PS: You can not say 'black skin' is a trait that people living in hot colours gained because the early humans were from Africa (or India or Arabia/Persia - the places were the earliest human remains were found).

[moujahid]

this guy definitely was not my ancestor...
its probably some evolutionist's great grand father;D

:astagfiru

[Mainul_Islam]

whats sad is churches are accepting evolution out of fear of Christianity being portrayed wrong just because scientists are backing up the theory; churches dont want to be seen scientifically wrong again like in Galeleo's time, so they accept the theory ahead of time before even being proven

[cleo]

If there was a possibilty of evolving from a chimp, why are there chimps still on earth, wouldn't we all be chimps?

[cleo]

I found this site, for relaxation in this termoil that is created, to fear. I found it peaceful and beautiful.....www.thedailymotivator.com...

[root]

root, that is a weak arguement

It's not an arguement nor was it debatable. It was a fact and a given hypothosis

please explain how single-celled organisms evolved into such complex living beings with the mind of its own.

Do you really think I am going to explain the theory of evolution, should you not do that for yourself and then discuss any "issues" you may have.

u may be able to explain some concepts with theories u dont have an explanation for everything of evolution

Like any science, your right to say we don't know everything.

can u tell me what was the need to evolve into mammals from reptiles? if it was something important

Firstly, that is a nonsensical question. Evolution is about gene-flow and adaptation to a given environment.

,why dont other reptiles evolve too?

Again, evolution is about adaptation to a given environment. Evolutionary change is often very slow and very progressive whilst at times prity rapid.

why are some creatures exactly the same as their ancestors were millions of years ago?

Evolution made a prediction that some species will experience so little change in environment that the species themselves don't evolve a great deal(which by the way includes predators, since new predators also have an impact on evolution).

can u name some species (animals) that is going thru the process of evolution (having features different from the rest of their kind)?

Such a question as this only demonstrates your lack of understanding of evolution, ALL life is going through evolution as we speak. Evolution does not have a finishing point, all life past & present are intermediates?

However, some recent examples are:

http://www.islamicboard.com/comparat...nightmare.html

New study finds natural selection IS a general force behind the formation of new species.

http://www.islamicboard.com/comparat...evolution.html

most importantly, how did the VERY FIRST living thing come into being

The theory of evolution does not seek to answer that question, where life came from and how it started is a big scientific mystery that Abiogenesis seeks to find and answer for including panspermia which is what I personally support as the probable source when found. Evolution is only concerned with how life "Evolved" not how it was "Created"

Panspermia is the hypothesis that the seeds of life are ubiquitous in the universe, that they may have delivered life to Earth, and that they may deliver or have delivered life to other habitable bodies; also the process of such delivery.

[j4763]

Darker skin colour is not evolution, because skin is still skin whether black or white. It would be evolution if people living in hotter countries actually had something that people living in cooler countries didn't have that was substantial enough to class them as two different species.

I think sure find skin is not just skin. Darker skin does protects aganist the sun a lot better than fairer skin (fact). When the Africans moved north into Europe there skin evolved to a lighter shade for the strength of the sun is far less damaging. So people in hotter country's do have something over people who live in cooler countries and vice versa thanks to evolving or as some may call it adapation.

[Cheb]

I am a Muslim and I do believe in evolution. I have not come across anything to suggest that I shouldnt. Evolution has and always will exist because it *needs* to. If it doesnt then it is likely there would be much less species on this earth.
Now do not get me wrong, i do not believe we were chimps (nor do most people) nor do I believe we were Neanderthals at one point. I believe the first actual humans were Adam and Eve and we are their decedents and we have evolved from them.
Now regarding evolution in animals, if you do a little research you would see that it definitely exists. When a certain species is forced to live in an environment that it normally would not be able to live in, assuming it does not go extinct, it will evolve and adapt to its environment. In fact I can go as far as saying dinosaurs have evolved into birds.:X

[cihad]

People found living in hot countries have darker skin to help them protect themselves from the sun, people living in colder countries have lighter skin and need less proctection from the sun. Same as if you take a load of chimps and place them in a flat area, over many (1000's) of years they will (i beleave) start to walk more up right.

so what you are implying is that africans are more 'less human' and more 'chimp' than white/british?

cos some africans still live in the bushes so are they animals

[root]

Abstract:

Skin color is one of the most conspicuous ways in which humans vary and has been widely used to define human races. Here we present new evidence indicating that variations in skin color are adaptive, and are related to the regulation of ultraviolet (UV) radiation penetration in the integument and its direct and indirect effects on fitness. Using remotely sensed data on UV radiation levels, hypotheses concerning the distribution of the skin colors of indigenous peoples relative to UV levels were tested quantitatively in this study for the first time.

The major results of this study are: (1) skin reflectance is strongly correlated with absolute latitude and UV radiation levels. The highest correlation between skin reflectance and UV levels was observed at 545 nm, near the absorption maximum for oxyhemoglobin, suggesting that the main role of melanin pigmentation in humans is regulation of the effects of UV radiation on the contents of cutaneous blood vessels located in the dermis. (2) Predicted skin reflectances deviated little from observed values. (3) In all populations for which skin reflectance data were available for males and females, females were found to be lighter skinned than males. (4) The clinal gradation of skin coloration observed among indigenous peoples is correlated with UV radiation levels and represents a compromise solution to the conflicting physiological requirements of photoprotection and vitamin D synthesis.

The earliest members of the hominid lineage probably had a mostly unpigmented or lightly pigmented integument covered with dark black hair, similar to that of the modern chimpanzee. The evolution of a naked, darkly pigmented integument occurred early in the evolution of the genus Homo. A dark epidermis protected sweat glands from UV-induced injury, thus insuring the integrity of somatic thermoregulation. Of greater significance to individual reproductive success was that highly melanized skin protected against UV-induced photolysis of folate (Branda &Eaton, 1978, Science201, 625–626; Jablonski, 1992, Proc. Australas. Soc. Hum. Biol.5,455–462, 1999, Med. Hypotheses52, 581–582), a metabolite essential for normal development of the embryonic neural tube (Bower & Stanley, 1989, The Medical Journal of Australia150, 613–619; Medical Research Council Vitamin Research Group, 1991, The Lancet338, 31–37) and spermatogenesis (Cosentino et al., 1990, Proc. Natn. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.87, 1431–1435; Mathur et al., 1977, Fertility Sterility28, 1356–1360).

As hominids migrated outside of the tropics, varying degrees of depigmentation evolved in order to permit UVB-induced synthesis of previtamin D3. The lighter color of female skin may be required to permit synthesis of the relatively higher amounts of vitamin D3necessary during pregnancy and lactation.

Skin coloration in humans is adaptive and labile. Skin pigmentation levels have changed more than once in human evolution. Because of this, skin coloration is of no value in determining phylogenetic relationships among modern human groups.

Copyright 2000 Academic Press

so what you are implying is that africans are more 'less human' and more 'chimp' than white/british?

It is a FACT that your genes will probably be more similar to a chimpanzee than mine are to you, and mine will be more of a match to my chimpanzees than yours. Your missing an important point, 98% or thier abouts of a chimpanzee DNA will match yours, further your and mine DNA WILL NOT match 100%!!!! white british DNA will differ from black african DNA. Make no mistake though, we are all HUMAN and one species, prrof of this is within mytocondrial DNA, this is DNA only passed through females and remains unchanged with no mutations for thousands of years.

Mitochondrial Eve is the name given by researchers to the woman who is the most recent common matrilineal ancestor of all living humans. We know about Eve because of mitochondria. Mitochondria are organelles that are only passed from mother to offspring. Each mitochondrion contains Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA), and the comparison of DNA sequences from mtDNA reveals a phylogeny. Based on the molecular clock technique of correlating elapsed time with observed genetic drift, Eve is believed to have lived in a population of humans about 150,000 years ago in Africa.

[Mainul_Islam]

Do you really think I am going to explain the theory of evolution, should you not do that for yourself and then discuss any "issues" you may have.

Like any science, your right to say we don't know everything.

until it is proven, it is still a theory

Firstly, that is a nonsensical question. Evolution is about gene-flow and adaptation to a given environment.

Again, evolution is about adaptation to a given environment. Evolutionary change is often very slow and very progressive whilst at times prity rapid.

evolution theory says that the animals with poor genes die out and the stronger survives. i dont see how a mammal evolves from a reptile and why did it evolve... u can say it was adaption to the environment, but what does environment have to do with reptiles and mammals? why r there both mammals and reptiles in certain areas if reptiles evolved into mammals due to the environment?

The theory of evolution does not seek to answer that question, where life came from and how it started is a big scientific mystery that Abiogenesis seeks to find and answer for including panspermia which is what I personally support as the probable source when found. Evolution is only concerned with how life "Evolved" not how it was "Created"

Panspermia is the hypothesis that the seeds of life are ubiquitous in the universe, that they may have delivered life to Earth, and that they may deliver or have delivered life to other habitable bodies; also the process of such delivery.

the theory of evolution completely denies the existence of God. if evolution cannot explain how the first life form came into being, then the theory itself is & remains defeated

[czgibson]

Greetings,

the theory of evolution completely denies the existence of God. if evolution cannot explain how the first life form came into being, then the theory itself is & remains defeated

I don't know if it does. I know several theists who also believe in evolution.

Peace

[root]

until it is proven, it is still a theory

Perhaps you should firmiliarise yourself to what a theory actually represents:

Theory - A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.

Next time you hear a child being taught that when he drops a stone and it falls to the ground that Gravity is pushing the stone to the ground you can jump right in and say "Ah, but the theory of general relativity is still a theory, until it is proven".

evolution theory says that the animals with poor genes die out and the stronger survives.

I don't accept your point at all. Firstly, evolution is not just about survival of the fittest or most adaptive. Survival of the luckiest is also a strong evolutionary force, the dinasaurs were not weak or less adaptive. Unlucky for them that they were taken to extinction by a massive meteorite strike. Using terms such as "poor genes" is far too genarel statement.

i dont see how a mammal evolves from a reptile and why did it evolve... u can say it was adaption to the environment, but what does environment have to do with reptiles and mammals?

The environment had everything to do with it. By the end of the cretacious period we can identify 15 mammal families were in existence, at the end of this period came another mass extinction (The K-T Event) which wiped out all dinasaurs including the winged reptiles Pterosaurs, All these species dying out left huge niche vacancies in the habitat. Following this disaster it was the mammals alone of the remaining groups of animals who diversified to take advantage of this new situation. Over the next 15 million years the remaining 10 mammal families (five became extinct with the dinosaurs during the K-T event) expanded to become 78 families by the early Eocene. The number of genera increased from about 40 to over 200 during the same time. This sudden massive increase in species from a single stem group is an example of what is called 'adaptive radiation'.

When reptiles move into new niches and evolve by adapting to a new niche, eventually they reach a point that they can no longer interbreed with thier own group that was left behind, this important milestone has now been proven as the first evolutionary step to "branching" off from one species to another. This isolation of species and adaptation can occur for a number of reasons, and is now proven to be true.

http://www.islamicboard.com/comparat...evolution.html

why r there both mammals and reptiles in certain areas if reptiles evolved into mammals due to the environment?

Reptiles remaining within a given habitat won't evolve a great deal, reptiles moving into new vacant niches will, just like the bull frog is evolving right now: Further proof of adapttion to new niches:

http://www.islamicboard.com/comparat...nightmare.html

the theory of evolution completely denies the existence of God. if evolution cannot explain how the first life form came into being, then the theory itself is & remains defeated

That is like saying if the theory of general relativity cannot explain the Big Bang then it remains defeated. Your assumption here is simply because you don't understand what the evolution theory covers that you claim it is defeated, others would call that living in ignorance.

[Lush]

Hmmm.

Well, personally, my belief in evolution never clashed with my belief in God. I guess I always thought that evolution was God's tool. My mother, on the other hand, she'd give you an earful on the subject! :giggling: We debate with her all the time. Then I call her a crazy Christian fundie, and head for bed...

[Cheb]

Hmmm.

Well, personally, my belief in evolution never clashed with my belief in God. I guess I always thought that evolution was God's tool. My mother, on the other hand, she'd give you an earful on the subject! :giggling: We debate with her all the time. Then I call her a crazy Christian fundie, and head for bed...

Yup me neither. I really see no reason why we cant believe in evolution and God. They do not contradict each other. I think people dont want to believe in evolution because they only "fear" that it may be contradicting their belief in God. I think they should study it more and see that it really does exist.

[root]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lush
Hmmm.

Well, personally, my belief in evolution never clashed with my belief in God. I guess I always thought that evolution was God's tool. My mother, on the other hand, she'd give you an earful on the subject! We debate with her all the time. Then I call her a crazy Christian fundie, and head for bed...

Yup me neither. I really see no reason why we cant believe in evolution and God. They do not contradict each other. I think people dont want to believe in evolution because they only "fear" that it may be contradicting their belief in God. I think they should study it more and see that it really does exist.

I agree with these points, and applaud you. People would do well to remember that evolution only describes how life evolved. The biggest mystery is still how life began and I think we will get an answer to that within my lifetime. However, far from answering the question it will raise more questions than answers, personally I think Panspermia will eventually win the day.

[Cheb]

I agree with these points, and applaud you. People would do well to remember that evolution only describes how life evolved. The biggest mystery is still how life began and I think we will get an answer to that within my lifetime. However, far from answering the question it will raise more questions than answers, personally I think Panspermia will eventually win the day.

Thanks...but you were joking about Panspermia right?:? :rollseyes :skeleton:

[root]

Thanks...but you were joking about Panspermia right?

Pamspermia - It holds that life on Earth was seeded from space, and that life's evolution to higher forms depends on genetic programs that come from space. (It accepts the Darwinian account of evolution that does not require new genetic programs.) It is a wholly scientific, testable theory for which evidence is accumulating.

Recent exploration, (deep impact & stardust) is giving us a greater understanding and the probability grows from strength to strength. Science works on probabilities, my money is on cosmic ancestory itself or at the very least the raw materials being formed and delivered in space.

I will even give you religous creationists a break, the deep impact probe detected "clay" in the comet of deep impacts target and I know how much Islam regards creation from clay? Amino-acids (fundamental to the building blocks of life) were found and a considerable ammount of water. Everything apparantly life would require. Additionally, the good old ("classed as non living") virus has recently been implecated as having a big role in the cosmic spread of life, don't look to the past for answers, look to the here and now?

Deep Impact

http://deepimpact.jpl.nasa.gov/press/pr-latest.html

This is information that is brand new to mankind, I find that quite spectacular........

Results from the first studies of cometary samples returned to Earth by NASA's Stardust spacecraft is the subject of a news conference at 3 p.m. EST, Monday, March 13, from NASA's Johnson Space Center, Houston

Landing on valentines day, the first cosmic particle was heart shaped (is this a miracle :-) Just think about the odds that on valentines day the first particle was heart shaped!!!

[Christian_dove]

Well i think we came from chimps/apes.

Why haven't chimps evolved into humans... well because of there environment of course. Why do you think blacks have dark skin and whites have light skin... because of there evironment!

Yeah, but the difference in skin (and other things) between white/dark people is less than 0,01 % of our genes.. Therefor there is not much of a difference.. The difference between man and ape, however... Is slightly more...

Maybe we came from a mix between neandertals and aliens. ;D

Well, okay, it was merely a suggestion...

[j4763]

Yeah, but the difference in skin (and other things) between white/dark people is less than 0,01 % of our genes.. Therefor there is not much of a difference.. The difference between man and ape, however... Is slightly more...

Maybe we came from a mix between neandertals and aliens. ;D

Well, okay, it was merely a suggestion...

Yeah the difference is 1% between man and ape. Man has only walked the earth for approx 160,000 years yet in that time there's been 0,01% change. But apes have been around between 22 million and 5.5 million years so gives plenty of time to evolve more.

[The Ruler]

^ yes bul if u say dat UV rays caused da genes to ulter...science has proven dat the ozone layer is becumin thinner day by day...n so more UV rays r reaching the earth. therefore, say 22 million years ago, think about how think the ozone layer was?! as a recult less UV rays reched the surface of the earth causing LESS mutation.

:w:

[Mainul_Islam]

Yup me neither. I really see no reason why we cant believe in evolution and God. They do not contradict each other. I think people dont want to believe in evolution because they only "fear" that it may be contradicting their belief in God. I think they should study it more and see that it really does exist.

:sl: brother...

evolution contradicts Judiasm, Christianity, AND Islam--saying that our ancestors were apes and not Adam & Eve

[czgibson]

Greetings,

:sl: brother...

evolution contradicts Judiasm, Christianity, AND Islam--saying that our ancestors were apes and not Adam & Eve

That's not the same as contradicting belief in god though, is it?

I think Cheb is right - you can believe in both creationism and evolution. If you believe in god, then it's possible god created the universe and used evolution as the method of developing life forms.

Peace

[Cheb]

:sl: brother...

evolution contradicts Judiasm, Christianity, AND Islam--saying that our ancestors were apes and not Adam & Eve

Come on now that is not what evolution is about. We can still believe in evolution AND the fact that we came from Adam and Eve or Hawwa. See I dont believe that we were apes, and neither do most people either. That is actually a misconception.
Anyway the first humans were Adam and Eve and we have evolved from them. It is likely that we have not evolved too much because we may not have been on this earth for more than a few hundred thousand years. As for other creatures that have been here since life began, it is impossible that they did not evolve or they would not have survived. Creatures evolve out of necessity. God uses evolution to insure that there will be enough life on this planet. Remember evolution does not only apply for humans, and there are only a few misinformed people that believe that we evolved from apes.

[czgibson]

Greetings Cheb,

I agree with your point earlier, as I said, but I'm a bit confused by your understanding of evolution.

Come on now that is not what evolution is about. We can still believe in evolution AND the fact that we came from Adam and Eve or Hawwa. See I dont believe that we were apes, and neither do most people either. That is actually a misconception.

Humans are actually classified by biologists as being apes, i.e., we are apes now.

Ape

Anyway the first humans were Adam and Eve and we have evolved from them.

In what way have we evolved from them? I thought Adam and Eve were meant to be humans in every respect.

It is likely that we have not evolved too much because we may not have been on this earth for more than a few hundred thousand years.

And before that...?

Remember evolution does not only apply for humans, and there are only a few misinformed people that believe that we evolved from apes.

Right. We didn't evolve from them, we share a common ancestor with them.

Peace

[Cheb]

Greetings

In what way have we evolved from them? I thought Adam and Eve were meant to be humans in every respect.



And before that...?

Humans still evolved after Adam and Eve. We are smaller, live shorter lives, and have different colors to suit our environment. We evolve just like all animals and plants do. However so far we have the least need to evolve than all other living things. We adapt using artificial means now which will greatly slow down our evolution.
Before Adam and Eve was all other life. Dinosaurs, apes, etc.

[root]

^ yes bul if u say dat UV rays caused da genes to ulter...science has proven dat the ozone layer is becumin thinner day by day...n so more UV rays r reaching the earth. therefore, say 22 million years ago, think about how think the ozone layer was?! as a recult less UV rays reched the surface of the earth causing LESS mutation.

Mutation due to UV only represents a small occurance. Mutations mainly occur during where the genome is copied during reproduction (Vertical Transfer Mutations). Additionally mutations also occur from one organism to another (Horizontal Transfer).

Thier is no evidence to support your hypothosis that mutation rates are in decline within the human species or any other species.

J4763 - Yeah the difference is 1% between man and ape. Man has only walked the earth for approx 160,000 years yet in that time there's been 0,01% change. But apes have been around between 22 million and 5.5 million years so gives plenty of time to evolve more.

I would be interested in your statistical data. Man is proven to have been on the earth 40,000 years earlier than you are stating

Source:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4269299.stm

I think your other data is questionable to, since are you classing "apes" as part of new world monkeys or indeed old world monkeys which were our closest ancestors before the rise of the ape? Can you provide a source for your figures please out of interest

[root]

Humans still evolved after Adam and Eve. We are smaller, live shorter lives,

Are you able to provide any scientific source to support this claim?

We evolve just like all animals and plants do. However so far we have the least need to evolve than all other living things.

This is not true, if you think it is please provide your source.

We adapt using artificial means now which will greatly slow down our evolution.

Same as above, sources please for this far fetched claim

Before Adam and Eve was all other life. Dinosaurs, apes, etc.

So what date did Adam & eve exist, and can I have the source where apes and dinosaurs co-existed.

[j4763]

Mutation due to UV only represents a small occurance. Mutations mainly occur during where the genome is copied during reproduction (Vertical Transfer Mutations). Additionally mutations also occur from one organism to another (Horizontal Transfer).

Thier is no evidence to support your hypothosis that mutation rates are in decline within the human species or any other species.



I would be interested in your statistical data. Man is proven to have been on the earth 40,000 years earlier than you are stating

Source:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4269299.stm

Ok 40,000 years early than i stated, still a lot less than primates have been around.

I think your other data is questionable to, since are you classing "apes" as part of new world monkeys or indeed old world monkeys which were our closest ancestors before the rise of the ape? Can you provide a source for your figures please out of interest

I guess i should use perhaps the word primate? Cant find the source (somewhere on google), but the point is humans have evolved in the little time we've been here.

[root]

Agreed;

200.000 years proven presence of Homo-sapiens

[czgibson]

Greetings,

Humans still evolved after Adam and Eve. We are smaller, live shorter lives, and have different colors to suit our environment.

I second root's request for evidence to back up the claim that Adam and Eve had longer lives than we do now. In fact our lifespans have increased due to advances in medicine.

Before Adam and Eve was all other life. Dinosaurs, apes, etc.

Apes are still around, of course. Does the fact that the dinosaurs became extinct around 65 million years ago help to pinpoint the time frame when Adam and Eve lived?

Also, for the record, could you say whether you accept biologists' classification of humans as belonging to the ape family?

Peace

[sevenxtrust]

Personally, I think if evolution was true people would still be walking out of the woods, and there would be no Monkeys left. But I do believe in Micro evolution..huge difference.

[Cheb]

Greetings,


I second root's request for evidence to back up the claim that Adam and Eve had longer lives than we do now. In fact our lifespans have increased due to advances in medicine.

This is from what I was tought as a Muslim so you wont believe in that anyway :)

Apes are still around, of course. Does the fact that the dinosaurs became extinct around 65 million years ago help to pinpoint the time frame when Adam and Eve lived?

why do you say that?

Also, for the record, could you say whether you accept biologists' classification of humans as belonging to the ape family?

Peace

No I dont. The ape family is one thing and humans are another. Humans are a unique species that do not "belong" with any family but the human family and the decendents of Adam and Eve.
Peace.

[czgibson]

Greetings,

This is from what I was tought as a Muslim so you wont believe in that anyway :)

So there's no evidence for this outside of religious tradition?

why do you say that?

Because I'm curious about when Adam and Eve existed. Aren't you?

No I dont. The ape family is one thing and humans are another. Humans are a unique species that do not "belong" with any family but the human family and the decendents of Adam and Eve.

It surprises me that you say you believe in evolution when you disagree with this fundamental of biology.

Peace

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

So there's no evidence for this outside of religious tradition?

How can there be historical evidence for the lifespan of people who cannot be confirmed historically?

Anyway, here's some interesting info that I came across with a quick search, although I don't know how credible it is. Vadim Chernobrov writes:

Archaeologists dug out skeletons and remains of the people who lived much longer than 100-200 years, but official science ignored these findings, and so called "forbidden archaeology" studies them.

In the Soviet Union a human bone was dug out and researched by the specialist on skull reconstruction Victor Zvyagin. The result of the research was amazing - the ancient person having this bone, lived for 1,500 years!

According to scholar Ivan Filimonenko from Moscow, human life duration has been reduced by radioactive potassium. In ancient times, foodstuff contained 179 times less of radioactive potassium than now. This trend can be seen by researching trees - birch lives up to 250 years (it contains 13.8 percent of potassium oxide), pine-tree - 600 years (6.9 percent), fur-tree - 1200 years (3.2 percent). Using the ratio, one can calculate that human"s life lasted for 12,250 years before the Flood. (Mysteries and Paradoxes of Time)

It surprises me that you say you believe in evolution when you disagree with this fundamental of biology.

It's not really a 'fundamental of biology', it's just an issue of taxonomy which is inherently from a human perspective anyway. It depends how you define terms especially when scientists are constantly coming up with new systems of classifcation. To argue whether the human being is distinct or not is really just an issue of what your definitions are.

Peace

[Cheb]

Greetings,


So there's no evidence for this outside of religious tradition?

I personally am not aware of any. But I dont need the evidence that you talk about.
Prophet Noah lived for 950 years ;)

Because I'm curious about when Adam and Eve existed. Aren't you?

No I was actually asking what you meant by that. Are you indicating that Adam and Eve appeared after the Dinosaurs were extinct?

It surprises me that you say you believe in evolution when you disagree with this fundamental of biology.

Peace

I believe in evolution as being Gods way of making creatures survive in different environments when they need to. Science has nothing to do with it.

[czgibson]

Greetings,

I personally am not aware of any. But I dont need the evidence that you talk about.
Prophet Noah lived for 950 years ;)

Fair enough, that's your belief.

No I was actually asking what you meant by that. Are you indicating that Adam and Eve appeared after the Dinosaurs were extinct?

I thought that's what you meant when you said this:

Before Adam and Eve was all other life. Dinosaurs, apes, etc.

Peace

[Cheb]

I see. Well ya I do not believe that they lived along side Dinosaurs so I guess I can say that they appeared less than 65 million years ago. But I really wouldnt know. I think 200,000 may be a possibility too.

[Christian_dove]

we still haven't found the reason (and the mechanism) as to why human bodies turn themselves "off" after a certain amount of years. Actually, the body is capable of reprodusing its cells "forever" so that a living age of several hundred years shouldn't be impossible. I've read that one consider 140 years to be the max amount of years that you may be able to live, if you live an extremely healthy life.

But we don't know much about people who lived, say, 10.000 years ago. We don't even know who and how they built the pyramids... We know nothing...

[Mainul_Islam]

I've read that one consider 140 years to be the max amount of years that you may be able to live, if you live an extremely healthy life.

maybe, but about 2 years ago i saw on news that this lady lived up to celebrating her 164th or 165th bday... dunno if she is still alive.

at first i could not believe it.. but then why i started reading about earlier Prophets (i.e. Adam & Noah) how they lived hundreds of years, and a 250 (around) yr old companion of the Prophet Muhammad, i thought "why would it be imposible for her to live so long too? Allah blessed her with a long life"

[root]

This ain't a debate for all. I think it is really quite funny yet tragic that this debate has simply gone down to the level that people can say just about anything they fancy, without producing any evidence or simply state you cannot prove it wrong thus it is true. This is simply bad science born out of ignorance.

Anyway, here's some interesting info that I came across with a quick search, although I don't know how credible it is. Vadim Chernobrov writes:

Ansar - I am dissapointed you posted an article of such weakness, this same person claimed to have built a time machine. Perhaps you shoulod write to him and ask if we can borrow it for a day fly back in time and ask Adam & Eve for an opinion? Clearly this is why science has a solid process of peer reviewing, it's not that science ignores him it is simply that his given hypothosis and supporting evidence is false.

How can there be historical evidence for the lifespan of people who cannot be confirmed historically?

So you think it is "safe" to assume "Man" or another "hominid" could live for more than a thousand years because we have no proof that is not the case. It is a scary place in your mind if u ask me. Perhaps, a species of hominid eat fire and lived for 5000 years on sea water. Under the basis of validation that people in this thread are using, why are we not teaching this fact of fire eating sea drinking long lived hominids to our young.

This thread truly has turned into nothuning more than bull s***.

Cheb - I personally am not aware of any. But I dont need the evidence that you talk about. Prophet Noah lived for 950 years

I put it to you that you don't need any cos you don't have any. Nothing wrong with having faith, statistically you will be happier and live longer. However, religion and faith has no purpose claiming what you are claiming to our kids outside of religous education.

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Ansar - I am dissapointed you posted an article of such weakness, this same person claimed to have built a time machine. Perhaps you shoulod write to him and ask if we can borrow it for a day fly back in time and ask Adam & Eve for an opinion? Clearly this is why science has a solid process of peer reviewing, it's not that science ignores him it is simply that his given hypothosis and supporting evidence is false.

I mentioned that his credibility wasn't confirmed before I quoted him.

So you think it is "safe" to assume "Man" or another "hominid" could live for more than a thousand years because we have no proof that is not the case.

No, I never said that scientists should accept the idea that human beings lived for such long periods of time before us. That is a religious teaching and science has comue up with nothing either in favor aganst that. So scientists can continue to investigate this issue further.

[root]

No, I never said that scientists should accept the idea that human beings lived for such long periods of time before us. That is a religious teaching

OK, so it is faith based. This is fine and the reason it is not supported outside of religion.

and science has comue up with nothing either in favor aganst that.

This is misleading, Archeologist's don't come up with things that do not exist. Archeologists have found plenty of fossils and none of the finds would lead to your hypothosis to be confirmed. Further, free radical damage on biological matter supports the opposite of what you believe.

So scientists can continue to investigate this issue further.

This is misleading, archeologists are not searching for 1000 year old species since nothing would support the hypothosis that they ever existed (apart from religous text) which is unscientific because it relies on the supernatural.