Creationists dealt a blow

[aamirsaab]

Oh cool!

You are thinking of evolution as linear progress. Everything changes all the time. So the apes we see today are the descendents of apes that lived a long time ago. And at some point our family tree joined their family tree and we had a common ancestor. Don't think of the apes as your Grandfather, but as your cousins. We have a common Grandfather, but that does not mean we do not have cousins too.

Ah I see where you're coming from.

Darwin's theory rests on three fundamental propositions

1. The Earth and all that is on it have been around for a long time.
2. Children inherit their looks and stuff from their parents.
3. The better adapted any individuals are to their environment the more children they will have.

Do you think that all of the above apply to humans? If so I do not see how you can deny evolution in humans.

Yeah it can apply to humans. Is there any scientific evidence, however, of the pre-ape beings that would, if what you say is true about humans and ape being cousin-like, have been alive before the cave-man era? Perhaps this answer would help me understand better.

One last question: are humans the last in the chain of evolution?

p.s:That's some interesting information, much appreciated.

 

[HeiGou]

Is there any scientific evidence, however, of the pre-ape beings that would, if what you say is true about humans and ape being cousin-like, have been alive before the cave-man era? Perhaps this answer would help me understand better.

One last question: are humans the last in the chain of evolution?

Well we are here. So we are the final product I guess. Humans and apes diverged a long time ago and there have been a lot of intermediate steps involving species now extinct,

You might be interested in this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_evolution

Or this on the larger family to which we belong,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hominidae

And this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ape

As discussed above, hominoid taxonomy has undergone several changes. Current understanding is that the apes diverged from the Old World monkeys about 25 million years ago. The lesser and greater apes split about 18 mya, and the hominid splits happen 14 mya (Pongo), 7 mya (Gorilla), and 3-5 mya (Homo & Pan)​

p.s:That's some interesting information, much appreciated.

Thanks. Do my best.

 

[root]

One of the main sources of humans evolution was ape, yet the ape is still around last time i watched the discovery channel.

OMG, such remarkable display of ignorance.

 

[czgibson]

Greetings,

Those who reject god tend to do evil as good came from god without gods rule which rule do we have?????

What a ludicrous generalisation. Do you think all agnostics, atheists and Buddhists are therefore evil?

Where did all these human rights, freedom of speech, jailing a person who commits a crime. Humans would not come up with these rules why should they care about others after death they got nothing.

How do you know humans wouldn't come up with morality? Moral systems throughout history have essentially been the same, whether the society was religious or not.

As we go into a world where atheist are taking over American and many western countries we can see the affects it’s having on the society.

I'd say fundamentalist Christians have got a pretty strong foothold in America just now.

Homosexuals are being accepted as if its ok to be homosexual

There's nothing wrong with being homosexual. It's not my own orientation, but I see no reason to denigrate gay people. Have you suffered great evil at the hands of a gay person or something?

at war times soldiers are cold hearted they will rape women also kill them even kids.

True - war can be exceptionally brutal. But what does this have to do with people who reject god? Religious people in war can be very brutal as well.

I live in Canada and a man use to live couple of streets away from mine he raped his 6 YEAR OLD DAUGHTER I can see he does not believe in god.

Do you think that he did that because he doesn't believe in god, or just because he was a nasty piece of work in general?

Of course because in gods rule its clearly forbidden.

It's forbidden in every moral code I can think of, whether religious or non-religious.

Clearly when the evolutionist came they destroyed the society as they came along

How have evolutionists destroyed society? Has the massive expansion of modern biology really been such a malign influence?

Peace

 

[HeiGou]

OMG, such remarkable display of ignorance.

He's young, he's learning. Help him up. Don't put him down.

Two seconds of typing without two minutes thought can hurt!

 

[root]

One last question: are humans the last in the chain of evolution?

Definately not. Evolution has no "end game" and followed no specific course and life continually adapts as evolutionary history has shown us. Evolution never began with a pre determined plan to have a "Human" as the end product.

He's young, he's learning. Help him up. Don't put him down.

Two seconds of typing without two minutes thought can hurt!

Point taken. I offer my apologies, I get a little frustrated the ammount of time people qoute:

"If we came from apes how comes apes still exist"

Once again, apologies dude.

 

[aamirsaab]

That's a lot of info HeiGou, it'll take me a while to read it all so i'd best start now. Thanks for the late Eid present. .

OMG, such remarkable display of ignorance.

It seems the world is not ready for my sense of humour. Back to Oz i guess. Come now toto, much reading to be done.

 

[Muslim Soldier]

Let us talk logic

Human beings evolved according to your claims. From what did they evoleve?
I need an answer please

 

[aamirsaab]

Definately not. Evolution has no "end game" and followed no specific course and life continually adapts as evolutionary history has shown us. Evolution never began with a pre determined plan to have a "Human" as the end product.

Ok, cool. So, what exactly is the next stage of evolution? What are the "disadvantages" of our current stage of evolution?

Point taken. I offer my apologies, I get a little frustrated the ammount of time people qoute:

"If we came from apes how comes apes still exist"

Once again, apologies dude.

Accidents happen , apology accepted.

 

[HeiGou]

Ok, cool. So, what exactly is the next stage of evolution? What are the "disadvantages" of our current stage of evolution?

Well one thing is that modern medical science has taken the pressure off the human race so in many ways we are getting "worse". It is a good thing to have a big head for instance, and humans already have disproportionately large heads. Giving birth is much harder for humans than almost any other species because babies' heads just don't fit that well. In the past a lot of mothers and babies would have died keeping head size down. They do not any more because the mothers all have medical intervention. So expect human heads to get a bit bigger.

Another thing is Tay-Sacks disease which strikes down otherwise normal children between the ages of two and five. This affects mainly Jews of Eastern European origin. A Rabbi called Josef Ekstein started an organisation called Dor Yeshorim after losing four children to Tay-Sacks. It tests for the genes for Tay-Sacks and advises some marriages to go ahead and some not to. This has cut the number of cases in the Orthodox Jewish community down to lower levels than the mainstream American population. But the down side is that it is spreading the genes for Tay-Sacks into the wider community and so making more people carry the gene. Evolution is action.

 

[Muslim Soldier]

come on answer my quesion

 

[czgibson]

Greetings,

Let us talk logic

Human beings evolved according to your claims. From what did they evoleve?
I need an answer please

This link, posted by HeiGou earlier, answers your question quite comprehensively.

Peace

 

[Muslim Soldier]

I dont want my question to be answered by that.
I want to discuss
Are you ready?

 

[root]

Human beings evolved according to your claims. From what did they evoleve? I need an answer please

Your answer is primitive single cells. Remember "Evolution" is only the theory of how life emerged from an already existing cell. IT DOES NOT cover how the very first life arose. (A big misconception peddled by creationsits)

Nobody knows what the most primitive cells looked like. All the cells around today are the product of billions of years of evolution. The earliest self-replicator was likely very much simpler than anything alive today; self-replicating molecules need not be all that complex (Lee et al. 1996), and protein-building systems can also be simple (Ball 2001; Tamura and Schimmel 2001).

Ok, cool. So, what exactly is the next stage of evolution? What are the "disadvantages" of our current stage of evolution?

Evolution is comparable to history so to suggest a future path of evolution is no more accurate than predicting the future of our cultural and social future. Both Evolutionary history and human social history have not followed a set pattern nor will they both in the future.

Some instances of future evolvement and evolution currently active are as follows:

Lactose tolerence in humans: Physiological and, to a large extent, the subsequent psychological evolution of humankind is based on the continuing changes in the common genetic composition of the species. In turn, anthropologists have found, this evolutionary trend in genetic composition of humans has been continuously influenced by certain factors within the cultural environment to which humans, as an animal species, are more susceptible to than any other animal species, including the ones closest to the human species – the great apes. There is also considerable variance in genetic composition among different human population groups generated by many factors, including cultural ones. One such variance is ability to digest milk

Additionally, 12% of Europeans are actually immune to AIDS and this is due to a "mutated gene" in response to the numerous plagues that swept europe during the middle ages. Chance has it that this mutation also protects the body from HIV. predators force are a big evolutionary force and disease whilst not really qualified as a predator to us is undoubtly another reason why we continually evolve.

Finally, a cautionary note. Evolution does not specifically care for the preservation of any given species and evolutionary history teaches us that us "Humans" will face mass extinction at some point and evolution will continue to move forward without us clearing the way for the next dominant species to take our place.

 

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Wrong. It's not "my" claim at all, it's a fact that Creationism/ID is not a theory because it consistently fails to validate itself as such.

Like I said, you claim that it is a fact that creationism is not a theory. Thank you for supporting my point. Now would you mind answering it? If you claim that creationism is not a theory then no amount of evidence will ever deal a blow to creationism. Hence your entire post here is off-target, beginning with the title.

Wrong. You keep misusing the word "theory", how can creationism be a falsifiable theory if it is not a theory to begin with.

Then if it is not a theory then how can you claim it was 'dealt a blow'?! That could only be the case if it was a falsifiable theory. Did you even bother to think over what I wrote or did you think you could get away by simply responding with "wrong" ?

Wrong. It differs greatly because it is a fish showing transitional traits to tetrapod and does differ from all other species during this period that we currently know about within this period of time.

So it differs 'greatly; because
1. because it is a transition to a tetrapod
2. and because it differs greatly

Wonderful demonstration of logic, root. It differs greatly because it differs greatly. And maybe you should learn about the other species I mentioned because they were also labeled as transitional forms from fish to tetrapod.

Regards

 

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

in fact, everything we know from evolutionary theory leads to the opposite conclusion, that what we call "races" do not differ biologically in any significant way.

Yet another inaccuracy in your post:
http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2005/10/rushton_revisit.php

In June, Mr. Rushton and University of California psychology professor Arthur Jensen published a 60-page study in Psychology, Public Policy and Law, a journal of the American Psychological Association. In it, the scholars presented 10 categories of evidence, including military and academic tests, brain size and adoption studies, to support their contention that East Asians as a group enjoy an evolutionary advantage over whites, and whites over blacks, that has contributed to measurable intelligence gaps between them.

“Neither the existence nor the size of race differences in IQ are a matter of dispute, only their cause,” the authors wrote.

The cause of that difference is contentious. Some blame the tests, arguing that they measure a narrow, western notion of intelligence. Others say intelligence is primarily determined not by genetics but by environmental factors: poverty, nutrition, parental education, discrimination, the quality of local schools.

But Mr. Rushton and Mr. Jensen posit that 50 to 80 per cent of the IQ gaps between racial groups can be explained by genetics, by the gift of inherited intelligence.

...In other words, those who design social policy should not seek to create equality between racial groups—an impossible outcome in Mr. Rushton’s mind—but learn to live with the statistical differences.

...They argue that their research is important because “we will never make progress in race relations if we operate on the belief that one segment of society is responsible for the plight of another segment and that belief is false.”

They suggest that policy-makers and judges have mistakenly ascribed “the underachievement of black people to prejudice and discrimination by white people,” rather than to genetic disadvantages. Mr. Rushton and Mr. Jensen then cite the landmark U.S. Supreme Court Decision, Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, which outlawed racial segregation in schools, as an example of a decision based on just such a wrong-headed assumption.​

 

[HeiGou]

Yet another inaccuracy in your post:
http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2005/10/rushton_revisit.php

In June, Mr. Rushton and University of California psychology professor Arthur Jensen published a 60-page study in Psychology, Public Policy and Law, a journal of the American Psychological Association. ​

That is not a fair criticism. The fact that you can find a neo-Nazi website and quote it is not an inaccuracy on the part of Root. Nor is the fact that Professor Jensen, a long-time advocate of racism and, it has been suggested, a fabricator of evidence and Mr Rushton, head of the Pioneer Fund, hold a view proof of anything much.

In this science agrees with Islam - race is not important and all men are brothers.​

 

[Islamicboy]

Greetings,
What a ludicrous generalisation. Do you think all agnostics, atheists and Buddhists are therefore evil?

How do you know humans wouldn't come up with morality? Moral systems throughout history have essentially been the same, whether the society was religious or not.

I'd say fundamentalist Christians have got a pretty strong foothold in America just now.


There's nothing wrong with being homosexual. It's not my own orientation, but I see no reason to denigrate gay people. Have you suffered great evil at the hands of a gay person or something?



True - war can be exceptionally brutal. But what does this have to do with people who reject god? Religious people in war can be very brutal as well.



Do you think that he did that because he doesn't believe in god, or just because he was a nasty piece of work in general?



It's forbidden in every moral code I can think of, whether religious or non-religious.



How have evolutionists destroyed society? Has the massive expansion of modern biology really been such a malign influence?

Peace

Yes Majority of atheist and people who reject god are evil for me i dont know about you.
Why would humans ban for themselves the things that they will like such as marriage why get married. Majority Genva conventions laws come from religion specally Islam.
Because of Homosexuals we have aids today and because of people going around sleeping around its spreading.
people who reject god dont have the same morals and values as a person who believes in god.
If a person feared gods wrath they would never do such evil crimes i believe those who dont have strong faith in god such as him.
There is no law and order in people who dont have Religion if people were to fornicate on the streets the people who believe in god dont care.
People who believe in evolution are the ones who said Blacks are animals thats how slavery worked even at that time black people use to be put in cage and researched astagfurillaah. Many more evils happen because of people like you becuase this is the life you have to live. If there is no God what do u have after this life nothing thats why if a theist wants money they will rob they hate someone they can kill them there is nothing going to happen to him. look at the majority cases in america like the BTK killer do u think he had faith in god ?? I highly dought it. People with faith will treat this life as temporary and the next life as everything. so money, cars, etc.. dont matter to them as much.

 

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Please, let's keep this thread on evolution and not atheism, morality, homosexuality or any of those other topics which have numerous other threads on the forum.

 

[Muslim Soldier]

Your answer is primitive single cells. Remember "Evolution" is only the theory of how life emerged from an already existing cell. IT DOES NOT cover how the very first life arose. (A big misconception peddled by creationsits)

can you explain onething?
Since you claim that humans originated from apes, why is it that humans walk on two legs while apes on four? Since having four legs makes one more stable, why has evoultion undergone negative development?