Do You Believe We Came From Monkeys?

[sealybobo]

Once again we all evolved from pigs if your theory is true. As for vestiges they prove nothing\. I repeat show me ANY mammal that has proven to evolve into 2 or more distinct mammals ever. All you have is bull shit it is not evidence, there is no fossil record to speak of that proves any such event.

We all evolved from rodent that lived in China 160m years ago | Daily Mail Online

You need to educate yourself.

Found: Humanity's Great-Grand-Rat

Actually, no you don't. You'll be dead soon and your grandkids will be smarter than you ever were.

But don't worry. They won't become a completely different mammal. That takes millions of years.

 

[sealybobo]

Most of us think we know exactly what we mean when we use the word “mammal”—and most of us are wrong. Typically, we think only of the sub-group of mammals like us, the so-called placental mammals. There are two other kinds, however: the egg-laying monotremes, which include the duck-billed platypus; and the marsupials, which count kangaroos, opossums and wombats among their ranks. But unless you live in Australia and a few other spots, the vast majority of mammals you run into, even at the zoo, are placentals, a group that encompasses everything from rats to rhinos, gerbils to giraffes, chipmunks to chimps, and, of course humans as well.

 

[gipper]

gipper

Exactly. Even if I were able to believe in an invisible, all knowing, all seeing, petulant, vicious, creature who creates and destroys on a whim, there's just no way that I could believe "he' created the earth, the planets, the stars, plant and animal (including the human animal) life and then rested on Sunday.

Religious people have an answer for everything. The earth is 14 trillion years old. 7 days, right? So they say to god 1 day is 2 trillion years.

Who posted anything about God or religion? Not me.

That's the thing about you lefties, you automatically think anyone who disputes your kooky evolution THEORY, must think everything in the Bible is true. STFU!

To think it all magically happened, is to not think.

At any rate, evolution can co-exist with a superior being.

I'm still waiting for your alternate theory without using god

One has to be able to think logically, so I am guessing that is not possible for you.

You condemn those who believe in God as akin to believing in fairy tales, while you believe the huge and complex universe just happened magically. Do you fail to see how illogical your position is?

What created your deity?

What created the universe?

 

[ScienceRocks]

We're primates that developed from a common ancestor 5-7 million years ago that yes was an ape.

That is a fact....The evidence is very strong.

And yet absolutely NO evidence other then this made up story that a mammal has EVER evolved into 2 distinct species before or after.

That's laughably False.
We obviously don't have videotape, but we have extensive fossil and DNA Evidence.
We have One fused Chromosome as all that separates us from Great Apes, and our, and most animal species having Useless anatomical vestiges of our evolutionary ancestors. Not ID, but Messy work.

yes, from ANOTHER String already posted here
WTF!
More Strong Evidence for Evolution: Anatomical Vestiges

29+ Evidences for Macroevolution: Part 2
Douglas Theobald, Ph.D.
Prediction 2.1: Anatomical vestiges

Some of the most renowned Evidence for evolution are the various nonfunctional or rudimentary vestigial characters, Both Anatomical and Molecular, that are found throughout biology. A vestige is defined, independently of evolutionary theory, as a reduced and rudimentary structure compared to the same complex structure in other organisms. Vestigial characters, if functional, perform relatively simple, minor, or inessential functions using structures that were clearly designed for other complex purposes. Though many vestigial organs have no function, complete non-functionality is not a requirement for vestigiality...
[.......]
Geoffroy was at a loss for why exactly nature "always leaves vestiges of an organ", yet he could not deny his empirical observations. Ten years later, Jean-Baptiste Lamarck (1744-1829) identified several vestigial structures in his Zoological Philosophy
[.......]...these "Hypocritical" structures profess something that they do Not do—they clearly appear designed for a certain function which they do Not perform. However, Common Descent provides a scientific explanation for these peculiar structures. Existing species have different structures and perform different functions. If all living organisms descended from a common ancestor, then both functions and structures necessarily have been gained and lost in each lineage during macroevolutionary history. Therefore, from Common Descent and the constraint of gradualism, we predict that many organisms should retain vestigial structures as structural remnants of lost functions. Note that the exact evolutionary mechanism which created a vestigial structure is irrelevant as long as the mechanism is a gradual one.

Confirmation:
There are Many examples of rudimentary and Nonfunctional vestigial characters carried by organisms, and these can very often be explained in terms of evolutionary histories. For example, from independent phylogenetic evidence, snakes are known to be the descendants of four-legged reptiles. Most Pythons (which are legless snakes) carry Vestigial Pelvises hidden beneath their skin.. The Vestigial pelvis in Pythons is Not attached to vertebrae (as is the normal case in most vertebrates), and it simply floats in the abdominal cavity. Some lizards carry rudimentary, Vestigial Legs underneath their skin, undetectable from the outside...
Many cave dwelling animals, such as the fish Astyanax mexicanus (the Mexican tetra) and the salamander species Typhlotriton spelaeus and Proteus anguinus, are blind yet have rudimentary, Vestigial eyes....
[.......]
The ancestors of Humans are known to have been herbivorous, and molar teeth are required for chewing and grinding plant material. Over 90% of all adult humans develop third molars (otherwise known as Wisdom Teeth).
Usually these teeth never erupt from the gums, and in one Third of all individuals they are Malformed and Impacted [*]. These Useless teeth can cause significant pain, increased risk for injury, and may result in illness and even death [*]

Another Vestige of our herbivorous ancestry is the vermiform appendix. While this intestinal structure may retain a function of some sort, perhaps in the development of the immune system, it is a rudimentary version of the much larger caecum that is essential for digestion of plants in other mammals..."

Yet another human Vestigial structure is the coccyx, the four fused caudal vertebrae found at the base of the spine, exactly where most mammals and many other primates have external Tails protruding from the back. Humans and other apes are some of the only vertebrates that lack an external tail as an adult. The coccyx is a developmental Remnant of the embryonic tail that forms in humans and then is degraded and eaten by our immune system ... Our internal tail is UNnecessary for sitting, walking, and elimination (all of which are functions attributed to the coccyx by many anti-evolutionists). The caudal vertebrae of the coccyx can cause extreme and unnecessary chronic pain in some unfortunate people, a condition called coccydynia. The entire coccyx can be surgically removed without any ill effects (besides surgical complications)...""
[.......]​

How many Millions of H sapiens and immediate predecessors, suffered and died from Wisdom Teeth impaction/infection?.
Were it not for Modern dentistry in the last 100 years (yes, even after Jesus), humans who had these impacted/infected Wisdom teeth (most) would have slowly died out and the specie would have been gradually purged/adapted/Evolved eventually as in all traits of all animals.
Everything that ever lived was, and is, 'intermediate' and constantly Evolving.
`

we share over 90 percent of our DNA with pigs does that mean we are descended from Pigs too? There are NO fossil records to support the theory that is a bald faced lie. And DNA wise we are similar to numerous other animals. Once again name a single other supposed Mammal that evolved into 2 separate distinct species other then this supposed ape man thing.

OK, silly ass, just post us a link that says that. You cannot because it is simply not true. We share DNA with all mammals, but the one with which we share the most DNA is the Chimpanzee. Don't know why you 'Conservatives' are forever pulling nonsense out of your ass.

Same thing with all knowledge and economics...Very dangerous as these people have the mindset of the isis.

 

[Hossfly]

Not a fact, it is a theory, big difference. And if we descended from an ape, why are there still apes?

I've asked the same question a number of times and never got an answer.

This question has been asked AND answered scores of times, including on page one of this string.
Or My OP:
15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense
You're Willfully Blinded by your religious indoctrination/conviction.
But let's do it AGAIN.

15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense
John Rennie, Editor in Chief
Scientific American - June 2002
15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense

1. Evolution is only a theory. It is not a fact or a scientific law.

Many people learned in Elementary School that a theory falls in the middle of a hierarchy of certainty--above a mere hypothesis but below a law. Scientists do NOT use the terms that way, however.
According to the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), a scientific theory is "a Well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses." No amount of validation changes a theory into a law, which is a descriptive generalization about nature. So when scientists talk about the theory of evolution--or the atomic theory or the theory of relativity, for that matter--they are Not expressing reservations about its truth.

In addition to the theory of evolution, meaning the idea of descent with modification, one may also speak of the Fact of evolution.
[......]

6. If humans descended from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?

This surprisingly common argument reflects several levels of Ignorance about evolution. The first mistake is that evolution does Not teach that humans descended from monkeys; it states that both have a common ancestor.

The deeper error is that this objection is tantamount to asking, "If children descended from adults, why are there still adults?" New species evolve by splintering off from established ones, when populations of organisms become isolated from the main branch of their family and acquire sufficient differences to remain forever distinct. The parent species may survive indefinitely thereafter, or it may become extinct.
[.....]
​

You've seen the answers HUNDREDS of times you knot heads.
No matter, you'll try the same Brain Dead questions/denial next week.
You're members of a religious Cult.
`

I believe we came from a Creator and I am not religious. We didn't come from apes and we didn't arrive with a Big Bang.

And the evidence for your beliefs are?

Faith.

 

[bodecea]

I know there are similarities but I think they are coincidental, like cats and seals both have whiskers. But cats didn't come from seals or vice a versa.

You're not familiar with Evolution, are you?

 

[bodecea]

We're primates that developed from a common ancestor 5-7 million years ago that yes was an ape.

That is a fact....The evidence is very strong.

Not a fact, it is a theory, big difference. And if we descended from an ape, why are there still apes?

Humans, Orangs, Gorillas, Chimps, we've all been evolving in parallel.

When you think orangutans, gorillas, and chimps will land on the moon, master fire, make electronics, create the written word, master flight, make beautiful music, make vaccines, create the internet or nuclear weapons, etc?

when you think humans can climb a tree in a twinkling, are super strong etc. All species have their skill sets. Our skill set is the frontal lobe....and long term memory.

 

[Hossfly]

Religious people have an answer for everything. The earth is 14 trillion years old. 7 days, right? So they say to god 1 day is 2 trillion years.

Who posted anything about God or religion? Not me.

That's the thing about you lefties, you automatically think anyone who disputes your kooky evolution THEORY, must think everything in the Bible is true. STFU!

To think it all magically happened, is to not think.

At any rate, evolution can co-exist with a superior being.

I'm still waiting for your alternate theory without using god

One has to be able to think logically, so I am guessing that is not possible for you.

You condemn those who believe in God as akin to believing in fairy tales, while you believe the huge and complex universe just happened magically. Do you fail to see how illogical your position is?

What created your deity?

What created the universe?

Some would have us believe that a big ol' bunch of inanimate objects collided in the vacuum of absolute zero space, had a huge BANG and the result was out of nothing came monkeys, water, rose petals and marijuana. They went on ahead and evolved and the Earth was full of Democrats forever and ever.

 

[Syriusly]

I know there are similarities but I think they are coincidental, like cats and seals both have whiskers. But cats didn't come from seals or vice a versa.

Why would anyone believe we came from Monkeys?

We evolved from a common ancestor.

That essentially is just like asking whether you believe you came from your cousin.

 

[Syriusly]

No chance. Evolution may account for the differences within a species, but it does not account for new species.

Where did species come from?

 

[Hossfly]

I know there are similarities but I think they are coincidental, like cats and seals both have whiskers. But cats didn't come from seals or vice a versa.

You're not familiar with Evolution, are you?

If you mean did monkeys appear on Earth already evolved completely and man sprung from the monkey, then........hell no.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Once again there is NO fossil record to support the claim man came from an ape like creature. None nada.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Yep, lets throw out all the evidence because WE believe something in our hearts. lol

 

[Old Rocks]

Once again there is NO fossil record to support the claim man came from an ape like creature. None nada.

Once again, you have not the slightest idea of what you are talking about.

The evolution of human and ape hand proportions

• Sergio Almécija
• , Jeroen B. Smaers
• & William L. Jungers

Abstract
Human hands are distinguished from apes by possessing longer thumbs relative to fingers. However, this simple ape-human dichotomy fails to provide an adequate framework for testing competing hypotheses of human evolution and for reconstructing the morphology of the last common ancestor (LCA) of humans and chimpanzees. We inspect human and ape hand-length proportions using phylogenetically informed morphometric analyses and test alternative models of evolution along the anthropoid tree of life, including fossils like the plesiomorphic ape Proconsul heseloni and the hominins Ardipithecus ramidus and Australopithecus sediba. Our results reveal high levels of hand disparity among modern hominoids, which are explained by different evolutionary processes: autapomorphic evolution in hylobatids (extreme digital and thumb elongation), convergent adaptation between chimpanzees and orangutans (digital elongation) and comparatively little change in gorillas and hominins. The human (and australopith) high thumb-to-digits ratio required little change since the LCA, and was acquired convergently with other highly dexterous anthropoids.

The evolution of human and ape hand proportions : Nature Communications

 

[Old Rocks]

Not a fact, it is a theory, big difference. And if we descended from an ape, why are there still apes?

I've asked the same question a number of times and never got an answer.

This question has been asked AND answered scores of times, including on page one of this string.
Or My OP:
15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense
You're Willfully Blinded by your religious indoctrination/conviction.
But let's do it AGAIN.

15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense
John Rennie, Editor in Chief
Scientific American - June 2002
15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense

1. Evolution is only a theory. It is not a fact or a scientific law.

Many people learned in Elementary School that a theory falls in the middle of a hierarchy of certainty--above a mere hypothesis but below a law. Scientists do NOT use the terms that way, however.
According to the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), a scientific theory is "a Well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses." No amount of validation changes a theory into a law, which is a descriptive generalization about nature. So when scientists talk about the theory of evolution--or the atomic theory or the theory of relativity, for that matter--they are Not expressing reservations about its truth.

In addition to the theory of evolution, meaning the idea of descent with modification, one may also speak of the Fact of evolution.
[......]

6. If humans descended from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?

This surprisingly common argument reflects several levels of Ignorance about evolution. The first mistake is that evolution does Not teach that humans descended from monkeys; it states that both have a common ancestor.

The deeper error is that this objection is tantamount to asking, "If children descended from adults, why are there still adults?" New species evolve by splintering off from established ones, when populations of organisms become isolated from the main branch of their family and acquire sufficient differences to remain forever distinct. The parent species may survive indefinitely thereafter, or it may become extinct.
[.....]
​

You've seen the answers HUNDREDS of times you knot heads.
No matter, you'll try the same Brain Dead questions/denial next week.
You're members of a religious Cult.
`

I believe we came from a Creator and I am not religious. We didn't come from apes and we didn't arrive with a Big Bang.

And the evidence for your beliefs are?

Faith.

Worthless.

 

[Hossfly]

Not a fact, it is a theory, big difference. And if we descended from an ape, why are there still apes?

I've asked the same question a number of times and never got an answer.

This question has been asked AND answered scores of times, including on page one of this string.
Or My OP:
15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense
You're Willfully Blinded by your religious indoctrination/conviction.
But let's do it AGAIN.

15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense
John Rennie, Editor in Chief
Scientific American - June 2002
15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense

1. Evolution is only a theory. It is not a fact or a scientific law.

Many people learned in Elementary School that a theory falls in the middle of a hierarchy of certainty--above a mere hypothesis but below a law. Scientists do NOT use the terms that way, however.
According to the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), a scientific theory is "a Well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses." No amount of validation changes a theory into a law, which is a descriptive generalization about nature. So when scientists talk about the theory of evolution--or the atomic theory or the theory of relativity, for that matter--they are Not expressing reservations about its truth.

In addition to the theory of evolution, meaning the idea of descent with modification, one may also speak of the Fact of evolution.
[......]

6. If humans descended from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?

This surprisingly common argument reflects several levels of Ignorance about evolution. The first mistake is that evolution does Not teach that humans descended from monkeys; it states that both have a common ancestor.

The deeper error is that this objection is tantamount to asking, "If children descended from adults, why are there still adults?" New species evolve by splintering off from established ones, when populations of organisms become isolated from the main branch of their family and acquire sufficient differences to remain forever distinct. The parent species may survive indefinitely thereafter, or it may become extinct.
[.....]
​

You've seen the answers HUNDREDS of times you knot heads.
No matter, you'll try the same Brain Dead questions/denial next week.
You're members of a religious Cult.
`

I believe we came from a Creator and I am not religious. We didn't come from apes and we didn't arrive with a Big Bang.

And the evidence for your beliefs are?

Faith.

Worthless.

I still don't get an explanation about where the apes came from. Any idea?

 

[Hossfly]

Yep, lets throw out all the evidence because WE believe something in our hearts. lol

​

 

[Old Rocks]

This question has been asked AND answered scores of times, including on page one of this string.
Or My OP:
15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense
You're Willfully Blinded by your religious indoctrination/conviction.
But let's do it AGAIN.

15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense
John Rennie, Editor in Chief
Scientific American - June 2002
15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense

1. Evolution is only a theory. It is not a fact or a scientific law.

Many people learned in Elementary School that a theory falls in the middle of a hierarchy of certainty--above a mere hypothesis but below a law. Scientists do NOT use the terms that way, however.
According to the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), a scientific theory is "a Well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses." No amount of validation changes a theory into a law, which is a descriptive generalization about nature. So when scientists talk about the theory of evolution--or the atomic theory or the theory of relativity, for that matter--they are Not expressing reservations about its truth.

In addition to the theory of evolution, meaning the idea of descent with modification, one may also speak of the Fact of evolution.
[......]

6. If humans descended from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?

This surprisingly common argument reflects several levels of Ignorance about evolution. The first mistake is that evolution does Not teach that humans descended from monkeys; it states that both have a common ancestor.

The deeper error is that this objection is tantamount to asking, "If children descended from adults, why are there still adults?" New species evolve by splintering off from established ones, when populations of organisms become isolated from the main branch of their family and acquire sufficient differences to remain forever distinct. The parent species may survive indefinitely thereafter, or it may become extinct.
[.....]
​

You've seen the answers HUNDREDS of times you knot heads.
No matter, you'll try the same Brain Dead questions/denial next week.
You're members of a religious Cult.
`

I believe we came from a Creator and I am not religious. We didn't come from apes and we didn't arrive with a Big Bang.

And the evidence for your beliefs are?

Faith.

Worthless.

I still don't get an explanation about where the apes came from. Any idea?

Archonta


Scandentia (mid-Eocene)
(tree shrews)

Primatomorpha

Plesiadapiformes X

Primates (early Paleocene)
(tarsiers, lemurs, monkeys, apes including humans)

Dermoptera (late Eocene)
(colugos)

Chiroptera (late Paleocene)
(bats)

You can see the relationships here;
Evolution of mammals - Wikipedia

Not that I expect you even to look. You guys just spout off, and never follow up with any research.

 

[Old Rocks]

Yep, lets throw out all the evidence because WE believe something in our hearts. lol

​

LOL See you there. LOL

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Once again there is NO fossil record to support the claim man came from an ape like creature. None nada.

Once again, you have not the slightest idea of what you are talking about.

The evolution of human and ape hand proportions

• Sergio Almécija
• , Jeroen B. Smaers
• & William L. Jungers

Abstract
Human hands are distinguished from apes by possessing longer thumbs relative to fingers. However, this simple ape-human dichotomy fails to provide an adequate framework for testing competing hypotheses of human evolution and for reconstructing the morphology of the last common ancestor (LCA) of humans and chimpanzees. We inspect human and ape hand-length proportions using phylogenetically informed morphometric analyses and test alternative models of evolution along the anthropoid tree of life, including fossils like the plesiomorphic ape Proconsul heseloni and the hominins Ardipithecus ramidus and Australopithecus sediba. Our results reveal high levels of hand disparity among modern hominoids, which are explained by different evolutionary processes: autapomorphic evolution in hylobatids (extreme digital and thumb elongation), convergent adaptation between chimpanzees and orangutans (digital elongation) and comparatively little change in gorillas and hominins. The human (and australopith) high thumb-to-digits ratio required little change since the LCA, and was acquired convergently with other highly dexterous anthropoids.

The evolution of human and ape hand proportions : Nature Communications

That does not prove anything at all and is in no way evidence that man evolved from an ape like creature. Once again NO fossil record exists to support the claim. That is why it is still JUST a theory.