Contrary to wingnut claims, evolutionary theory does NOT...

[Colin]

Something long extinct.

Exactly what, nobody knows.

They say macro evolution is both theory and fact, so if they don't know what humans evolved from and no one was around to witness it how can they say it is fact ? Hmm.

If it were fact, it wouldn't be theory.

Hang on. I have a theory. That's a fact!

 

[manifold]

^

 

[pinqy]

Well, since humans are apes, it's quite true we didn't evolve from apes. "Ape" is just a general term to describe a couple of families of Primates. There's the Hylobatidae, or lesser apes (gibbons) and the Hominidae, or great apes: Humans, Chimpanzees, Gorillas, and Orangutans.

 

[sangha]

Oh I'm getting around to the different sections now that olfraud and company are moping. So tell us, if not apes then from what?

Something long extinct.

Exactly what, nobody knows.

They say macro evolution is both theory and fact, so if they don't know what humans evolved from and no one was around to witness it how can they say it is fact ? Hmm.

That's how we know creationism is true. There were plenty of witnesses

 

[sangha]

If our common ancestors are Adam and Eve that would certainly be true.

If we didn't evolve from apes what did we evolve from?

Something tells me your "theory" of how we got here will probably be the most entertaining.

So please, enlighten us. Tell us how we got here.

I would also like to hear this

 

[sangha]

Something long extinct.

Exactly what, nobody knows.

They say macro evolution is both theory and fact, so if they don't know what humans evolved from and no one was around to witness it how can they say it is fact ? Hmm.

If it were fact, it wouldn't be theory.

Evolution is both a scientific fact, and a scientific theory

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Well..if we do all have a common ancestor, there would have had to be some incest.

Wouldn't there???? Because all of us would have come from the same dad, so to speak...and that could only happen if his children had children with each other.

If our common ancestors are Adam and Eve that would certainly be true.

Wrong, God made other people. Cain left to join them when kicked out for killing his brother. He married and had children. Further there had to be a third group as Adam's children also married outside the family.

God was clear, every thing on Earth was created by him. So these other people were created by God. After Adam and Eve.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

They say macro evolution is both theory and fact, so if they don't know what humans evolved from and no one was around to witness it how can they say it is fact ? Hmm.

If it were fact, it wouldn't be theory.

Evolution is both a scientific fact, and a scientific theory

You are only partially right. Evolution WITHIN a species is pretty much a fact. They have compelling evidence that WITHIN a species evolution occurs.

However there is absolutely no evidence at all that one species of MAMMALS has EVER evolved into 2 or more different species.

 

[sangha]

If it were fact, it wouldn't be theory.

Evolution is both a scientific fact, and a scientific theory

You are only partially right. Evolution WITHIN a species is pretty much a fact. They have compelling evidence that WITHIN a species evolution occurs.

However there is absolutely no evidence at all that one species of MAMMALS has EVER evolved into 2 or more different species.

Mammals? Sure

But I'm sure you know that evolution is not limited to MAMMALS

 

[Baruch Menachem]

What does evolutionary theory say then, if not from some variety of ape? (There is no species ape that I am aware of. Ape is a genus, which includes chimps, orangs, baboons, mandrils etc. all under the general heading of Pan. I have read that there is a facetious move afoot to end the distinction homo and place us under the heading of Pan Naritivarius, the story telling ape, as there is less difference between homo and pan than there is between any other two varieties of pan.)
The most fun and interesting evolutionary theory I have read is that humans are a sort of aquatic chimp that liked to live in and around lakes. I have heard that that theory is pretty universally discredited, which is a pity as it explains so much so well

 

[sangha]

What does evolutionary theory say then, if not from some variety of ape? (There is no species ape that I am aware of. Ape is a genus, which includes chimps, orangs, baboons, mandrils etc. all under the general heading of Pan. I have read that there is a facetious move afoot to end the distinction homo and place us under the heading of Pan Naritivarius, the story telling ape, as there is less difference between homo and pan than there is between any other two varieties of pan.)
The most fun and interesting evolutionary theory I have read is that humans are a sort of aquatic chimp that liked to live in and around lakes. I have heard that that theory is pretty universally discredited, which is a pity as it explains so much so well

The answer has already been posted, but since no one expects a fact to sink into your mind the first time, I'll repeat it

Apes and man descended from a common ancestor.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Evolution is both a scientific fact, and a scientific theory

You are only partially right. Evolution WITHIN a species is pretty much a fact. They have compelling evidence that WITHIN a species evolution occurs.

However there is absolutely no evidence at all that one species of MAMMALS has EVER evolved into 2 or more different species.

Mammals? Sure

But I'm sure you know that evolution is not limited to MAMMALS

We are mammals. There is ABSOLUTELY NO evidence that a mammal species has ever evolved into 2 or more species. There for evolutionary theory is not PROVEN in regards to mammals.

Further I know of no evidence that insects have evolve4d into two or more species. No fish or sea life either. Are birds mammals, as far as I know there is zero evidence they have evolved from one species into 2 or more species.

Plants and virus do not operate like these other species.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

What does evolutionary theory say then, if not from some variety of ape? (There is no species ape that I am aware of. Ape is a genus, which includes chimps, orangs, baboons, mandrils etc. all under the general heading of Pan. I have read that there is a facetious move afoot to end the distinction homo and place us under the heading of Pan Naritivarius, the story telling ape, as there is less difference between homo and pan than there is between any other two varieties of pan.)
The most fun and interesting evolutionary theory I have read is that humans are a sort of aquatic chimp that liked to live in and around lakes. I have heard that that theory is pretty universally discredited, which is a pity as it explains so much so well

The answer has already been posted, but since no one expects a fact to sink into your mind the first time, I'll repeat it

Apes and man descended from a common ancestor.

We are almost genetically the same as mice too, does that mean we have a common MOUSE ancestor? Pigs are very similar to man also, we can even use their organs. Is there a pig common ancestor? Once again for the slow you have ZERO evidence that a mammal species has EVER evolved into 2 or more species.

 

[pinqy]

You are only partially right. Evolution WITHIN a species is pretty much a fact. They have compelling evidence that WITHIN a species evolution occurs.

And what stops a species from becoming seperate species? I assume you're familiar with ring species.

However there is absolutely no evidence at all that one species of MAMMALS has EVER evolved into 2 or more different species.

Are you saying you accept the observations of speciation of non-mammals? And what's different about mammals that they could not split into different species? And since many mammal species can imperfectly interbreed for sterile offspring, (mules, ligers) and in some cases fertile offspring (beefalo, wholphins), a common ancestor seems likely.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

You are only partially right. Evolution WITHIN a species is pretty much a fact. They have compelling evidence that WITHIN a species evolution occurs.

And what stops a species from becoming seperate species? I assume you're familiar with ring species.

However there is absolutely no evidence at all that one species of MAMMALS has EVER evolved into 2 or more different species.

Are you saying you accept the observations of speciation of non-mammals? And what's different about mammals that they could not split into different species? And since many mammal species can imperfectly interbreed for sterile offspring, (mules, ligers) and in some cases fertile offspring (beefalo, wholphins), a common ancestor seems likely.

Keep reading, the only things that are know to be able to be manipulated into evolving into two or more separate species are so foreign to how Mammals and such work as to be ignorant to claim they prove evolution as is.

 

[pinqy]

We are almost genetically the same as mice too, does that mean we have a common MOUSE ancestor?

Yes, humans and mice have a common ancestor. Not nearly as close as humans and other apes or primates, of course.

Pigs are very similar to man also, we can even use their organs. Is there a pig common ancestor?

Yes there is a common ancestor with pigs.

Once again for the slow you have ZERO evidence that a mammal species has EVER evolved into 2 or more species.

Oh, there's plenty of evidence, you just don't want to accept any of it.

 

[pinqy]

Keep reading, the only things that are know to be able to be manipulated into evolving into two or more separate species are so foreign to how Mammals and such work as to be ignorant to claim they prove evolution as is.

Let's be clear...you are claiming that despite close physiology of groups of mammals, and the known ability of cross-breeding otherwise seperate species (especially with different number of chromosones), despite the fact that biologists predicted that the reason humans had a different number of chromosones than other apes was because of a fused pair, which has since been identified, that none of these are evidence for common ancestory?

I have to ask, what would you accept as evidence of common ancestory? Be as specific as possible.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Keep reading, the only things that are know to be able to be manipulated into evolving into two or more separate species are so foreign to how Mammals and such work as to be ignorant to claim they prove evolution as is.

Let's be clear...you are claiming that despite close physiology of groups of mammals, and the known ability of cross-breeding otherwise seperate species (especially with different number of chromosones), despite the fact that biologists predicted that the reason humans had a different number of chromosones than other apes was because of a fused pair, which has since been identified, that none of these are evidence for common ancestory?

I have to ask, what would you accept as evidence of common ancestory? Be as specific as possible.

Find a species that has evolved into 2 or more DIFFERENT species. We have had almost 200 years and no one has. Nor have they with the other types I listed.

 

[westwall]

If our common ancestors are Adam and Eve that would certainly be true.

If we didn't evolve from apes what did we evolve from?

Something tells me your "theory" of how we got here will probably be the most entertaining.

So please, enlighten us. Tell us how we got here.

I hate to disappoint you (as I know that you thought that because I am a GW sceptic I MUST be an evil religious fanatic) but I am a firm Darwinian, well actually Wallace originated the theory long before Darwin got around to it but Darwin gets all of the credit.

You see, a scientist can be an evolutionist and still not believe AGW religous dogma...how shocking!

 

[Youwerecreated]

Something long extinct.

Exactly what, nobody knows.

They say macro evolution is both theory and fact, so if they don't know what humans evolved from and no one was around to witness it how can they say it is fact ? Hmm.

That's how we know creationism is true. There were plenty of witnesses

Look at my signature, those are your choices . Both views are based on faith but one side can admit to it.