Creationists

[JakeStarkey]

I can't answer that or how he has always existed,that is something you might want to ask him when you meet him.


Bible and science provide faith and truth.

Not lies and propaganda.

I'll see you in the other thread.

I accept your intellectual surrender.

Surrender hardly, I still feel from the evdence that it is more logical to accept creation over a natural process undirected by intelligence.

What you "feel" does not matter. The empirical data dictates the conclusion. That you don't accept it is your problem, no one else's.

 

[Dr.Drock]

How did they share a common ancestor ?

Ancestry of both humans and apes is determined from examination of the fossils of extinct primate species, and seeing how a primitive primate had descendants some of whom were apes, and others were hominids, from the latter of whom humans are descended. It's like putting together the pieces of a puzzle.

Old-world monkeys branched into both apes and hominids.

How come you exclude other animals that's DNA is similar to humans from being realtives to humans ?

All animals and plants are related to humans, however distantly.

These questions have already been answered. You are repeating yourself.

Thank you, stated perfectly.

 

[koshergrl]

What a shame there's no actual proof of that.

Of course one could argue, of course we're all related, God is the father of all....

 

[Dr.Drock]

Jean Auel (clan of the cavebear) hypothesised that humans interbred with non-human neandertals or cro-magnons, whatever they were. And offered exactly zero insight on how the two separate species came into being.

You do know that Clan of the Cave Bear and its sequels are fiction, right?

How bout this for a theory, God created all living organisms from ingredients of the earth and that is why we see DNA similarity ?

That's fine, I take no issue with people saying it's God's guiding hand behind evolution.

 

[koshergrl]

So long as you don't say we all evolved from the same creature. There's no evidence for that. Or attribute solid timelines that contradict biblical accounts of creation, and pretend they're unquestionable. There's no proof of that, either.

 

[Youwerecreated]

You do know that Clan of the Cave Bear and its sequels are fiction, right?

How bout this for a theory, God created all living organisms from ingredients of the earth and that is why we see DNA similarity ?

That's fine, I take no issue with people saying it's God's guiding hand behind evolution.

Not what I said.

 

[Dr.Drock]

So long as you don't say we all evolved from the same creature. There's no evidence for that. Or attribute solid timelines that contradict biblical accounts of creation, and pretend they're unquestionable. There's no proof of that, either.

You can continue to pretend there's no proof at your own detriment, that's fine.




As long as you're not a teacher, you can go against scientific evidence all you like.

 

[koshergrl]

What specific evidence proves we have the same ancestor?

Remember to leave out those pesky terms "theorize" and "believe".

 

[koshergrl]

If I'm not mistaken, that's the whole mystery behind the "missing link". Which is, after all, still missing.

Meanwhile, I took college biology for a year, and genetics for a term, and I don't remember my professor ever once speaking in absolutes when it comes to the history of mankind.

 

[Dr.Drock]

How bout this for a theory, God created all living organisms from ingredients of the earth and that is why we see DNA similarity ?

That's fine, I take no issue with people saying it's God's guiding hand behind evolution.

Not what I said.

Believe me, I have no idea what your stances are, they change daily.

One day you're a full blown science denier.

The next day you admit to parts of evolution being fact.

The next day you completely buy into microevolution.

Then the 4th day you're back to saying Satan is behind science.

 

[Dr.Drock]

What specific evidence proves we have the same ancestor?

Remember to leave out those pesky terms "theorize" and "believe".

There's unlimited amounts of specific evidence, DNA, fossils, etc.




I have a feeling you deny all those, correct?

 

[koshergrl]

I deny that they prove a specific timetable, and I deny that they disprove anything in the bible.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Denials of amateurs like koshergirl or Youwerecreated or me mean nothing.

Only empirical data on matters of nature count, not our faith beliefs or emotional feelings.

 

[Dragon]

What specific evidence proves we have the same ancestor?

Remember to leave out those pesky terms "theorize" and "believe".

Before I present the evidence, I'm going to point out that your request to leave out those two words betrays a failure to understand one of the key points of science: that we can never know anything for certain, beyond any possibility of doubt. Certainty beyond the possibility of doubt is the arena of dogma, not science. In fact, I submit that this is precisely why religious doctrine strays further from the evidence than science: it is believed with such arbitrary certainty that checking the facts is never done.

When you ask "what evidence shows we have the same ancestor?" it's also important to include the context of the question. If one accepts the model of evolution for the divergence of species, then the question means, "What evidence shows that humans and chimpanzees have the same ancestor, as opposed to humans being descended from chimps, or humans being off the primate tree altogether?" If not, then the question means, "What evidence shows that humans and chimpanzees have the same ancestor, as opposed to humans and chimps being separate creations?"

It's better to present evidence for evolution in general rather than in specific; that is, evolution is simply the only non-nonsensical explanation for the temporal divergence in the fossil record generally. The evidence that humans and chimps are not separate creations is that the emergence of the two species in the past is separated by about twenty million years. Pan troglodytes is about twenty million years old, while Homo sapiens emerged only 100,000 to 200,000 years ago. And of course, similar observations may be made about other species of life. So unless we have a creation that keeps happening, with new species being created all the time over hundreds of millions of years (which differs sharply from the Genesis account), creation is a model not consistent with the observed facts.

For this reason, I'm going to present answers that assume evolution, and explain why humans and chimpanzees probably share a common ancestor rather than one being descended from the other or hominids representing a completely distinct, non-primate line of animal life.

Evidence for humans and apes sharing a common ancestry is partly genetic and partly from the fossil record. You can find both here: The Evolution Evidence Page.

Details on the genetic similarities among humans, chimpanzees, gorillas, and orangutans can be found from that link by clicking on the "chromosomal evidence for common ancestry of apes and humans" on the frames on the left. Roughly stated, we have strong congruence of many of the human chromosomes, in one, two, or all three of the ape species, and greater genetic similarity than we find in other animals. (Which, given the phenotypic similarity, is what we should expect.)

Talk.origins, despite your ad-hom dismissal of that source, actually has a very good rundown on the fossil evidence for ancestral hominid species. Fossil Hominids: the evidence for human evolution. Here is a timeline on the process: Hominid Species. The Australopithecus genus is where the two lines appear to have branched, well before the Homo genus emerged. Note the characteristics listed in the key: small or large brains, small or large teeth, quadrupedalism or bipedalism.

Hominid Species The species Sahelanthropus tchadensis is the best candidate so far.

 

[Dr.Drock]

I deny that they prove a specific timetable, and I deny that they disprove anything in the bible.

If ppl interpret the Bible to say it's god's guiding hand behind evolution also ambiogenesis, I take no issue with that.

 

[koshergrl]

Denials of amateurs like koshergirl or Youwerecreated or me mean nothing.

Only empirical data on matters of nature count, not our faith beliefs or emotional feelings.

Precisely.

And the empirical data hasn't shown where, when or how our species came into being.

Thank you.

 

[Dragon]

I deny that they prove a specific timetable, and I deny that they disprove anything in the bible.

Well, they do prove a specific timetable, so you're wrong about that.

As for disproving what's in the Bible, note that I've been careful to speak of "a literal interpretation of the creation story in Genesis." That creation story goes into more specifics than simply saying "God created life." It has God creating the waters, the dry land, the sun, plants, animals, and man on different "days," each with its own separate one-time creation. If this is interpreted with complete literality, so that one has a literal six-day creation, well, that's easy to show as false. If we allow that "day" may be a metaphor for a longer and not-strictly-defined length of time, as some do, we still run into the problem that many plant species emerged long after the first animals, and the most recent known animal species are actually younger than man.

It is of course possible to take the creation story in Genesis as a metaphor or spiritual tale, and take away from it in terms of literal statement only divine guidance of the emergence of life. That, it is true evolution does not disprove.

 

[koshergrl]

What specific evidence proves we have the same ancestor?

Remember to leave out those pesky terms "theorize" and "believe".

Before I present the evidence, I'm going to point out that your request to leave out those two words betrays a failure to understand one of the key points of science: that we can never know anything for certain, beyond any possibility of doubt. Certainty beyond the possibility of doubt is the arena of dogma, not science. In fact, I submit that this is precisely why religious doctrine strays further from the evidence than science: it is believed with such arbitrary certainty that checking the facts is never done.

When you ask "what evidence shows we have the same ancestor?" it's also important to include the context of the question. If one accepts the model of evolution for the divergence of species, then the question means, "What evidence shows that humans and chimpanzees have the same ancestor, as opposed to humans being descended from chimps, or humans being off the primate tree altogether?" If not, then the question means, "What evidence shows that humans and chimpanzees have the same ancestor, as opposed to humans and chimps being separate creations?"

It's better to present evidence for evolution in general rather than in specific; that is, evolution is simply the only non-nonsensical explanation for the temporal divergence in the fossil record generally. The evidence that humans and chimps are not separate creations is that the emergence of the two species in the past is separated by about twenty million years. Pan troglodytes is about twenty million years old, while Homo sapiens emerged only 100,000 to 200,000 years ago. And of course, similar observations may be made about other species of life. So unless we have a creation that keeps happening, with new species being created all the time over hundreds of millions of years (which differs sharply from the Genesis account), creation is a model not consistent with the observed facts.

For this reason, I'm going to present answers that assume evolution, and explain why humans and chimpanzees probably share a common ancestor rather than one being descended from the other or hominids representing a completely distinct, non-primate line of animal life.

Evidence for humans and apes sharing a common ancestry is partly genetic and partly from the fossil record. You can find both here: The Evolution Evidence Page.

Details on the genetic similarities among humans, chimpanzees, gorillas, and orangutans can be found from that link by clicking on the "chromosomal evidence for common ancestry of apes and humans" on the frames on the left. Roughly stated, we have strong congruence of many of the human chromosomes, in one, two, or all three of the ape species, and greater genetic similarity than we find in other animals. (Which, given the phenotypic similarity, is what we should expect.)

Talk.origins, despite your ad-hom dismissal of that source, actually has a very good rundown on the fossil evidence for ancestral hominid species. Fossil Hominids: the evidence for human evolution. Here is a timeline on the process: Hominid Species. The Australopithecus genus is where the two lines appear to have branched, well before the Homo genus emerged. Note the characteristics listed in the key: small or large brains, small or large teeth, quadrupedalism or bipedalism.

Hominid Species The species Sahelanthropus tchadensis is the best candidate so far.

Thank you. "Bla bla bla bla blah" and "We don't know".

Exactly what I said.

 

[koshergrl]

"The basic issue is this: Despite the fact that human/ape genetic similarities are often overstated, YES, in many instances it is true that humans and chimps have very high levels of genetic similarity. Does this functional genetic similarity bolster neo-Darwinian evolution and human/ape common ancestry? Not at all. In fact, we could have predicted these similarities without any knowledge of Darwinian evolution simply by observing that humans have similar body plans to apes. If similar morphology implies similar genetics, then we could predict these high levels of similarities without even thinking about considerations pertaining to common ancestry.

But there's another important point to consider: Functional morphological and genetic similarities between humans and apes could be the result of common design just as much as common descent. That's a good principle to keep in mind as you investigate this issue: functional biological similarity is explained by common design just as well as it's explained by common descent. (In fact, in some cases--such as extreme convergent evolution--such similarity is explained much better by common design.)"

Human/Ape Common Ancestry: Following the Evidence - Evolution News & Views

 

[Youwerecreated]

That's fine, I take no issue with people saying it's God's guiding hand behind evolution.

Not what I said.

Believe me, I have no idea what your stances are, they change daily.

One day you're a full blown science denier.

The next day you admit to parts of evolution being fact.

The next day you completely buy into microevolution.

Then the 4th day you're back to saying Satan is behind science.

You're avoiding my questions again.

I have never denied real science.

I have never denied micro-evolution or in other words micro-adaptations.