CDZ Questions About Evolution

[S.J.]

This thread is intended to be an opportunity for anyone who is interested to ask questions of those who subscribe to the theory of evolution. It is not intended to be a Creation vs Evolution debate.

Anyone can ask and anyone can answer but please be respectful. This isn't intended to be an opportunity to insult those with a different viewpoint, so please refrain from flaming and name calling. Thanks for your cooperation.

 

[S.J.]

How long has man been on Earth?

 

[pinqy]

How long has man been on Earth?

Around 500,000 years, if memory serves. are the oldest homo sapiens fossils. But if you want to extend "man" to mean the genus homo, then I think it's 1.5 to 2 million years.

 

[toxicmedia]

This thread is intended to be an opportunity for anyone who is interested to ask questions of those who subscribe to the theory of evolution. It is not intended to be a Creation vs Evolution debate.

Anyone can ask and anyone can answer but please be respectful. This isn't intended to be an opportunity to insult those with a different viewpoint, so please refrain from flaming and name calling. Thanks for your cooperation.

Evolution is not a theory. It is observable changes/adaptations/mutations in species over time. Nobody disputes that reality.

If we want to debate a theory on the subject, might I suggest debating "Natural Selection", which is actually a theory.

 

[Syriusly]

How long has man been on Earth?

Not really a question about evolution is it?

There are several steps to answering that question- what do you personally accept as a definition of 'man'?

Secondly, what evidence are you willing to accept?

 

[S.J.]

How long has man been on Earth?

Not really a question about evolution is it?

There are several steps to answering that question- what do you personally accept as a definition of 'man'?

Secondly, what evidence are you willing to accept?

It is, actually. I'll explain after I've gotten a general consensus from a few of you.

 

[S.J.]

We're all familiar with the question "If we evolved from apes, why are the apes still here?". The answer I've always heard is that evolution is not a replacement, but an enhancement. The apes didn't disappear, they just branched off.

My question is: Why are none of the lower forms of man still in existence? The apes that we supposedly evolved from are still around but the more recent ancestors are not. If they were an enhancement of the ape, why did at least some of them not survive?

 

[G.T.]

We're all familiar with the question "If we evolved from apes, why are the apes still here?". The answer I've always heard is that evolution is not a replacement, but an enhancement. The apes didn't disappear, they just branched off.

My question is: Why are none of the lower forms of man still in existence? The apes that we supposedly evolved from are still around but the more recent ancestors are not. If they were an enhancement of the ape, why did at least some of them not survive?

Evolution DOESNT SAY we evolved from Apes. It says we SHARED A COMMON ANCESTOR. Try running that over and over and over through your mind until the meaning of those words makes sense, and then you'll understand why this post of yours I am quoting TOTALLY exposes that you havent even BEGUN to study the subject, so WHY PLAY? Because: politics, and an o.c.d. for "argument." Waste of time.

 

[jwoodie]

Evolution is not a theory. It is observable changes/adaptations/mutations in species over time. Nobody disputes that reality.

If we want to debate a theory on the subject, might I suggest debating "Natural Selection", which is actually a theory.

Why the word games? There are no issues with a generic meaning of "evolution" even if it is described as "observable changes/adaptations/mutations in species over time." Neither is there any controversy over "natural selection" which is inherently implied within "evolution."

Everyone else understands that the two substantive issues regarding this subject are how life started on this planet and how different species developed from it. If you are unable or unwilling to address these issues, please try another forum.
observable changes/adaptations/mutations in species over time

 

[jwoodie]

Try running that over and over and over through your mind until the meaning of those words makes sense

Good description of brain washing. Seems to have worked on you.

 

[S.J.]

We're all familiar with the question "If we evolved from apes, why are the apes still here?". The answer I've always heard is that evolution is not a replacement, but an enhancement. The apes didn't disappear, they just branched off.

My question is: Why are none of the lower forms of man still in existence? The apes that we supposedly evolved from are still around but the more recent ancestors are not. If they were an enhancement of the ape, why did at least some of them not survive?

Evolution DOESNT SAY we evolved from Apes. It says we SHARED A COMMON ANCESTOR. Try running that over and over and over through your mind until the meaning of those words makes sense, and then you'll understand why this post of yours I am quoting TOTALLY exposes that you havent even BEGUN to study the subject, so WHY PLAY? Because: politics, and an o.c.d. for "argument." Waste of time.

An obvious attempt to poison the well when you have no answer.

 

[G.T.]

We're all familiar with the question "If we evolved from apes, why are the apes still here?". The answer I've always heard is that evolution is not a replacement, but an enhancement. The apes didn't disappear, they just branched off.

My question is: Why are none of the lower forms of man still in existence? The apes that we supposedly evolved from are still around but the more recent ancestors are not. If they were an enhancement of the ape, why did at least some of them not survive?

Evolution DOESNT SAY we evolved from Apes. It says we SHARED A COMMON ANCESTOR. Try running that over and over and over through your mind until the meaning of those words makes sense, and then you'll understand why this post of yours I am quoting TOTALLY exposes that you havent even BEGUN to study the subject, so WHY PLAY? Because: politics, and an o.c.d. for "argument." Waste of time.

An obvious attempt to poison the well when you have no answer.

Oh so you double down, surprise!

 

[S.J.]

We're all familiar with the question "If we evolved from apes, why are the apes still here?". The answer I've always heard is that evolution is not a replacement, but an enhancement. The apes didn't disappear, they just branched off.

My question is: Why are none of the lower forms of man still in existence? The apes that we supposedly evolved from are still around but the more recent ancestors are not. If they were an enhancement of the ape, why did at least some of them not survive?

Evolution DOESNT SAY we evolved from Apes. It says we SHARED A COMMON ANCESTOR. Try running that over and over and over through your mind until the meaning of those words makes sense, and then you'll understand why this post of yours I am quoting TOTALLY exposes that you havent even BEGUN to study the subject, so WHY PLAY? Because: politics, and an o.c.d. for "argument." Waste of time.

An obvious attempt to poison the well when you have no answer.

Oh so you double down, surprise!

If you can't or don't want to answer the question, fine, but please stop trolling this thread!

 

[320 Years of History]

We're all familiar with the question "If we evolved from apes, why are the apes still here?". The answer I've always heard is that evolution is not a replacement, but an enhancement. The apes didn't disappear, they just branched off.

My question is: Why are none of the lower forms of man still in existence? The apes that we supposedly evolved from are still around but the more recent ancestors are not. If they were an enhancement of the ape, why did at least some of them not survive?

Evolution DOESNT SAY we evolved from Apes. It says we SHARED A COMMON ANCESTOR. Try running that over and over and over through your mind until the meaning of those words makes sense, and then you'll understand why this post of yours I am quoting TOTALLY exposes that you havent even BEGUN to study the subject, so WHY PLAY? Because: politics, and an o.c.d. for "argument." Waste of time.

An obvious attempt to poison the well when you have no answer.

Oh so you double down, surprise!

If you can't or don't want to answer the question, fine, but please stop trolling this thread!

I don't think s/he was "trolling" at all. I believe s/he was referring to your use of the repetition tactic/fallacious line of presentation.

 

[FA_Q2]

We're all familiar with the question "If we evolved from apes, why are the apes still here?". The answer I've always heard is that evolution is not a replacement, but an enhancement. The apes didn't disappear, they just branched off.

My question is: Why are none of the lower forms of man still in existence? The apes that we supposedly evolved from are still around but the more recent ancestors are not. If they were an enhancement of the ape, why did at least some of them not survive?

Evolution DOESNT SAY we evolved from Apes. It says we SHARED A COMMON ANCESTOR. Try running that over and over and over through your mind until the meaning of those words makes sense, and then you'll understand why this post of yours I am quoting TOTALLY exposes that you havent even BEGUN to study the subject, so WHY PLAY? Because: politics, and an o.c.d. for "argument." Waste of time.

An obvious attempt to poison the well when you have no answer.

Does not change the fact that we did not evolve from apes. That is an incorrect assumption on your part.

 

[S.J.]

We're all familiar with the question "If we evolved from apes, why are the apes still here?". The answer I've always heard is that evolution is not a replacement, but an enhancement. The apes didn't disappear, they just branched off.

My question is: Why are none of the lower forms of man still in existence? The apes that we supposedly evolved from are still around but the more recent ancestors are not. If they were an enhancement of the ape, why did at least some of them not survive?

Evolution DOESNT SAY we evolved from Apes. It says we SHARED A COMMON ANCESTOR. Try running that over and over and over through your mind until the meaning of those words makes sense, and then you'll understand why this post of yours I am quoting TOTALLY exposes that you havent even BEGUN to study the subject, so WHY PLAY? Because: politics, and an o.c.d. for "argument." Waste of time.

An obvious attempt to poison the well when you have no answer.

Oh so you double down, surprise!

If you can't or don't want to answer the question, fine, but please stop trolling this thread!

I don't think s/he was "trolling" at all. I believe s/he was referring to your use of the repetition tactic/fallacious line of presentation.

Of course you don't, it's the same thing you do.

 

[S.J.]

We're all familiar with the question "If we evolved from apes, why are the apes still here?". The answer I've always heard is that evolution is not a replacement, but an enhancement. The apes didn't disappear, they just branched off.

My question is: Why are none of the lower forms of man still in existence? The apes that we supposedly evolved from are still around but the more recent ancestors are not. If they were an enhancement of the ape, why did at least some of them not survive?

Evolution DOESNT SAY we evolved from Apes. It says we SHARED A COMMON ANCESTOR. Try running that over and over and over through your mind until the meaning of those words makes sense, and then you'll understand why this post of yours I am quoting TOTALLY exposes that you havent even BEGUN to study the subject, so WHY PLAY? Because: politics, and an o.c.d. for "argument." Waste of time.

An obvious attempt to poison the well when you have no answer.

Does not change the fact that we did not evolve from apes. That is an incorrect assumption on your part.

Ok, then instead of splitting hairs and playing word games, why don't you just spell out exactly what your claim is? Are the apes our ancestors or not?

 

[FA_Q2]

We're all familiar with the question "If we evolved from apes, why are the apes still here?". The answer I've always heard is that evolution is not a replacement, but an enhancement. The apes didn't disappear, they just branched off.

My question is: Why are none of the lower forms of man still in existence? The apes that we supposedly evolved from are still around but the more recent ancestors are not. If they were an enhancement of the ape, why did at least some of them not survive?

Evolution DOESNT SAY we evolved from Apes. It says we SHARED A COMMON ANCESTOR. Try running that over and over and over through your mind until the meaning of those words makes sense, and then you'll understand why this post of yours I am quoting TOTALLY exposes that you havent even BEGUN to study the subject, so WHY PLAY? Because: politics, and an o.c.d. for "argument." Waste of time.

An obvious attempt to poison the well when you have no answer.

Does not change the fact that we did not evolve from apes. That is an incorrect assumption on your part.

Ok, then instead of splitting hairs and playing word games, why don't you just spell out exactly what your claim is? Are the apes our ancestors or not?

It has already been made clear - we share an ancestor.

 

[baileyn45]

We're all familiar with the question "If we evolved from apes, why are the apes still here?". The answer I've always heard is that evolution is not a replacement, but an enhancement. The apes didn't disappear, they just branched off.

My question is: Why are none of the lower forms of man still in existence? The apes that we supposedly evolved from are still around but the more recent ancestors are not. If they were an enhancement of the ape, why did at least some of them not survive?

Evolution DOESNT SAY we evolved from Apes. It says we SHARED A COMMON ANCESTOR. Try running that over and over and over through your mind until the meaning of those words makes sense, and then you'll understand why this post of yours I am quoting TOTALLY exposes that you havent even BEGUN to study the subject, so WHY PLAY? Because: politics, and an o.c.d. for "argument." Waste of time.

An obvious attempt to poison the well when you have no answer.

Does not change the fact that we did not evolve from apes. That is an incorrect assumption on your part.

We are apes. Just one more in a long line.

 

[S.J.]

We're all familiar with the question "If we evolved from apes, why are the apes still here?". The answer I've always heard is that evolution is not a replacement, but an enhancement. The apes didn't disappear, they just branched off.

My question is: Why are none of the lower forms of man still in existence? The apes that we supposedly evolved from are still around but the more recent ancestors are not. If they were an enhancement of the ape, why did at least some of them not survive?

Evolution DOESNT SAY we evolved from Apes. It says we SHARED A COMMON ANCESTOR. Try running that over and over and over through your mind until the meaning of those words makes sense, and then you'll understand why this post of yours I am quoting TOTALLY exposes that you havent even BEGUN to study the subject, so WHY PLAY? Because: politics, and an o.c.d. for "argument." Waste of time.

An obvious attempt to poison the well when you have no answer.

Does not change the fact that we did not evolve from apes. That is an incorrect assumption on your part.

Ok, then instead of splitting hairs and playing word games, why don't you just spell out exactly what your claim is? Are the apes our ancestors or not?

It has already been made clear - we share an ancestor.

You had your chance. Obviously you are more interested in derailing this thread than you are in answering questions. Bye bye.