The Evolution of Early Homo in One Image

[Hollie]

You ARE the STUPIDEST ASSIEST FARKER-IEST OF ALL-TIME. You need to go to the lowest level you SAF and POS. You have absolutely no evidence. All you have are papers and articles. That isn't evidence. Bashing yourself in the face with a sledgehammer would be evidence.

All you have is just evidence that atheist scientists wrote papers and got funding like I said. OTOH, I have hard evidence that humans could not have created water, the liquid essence of life AND...

"

Natural selection and evolution​

Natural selection is often considered to be synonymous with evolution, but the two ideas are distinct.

Concepts similar to Natural Selection were described by a number of people before Darwin, and in particular by creationist Edward Blyth, from 1835 to 1837. Blyth described it as "a mechanism by which the sick, old and unfit were removed from a population; that is, as a preserving factor and for the maintenance of the status quo—the created kind".[2]

Evolution uses the idea of Natural Selection to explain why some living things survive at the expense of other living things, but Natural Selection doesn't explain how the variations to select from came to be. Variations can arise in at least two different ways.

• When male and female produce offspring, half the offspring's DNA is derived from each parent. Thus the offspring have a different selection of genetic information than either parent.
• Mutations can alter the genetic information.

Some of the variations produced by these mechanisms are better suited for given environments than other variations. Natural Selection removes the variations that are unsuited or less suited to those environments, in favour of those more suited ("fitter") to those environments.

According to evolution, mutations can give rise to new genetic information, thus the offspring can have new capabilities that were not coded in the DNA of their parents, and that Natural Selection will therefore select for these new capabilities if they constitute a survival advantage.

Creationists reject this claim (of mutations producing new genetic information), on the grounds that it has not been observed in science.

In the example above of plans for a dam, the engineer started off with plans that had been designed by someone, and although some of the measurements were altered, nothing new was introduced. For example, if the original plans did not include a bypass tunnel, no amount of altering measurements on the plan would produce one.

This is analogous to what we observe in nature. We see that variations only come to already-existing plans (DNA), and that changes to the plans produce nothing new."

Natural selection - Conservapedia

www.conservapedia.com

BASH-BASH-BASH-LOL.

ID'iot creationers believe in a flat earth.

 

[james bond]

Once again, abu afak has no reply, but dumb wiki articles. That isn't evidence as it's just more of the same BS atheist science articles. That is all they have. Articles written for SELF-CONFIRMATION. What creationists observe is hard evidence like our atmosphere and water and we have shown natural selection as that which causes change in biology, but have shown that they do not become other species. Only what the DNA allows. Thus, we see a monkey doesn't become ape-human. Nor do dinosaurs become dino-birds. It also explains why we still have monkeys, birds and so-called prehistoric creatures like the coelacanth.

 

[abu afak]

I don't know what is more pitiful; the cartoon chart or the discussions that follow it. But I did get a kick out of this advice:

OUT of context 'short quote.'
But as far as the chart goes, it encompasses many pre-human Hominids regardless of their species name as they are all part of the progression of Homo Sapiens evolution. (ie, Brain size, loss of body hair, etc)
`

 

[Cougarbear]

There actually is. The fossil evidence shows unequivocally that more simple organisms predate more complex ones ... including humans.

But, if you're going to dispute a theory, you absolutely have to propose an alternative theory. Otherwise, you're just being a contrarian crackpot.

Fossils are viewed today with our prejudices of things in the past. When you are searching for evolution of simple to complex organisms, you will take the fossil records and force your beliefs into them. Just as you have.
I could be that Genesis is correct and that once life was flourishing in the waters, that God place there, God then placed plant life on the lands. Then, animals once plant life was plentiful. Then, mankind with living souls or spirit children of our Heavenly Parents.
Both theories and/or beliefs cannot be proven since they are observable of past history. There are tons of missing-missing links and poor analogies on DNA studies making huge mistakes and bogus conclusions. And, only the faithful will gain knowledge of God.

 

[beautress]

There actually is. The fossil evidence shows unequivocally that more simple organisms predate more complex ones ... including humans.

But, if you're going to dispute a theory, you absolutely have to propose an alternative theory. Otherwise, you're just being a contrarian crackpot.

You mean, human life started before this?

I prefer:
Michelangelo's God creates Adam:

​

 

[Cougarbear]

There's a bloody lot more than your silly belief some God did it.

Nothing is more silly than charts like these or the one about apes growing in stature and straightening up.

 

[Colin norris]

Nothing is more silly than charts like these or the one about apes growing in stature and straightening up.

You continue to believe in immaculate conceptions and virgin births.
The facts about the universe will be left to others.

 

[Hollie]

Nothing is more silly than charts like these or the one about apes growing in stature and straightening up.

Nothing is more silly than science deniers who feel their sacred cows are threatened.

It makes sense that ancestors of homo sapiens would grow in stature as they formed increasingly larger and more sophisticated social structures. A net affect would be more successful hunting and better diet.

There are obvious effects of a high protein, meat and poultry diet.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1993/01/23/japanese-standing-taller/94ba4f2d-68f9-49ed-9617-0d3287f41a1f/

In the last 30 years, the height of the average Japanese male has gone up nearly four inches, while average female height has increased about 2.7 inches. The average 20-year-old Japanese man today is 5 feet 8 1/4 inches, according to data released this month by Japan's Health and Welfare Ministry. That is about the same height as European 20-year-olds.

The fundamental change in the Japanese diet is visible every day at noon in every Japanese city, as people turn away from the traditional lunch of rice balls wrapped in sea weed to form long lines in front of places like McDonald's and Kentucky Fried Chicken, which now rank as the No. 1 and No. 2 most popular restaurants in Japan.

 

[Cougarbear]

You continue to believe in immaculate conceptions and virgin births.
The facts about the universe will be left to others.

"Will be?" You are god? Were you born of a virgin's birth in an immaculate way? If not, I'll take the words of the member of the Godhead that was, Jesus Christ. You have no facts about the origins of the universe. Just conjectures.

 

[Cougarbear]

Nothing is more silly than science deniers who feel their sacred cows are threatened.

It makes sense that ancestors of homo sapiens would grow in stature as they formed increasingly larger and more sophisticated social structures. A net affect would be more successful hunting and better diet.

There are obvious effects of a high protein, meat and poultry diet.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1993/01/23/japanese-standing-taller/94ba4f2d-68f9-49ed-9617-0d3287f41a1f/

In the last 30 years, the height of the average Japanese male has gone up nearly four inches, while average female height has increased about 2.7 inches. The average 20-year-old Japanese man today is 5 feet 8 1/4 inches, according to data released this month by Japan's Health and Welfare Ministry. That is about the same height as European 20-year-olds.

The fundamental change in the Japanese diet is visible every day at noon in every Japanese city, as people turn away from the traditional lunch of rice balls wrapped in sea weed to form long lines in front of places like McDonald's and Kentucky Fried Chicken, which now rank as the No. 1 and No. 2 most popular restaurants in Japan.

So, Japanese use to be hunched over, supper harry all over and pugged nosed, made grunting sounds 30 years ago, before growing 2.7 to 4.0 inches? Such stupidity! The Japanese are still the same people, not new ones.

 

[Hollie]

So, Japanese use to be hunched over, supper harry all over and pugged nosed, made grunting sounds 30 years ago, before growing 2.7 to 4.0 inches? Such stupidity! The Japanese are still the same people, not new ones.

So, Jesus used to be a shorter, dark haired, olive complexioned Middle Easterner until he became a tall, fair skinned, fair haired Caucasian looking hippie. Not surprising that westerners invented gods in their own image.

But yes, ignore the obvious fact that you noted the growth of Homo sapiens and there are obvious examples of changes in populations; Japanese generational changes.

There's a term for changes in population due to environmental factors. That term is ''biological evolution''.

The planet is not flat, BTW.

 

[Hollie]

"Will be?" You are god? Were you born of a virgin's birth in an immaculate way? If not, I'll take the words of the member of the Godhead that was, Jesus Christ. You have no facts about the origins of the universe. Just conjectures.

Jesus, ie: God Jr. never identified as being born of supernatural, magical conception.

Do you have your own, self edited version of a bible?

 

[Cougarbear]

So, Jesus used to be a shorter, dark haired, olive complexioned Middle Easterner until he became a tall, fair skinned, fair haired Caucasian looking hippie. Not surprising that westerners invented gods in their own image.

But yes, ignore the obvious fact that you noted the growth of Homo sapiens and there are obvious examples of changes in populations; Japanese generational changes.

There's a term for changes in population due to environmental factors. That term is ''biological evolution''.

The planet is not flat, BTW.

So, in 30 years, Japanese went from harry apes to taller man by 2-4 inches. Amazing!!! I didn't know we were fighting apes in WW2.
We don't know what Jesus looked like. He may have been short or tall. Being that his Father in Heaven may be tall and white, Leonardo may be right about his looks. He could be sort of a mix as well. My family is Jewish and I'm very white.

 

[fncceo]

I could be that Genesis is correct and that once life was flourishing in the waters, that God place there, God then placed plant life on the lands. Then, animals once plant life was plentiful. Then, mankind with living souls or spirit children of our Heavenly Parents.

Present your data, your carbon-dated fossil evidence, and your peer-reviewed papers supporting that hypothesis and we can discuss.

 

[Cougarbear]

Jesus, ie: God Jr. never identified as being born of supernatural, magical conception.

Do you have your own, self edited version of a bible?

John 14:9, "Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me John 6:32, "hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Show us the Father?"
Jesus then said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, it is not Moses who has given you the bread out of heaven, but it is My Father who gives you the true bread out of heaven."
John 8:58, "Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am."
John 11:25, "Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life; he who believes in Me will live even if he dies, and everyone who lives and believes in Me will never die. Do you believe this?"
John 14:6, "Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me."

There are plenty of times Jesus identified himself being the son of the Father God. It's you that seems to edit the Bible to suit your own lifestyle.

 

[fncceo]

My family is Jewish

And you're not? Conversion?

 

[Grumblenuts]

Oopsies. Maybe he has yet to accept Jesus Christ as his Lord and Savior Son of God..

 

[Grumblenuts]

Well, proselytize in the Science and Technology section anyway..

 

[fncceo]

harry apes

Why would anyone name a Japanese ape "Harry"?

 

[Hollie]

So, in 30 years, Japanese went from harry apes to taller man by 2-4 inches. Amazing!!! I didn't know we were fighting apes in WW2.
We don't know what Jesus looked like. He may have been short or tall. Being that his Father in Heaven may be tall and white, Leonardo may be right about his looks. He could be sort of a mix as well. My family is Jewish and I'm very white.

In a mere 30 years, populations change. There's no reason why anatomy can't change dramatically in 30k years or 3 million years. I think the biggest problem the hyper-religious have with evolution is that so much of science and biology contradicts biblical tales and fables. There is the FACT that species change. There is a predictable range of genetic variation in a species, as well as an expected rate of random mutations. It's really comical how the religious will accept that ''kinds'' can evolve, even though they can't even define what a ''kind'' is, and they must limit evolution of ''kinds'' to a mere 4,000 years since the flood myth. But they can't accept anything more than that. They give no reason for this fabricated limitation.


Western Christians have invented their gods in their own image just as the Hindu's have done, just as the Greeks gave done, etc., etc. Christianity simply carried on the traditions of finding a level of comfort in gods that shared their physical characteristics.