Dhampir Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 I do believe the world evolved into what it is today. I do believe that humans have evolved into what they are today. I do NOT believe that we were evolved from something else, or branched off from any other specie. I guess this topic is kinda moot altogether, because I believe God made human beings Wendyshrug.gif You shouldn't believe we evolved without at least a rudimentary understanding of what evolution entails. That's not an insult, I'm just saying it doesn't seem worthwhile to back a concept you don't know about. That said, that you don't believe we evolved from something else doesn't make sense in light of your newest revelation. If we evolved at all, that means we were something else before. It may technically have still been human, but it was something else. In fact, if you've heard the term "transition form", then it might help you to know that every person living is a transition form. You are the transition between what your parents were, and what your children are/will be. Furthermore, as to "branching off" is when large numbers of a certain organism divide and live apart from one another, the differing environmental pressures causing them to develop in different ways. The longer they live separately, the more different they become from one another. This doesn't even have to result in speciation. Take the Tutsis, and the Hutus, two different African peoples. I forget which is which, but one group is known to almost always grow to about 7 feet in height, whereas the other is known to only grow to about 4 feet. Now, can the Tutsis and Hutus interbreed? Of course they can. However the reasons that each group grows to their respective heights is environmental. You see, their heights are necessary for the environments they live in. If one member fails to grow to 7 feet, they aren't expected to survive very long. And if one member of the other group grows taller than 4 feet, their survival is likewise endangered. Can they interbreed? Sure, but they probably shouldn't, because that would hurt the offspring's chances of living in either environment. In a few thousand years, can each group grow so far apart that they can no longer interbreed? Entirely possible. Could other humans still interbreed with either group? Entirely possible. Branching additionally, is NOT a requirement for speciation. If there were no chimps, and our common ancestor simply developed from what they were into us humans, that is, if there had been no branching whatsoever, it would be the same as if there had been chimps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PandaPirate Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 Maybe as Legion said earlier, maybe I feel special or something. Don't worry Yoyo. I think you're special too... ... in a special olympics kind of way. Awww.....Legion!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The-Captain Posted March 18, 2009 Share Posted March 18, 2009 Jeezy Chreezy! Nine pages to establish that YoYo does not in fact find the theory of evolution convincing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saviourmachine Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 I think what got everybody in a frizzy was when I was trying to explain that the idea, scientific inquiry, scientific speculation, theory; these words have all been used in terminology when it comes to describing evolution of man, and their possible migration. I don't know maybe I'm missing something. Those that gave advice, in regard to my questions, thanks. Those that vented, I apologize if the thread offended. Missing something..............?????? Understatement of the century. Be happy that you are part of one of the last generations that is "allowed" to believe that they have no common ancestor with the rest of what lives. Probably your kids will already laugh about you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Searska Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 Ordinarily, I prefer to lurk rather than get myself involved in this sort of thing, and I'll probably get pounced on for it, but here it goes. Theoretically, you could make a human/chimp hybrid. There have been experiments done that means such a thing can be done *in theory.* It's never been put to practice because both humans and chimps live a long time. Upwards of 40 years for a chimp, and well over 70 for a human. Assuming you were able to pull it off... What do you do with the result? What do you do with this twisted creature you have birthed? How do you care for such a being? The experiment has been proven in a lab, but never taken to full term. One scientist was in the process of getting permission. http://xenophilius.wordpress.com/2008/12/07/humanzee/ A little more information there. There was something similar on wikipedia, but that site tends to worry me a bit when it comes to reliability. There was also some mention of tool-usage among non-primate creatures. It is...speciesist to think that humans are the only creatures bright enough to use a tool. Tool using is not a uniquely human ability. Granted, humans excel at it, have turned the concept into the very core of what it means to be human. But this is due to the fact that humans have a very unspecified body form. We aren't predators with sharp claws or fangs, we aren't particularly great swimmers or particularly powerful runners. But we have an opposable thumb and a big brain. We made up for what we lacked as we went. It's how humans moved from scavenger/prey to predator. No claws? We'll make spears. Truthfully, I don't care one way or the other if you don't believe in science. To each his own. Evolution, like almost everything in science, requires a lengthy explanation, mountains of evidence, and a short lifetime to fully comprehend. It is much easier to simply say "god did it" than give the full explanation, which would require several hours and a large stack of collee text books ranging from basic biology to geology. I prefer Occam's Razor here. The idea that a benevolent god created this universe dies the death of a thousand conditions. But evolution? Every hole you attempt to punch into it eventually patches up, the more we learn. To understand, you have to be open to the idea. YoYo, I get the feeling that you simply shut down. You hear, but you do not listen. I get the feeling that there is more to this rejection of evolution than simply the Bible. *shrug* Perhaps accepting this will make you feel less "special?" Is it perhaps that you think humanity would be diminished by our ancestry? I find it...inspiring, actually. To think that the whole of civilization came about because of a few small changes to a primate's genetic code...for me, it is a far more beautiful thing than saying humanity was crafted. (Then again, it would give someone to blame for the state of things...) Ah, well, just my two-cents. My apologies if this became a TL;DR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abiyoyo Posted March 25, 2009 Author Share Posted March 25, 2009 Probably your kids will already laugh about you. Yeah, and maybe they will laugh at you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dhampir Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 That's about as likely as them laughing at us about Gravity. No, literally. Evolution isn't going to be discredited in the near future. The ONLY things scientists debate is exactly how it happens (and things along that vein). What we may believe to be the exact mechanism behind it may be laughable in 50 years, but since most lay persons don't have that great an understanding of what that's all about, chances are no one outside of the scientific community will be laughing, and they'll only be laughing at their predecessors, not us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest M_H Posted March 28, 2009 Share Posted March 28, 2009 Humans have 23 base pairs while the other primates have 24. Human chromosome 2 turns out to have 2 centromeres (1 disabled) and pieces of telomeres (the ends of chromosomes) inside of it. Additionally, when you compare genes from it to genes in our closest evolutionary relatives, ch.2 maps to 2 seperate chromosomes in other primates like bonobos or the orangutan. What happened is that sometime after the common ancestor between us and the other primates, those 2 chromosomes fused and became human chromosome 2. This is powerful evidence of common descent by itself. Add in endogenous retrovirus (virii that put their code back into DNA) that get passed down different branches of the evolutionary tree, tiktaalik being found in exactly the place evolutionary theory says it would, the evolution of nylon eating bacteria, Professor Richard Lenski's citrate evolved bacteria at 31k generations and the thousands of other details, well. . . . Or god hates biologists and wants them all to go to hell. Geologists and astronomers too. Close your eyes and continue to believe the lies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legion Posted March 28, 2009 Share Posted March 28, 2009 Close your eyes and continue to believe the lies. Damn, I bet that felt good to say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scorpion Posted March 28, 2009 Share Posted March 28, 2009 Or god hates biologists and wants them all to go to hell. Geologists and astronomers too. Don't forget those god hatin', bible burnin' physicists too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abiyoyo Posted March 28, 2009 Author Share Posted March 28, 2009 What happened is that sometime after the common ancestor between us and the other primates, those 2 chromosomes fused and became human chromosome 2. So, then, God looks like an orangutan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted March 28, 2009 Share Posted March 28, 2009 So, then, God looks like an orangutan Yes, with a long white beard, big belly, and a read dress. And he got a bunch of flying reindeer too. I think the one with the red nose is called Jesus, but I'm not sure... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ariella Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 I think humans are not evolved from chimps. You're right, we're not. Do you care to elaborate on that Hans? I thought chimps/apes were suppose to be some kind of link to humans evolution? They are. It's even possible to calculate both the approximate time of the evolutionary split between the species, and the ways in which that split occured at the genetic level. Chimps have 24 pairs of chromosomes, we have 23. Our split from those primates involved, among other things, the loss of a chromosome pair, much the same way that chromosomes come and go over periods of time. The major purpose the Y chromosome serves is being the location of the SRY (sex determining) gene. If that gene "moves" to another chromosome in a way that "works out", the Y chromosome will be gone forever, hopefully taking men who leave the toilet seat up along with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMathGuy Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 At this point in research, and study of it. A time machine and a video camera! Your insistence that only a time machine and a video camera will convince you is totally unreasonable! Let me illustrate with an analogy: If you were walking down the road and you encountered two badly battered cars in the ditch, let's say a red Ford Taurus and a blue Chevy Caprice, and if furthermore there was a dent in the front of the Ford Taurus whose shape was a perfect match to a dent in the side of the blue Caprice, and furthermore there were scrape marks of red paint along the dent in the blue Caprice (and no part of the blue Caprice was painted red), and similar blue scrape marks on the front of the Taurus, and forensic tests showed a chemical in the red paint scrapes on the blue Caprice that is only found in the particular paint of that specific model of red Ford Taurus (it is not found in any other red paint of any other make or model of car), and the same thing was true of the blue paint scrapes, and furthermore there were skid marks along the road that intersect at a pile of rubble from the two cars in the middle of the road, rapidly change direction, and end at the position of the Red Ford Taurus and Blue Chevy Caprice, respectively, and upon forensic testing these skid marks' rubber shows the exact same chemical composition as the rubber that is in the tires of each of those two cars, and literally thousands of other similar pieces of evidence all in perfect correspondence with the theory that the two cars had collided, such as perhaps broken glass, fragments of the interior of the two cars, pieces of metal from the frames of the two cars, etc.--would you then say "Well we can't really know for sure that the red Ford Taurus collided with the blue Chevy Caprice. The only thing that will convince me is a time machine and a video camera!" ? Tell me, do you think that kind of argument would hold up in court? Could you really see any sane person trying to make that argument? And yet this is exactly the same thing you are doing when it comes to evolution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Marty Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 I think humans are not evolved from chimps. You're right, we're not. Do you care to elaborate on that Hans? I thought chimps/apes were suppose to be some kind of link to humans evolution? They are. It's even possible to calculate both the approximate time of the evolutionary split between the species, and the ways in which that split occured at the genetic level. Chimps have 24 pairs of chromosomes, we have 23. Our split from those primates involved, among other things, the loss of a chromosome pair, much the same way that chromosomes come and go over periods of time. The major purpose the Y chromosome serves is being the location of the SRY (sex determining) gene. If that gene "moves" to another chromosome in a way that "works out", the Y chromosome will be gone forever, hopefully taking men who leave the toilet seat up along with it. Don't bother, we've explained this point to him many times over. The question will only be asked again in a different form. He either is not able to understand, or is simply unwilling. My vote is for the latter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taphophilia Posted May 8, 2009 Share Posted May 8, 2009 They are. It's even possible to calculate both the approximate time of the evolutionary split between the species, and the ways in which that split occured at the genetic level. Chimps have 24 pairs of chromosomes, we have 23. Our split from those primates involved, among other things, the loss of a chromosome pair, much the same way that chromosomes come and go over periods of time. The major purpose the Y chromosome serves is being the location of the SRY (sex determining) gene. If that gene "moves" to another chromosome in a way that "works out", the Y chromosome will be gone forever, hopefully taking men who leave the toilet seat up along with it. I wanted to highlight this post because reality is so much more interesting and exciting than hiding behind silly superstions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator florduh Posted May 8, 2009 Super Moderator Share Posted May 8, 2009 hopefully taking men who leave the toilet seat up along with it. Perhaps women should put the seat up after they finish, in anticipation of the next man who might want to use the facility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Marty Posted May 8, 2009 Share Posted May 8, 2009 I put both seats down...if I have to touch the toilet seat everytime I use it, women have to too. I actually had a girl complain that I put BOTH seats down. Make up your mind!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts