| Creation & Evolution Forum for the discussion of this important topic. This forum is open to non-believers. There is a Christians-only forum in the Christians-only section too. |
 | | 
20th July 2005, 03:49 PM
|  | Contributor
   
| | Join Date: 26th August 2003
Posts: 14,673
Blessings: 1,152,484
Reps: 388,401,009,366,160,832 (power: 388,401,009,366,184) | | Originally Posted by The Bible Thumper You're somehow saying that I think that the Human is a direct acestor to the Chimpanzee (?). Obviously not the case, seeing as how both live concurrently.
Humans and chimps are cousins, so to speak. We share a common ancestor, just as you and your cousins share a common ancestor, your grandparents. Also, I descended from my parents and they are still alive. Is this a problem? No. My point is simple. Evolutionists claim that we descended from Chimp-like ancestors.
It would be more accurate to say "ape-like" instead of "chimp-like". But, you are correct. If this were true, then we would expect to find fossils that have characteristics of both ape like features found in chimps and human like features. That is exactly what we find in the fossil record. Therefore, the theory of comman ancestory between chimps and humans is supported by evidence. The modern Chimp represents, roughly, what modern Man was like about 4.1 million years ago (with exception to jaw and teeth--Chimps have gracile features here, whereas the Evolutionists claim 4.1 million years ago our ancestors had more robust features).
The chimp is considered to be less derived than Homo sapien, to put it in biological parlance. What I'm trying to figure out, is that according to the 'Out of Africa' theory (or is it the 'Out of China theory? Those faithful to Evolutionism can never seem to agree on anything...), certain Chimp-like species should have remained; some should have ventured into now Europe and some into China. In the meantime, 4+ million years should have produced radically different species from continent to continent. What we see instead is a single species of man dominating all parts of the globe. A geneticist couldn't tell us apart. The only thing that sets the African from the European from the asiatic apart would be more melatonin/fairer skin/slanted eyes respectively. BUT NO DISTINCT SPECIES WHATSOEVER!!!
It's called migration, you might want to look it up. Where is your speciation? Where is your genetic drift? Neither concept can save you or others like you who wear the Evolutionist cloth now... http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/speciation.html
Speciation has been observed. What's the problem here?
__________________
“Because they know not the forces of nature, and in order that they may have comrades in their ignorance, they suffer not that others should search out anything, and would have us believe like rustics and ask no reason...But we ask in all things a reason must be sought.” --William of Conches (c. 1090 – after 1154) |
20th July 2005, 03:53 PM
| | Regular Member
  
| | Join Date: 14th March 2005 Location: US
Posts: 172
Blessings: 130,997
Reps: 7,718,868 (power: 0) | | Originally Posted by Ledifni You got through the first paragraph before you went wrong. The modern chimp does not represent what humans were like about 4.1 million years ago. Rather, there is a common ancestor of humans and chimps that represents what humans and chimps were millions of years ago.
Now that that misunderstanding has been corrected, why don't you revise your reasoning to fit? Thanks.
"Rather, there is a common ancestor between us and the Chimp..." You could, of course, reduce this to the bird or similar animal that survived the catastrophe that wiped out the Dinosaurs. "Our common ancestor is the XYZ mammal that survived the Big Meteor..."
The point I was trying to make is that the verisimilitude between the Chimp and what those faithful in Evolutionism say was our ancestor some 4.1 million years ago are very similar. I mean, a dish-shaped nose. Braincase of some 400cc's. Some sharp teeth, signs of emerging bi-pedalism from pelvic bone remains, hight (both male Chimp and female) all seem to agree roughly with what the Evolutionist says we were 4+ million years ago. Please don't dispute this claim. If you do, you'll just be arguing among those who wear the same cloth as you.  |
20th July 2005, 03:53 PM
|  | Contributor
30  
| | Join Date: 26th January 2004
Posts: 7,999
Blessings: 1,069,617
Reps: 26,992,200,142,119,056 (power: 26,992,200,142,136) | | Originally Posted by The Bible Thumper You're the one who's doing the implying; mot me. In fact, I made it clear that the transitions I was referring to were those that should bridge us and our nearest cousin: the Chimpanzee.
No, you imply. I infer.
You asked for a the intermediate between chimp and man: Where is the intermediate between Chimp and Man?
By the way in which you asked the question, and the commonly understood definition of intermediate in regards to biology, it means you think you one descended from another. That's why we mentioned multiple times that humans and chimps are not descended from eachother so we wouldn't expect to find an intermediate between the two. You were using the term "intermediate" differently from the way we commonly use it. What you should have asked for is a common ancestor. It's not my fault you didn't ask your question clearly.
My mother is an intermediate between me and my grandmother, she is also a common ancestor between me and my brother. See the difference? And see why your request for an intermediate implies one being descended from the other?
Seeing as how you also went on a long thing about us saying we wouldn't expect to find an intermediate because we share a common ancestor and are not descended from eachother leaves me to believe that you are just back pedaling now.
Last edited by trunks2k; 20th July 2005 at 04:03 PM.
|
20th July 2005, 04:02 PM
| | Regular Member
| | Join Date: 14th March 2005 Location: US
Posts: 172
Blessings: 130,997
Reps: 7,718,868 (power: 0) | | | Now. Show us Aficanus Robustus. Show us Homo Erectus. Show us Ancient Cro-Magnun. Show us Neanderthal. And we don't want fossils, either. We want to see living specimens which should be alive and thriving, IAW the faith of Evolutionism.
Since creatures don't actually evolve, however, we will only see the created species. Man, Chimp, Gorilla, and all those that follow. All distinct from one another.
Creation = 3
Evolutionism = 0. |
20th July 2005, 04:06 PM
| | Contributor
30
| | Join Date: 26th January 2004
Posts: 7,999
Blessings: 1,069,617
Reps: 26,992,200,142,119,056 (power: 26,992,200,142,136) | | Originally Posted by The Bible Thumper Now. Show us Aficanus Robustus. Show us Homo Erectus. Show us Ancient Cro-Magnun. Show us Neanderthal. And we don't want fossils, either. We want to see living specimens which should be alive and thriving, IAW the faith of Evolutionism.
What in evolution says that they would still be living?
In fact, homo sapiens are considered responsible for the extinction of at least one other homind species (I can't recall which ATM). It was originally thought that we were close enough related that we could interbreed and just blended together. But more recent evidence has shown this to be false and it seems that we simply out competed them for resources.
And, IIRC Cro-Magnon man was just early homo sapiens. |
20th July 2005, 04:06 PM
| | Regular Member
| | Join Date: 14th March 2005 Location: US
Posts: 172
Blessings: 130,997
Reps: 7,718,868 (power: 0) | | | When I request that the Evolutionist show me living specimens of Robustus or Erectus (not to mention the many other so-called ancestors), the usual response would be, "Bible Thumper, haven't you ever heard of extinction?"
...Extinction. What a convenient excuse...
Last edited by The Bible Thumper; 20th July 2005 at 04:19 PM.
|
20th July 2005, 04:07 PM
| | Legend
| | Join Date: 2nd January 2002
Posts: 17,602
Blessings: 1,113,553
Reps: 139,009,712,884,886,112 (power: 139,009,712,884,915) | | Originally Posted by The Bible Thumper When I request that the Evolutionist show me living specimens of Robustus or Erectus (not to mention the many other so-called ancestors), the usual response would be, "Bible Thumper, haven't you ever heard of extinction?"
...Extinction. What a convinient excuse...  |
20th July 2005, 04:08 PM
| | Contributor
30
| | Join Date: 26th January 2004
Posts: 7,999
Blessings: 1,069,617
Reps: 26,992,200,142,119,056 (power: 26,992,200,142,136) | | Originally Posted by The Bible Thumper
...Extinction. What a convinient excuse...
Aaaaannnddd we're done here.
You had me going there for a little while. I was starting to think that you might actually be interested in learning something. But this just shows that you are not.
Move along folks, nothing to see here. |
20th July 2005, 04:13 PM
|  | aude sapere...sed praeterea, aude esse
24
 | | Join Date: 15th February 2004
Posts: 3,660
Blessings: 109,812
Reps: 15,076 (power: 28) | | | Ooh, the Discovery Institute, you mean the conservative Christian think tank? Yes, because when i think "objective source", I think "the Discovery Institute".
__________________
“Dangerous? Perhaps. But evil? She acts according to her nature. Is that evil?”
--Dream of the Endless |
20th July 2005, 04:15 PM
| | Regular Member
| | Join Date: 14th March 2005 Location: US
Posts: 172
Blessings: 130,997
Reps: 7,718,868 (power: 0) | | Originally Posted by trunks2k What in evolution says that they would still be living?
In fact, homo sapiens are considered responsible for the extinction of at least one other homind species (I can't recall which ATM). It was originally thought that we were close enough related that we could interbreed and just blended together. But more recent evidence has shown this to be false and it seems that we simply out competed them for resources.
And, IIRC Cro-Magnon man was just early homo sapiens.
It was originally thought that 'we' interbred with these separate species? Now 'we' out-competed them for resources? What about the 'out of China' theory? What about the Piltdown hoax? Can't Evolutionists ever get anything straight?
...the most absurd 'theory' ever... | | |
| Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes |  Linear Mode |
| | |
