Humans ARE apes. Thus what you're saying doesn't quite make sense.
To clarify:
Hominoidea
- humans (genus Homo)
- chimpanzees (genus Pan)
- gorillas (genus Gorilla)
- orangutans (genus Pongo)
Here we go again.. How many times have I said that classifying a species according to a classification system you evos invented is not evidence of anything. If you bothered to actually look at the differences you would clearly see that sophisticated language, higher reasoning ability, abstract thought, lack of a furry coat, 30% differences at least in the Y chromosome, insertions and deletions and genetic homoplasy that means human and chimp DNA is not the same at all, the 10% larger chimp genome, the differences in genome surface composition, the differnces in hot spots, the differences in expression would clearly separate mankind from beast if you evolutionists were not living in a dream world.
This is the modern-day grouping that you refer to when you say, "ape". Specifically these are the "great apes". The lesser apes are the gibbons. From what I understand there are three common uses of the term "ape": non-biologists may not distinguish between "monkeys" and "apes", or may use "ape" for any tailless monkey or nonhuman hominoid, whereas biologists traditionally used the term "ape" for all non-human hominoids, or the non-human apes.
Yeah we all know what the flavour of the month states. Too bad I have demonstrated it to be all crap. Ardi has redrawn your tree to a new flavour of the month
So if you're going to be specific and pretend to be scientific please, what do you mean?
I use your own evidence to demonstrate you lot have no idea what you are talking about. eg human feet on apes. I also use your own research to demonstrate even biased woffle still supports creation better than evolution eg Human metararsel
I don't need to speak to any of it when you speak to magic and what you would expect to find if magic happened. That's also ridiculous. You can't get the basics correct and fail to understand what a classification even IS much less how they come about. So you bandy about terms like "ancestor" and then apply it to the wrong groups.
No magic in the science I use as support other than the whole lot of of your evo science being nonsense..that is
Not even a nice try. But like I said, even if every single piece of research were falsified that would not support creation. By the way, the word is "metatarsal". One other thing, every one of your posts contain spelling errors. That also supports that you're just a touch out of sync with reality and perhaps a high school education.
My spelling errors do not bolster your stance lovey. I am telling you to either defend your stance with more than woffle or sustain from further tail chasing and challenges I have already more than adequately dealt with.
Well, nothing that you want to hear or can understand.
Then refute the research I posted that clearly states Lucy has chimpanzee traits, which BYW the common ancestor does not have eg Ardi
I do ignore how you cherry-pick evidence to support your desire to see us all created. Because you have an obvious bias. For all your ploys at pretending that you are scientifically based what you are is Biblically based. You just find bits and pieces of science that support what you want to say regardless of the context. You'll excuse me if I don't take your critique of my credibility to heart. And the word is "waffling".
I can refute any taxon you care to mention. Start a new thread and let's go....
I think he might just be busy with the holidays.
Australopithecus afarensis shows traits that are halfway between non-human ape and hominid. So how in the world did you manage something that nobody else has been able to do?
You mean your silly researchers have made Lucy out to be so. That was great when she was a human ancestor. She isn't and I have produced the evidence to back myself up. Clearly you, USingonito & Loudmouth are unable to wiggle your little butts out of this one..so you ignore it, try to lurk around every aside like spelling mistakes and resort to tail chasing....
Rememer this? or is your retentive memory challenged in some way?
The presence of the morphology in both the latter and Au. afarensis and its absence in modern humans cast doubt on the role of Au. afarensis as a modern human ancestor. The ramal anatomy of the earlier Ardipithecus ramidus is virtually that of a chimpanzee, corroborating the proposed phylogenetic scenario.
Gorilla-like anatomy on Australopithecus afarensis mandibles suggests Au. afarensis link to robust australopiths
I am still waiting for Loudmouth to address the whackey pelvis of Turkana Boy after he threw of to it possibly being a mix of individuals. I as stilkl waiting for US to have something to save Dawkins and now I have you flatly refusing to defend your fossils with any more than your opinion.
Waffle, chute and sitting. Lucy belongs in our family tree. I haven't read enough to categorically state whether that's as a direct ancestor or a branch but she's a hominid. No doubt. In your zeal to find out that mankind doesn't have ancestors you overlooked the possibility that you're simply wrong.
You still have said nothing of substance let alone say anything that looks like a refute
is not a river Egypt.
