Humans did NOT evolve from Apes...

[miknik5]

Cain was very different from Abel

Not only that, GOD further shows that not all are exactly as they should be

And HE not only shows this but knows and reveals this to us even before a child does anything

Esau and Jacob were twins
In The same womb at the same time

And yet GOD chose Jacob and not Esau

 

[miknik5]

No, you are trying to do something that is never seen in biology. New species form, but once they are past the point where they cannot produce offspring there is no going back.

By the way, your wording is incorrect. Men are apes, you are an ape. To be specific you are a member of the family of great apes.

I'm not trying to do do anything

Nor do I want to

I would like.very much never to have seen what I have seen

 

[Subduction Zone]

Hilarious.

I trust medicine because it has been deemed safe by the FDA, and generally is, or because I know it works. Funny that now I have to belive in evolution to trust medication. I mean...seriously? What a riot.

You create what ever weirdness you *think* works for you, but to me, it appears a desperate means of defense...very desperate.

You don't have to accept the fact of evolution, but it does make one a bit of a hypocrite to rely on evolution and to deny it at the same time.

By the way, a firm understanding of evolution is necessary to be a paleontologist and TBDude65 could probably give you the specifics on how paleontology and oil exploration go hand in hand. In other words, whenever you drive your car you are tacitly endorsing the theory of evolution.

 

[miknik5]

No, you are trying to do something that is never seen in biology. New species form, but once they are past the point where they cannot produce offspring there is no going back.

By the way, your wording is incorrect. Men are apes, you are an ape. To be specific you are a member of the family of great apes.

Im not an ape

 

[Subduction Zone]

I'm not trying to do do anything

Nor do I want to

I would like.very much never to have seen what I have seen

Oh, I see you edited your post.

You may not be trying to do that conscientiously, but you are still trying to do the impossible.

And what have you seen that you wish that you had not seen?

 

[TBDude65]

Im not an ape

Yes, you (and literally every other human on Earth) are an ape. Specifically you are a Great Ape. You are in the same family as Chimpanzees and Gorillas.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Im not an ape

Actually you are:

Hominidae - Wikipedia

"The Hominidae (/hɒˈmɪnᵻdiː/), whose members are known as great apes[note 1] or hominids, are a taxonomic family of primates that includes seven extant species in four genera: Pongo, the Bornean and Sumatran orangutan; Gorilla, the eastern and western gorilla; Pan, the common chimpanzee and the bonobo; and Homo, which includes modern Humans and its extinct relatives (e.g., the Neanderthal), and ancestors, such as Homo erectus.["

 

[miknik5]

Oh, I see you edited your post.

You may not be trying to do that conscientiously, but you are still trying to do the impossible.

And what have you seen that you wish that you had not seen?

Gehazzis

 

[Kenny'sID]

I already gave you that evidence in the form of 2 commonly used textbooks used to present and teach this evidence. There is literally no better place for you to start than those textbooks if you actually want the examples you claim to want.

I can give you pictures of species of Spinatrypa (a brachiopod genus I am working on) as a way of demonstrating the evolutionary relationships within a single clade, but I don't think it'll be as easy for you to follow as simpler examples from the aforementioned textbooks. I attached a first draft of a figure for one of the Spinatrypa species (the individual pictures aren't labeled yet because I haven't gotten that far along yet). These are images of S. hystrix, a species of Spinatrypa that descended from S. trulla and flourished in the northern Appalachian Basin during the Late Devonian. We can look at and compare the morphological traits (internal and external) from S. hystrix and S. trulla and determine that these two species represent the same lineage with the latter being the ancestor of the former. The great thing about doing these studies with brachiopods (and other invertebrates) is that they have easy to identify morphological structures and they are abundant in the rock record. Making it easy to get large sample sizes to be able calculate basic statistics for reliably.

Is that what you want?

OK, you have some pictures there, now how do they or whatever else you offer, prove evolution?

 

[miknik5]

And by the way your comment, oh I saw you edited your post
Be honest sir, or don't address me again

What exactly did you see me "edit"
Typos?

I didn't change at all what I was saying

I didn't post something and decide on second thought to remove it

Yet that by your comment is what you would like to imply

 

[miknik5]

Yes, you (and literally every other human on Earth) are an ape. Specifically you are a Great Ape. You are in the same family as Chimpanzees and Gorillas.

Nope

 

[Kenny'sID]

You don't have to accept the fact of evolution, but it does make one a bit of a hypocrite to rely on evolution and to deny it at the same time.

The last time we discussed this you failed miserably, so you don't get to waste any more of my time.

TBD, however has not done that as of yet so, giving benefit of the doubt still.

 

[TBDude65]

OK, you have some pictures there, now how do they or whatever else you offer, prove evolution?

They demonstrate descent with modification by looking at how the morphological traits differ through time between ancestor and descendent (I have no pictured the ancestor species in that picture). Meaning that we sample these species through time (in the rock record) and compare the morphology of these species in order to look at how, when, and why they evolved.

These extremely basic details are explained in great detail...in those textbooks that you should consider reading. Whole chapters are devoted to explaining these observations and examples in detail. They are fully sourced and include not only pictures of fossils, but cladograms and other independent lines of evidence.

 

[TBDude65]

Nope

This is akin to claiming that an ant is not a member of Hexapoda.

 

[TBDude65]

OK, you have some pictures there, now how do they or whatever else you offer, prove evolution?

If you want a full detailed explanation for the Spinatrypa genus, you'll have to wait until I finish writing it up. In the meantime, you can look up studies on other clades of organisms. I'd link you to them but you apparently have a phobia of links.

 

[miknik5]

This is akin to claiming that an ant is not a member of Hexapoda.

an ant does naturally what it was naturally designed to do
And because of this it bears fruit with seed in it according to its likeness /kind

Fruit being its offspring
Seed being its genetic material

 

[TBDude65]

Your response doesn't really apply to literally anything I've said.

an ant does naturally what it was naturally designed to do
And because of this it bears fruit with seed in it according to its likeness /kind

Fruit being its offspring
Seed being its genetic material

 

[Kenny'sID]

and compare the morphology of these species in order to look at how, when, and why they evolved

Example please.

 

[TBDude65]

Example please.

Examples of what? Morphological traits that show the evolution from S. trulla to S. hystrix?
Rib density
Spine morphology
Rib formation
Muscle scars
Shape (juvenile vs adult and the way shape changes throughout ontogeny)
Shell micro-textures

It's literally a project in progress. If you want a completed project (or literally dozens), check out those textbooks

 

[Subduction Zone]

And by the way your comment, oh I saw you edited your post
Be honest sir, or don't address me again

What exactly did you see me "edit"
Typos?

I didn't change at all what I was saying

I didn't post something and decide on second thought to remove it

Yet that by your comment is what you would like to imply

I was going to comment on the typo for "nothing". Your hands must have slipped on the keyboard and that was going to be my first question for you. When I hit the quote button I did not get the version that you first posted, I saw that corrected version and that was what I was commenting on. There was no implication that you were dishonest, you had merely already answered my first question for me.

By the way, if I thought that you were being dishonest I would have come right out and said it. I made no such comment.

Don't make a mountain out of a molehill. You made a typo, I was going to ask you about it, but it showed up as corrected when I quoted you so I merely commented on that.