Did humans descend from Apes?

[Brightmoon]

actually the scientific consensus were wrong many time in the past. how do you know evolution is different?

When scientists get better data that have better answers . There was a minor controversy a few decades ago within the evolution of modern Homo sapiens. The multi-regional hypothesis was used to explain some of the anatomical differences in human populations ( you’d say races but that’s not an accurate term) and other paleontologists accepted the out of Africa hypothesis. The Multiregional hypothesis says that different species of protohumans joined together and hybridized . The out of Africa hypothesis says that modern “races”evolved from a baseline population that originated in Africa. It turns out that both are true . So the modern theory of H sapiens evolution includes elements of both . The facts are there. Some people even know that they’re part Neanderthal. Yes they were a different species. Their growth rates were different and there are obvious ( even to a layman) anatomical differences

 

[durangodawood]

I dont think we descended from apes. We are made in the image of God.

Could be both.

 

[Brightmoon]

Blasted autocorrect. When scientists get better data then they get better answers

 

[xianghua]

When scientists get better data that have better answers . There was a minor controversy a few decades ago within the evolution of modern Homo sapiens. The multi-regional hypothesis was used to explain some of the anatomical differences in human populations ( you’d say races but that’s not an accurate term) and other paleontologists accepted the out of Africa hypothesis. The Multiregional hypothesis says that different species of protohumans joined together and hybridized . The out of Africa hypothesis says that modern “races”evolved from a baseline population that originated in Africa. It turns out that both are true . So the modern theory of H sapiens evolution includes elements of both . The facts are there. Some people even know that they’re part Neanderthal. Yes they were a different species. Their growth rates were different and there are obvious ( even to a layman) anatomical differences

ok. but how do you know that evolution is true and id isnt?

 

[xianghua]

Cars don't have a common designer. There are tens of thousands of automotive designers.

and all of them are humans.

 

[Brightmoon]

Watch your terminology! we aren’t descended from apes , we ARE apes. We have never evolved out of that lineage. You’re a mammal because you have breasts . You’re a primate and all primates have hands and front facing eyes. You’re a ape because you have arms and a chest evolved for treeswinging . Which means that you have an elbow that fully straightens and a shoulder girdle that allows you to swing your arms in almost a full circle. You have a flat wide rib cage that allows you arms to hang to the side instead of under your body if you’re on all fours . Look at a dog or cat if you can’t get your head around that. Their body weight is supported by their front legs. Your scapular is on your back instead of on the side, again to support tree-swinging. There has never been disagreement within the international scientific community about human/ape ancestry once we understood what we were looking at. This happened around the late 1880s .

 

[Brightmoon]

ID is a idea that is simply not provable. Science is based on verifiable physical evidence. We can’t prove intelligent design. Once you shoehorn it in then you’re out of the realm of science

 

[xianghua]

Watch your terminology! we aren’t descended from apes , we ARE apes. We have never evolved out of that lineage. You’re a mammal because you have breasts . You’re a primate and all primates have hands and front facing eyes. You’re a ape because you have arms and a chest evolved for treeswinging . Which means that you have an elbow that fully straightens and a shoulder girdle that allows you to swing your arms in almost a full circle. You have a flat wide rib cage that allows you arms to hang to the side instead of under your body if you’re on all fours . Look at a dog or cat if you can’t get your head around that. Their body weight is supported by their front legs. Your scapular is on your back instead of on the side, again to support tree-swinging. There has never been disagreement within the international scientific community about human/ape ancestry once we understood what we were looking at. This happened around the late 1880s .

im not sure what this comment appointed to. be sure that you select "replay" before you comment.

 

[Brightmoon]

I should have said you’re a mammal because you have breasts and a large brain . Yes that large brain is a primitive trait that we inherited

 

[xianghua]

ID is a idea that is simply not provable. Science is based on verifiable physical evidence. We can’t prove intelligent design. Once you shoehorn it in then you’re out of the realm of science

lets see. lets say that you will see an organic walking robot that has a DNA. you will conclude design in this case?

 

[Brightmoon]

Ok . I’m new , still trying to figure this out and typing on my phone which is a pain

 

[Larniavc]

ok. but how do you know that evolution is true and id isnt?

ID has no supporting evidence and is unfalsifiable.

 

[Brightmoon]

A robot that has DNA ? Cyborg ? They already exist . Humans with robotic prosthetic devices are technically cyborgs

 

[xianghua]

A robot that has DNA ? Cyborg ? They already exist . Humans with robotic prosthetic devices are technically cyborgs

i refer to a robot that is completely made of organic components. like a living thing. by the way english isnt my native so i may not understand some of your words here and there in general.

 

[Speedwell]

lets see. lets say that you will see an organic walking robot that has a DNA. you will conclude design in this case?

Only if there is evidence of human manufacture. Otherwise it is impossible to tell.

 

[Brightmoon]

I’m going to agree with larnievc about ID . The Dover trial transcripts are online and the mainstream scientists involved explained very thoroughly why they don’t accept ID as science . They had to explain this to a judge who didn’t have a science background. The transcripts are long; this was over several days of a trial involving multiple witnesses.

 

[Larniavc]

lets see. lets say that you will see an organic walking robot that has a DNA. you will conclude design in this case?

You mean like a replicant or a synthetic off of the movies?

I’m not sure they are really real.

 

[Brightmoon]

Bless you! I wish I knew another language. And English is a hard language because we borrow so many words and terminology from other languages ( along with the ridiculous spelling )
Now about the organic robots, if I recall correctly, they do have them . They’re cutting edge research

 

[Brightmoon]

The organic robots are mostly microscopic though

 

[xianghua]

Bless you! I wish I knew another language. And English is a hard language because we borrow so many words and terminology from other languages ( along with the ridiculous spelling )
Now about the organic robots, if I recall correctly, they do have them . They’re cutting edge research

ok. so you will conclude design or a natural process if you will find such a robot?