Aesop's Fables? Tortoise and the Hare? Ant and the Grasshopper?
I used to check out collections of these in elementary school. Oooooh so long ago.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Aesop's Fables? Tortoise and the Hare? Ant and the Grasshopper?I don't know.
It's a kiddie test, but not one with inaccurate answers.
Honestly. I thought I made that clear allready.
I have no idea who or what Aesop is.
I'm pretty sure I'm not being goofy. If you saw some of our ancestors living today, you'd call it a monkey. It did, after all, descend from a species that gave rise to both New World and Old World monkeys.That is one of the problems with these discussions: mixing popular and scientific usages of words. If you think that "monkey" is a generic term for any non-human primate then, yes, humans evolved from monkeys. But if you say that to someone who is familiar with the scientific use of the term he will think you are just goofy.
I'm not talking about whether you are actually goofy. I'm just talking about the impression you would likely make on non-creationists if you said, "Evolution claims that humans evolved from monkeys."I'm pretty sure I'm not being goofy. If you saw some of our ancestors living today, you'd call it a monkey. It did, after all, descend from a species that gave rise to both New World and Old World monkeys.
What do they think we evolved from?I'm not talking about whether you are actually goofy. I'm just talking about the impression you would likely make on non-creationists if you said, "Evolution claims that humans evolved from monkeys."
I still don't get it. Why do they think the common ancestor of OWM and apes wasn't a monkey?From the common ancestor of the Hominidae (apes) which in turn share a common ancestor with new and old world monkeys.
For the same reason they think the common ancestor of old world monkeys and the apes wasn't a human.I still don't get it. Why do they think the common ancestor of OWM and apes wasn't a monkey?
That doesn't make any sense. Humans are a leaf node on the tree. Here's a paleontologist's visual explanation of the situation (from here):For the same reason they think the common ancestor of old world monkeys and the apes wasn't a human.
And here we have another creationist who doesn't get the difference between understanding what the theory of evolution claims and accepting those claims.Here's the entire quiz, with my commentary:
1. Humans are still evolving. True or false?
"Still" evolving? Do you still beat your wife? This is a nonsense question if you don't believe in macro evolution to begin with.
2. Evolution can only happen slowly, over long periods of time. True or false?
Here's another question that assumes macro evolution is true, and then asks details about it.
3. The giraffe's long neck is an example of evolution. True or false?
I know what the quiz wants you to say, but I think it's an example of God's creation.
4. Evolution can cause an individual to change during their lifetime. True or false?
Finally one that can be answered honestly! No, since macro evolution is not in play, it can't cause an individual to change during their lifetime.
5. Humans are descended from monkeys. True or false?
Humans are created in the image of God and have descended from other humans.
6. Evolution results in progress; organisms are always getting better through evolution. True or false?
Here's another question that assumes macro evolution is true, and then asks details about it.
7. Evolution and religion are not necessarily incompatible. True or false?
I guess it depends on the religion. Evolution and the Bible are certainly incompatible since the latter tells us that mankind was created in the image of God, and that "kinds" produce after their own kind. The macro evolution claim of birds turning into dinosaurs is more nonsense.
LOL!View attachment 241950
That doesn't make any sense. Humans are a leaf node on the tree. Here's a paleontologist's visual explanation of the situation (from here):
View attachment 241950
No, I understand what the theory claims. I did get a 7/7 on the quiz by answering how an evolutionist would answer. I just don't accept the claims. No biggie.And here we have another creationist who doesn't get the difference between understanding what the theory of evolution claims and accepting those claims.
That's good to hear. Most of our effort in this forum is taken up with trying to explain to creationists what the theory of evolution actually says rather than whether it is true or not.No, I understand what the theory claims. I did get a 7/7 on the quiz by answering how an evolutionist would answer. I just don't accept the claims. No biggie.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?