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.
Is there any evidence of beneficiary evolutionary improvements to human beings? By this I mean extra capabilities or gifts.
Has the genome project revealed any trends in terms of human evolution that points to a class of people who live among us who are the first to move to a higher state of evolution?
Or is evolution a myth when it comes to human beings?
Certainly we humans have evolved way beyond the "caveman days." Also, specifically what do you mean by th4 Law of God? All the biblical laws? If so, would that include the sanctification of slavery, as per Exod. 21? What?Define evolution. There is no evidence that I have heard of that suggests humans are evolving to a higher order, like evolving into angels. It is probably true that a Hitler type of animal husbandry could produce a more healthy species but that is not what Darwin had in mind. But if mankind followed he Law of God that would produce a heathier species also.
This whole micro-vs-macro way of looking at evolution is purely something unqualified laity do. it has no real place in science.
Both human beings and human culture are becoming more and more technologically advanced. That is evolution at work. Also, the distinction between human and machine is beginning to vanish. It's hard to predict the future, but we may well be on the way to a future where you can't tell where machine ends and human begins. Darth Vader may well be a foreshadowing of our future.
Oh, most definitely, yes, it is. As you change the technology, you change the biology. Reality is all interconnected.Technological innovation is evidence of human creativity but not of biological evolution.
Not necessarily. Most mutations are on the genetic level that might not even be recognizable without a specific search for them, and most mutations just don't make any difference.
Is there any evidence of beneficiary evolutionary improvements to human beings? By this I mean extra capabilities or gifts.
Has the genome project revealed any trends in terms of human evolution that points to a class of people who live among us who are the first to move to a higher state of evolution?
Or is evolution a myth when it comes to human beings?
You have no idea how evolution works.You could say we are devolving, since we now have 98% of our DNA as junk DNA. So we are going from a state of perfection to a state of imperfection - just like the entire universe follows the laws of entropy.
Evolution is a myth when it comes to every living thing, not just humans.
HUMAN:
Asian mates with Asian and produces ONLY Asian. African mates with African and produces ONLY African. The only time variation comes into the species is when two infraspecific taxa within the species (Asian and African) mate and produce a new infraspecific taxa (Afro-Asian). The Asian does not evolve into the Afro-Asian, nor does the African. The Asian remains Asian and the African remains African.
ANIMALS:
Husky mates with Husky and produces ONLY Husky. Mastiff mates with Mastiff and produces ONLY Mastiff. The only time variation comes into the species is when two infraspecific taxa within the species (Husky and Mastiff) mate and produce a new infraspecific taxa (Chinook). The Husky does not evolve into the Chinook, nor does the Mastiff. The Husky remains Husky and the Mastiff remains Mastiff.
This is true of all life on this planet. Even the fossil record supports this. T-Rex remained T-Rex from the oldest fossil found to the youngest fossil found. They have simply incorrectly classified the fossil record as separate species, when in reality they are merely different infraspecific taxa within the species - just like we observe today with all life that produce new infraspecific taxa through mating and the exchange of genomes, not evolution.
I couldn't have said it better.Human ingenuity has overruled much of the selection-side of evolution.
Almost anyone can survive to reproductive age and reproduce, thanks to cultural and scientific factors. So beneficial novelties dont offer much comparative advantage.
The theory of macro-evolution posits a series of jumps in capabilities between less developed common ancestors and the later more complex forms that followed them
So fish like beings become ape like beings become human beings would be the historical path. The difference between the ape like ancestors we are supposed to be descended from and modern humans is profound and includes the development of language, tool making capabilities and a capacity for abstract thought missing in the previous generations.
The comparison with x men is therefore warranted
as we are qualitatively that much superior to our supposed ancestors as xmen/heroes/alphas (whichever TV series you watch that share this assumption) would be to us.
Adaptation and the ability of the human design to change in response to its environment is not necessarily a proof of the larger claims of the evolutionary theory.
The jump between ape like ancestors and human beings included things like developing the hardware to support language, tool making, art and abstract thought.
What evidence exists to support the view that these larger jumps are possible or occurring.
The number of human beings is now in excess of 7 billion. There has never been a larger sample. Yet where are the examples of people who are so genetically beyond the norm that they have developed new advantages over the rest of us that set them up for breeding and succeeding in the modern world at our expense?
There are a great many examples of disabilities and regressions from the norm but where are the examples of beneficial mutations on the scale of the development of language or tool making?
Didn't 'modern man' burst suddenly on the scene (like T-Rex)?
Actually the fossil record supports sudden, not gradual, change doesn't it?
Playing the time card simply places your theory beyond the scope of the scientific method.
No observable experiments can be run to prove these connections or timespans whether in a single generation or over thousands of years.
According to the theory of evolution for millions of years the human population was miniscule compared to today. the size of the modern human population means that we have a living sample equivalent to thousands of years of previous history but these sudden jumps in capability are not being observed.
Humans are devolving, not evolving. Case in point, the recent spate of LGBT activity. Animals are not sexual perverts.
You have no idea how evolution works.
No one does, not even evolutionists, because there is no such thing.
Asian mates with Asian and produces ONLY Asian. African mates with African and produces ONLY African. Only when Asian mates with African is variation (Afro-Asian) ever seen in the species.
Husky mates with Husky and produces ONLY Husky. Mastiff mates with Mastiff and produces ONLY Mastiff. Only whe Husky mates with Mastiff is variation (Chinook) ever seen in the species.
Granted, I understand it works differently in your fantasies, but since you have never observed the evolution of one species into another
While on the other hand we can see from direct observation how variation does occur in the species.
Only you require a process never once observed to explain variation
while I on the other hand only need what we have observed since the very first observation was made.
/facepalm....
Dude, if it's a slow process, then it's a slow process. We can't speed it up, just so you can wrap your head around it...
Having said that, we don't need to see a chimp-like primate evolve into a homo sapiens to know that that is exactly what happened.
For the exact same reason that we don't need to observe your parents having sex to know that they are your biological parents....
We can compare genomes and prove beyond any reasonable doubt that humans and the other great apes (and by extension, all animals) share ancestry.
Again, it's not the amount of individuals that matters. It's the amount of generations.
Why is it, that every time someone argues against such a solid scientific theory, it turns out that they don't understand it??
Every newborn of every species has a set of mutations.
In humans, the mutation rate is about 55 per newborn.
That's 55 things in your DNA that you didn't get from your parents, but which you will pass on to your off spring (if you manage to reproduce).
Mutation in every newborn is very observable.
...and a misrepresentation of that actual theory of biology.
What solid scientific theory?
Asian mates with Asian and produces ONLY Asian. African mates with African and produces ONLY African. Only when Asian mates with African is variation (Afro-Asian) ever seen in the species.
Husky mates with Husky and produces ONLY Husky. Mastiff mates with Mastiff and produces ONLY Mastiff. Only whe Husky mates with Mastiff is variation (Chinook) ever seen in the species.
Neither the Asian nor the African evolves into the Afro-Asian. Nor does the Husky or Mastiff evolve into the Chinook.
The only thing you have backing your theory is the incorrect classification of the fossil record
If evolutionists had never seen a dog in life, bit only in fossils, you would claim the Husky or the Mastiff evolved into the Chinook. Worse yet you would list them all as separate species, just like you have incorrectly done in the fossil record. The fact that you refuse to accept what it right before your eyes, shows your theory is based on pure belief - with no science at all.
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?