Did humans descend from Apes?

[tas8831]

Theory of evolution was meant to serve as a way of looking at humans differently (specifically slaves,) and providing a scientific critique to challenge the contemporary Church and humanist idea that (again, specifically,) blacks were inferior savages destined to be taken over by more advanced "races."

Here you go, sport - read and LEARN:

Darwin Online

It seems to me that you have some religio-social position that you are convinced of and will not budge from. The ToE was meant to describe and produce a mechanism of the change of species over time. That others used it for their own purposes is irrelevant.

Unless you can find in Darwin's actual writings that he set out to justify slavery or something similar, then you are simply wrong and possibly maliciously so. Given that Darwin wrote the following, I find it hard to believe that he in any way set out to justify slavery:



“It may be doubted whether any character can be named which is distinctive of a race and
is constant.”

“This diversity of judgment does not prove that the races ought not to be ranked as species,
but it shews that they graduate into each other, and that it is hardly possible to discover
clear distinctive characters between them.”

“He who will read Mr. Tylor's and Sir J. Lubbock's interesting works can hardly fail to be
deeply impressed with the close similarity between the men of all races in tastes,
dispositions and habits. …and this fact can only be accounted for by the various races having similar inventive or mental powers.”

- Descent of Man, 1871

 

[Kaon]

Here you go, sport - read and LEARN:

Darwin Online

It seems to me that you have some religio-social position that you are convinced of and will not budge from. The ToE was meant to describe and produce a mechanism of the change of species over time. That others used it for their own purposes is irrelevant.

Unless you can find in Darwin's actual writings that he set out to justify slavery or something similar, then you are simply wrong and possibly maliciously so. Given that Darwin wrote the following, I find it hard to believe that he in any way set out to justify slavery:



“It may be doubted whether any character can be named which is distinctive of a race and
is constant.”

“This diversity of judgment does not prove that the races ought not to be ranked as species,
but it shews that they graduate into each other, and that it is hardly possible to discover
clear distinctive characters between them.”

“He who will read Mr. Tylor's and Sir J. Lubbock's interesting works can hardly fail to be
deeply impressed with the close similarity between the men of all races in tastes,
dispositions and habits. …and this fact can only be accounted for by the various races having similar inventive or mental powers.”

- Descent of Man, 1871

Ok, oh.

 

[Kaon]

Well, I was just say "the theory is true". I would reserve the identification of TRUTH with all caps for Jesus.

There is only one truth, the rest is relativism IMO.

 

[Kaon]

Yes, I know how maps work.

Am I correct in thinking that you don’t actually believe in a flat Earth, but were merely responding to something someone else wrote?

My point was about verification methods; I am not concerned with a flat/ball earth debate.

If someone told me, for example, that 1) There is a planet called Nggresan and 2) Nggresan had two "X" shapes on either hemispherical face as big as Neptune, I would either trust whoever told me this on faith, or I would need to verify it for myself.


At least, this is how I would treat information. I am not going alter my own paradigms in exchange for social and intellectual ephemerality.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

There is only one truth, the rest is relativism IMO.

Well, there is such a thing as uncertainty.

 

[Kaon]

Well, there is such a thing as uncertainty.

And, that is why uncertainty is not the truth, or the unique solution. It is a qualification of truth.

Qualifications of truth (not the truth itself) is what is used to substantiate what is intellectually acceptable, and this socially acceptable. That mentality is what keeps a culture quantum mechanics stuck on rocket technology for nearly a century.

 

[Gene2memE]

The entire enlightenment period of the west, and after, was about political protest through a knowledge revolution.

Theory of evolution was meant to serve as a way of looking at humans differently (specifically slaves,)

Slavery was a complete irrelevancy to the formation of the theory of evolution, by either Darwin or Wallace. Neither of them considered human evolution when they made their initial publications.

and providing a scientific critique to challenge the contemporary Church and humanist idea that (again, specifically,) blacks were inferior savages destined to be taken over by more advanced "races."

I'm not sure about Church ideas about racism - certainly, there was no uniform opinion at the time in the United Kingdom about equality of the races - but Humanism as a doctrine didn't exist as we conceptualise it now, and was actually very closely linked with the Christian Church - see Christian Humanism and Renissance Humanism, which were as much philosophical traditions as they were faith traditions.

Yes, that is greatly what ToE is about. It was never meant to be taken as axiom like academic and by consequence layperson lot have done.

This is demonstrable false. Darwin and Wallace published in an academic and scientific context (delivering a joint paper to the Linnean Society of London) and their work was treated as such. Evolutionary biology has developed as an academic and scientific discipline ever since those initial publications.

 

[Kaon]

Slavery was a complete irrelevancy to the formation of the theory of evolution, by either Darwin or Wallace. Neither of them considered human evolution when they made their initial publications.



I'm not sure about Church ideas about racism - certainly, there was no uniform opinion at the time in the United Kingdom about equality of the races - but Humanism as a doctrine didn't exist as we conceptualise it now, and was actually very closely linked with the Christian Church - see Christian Humanism and Renissance Humanism, which were as much philosophical traditions as they were faith traditions.



This is demonstrable false. Darwin and Wallace published in an academic and scientific context (delivering a joint paper to the Linnean Society of London) and their work was treated as such. Evolutionary biology has developed as an academic and scientific discipline ever since those initial publications.

Oh, ok.

 

[Jimmy D]

My point was about verification methods; I am not concerned with a flat/ball earth debate.

If someone told me, for example, that 1) There is a planet called Nggresan and 2) Nggresan had two "X" shapes on either hemispherical face as big as Neptune, I would either trust whoever told me this on faith, or I would need to verify it for myself.


At least, this is how I would treat information. I am not going alter my own paradigms in exchange for social and intellectual ephemerality.

I thought so, and I agree to an extent.

 

[tas8831]

How do you know dinosaurs are not abdominal creatures created by ancient civilizations for the purposes of terrorizing their enemies?

Abdominal?

Were you there to see creation itself, or the building blocks of life ebb up and evolve into what we know of as life?

I am being serious; how can you make such a judgment so much so that you can apply it to the entirety of the human population. You must have pictures/video, no?

One does not need video when one can see the evidence left behind.

 

[Kaon]

Abdominal?




One does not need video when one can see the evidence left behind.

Oh, ok.

 

[Aman777]

Humans coming from apes is an idea that came to be when people were trying to figure out how to separate the human race into favored species in superior rank.


It is a destructive theory that comes from sick origins, and has been accepted as legitimate science (when it was use to enslave, rape, torture, experiment on and imperialize) people.

The fact that it is so accepted is one of the psychological reasons why other humans have to remind others their lives exist, or why other humans are bombed or massacred and the world barely relieves saline mist from their eyes.

It has been ingrained in heads since the Enlightenment to accept this,and there are social consequences if you do not.

Amen. The false ToE is the biggest satanic lie ever forced upon our children in the public schools. With NO evidence of how prehistoric people magically changed into reasoning Humans (descendants of Adam) is the false religion of Godless atheists, agnostics and unbelievers of every kind.

 

[Aman777]

Aman777 said: ↑
Then please explain the process which is different from sex, which is the only way to change Humans intelligence level.

I have no idea what you mean. Maybe you can ask the question more coherently?

Tell us HOW Human intelligence levels were changed internally APART from sex. IOW, Humans INHERIT their superior intelligence level to ANY other living creature, from their parents. There is NO force, NO process, apart from sex, which has the Ability to change our internal brains UNLESS you can explain another.....

Invoking magical long periods of time and zillions of random mutations does not and cannot produce the higher intelligence level of God, Gen 3:22 in Apes, no matter how much you might wish it could. Godless evolution is a false concept and has NO power, NO force and NO process to change Human brains.

God's Truth shows that today's Humans are the result of sex between Noah's descendants and the sons of God (prehistoric people). The sons of God are THEIR kind (Trinity kind) and Humans are HIS (Jesus kind) and together we have produced the soon to be 10 Billion Humans alive today. Genesis 6:4

 

[Aman777]

Well with your ability to read weird stuff into scripture, anything could be believed. It is therefore not convincing.

What weird stuff? Adam's firmament was immersed in the midst or middle of water and had water above and below it. Gen 1:6-7 Here's a hint:

When you have water above and below a solid object, it is covered totally in water. What is unconvincing is the traditional view which falsely supposes God is speaking of our present 2nd Heaven. It's the 2nd because the 1st was totally destroyed in the flood according to ll Peter 3:6. Don't you believe Scripture?

 

[Aman777]

Well, not accepting the ToE is not accepting physical reality and, quite frankly, both stupid and ignorant.

What is stupid and ignorant is to believe that mindless Nature produced the superior intelligence, which only God and Adam have, Genesis 3:22 in Apes.

 

[Aman777]

Exactly, the Bible doesn't have or even acknowledge today's scientific discoveries and their applications, which is contrary to what you said.

False, since God hid the current scientific Truth in Genesis. Your problem is that you cannot understand what He wrote. Here are some:

1. Our Universe began at the end of the 3rd Day Gen 2:4 because the first Stars didn't light up until the 4th Day Gen 1:16 and it was 180 million years from the Big Bang until the first Stars lit up. Science discovered the SAME last month.

Astronomers May Have Found the First Stars Born After the Big Bang
https://news.nationalgeographic.com/.../first-stars-universe-big-bang-edges-space-scie...
Feb 28, 2018 -

2. All living creatures that move were made from Water on the 5th Day, some 3.8 Billion years ago. Genesis 1:21 and Meet Luca, the Ancestor of All Living Things - The New York Times Meet Luca, the Ancestor of All Living Things Jul 25, 2016 -

Now, it's your time to tell us HOW any ancient man could have known and written these things thousands of years BEFORE Science. I don't think you can. Do you?

 

[BNR32FAN]

No

 

[Jjmcubbin]

False, since God hid the current scientific Truth in Genesis. Your problem is that you cannot understand what He wrote. Here are some:

1. Our Universe began at the end of the 3rd Day Gen 2:4 because the first Stars didn't light up until the 4th Day Gen 1:16 and it was 180 million years from the Big Bang until the first Stars lit up. Science discovered the SAME last month.

Astronomers May Have Found the First Stars Born After the Big Bang
https://news.nationalgeographic.com/.../first-stars-universe-big-bang-edges-space-scie...
Feb 28, 2018 -

2. All living creatures that move were made from Water on the 5th Day, some 3.8 Billion years ago. Genesis 1:21 and Meet Luca, the Ancestor of All Living Things - The New York Times Meet Luca, the Ancestor of All Living Things Jul 25, 2016 -

Now, it's your time to tell us HOW any ancient man could have known and written these things thousands of years BEFORE Science. I don't think you can. Do you?

Vedic science - Wikiquote
I mean, they did say the planet and universe is billions of years old, that dimensions exist, etc.
It is just as credible as the stuff you wrote.
Also, I asked for very specific cases to which you responded with someone thinking of the first stars and water living things being made of water. I agree the bible (really any ancient book) got a few things right, but you did claim ALL. So show me the law of conservation of angular momentum, law of independent assortment (between different chromosomes), and the ideal gas laws (basically PV=nRT). You can't. Because the Bible does not have ALL the sciemtific laws and discoveries. It has some, the vedas had some, and I'm pretty sure ancient egyptians and Babylonians made a lot of progress in astronomy back in the day.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

... please explain the process which is different from sex, which is the only way to change Humans intelligence level.

The process by which humans became more intelligent was evolution by natural selection, which - naturally - involves sex.

Invoking magical long periods of time and zillions of random mutations does not and cannot produce the higher intelligence level of God, Gen 3:22 in Apes, no matter how much you might wish it could. Godless evolution is a false concept and has NO power, NO force and NO process to change Human brains.

There's no magic in long periods of time (it's often called 'deep time') and lots of mutations being selected for or against.

Fundamentally, evolution is algorithmic in nature; populations show a variability in heritable traits (typically following a 'normal distribution', e.g. a few short-legged individuals, a bulk of individuals with legs around average length, and a few long-legged individuals). If having longer legs is an advantage leading to having a greater than average number of viable offspring (and short-leggedness is a corresponding disadvantage), over many generations the population average will shift towards longer legs as more long-legged offspring contribute long-leggedness to subsequent generations.

The same logic applies to other heritable traits , including intelligence - and there may be a significant boost from sexual selection if intelligence is seen as a desirable feature in a mate, or if being more intelligent leads to greater status or wealth, and status or wealth are seen as desirable in a mate.

No matter how incredulous you may be, preferential selection from a varied population is basically how evolution works.

You're welcome to your God beliefs and your imaginative claims about where human intelligence came from, but they're really not necessary to explain it; if there is any invocation of 'magic', it's in those beliefs and claims.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

And, that is why uncertainty is not the truth, or the unique solution. It is a qualification of truth.

Qualifications of truth (not the truth itself) is what is used to substantiate what is intellectually acceptable, and this socially acceptable. That mentality is what keeps a culture quantum mechanics stuck on rocket technology for nearly a century.

The woo is strong with this one.