Dinosaur Duck Discovered!!

[Arius]

Yeah except DNA studies says you're wrong,

You can spot species due to the fact you are looking at animals that are far apart on the continuum. As I and several others have stated, the closer you get on that continuum the harder it is to identify species.

So Lucy would be an unidentifiable species?
What did she evolve from, any idea?
So this is why you guys can't tell me what species the Common Ancestor was, .. of ANY species?
What makes you think the Common Ancestor of the human like Lucy wasn't just another human, who gave birth to humans, only real ugly ones. Deformed, plagued, which is why she was the last of her kind!? We have genetic deformities today, we don't call it evolution, but sickness, diseased, dying, not evolving.

So again animal A can mate (therefore is a same species) as animal B, animal B can mate with animal C (same species) but animal A is not the same species as animal C.

Show me this from human evolution perspective, we have 7 billion humans living on every continent, with millions of other species which all evolved together over the 4 billion years from the amoeba found in your primordial soup.

Show me where the animal gorilla can mate with the species you call "Common Ancestor", which can mate with the animal human? Please?

Therefore we can identify animal A as 1 species and animal C as a species but where do you put animal B? That animal belongs to both species.

Awesome, show me a species that can mate with both human and gorilla, and produce offspring with both, .. this I have got to see? I never even heard of such creature?

Archaeopteryx for instance has huge amount of bird features and huge amount of dinosaur features. The issue of thinking of species as distinct is that go far enough and you'll find a point where a creature fits both species.

Wow, so them dug up bones can do all that, and even mate across species? So these bone fossils were something like Bruce/Caitlin Jenner who can mate with both sexes too!? Maybe heshit (he/she/it) is the missing link, that "Common ancestor" we've been looking for?
Finally we have proven the Evolution story true, and proved I.D. false, .. even if we had to use I.D. to do it with!
Bravo!
"Children, do not go stupid and start believing in I.D., but use I.D. to ridicule and debunk I.D. and be considered a scientist!"

Arius interprets the bible as stating there are defined species and therefore the evidence, that has met the scientific burden of proof again and again and again, screws with his belief.
So while no one says Arius is stupid but his faith (religious faith - belief without evidence) blinds him to all evidence that does not confirm what he already believes.

Oh come on now Rivga, you just described every Evolutionist. Here, let me prove it to you:

Q. What species is the Common Ancestor that Dawkins is pointing to in this video specifically time 0:21
"The Common Ancestor who lived there (points to a "T") about six million years ago. That 'Common Ancestor' then produced two branches, one of which went to us humans, and one of which went and branched further to produce bonobos and common chimpanzees. We are all cousins, we are not descended from chimpanzees."

Where did the African Pigmies and the Aborigines (including that poor white Christian housewife that he asks everyone to ridicule, why else would he put her pic with a bunch of monkeys?) descend from?

A. A common ancestor.
Where did that "common ancestor" descended from?
A. Another common ancestor

Where did that "common ancestor" descended from?
A. Another common ancestor
Where did that "common ancestor" descended from?
A. Another common ancestor
Where did that "common ancestor" descended from?
A. Another common ancestor

Class, .. class, .. this is why we have pictures depicting gorillas evolving into humans, because we Evolutionists don't believe we evolved from gorillas or orangutans, or any monkeys. It is a creationist misconception that human Evolution has anything to do with apes at all!

Here is another depiction of human evolution,

Human Evolution in 12 Pictures

and again, we did not evolve from lizards or any long tailed monkeys, that is why we make these videos and pictures, so people will learn science and understand how evolution works.

Look again, do you see anywhere we hint on humans evolving from fish, or lizards or dinosaurs, or monkeys or chimps or gorillas, .. huh, do you Arius? You are a liar Arius, a Troll, putting words and images in our mouth that you will never find in evolution claims!

No gorillas mentioned about human evolution, see Arius the liar!
Here is another, do you see anything about apes, or gorillas or chimps? Human evolution is about evolution from common ancestors, who evolved from other common ancestors.

NOT apes, not monkeys, not gorillas or todays chimps, Ha, Ha, ha, .. what a joke you are Arius!
​

 

[Shemjaza]

Your behavior is disgusting. You ignore people, ridicule and distort.

Same continent, same amount of sun, same moon, same food source, same continental drifts, same air, same amount of oxygen, same everything including the amount of TIME each species evolved from the amoeba, yet look at all the different species!?

Did you know that French, Italian, Catalan, Portuguese and Castilian all come from the same continent and from the same parent language?

OK, so again you guys say that humans did not evolve/speciate from gorillas, ..

(I don't know where I got this crazy idea from anyways, .. since no evolutionist, or evolution documentaries, movies, papers, archeological finds of gorilla skeletons has EVER suggested such idiotic claim that I for some reason keep claiming. I should be whipped with 40 lashes like the Hunchback of Notre dame for his insolence!)

Then Please tell me what species that "common ancestor" was that eventually, over millions and billions and trillions of years changed into human, chimp and bonobo?"

We don't specifically know the prescise species, but we know a lot about it from genetics found in living and dead species including our own.

Like I don't know the name of my nine times grandfather, but I can infer from genetics and history that he was a man living in the York moors of England.

Lucy is not a species of animal? So what is it, just some bones found in a cave? So why all the big fuss over her?
So Evolution never mentioned how religion started, and why they think it evolved, what environmental, or diet effects caused these hallucinations on the brain??
You know what, someone is putting a bunch if misinformation out on Evolution, like this movie:

time 25:20 "What is Lucy", gorilla, chimp, human, bonobo, an alien, a Vulcan what? A non-species?

Contemptible behavior. It was clear from the next line that Lucy was a member of the species, Australopithecus afarensis. I'm sure you would call this a chimp or a gorilla, but that would be wrong, because no member of either species walked upright like Lucy's brethren nor do they have as developed a brain.

I did and I do.
But what you really mean is: Don't ask anything that is not covered in the Evolution Religion, you are to stay within the box. Wondering outside of that box are considered enemies of science, and will be ridiculed.

You have done nothing but insult and lie about what people have attempted in good faith to communicate yo you.

You have never linked to an actual quote from a scientific source. If you would like to actually discuss evidence, not word games and taunts, there are many here to help you.

 

[Arius]

No. Speedwell is saying, "And nothing to do with anything we posted or with anything Dawkins ever said."

Again,
1. Extant species do not evolve into other extant or extinct species. If that happened, then evolution would be falsified.
2. When populations speciate, they never stop being what their ancestors were. That's why Neil Shubin had three chapters to his television version of Your Inner Fish - Your Inner Fish, Your Inner Reptile, and Your Inner Monkey.
3. For the hundredth time, humans (and chimpanzees) share a common ancestor with gorillas. No one is claiming we evolved directly from gorillas.

So it's a lie then, all those videos I just posted of evolution depicting human evolution going from gorilla (or some other type of monkey with long tail) to human, and for the hundredth time you are repeating that: "humans didn't evolve from gorillas"

Thank you, .. again and again. You are not far from the Kingdom of God.

Koko[/ur] and her male companion Michael were taught sign language by Dr. Patterson. They have nothing to do with evolution.
We would never expect any other hominid species to become humans. If we ever observed such a thing it would falsify evolution.

I know, you guys admitted that about a hundred times. I hope other I.D. believers here, my Bible buddies have read all this, because this comes straight from the horses mouth.

In summary:
"No gorilla, or chimp, or any hominid species will evolve/turn/speciate/morph into a human, or that would falsify evolution."

Here is an evolution of human over the six million years:

So this concludes that humans didn't evolve from any other species, humans remained humans, just got better looking and smarter over the years, .. which is since God created Adam and Eve. This is a depiction how atheist Evolutionist see Adam as, and how he evolved over the 6,000 (not 6 million, Evolutionist like to exaggerate things) but 6,000 years.

I guess even if they do admit that Evolution never happens in, like speciation from one species into another, but they can't help to ridicule Gods creation in other ways, making him look and feel like an ape, and even to label him an animal of the ape family! While they freely admit he was always human.
Why all this lies then? The billion$ $pent on all this grave robbing, building museums etc. when they admit evolution of species into another different species never happened!?

 

[Arius]

You get it? But that is not what we said. If you get it, why not echo back what we said?

I do, but you guys don't like hearing yourself talk.

I assume you are referring to the common ancestor between gorillas and humans. But what I find phenomenol is that you want us to choose one of the species alive today. The common ancestor is extinct. Nobody will ever be able to pick a living species and show it to you as the common ancestor.

Eight million distinct species alive today that over the 4 billion years all evolved from amoeba, and gosh-darn, every one of their "common ancestors" went extinct, .. how convenient?

But we can find bones from an extinct species long ago that is probably a close relative of the common ancestor.

Oh yeah, .. thank God for the dried up bones in the graves. Choosing pieces of sick, deformed human bone fragments from here, a tooth from a pig roast there, and those Peleoartist's through CGI generated characters can do their magic, hey, evolution or bust, right?
They can take an acorn and turn it into a sexy babe in a bikini.

Again, you have eight million living species, doesn't at least one of the 8.2 million scientists on earth even watch for one speciating into another species?

EVERY ONE of the 8 million living species is a "potential for speciation", .. every one of them. They all been evolving for over 4 billion years, and you guys spend billions on digging up graves and collecting skull and bones, and ignore 8 million evolving species!? I just don't get it?

 

[Shemjaza]

So it's a lie then, all those videos I just posted of evolution depicting human evolution going from gorilla (or some other type of monkey with long tail) to human, and for the hundredth time you are repeating that: "humans didn't evolve from gorillas"

Thank you, .. again and again. You are not far from the Kingdom of God.

Look, the important bit is: (or some other type of monkey with long tail)
That is not the same thing as "a gorilla". Your mixing and matching of terms and concepts goes all the way from sloppy and inaccurate into actually being wrong. When you you repeat wrong statements, especially about someone else's opinion or belief you are lying and bearing false witness against your neighbour. Despicable.

No one who supports evolution is denying that humans ultimately are descended from an ancestor species that more closely resembled modern apes. However, the change happened so slowly that you could never tell when the "ape" (to use a simplistic vernacular term) ended and the "human" began.

I know, you guys admitted that about a hundred times. I hope other I.D. believers here, my Bible buddies have read all this, because this comes straight from the horses mouth.

In summary:
"No gorilla, or chimp, or any hominid species will evolve/turn/speciate/morph into a human, or that would falsify evolution."

IN A SINGLE GENERATION!

Stop repeating lies!

If you want to disagree with evolution, atheists or any other belief, feel free to, just don't lie about other's beliefs!

Here is an evolution of human over the six million years:

So this concludes that humans didn't evolve from any other species, humans remained humans, just got better looking and smarter over the years, .. which is since God created Adam and Eve. This is a depiction how atheist Evolutionist see Adam as, and how he evolved over the 6,000 (not 6 million, Evolutionist like to exaggerate things) but 6,000 years.

I guess even if they do admit that Evolution never happens in, like speciation from one species into another, but they can't help to ridicule Gods creation in other ways, making him look and feel like an ape, and even to label him an animal of the ape family! While they freely admit he was always human.
Why all this lies then? The billion$ $pent on all this grave robbing, building museums etc. when they admit evolution of species into another different species never happened!?

Homo erectus was much more human like then any modern ape, and much more ape like then any modern human. Homo habilis was much more ape like then any Homo erectus, but still far more human like then any modern ape.

We have many, many fossils of transitional species all the way back to the upright, yet chimp-like Australopithecus afarensis (if you remember, Lucy was one of these).

What is your explanation for all of these?

 

[Arius]

Your behavior is disgusting. You ignore people, ridicule and distort.

Ah, nothing like turning the insulting back to self, like others here, to claim to be not the offender but the victim. Nice try.
I DO NOT call other humans, black, yellow, white, tattooed blue, no matter what Religion or political stand: an animal, .. especially an ape. But yes, Evolutionists have done those things as I have shown in many of my previous posts, and continue doing it. But oh my, I'm the one who's disgusting. Like the SNL Church Lady would say: "Now isn't that special?"

Did you know that French, Italian, Catalan, Portuguese and Castilian all come from the same continent and from the same parent language?

We've been through all them shades between species, languages, colors etc. Until you guys show a few million different shades of humans from gorilla to human, your examples are nothing but diversion techniques. Trying to derail the train of thought.

We don't specifically know the prescise species, but we know a lot about it from genetics found in living and dead species including our own.

So this just proves that God created Adam, then seen that He was lonely and didn't have anyone to have fun with, so God created all kinds of animals, some even to look a little like Adam, to entertain him. Of course as you can see from genetics, DNA that He used the same format, same plans, for all the creatures so not to freak Adam out.
This is why people, especially widows must have pets, and it is also proof that they feel comforted by these pets because they are so much like us. Sure dogs can't talk, but who can deny the love they show to us, right?
So instead of thanking our Lord and our Creator for giving us all these animals, we deny Him, His creation, and even ourselves for what?
An idea, some Religious idea that even though we know is a lie, we'll spend billions of dollars on, and murder billions of our own creation man to hold on to that religious belief.

Like I don't know the name of my nine times grandfather, but I can infer from genetics and history that he was a man living in the York moors of England.

And may I guess what species he was? I bet he was human, just like you.

Contemptible behavior. It was clear from the next line that Lucy was a member of the species, Australopithecus afarensis. I'm sure you would call this a chimp or a gorilla, but that would be wrong, because no member of either species walked upright like Lucy's brethren nor do they have as developed a brain.

the bone fragments that Evolutionists named Lucy may have been a severally retarded adult, crippled, may have been a midget, .. and here you guys base an entire religion on these dried up bone fragments. Seriously now?
Besides, if Lucy was a human, so what?
If Lucy was an ape, then again, so what? we have the same thing today, apes, chimps humans, gorillas all living on the same continent, eating the same food, drinking the same water, and getting chem-trailed like we all are.

You have done nothing but insult and lie about what people have attempted in good faith to communicate yo you.

Did I call you an animal of the ape family, and your relatives a bunch of apes?
I am your friend who has risked it all, family, a close Religious Christian cult where I was loved, and here I am being called names, so all I ask is you point out the insults to me, not report me out of context, but deal it to me first. If I truly insulted you, I will write a hundred word apology, .. deal?

But if you feel insulted that you've been labeling yourself, your children and even your loving parents and grandparents as animals, apes, descended from rats, .. hey, please don't take it out on me.

You have never linked to an actual quote from a scientific source. If you would like to actually discuss evidence, not word games and taunts, there are many here to help you.

That is the Religions job to defend its claims, not mine.
All I asked is:
1. "Can anyone tell me the species that Dawkins was pointing to in the video that I provided, that he called "Common Ancestor"? What species was it?
Yes, I will accept scientific sources, but not pseudoscience, which is what both the Big-Bang theory and the Evolution theory was built on and sustained by, besides all the straight out lies and insults.
2. where are all the "Common Ancestor" Species for the eight million existing species still living here on earth today?

Thank you.

 

[Arius]

Look, the important bit is: (or some other type of monkey with long tail)

did you watch that video?

That is not the same thing as "a gorilla". Your mixing and matching of terms and concepts goes all the way from sloppy and inaccurate into actually being wrong. When you you repeat wrong statements, especially about someone else's opinion or belief you are lying and bearing false witness against your neighbour. Despicable.

Would you like me to show you all the different ideas, depictions that's out there on evolution? Even you're confused. You think humans evolved from apes, .. lol

No one who supports evolution is denying that humans ultimately are descended from an ancestor species that more closely resembled modern apes. However, the change happened so slowly that you could never tell when the "ape" (to use a simplistic vernacular term) ended and the "human" began.

read the previous posts, people here were denying that humans evolved from gorillas.
Now even you messed up, on purpose I suppose, .. human ancestor species didn't resemble modern apes, Evolution says we ARE apes. It never ended, for we humans are labeled animals, and evolving apes, .. not even apes, but evolving apes.
One day I guess we will evolve into apes, not just act like them.

IN A SINGLE GENERATION!

Stop repeating lies!

If you want to disagree with evolution, atheists or any other belief, feel free to, just don't lie about other's beliefs!

If a train is coming to the station gradually, coming 1 inch per day, it will still arrive in an instant.
If a species is speciating gradually over millions and billions of years, it will eventually become another species in an instant, while it is still alive, YES in a single generation, the generation that finally speciates to another species.

I'm done with you, before you report me for stalking you or something.

Answer my question, or admit the truth, which is that no species of a kind has ever speciated into another species, specifically gorilla to human.

And since you guys play the dishonest game called rhetoric, you keep avoiding the question and think no one can notice it, .. lol.

Homo erectus was much more human like then any modern ape, and much more ape like then any modern human. Homo habilis was much more ape like then any Homo erectus, but still far more human like then any modern ape.

LOL, .. see what I mean? Humans are apes according to your Evolution Religion. apes can't speciate into apes, they are apes, just like we can't claim evolution saying a zebra speciated/shanged/morph into zebra because they are already zebra. Oh my, now I'm teaching Devilution 101.

We have many, many fossils of transitional species all the way back to the upright, yet chimp-like Australopithecus afarensis (if you remember, Lucy was one of these).

What is your explanation for all of these?

Fossils are neat, I have friends who collected them, but never seen one speciate into another species.
But I guess if you believe something enough, you can actually see them speciating!?

 

[Jimmy D]

Ah, nothing like turning the insulting back to self, like others here, to claim to be not the offender but the victim. Nice try.
I DO NOT call other humans, black, yellow, white, tattooed blue, no matter what Religion or political stand: an animal, .. especially an ape. But yes, Evolutionists have done those things as I have shown in many of my previous posts, and continue doing it. But oh my, I'm the one who's disgusting. Like the SNL Church Lady would say: "Now isn't that special?"



We've been through all them shades between species, languages, colors etc. Until you guys show a few million different shades of humans from gorilla to human, your examples are nothing but diversion techniques. Trying to derail the train of thought.



So this just proves that God created Adam, then seen that He was lonely and didn't have anyone to have fun with, so God created all kinds of animals, some even to look a little like Adam, to entertain him. Of course as you can see from genetics, DNA that He used the same format, same plans, for all the creatures so not to freak Adam out.
This is why people, especially widows must have pets, and it is also proof that they feel comforted by these pets because they are so much like us. Sure dogs can't talk, but who can deny the love they show to us, right?
So instead of thanking our Lord and our Creator for giving us all these animals, we deny Him, His creation, and even ourselves for what?
An idea, some Religious idea that even though we know is a lie, we'll spend billions of dollars on, and murder billions of our own creation man to hold on to that religious belief.



And may I guess what species he was? I bet he was human, just like you.



the bone fragments that Evolutionists named Lucy may have been a severally retarded adult, crippled, may have been a midget, .. and here you guys base an entire religion on these dried up bone fragments. Seriously now?
Besides, if Lucy was a human, so what?
If Lucy was an ape, then again, so what? we have the same thing today, apes, chimps humans, gorillas all living on the same continent, eating the same food, drinking the same water, and getting chem-trailed like we all are.



Did I call you an animal of the ape family, and your relatives a bunch of apes?
I am your friend who has risked it all, family, a close Religious Christian cult where I was loved, and here I am being called names, so all I ask is you point out the insults to me, not report me out of context, but deal it to me first. If I truly insulted you, I will write a hundred word apology, .. deal?

But if you feel insulted that you've been labeling yourself, your children and even your loving parents and grandparents as animals, apes, descended from rats, .. hey, please don't take it out on me.



That is the Religions job to defend its claims, not mine.
All I asked is:
1. "Can anyone tell me the species that Dawkins was pointing to in the video that I provided, that he called "Common Ancestor"? What species was it?
Yes, I will accept scientific sources, but not pseudoscience, which is what both the Big-Bang theory and the Evolution theory was built on and sustained by, besides all the straight out lies and insults.
2. where are all the "Common Ancestor" Species for the eight million existing species still living here on earth today?

Thank you.

I have to ask, do you know what “common ancestor” means?

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Sure, .., but deep down they know who exactly they're calling animals and apes. Look, I shown you from history, and I can show you dozens of videos of Dawkins going around to even Christian Churches calling good, kind down to earth people; animals and apes, and offending them greatly.

Dawkins is correct in what he says, and presumably he wants to educate those who don't know, or whose beliefs are incorrect in that respect. I think his approach is often tactless and boorish, but he's telling a simple truth.

There are still some doctors, scientists, lawyers and even judges alive today that can tell the difference between animal and human. A judge will not sentence you to death for putting down your unwanted crazy pet, but kill your crazy uncle and see what happens!

I bet even you can tell that difference, have you ever disregarded a sign on a grocery store door that said: "Warning: No animals allowed!" ,, and just walk right in ignoring the warning?

Now you're being silly. The distinction is between humans and other animals.

 

[Astrophile]

Let's get back to the beginning: "What species was the "Common Ancestor" that Dawkins is pointing at in that YouTube video I shown a half a dozen times?

Did you read my post 322?

According to Chimpanzee–human last common ancestor - Wikipedia , it was perhaps something like Orrorin tugenensis and Sahelanthropus tchadensis.

Again, .. "What species was that 'Common Ancestor'?"

I said somewhere else that the common ancestor of gorillas, chimpanzees and humans (and australopithecines) was possibly Nakalipithecus nayakamai , or something very like it - Nakalipithecus - Wikipedia . Samburupithecus kiptalami has also been named as a possible common ancestor to gorillas, chimpanzees and hominins (including humans) - Samburupithecus - Wikipedia.

You can see from this that there there are several fossil animals that may have been the common ancestor of ourselves and the African apes, even if biologists can't say which of these was the true last common ancestor. No doubt other possible common ancestors will be discovered in the next ten years or so.

 

[Gene2memE]

Show me this from human evolution perspective, we have 7 billion humans living on every continent, with millions of other species which all evolved together over the 4 billion years from the amoeba found in your primordial soup.

Show me where the animal gorilla can mate with the species you call "Common Ancestor", which can mate with the animal human? Please?

You don't understand the point you're attempting to critique.

Homo Sapiens and Gorilla Gorilla are modern, extant species that have a barrier to reproduction. Neither of them mated with theoretical third species at some point in the distant past. They share a common ancestor species of the Hominidae family, which had various biologically distinct populations diverge from it. At some point after this, the ancestor species in the Hominidae family itself became extinct. However, its ancestor species diverged and diverged again, until we have our present situation of four major genra - Homo, Pongo, Gorilla and Pan - being descended from that ancestor species.

Humans DID interbreed with near evolutionary relatives - essentially, other members of the homo genus - which existed at the same time as we did (ie cross breeding within in the past 100,000 years). There's very strong evidence that humans interbred with Homo Neanderthalis and Homo sapiens ssp. Denisova - as well as less strong evidence of interbreeding with at least two other homo species, Homo Heidelbergis at the very least - at multiple points in recent evolutionary history.

If you're of European ancestry, then between 2% and 4% of your DNA was contributed by Neanderthal ancestors. If you're of East Asian ancestry, then this may be as much as 8%.
If you're of Melansian or Australian aborigine ancestry, then between 3% and 5% of of your DNA was contributed by Denisovan ancestors.

Awesome, show me a species that can mate with both human and gorilla, and produce offspring with both, .. this I have got to see? I never even heard of such creature?

You've never heard of it, because such a thing is a figment of your imagination and a product of your faulty understanding of the basics of the mechanisms of evolutionary biology as it relates to speciation.

 

[USincognito]

I would suggest that Arius is more interested in repeating his shtick than having an actual discussion and that until he exhibits a willingness to engage in an actual discussion we refrain from responding to him.

 

[Rivga]

I would suggest that Arius is more interested in repeating his shtick than having an actual discussion and that until he exhibits a willingness to engage in an actual discussion we refrain from responding to him.

It does not sound as if he even understands some of the questions he is asking, it is like he read a book "Debunking Evolution", the usual one sided Strawman building type that we all know and love, and he is just repeating it.

 

[Arius]

To show that I respect both you all here, especially our Moderators, I would like to apologize for my, .. what was that one of you called it, .. oh yeah, my "snarky" (sharply critical; cutting; snide, cranky; irritable) remarks here and there in my posts.
No matter how discriminating, dark, anti-common sense that I feel and know from what I have seen throughout my life about this topic on 'Evolution', it was not right for me to, .. to 'goad' like that.

Please forgive me everyone, and I do appreciate your efforts in trying to "open my eyes and understanding" to your belief in Evolution.

I am honestly telling you all that I am just beginning to understand that you (those who believe in Evolution) really do believe it!? I honestly find this extremely difficult to swallow, seeing how smart you all are. But is that because I am ignorant of the concept of Evolution, .. that we'll just have to see?

So I will do my best to stick to Forum Rules try to prove my case, without any of those "snarky comments".

 

[Arius]

I have to ask, do you know what “common ancestor” means?

Is this the definition you're thinking of too?

Common Ancestor - noun. in genealogy, any person to whom two or more persons claim descent; also, the most recent ancestral form or species from which two different species evolved.

If yes, then may I ask you please: What was the species of that Common Ancestor Dawkins is pointing to (time 0:21) in this video?

.. from which two different species evolved?

Thank you.

 

[Arius]

Dawkins is correct in what he says, and presumably he wants to educate those who don't know, or whose beliefs are incorrect in that respect. I think his approach is often tactless and boorish, but he's telling a simple truth.

So am I, .. and I just got my first "Warning" because of it.
But it's nice to see that you understand coming from Dawkins.

Now you're being silly. The distinction is between humans and other animals.

I will try to abide by Forum Rules from now on, ..

I was warned about giving a "funny" remark about another's, .. supposedly serious comment, .. well, in my above comment, I am "Dead Serious", not being silly. I was pointing out paradoxes and ridiculous contradictions in Evolution. Now if you would like to point out why that was 'silly', .. by all means please do so, .. I'm all ears?

 

[Arius]

According to Chimpanzee–human last common ancestor - Wikipedia , it was perhaps something like Orrorin tugenensis and Sahelanthropus tchadensis.

Sorry, I didn't have time to, but I did now that you reminded me, thank you.

Here:
Speciation from Pan to Homo appears to have been a long, drawn-out process. After the original divergences, there were, according to Patterson (2006), periods of hybridization between population groups and a process of alternating divergence and hybridization that lasted several million years. Some time during the late Miocene or early Pliocene, the earliest members of the human clade completed a final separation from the lineage of Pan — with date estimates ranging from 13 million to as recent as 4 million years ago. The latter date and the argument for hybridization events are rejected by Wakeley (see current estimates regarding complex speciation).

Richard Wrangham (2001) argued that the CHLCA species was very similar to the common chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes) — so much so that it should be classified as a member of the Pan genus and be given the taxonomic name Pan prior. However, no fossil has yet been identified as a probable candidate for the CHLCA or the taxon Pan prior.

In human genetic studies, the CHLCA is useful as an anchor point for calculating single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) rates in human populations where chimpanzees are used as an outgroup, that is, as the extant species most genetically similar to Homo sapiens.

This is something about: periods of hybridization between population groups and a process of alternating divergence and hybridization that lasted several million years.

I know this came from observing fragments of bones found in the dirt by "Evolutionists", because no scientist would make such a positive statement of things that may have, could have, might have happened millions and billions of years ago, unless there was some actual scientific observation of that time recorded by another scientist.
They are going by looking at a bone fragment that they believe lived anywhere from million, to 10 million years ago, and that they believe this species was very similar to the common chimpanzee(if I understand it correctly?)

As I have shown you guys over and over again that Evolutionists thought Ota Benga was "similar to a chimpanzee" also.

May I also ask you guys: What do Evolutionist-scientist mean when they say "similar"? I mean that "Common Ancestor" had to be either, or?
If it was a chimp, then it wasn't the Common Ancestor, because the common ancestor gave rise to chimps and humans (according to your beliefs), am I correct? If not, I am here to be corrected.

If it was 'human' (Homo), then so what, .. they just found some bone remains of a human!?

 

[Arius]

You don't understand the point you're attempting to critique.

Homo Sapiens and Gorilla Gorilla are modern, extant species that have a barrier to reproduction. Neither of them mated with theoretical third species at some point in the distant past. They share a common ancestor species of the Hominidae family, which had various biologically distinct populations diverge from it. At some point after this, the ancestor species in the Hominidae family itself became extinct. However, its ancestor species diverged and diverged again, until we have our present situation of four major genra - Homo, Pongo, Gorilla and Pan - being descended from that ancestor species.

Hello Gene2memE
Just because I simplify rhetoric doesn't mean I don't understand. But thank you, so may I ask you then, why did Dawkins put "modern' species in the family collage of that white woman in this video?

we have gorillas, orangutans, humans, chimps, bonobos today, why didn't Dawkins use one of the thousands of Peleoartist drawings of the common ancestor in every "T" he calls "common ancestor" in that family collage?
What is missing is all the "common ancestors" from the entire 8 million different species alive today, not just gorilla and human.

Show me one "distinct species" of animal that can reproduce with two other "distinct species" like someone else claimed happens, .. where A can reproduce with B, and B can reproduce with A and C? I want to see three different species, not different "kind" of geese, or ducks or big cats.

Just because someone stopped mating with their same species anymore (trauma, disease, whatever) doesn't mean they are now a different species.

Humans DID interbreed with near evolutionary relatives - essentially, other members of the homo genus - which existed at the same time as we did (ie cross breeding within in the past 100,000 years). There's very strong evidence that humans interbred with Homo Neanderthalis and Homo sapiens ssp. Denisova - as well as less strong evidence of interbreeding with at least two other homo species, Homo Heidelbergis at the very least - at multiple points in recent evolutionary history.

100,000 year old scientific observation records showing this would be science, what you have above is built on a belief, particularly the evolution Religious belief observing dried up skull and bones who have died from God knows what diseases, dug up from graves.

If you're of European ancestry, then between 2% and 4% of your DNA was contributed by Neanderthal ancestors. If you're of East Asian ancestry, then this may be as much as 8%.
If you're of Melansian or Australian aborigine ancestry, then between 3% and 5% of of your DNA was contributed by Denisovan ancestors.

Wow, and they can get all this DNA info from millions and even billion year old skull and bones? So they can trace my lineage down to a 6 million year old lower jawbone with some teeth left on it!? No wonder Dawkins don't want to post that on his family-tree collage in his video, but simply calls it "Common Ancestor"!?

1. from the Evolutionary standpoint, we all evolved from amoeba. That means that even the algae and the rock it is sticking on is our ancestor, and we evolved from a population of extinct skull & bones.

2. As we have witnessed throughout human existence that man turns to dust, just as all the animals do. So we are all created from the dust of the earth. Same Creator, same plan, different purpose, and so far it fits exactly with that description, which is all described in the Bible.

You've never heard of it, because such a thing is a figment of your imagination and a product of your faulty understanding of the basics of the mechanisms of evolutionary biology as it relates to speciation.

Someone told me in a post, about the A, B, C species, where B can mate with both, but not A with B.

Tell me what "species" our "common ancestor" was in the above video by Richard Dawkins (time 0:21)

.. so we can settle this discussion once and for all!?
That's it, .. it will either prove, or disprove this Religious idea that there is No God, man is just another animal of the ape family, and we are spinning and twirling through the infinite cold dark vacuum called NASA-space(r) where pagan gods with names like Mars, Venus, Jupiter, .. are worshipped.

 

[Arius]

It does not sound as if he even understands some of the questions he is asking, it is like he read a book "Debunking Evolution", the usual one sided Strawman building type that we all know and love, and he is just repeating it.

No, I just have questions about what Evolution claims, and what those who are deep in this belief system believe!?

 

[Skreeper]

No, I just have questions about what Evolution claims, and what those who are deep in this belief system believe!?

It's not a belief system but I think we already told you that.

Just because your resent the idea of being related to other species doesn't make it false. I know you think you are very special and everything was made for you by this loving god who's gonna give you eternal life but please keep in mind that your dreams don't magically come true.