Evidence for human evolution

[misty]

Today at 11:32 AM Micaiah said this in Post #18

Much of the evidence used by evolutionists to support human descent from apes stems from the apparent likeness of apes to humans. Of course this also provides evidence they had the same Creator. I've made an interesting observation of a number of land mammals. They all have two ears, two eyes, legs, and noses. This suggests to me that God was not seeking to provided unlimited variety in creation. Had we evolved, I would expect to see a much greater variety in lifeforms.

So because most land mammals have attributes that make sense for their environment, you reject evolution? 

You seem to have a rather narrow opinion of animal evolution. What about the varied species in the ocean?  How did they come to be so? Did god get the giggles and create jellyfish?

 




 

 

[LadyShea]

Today at 03:32 AM Micaiah said this in Post #18

Much of the evidence used by evolutionists to support human descent from apes stems from the apparent likeness of apes to humans. Of course this also provides evidence they had the same Creator. I've made an interesting observation of a number of land mammals. They all have two ears, two eyes, legs, and noses. This suggests to me that God was not seeking to provided unlimited variety in creation. Had we evolved, I would expect to see a much greater variety in lifeforms.

In all of the information and links on page one, the "likeness" of apes to humans was not mentioned once. Do you have any criticism of the loads of science presented in this very thread? Your strawman is much easier to knock down I know, but at least acknowledge you have read and understood the evidence before dismissing it.

 

[lucaspa]

Yesterday at 01:19 PM LadyShea said this in Post #1

A thread in General Apologetics derailed into a discussion about human evolution. I looked but have been unable to find a thread dedicated to ONLY human evolution so I wanted to start one. I know many of you have information and evidence to share, and I thought it would be helpful to everyone to have it collected in one place.

I would like to start with this article, written for the layman (like me), discussing the fossil finds of transitionals.

http://www.theistic-evolution.com/transitional.html 

The article gives only the transitional species. That is only part of the story. There are also transitional individuals linking many of the species.  I have been compiling my own list from anthropological material.  Part of the problem is that many of these transitional individuals were discovered more than 20 years ago and they are no longer mentioned by those who don't search back far enough.

F. Clark Howell, Early Man Time Life Library, 1980

Afarensis to habilis:  OH 24 is in between A. afarensis and habilis

Habilis to erectus:
Oldovai:  Bed I has Habilis at bottom, then fossils with perfect mixture of characteristics of habilis and erectus, and erectus at top.  At bottom of Bed II (top of Bed I) have fossils resemble H. erectus but brain case smaller than later H. erectus that lies immediately above them.  pg 81
OH 13, 14 was classified by some anthropologists as H. habilis but others as early H. erectus.  650 cc

Koobi Fora: Another succession with several habilis up to 2 Mya, then transitionals, and then erectus at 1.5 Mya.

Erectus to sapiens:  Omo valley.  Omo-2 "remarkable mixture of Homo erectus and Homo sapiens characteristics"  pg. 70. 
Omo-1: another mix of erectus and sapiens
Skhul and Jebel Qafza caves: "robust" H. sapiens at 120 Kya that have brow ridges like erectus but brain case like sapiens.
Tautavel, 200Kya:  large brow ridges and small cranium but rest of face looks like H. sapiens.
"We shall see the problem of drawing up a dividing line between Homo erectus and Homo sapiens is not easy."  pg 65.
Ngaloba Beds of Laetoli, 120 Kya:  ~1200 cc and suite of archaic (erectus) features.
Guamde in Turkana Basin, 180 Kya: more modern features than Ngaloba but in-between erectus and sapiens.
Skhul, Israel  "posed a puzzle to paleoanthropologists, appearing to be almost but not quite modern humans" 

Erectus to neandertalis:
Stenheim and Swanscombe, 250 Kya: called H. heidelbergensis but have characteristics of both erectus and neandertalis.  Large brows and small cranium ( ~1200cc) but otherwise looks like neandertalis
Petroloma skull (complete): brow ridges and low forehead like erectus but not quite as primitive but not as derived as sapiens or neandertalis.  Back of head resembles sapiens. 250 Kya
Vertesszollos, 400 Kya.  Teeth like H. erectus but occipital bone like H. sapiens.  brain ~ 1300 cc

Francis M Clapham, Our Human Ancestors, 1976
Omo Valley, Ethiopia:  ~ 500,000 ya. mixture erectus and sapiens features
Sale in Morrocco: skull discovered in 1971, ~300,000 ya.  also shows erectus and sapiens features.
Broken Hill skull: another skull with mixtures of erectus and sapiens features

Ehrendorf in Germany and Saccopestore in Italy:  mixture erectus and early neandertals, classed as archaic H. sapiens or H. heidelbergensis.

 

[lucaspa]

Today at 06:32 AM Micaiah said this in Post #18

Much of the evidence used by evolutionists to support human descent from apes stems from the apparent likeness of apes to humans. Of course this also provides evidence they had the same Creator. I've made an interesting observation of a number of land mammals. They all have two ears, two eyes, legs, and noses. This suggests to me that God was not seeking to provided unlimited variety in creation. Had we evolved, I would expect to see a much greater variety in lifeforms.

Unlimited variety turns out not to be possible.  EVOLUTION:
G Wagner, Complexity matters.  Science, 279, Number 5354 Issue of 20 February 1998, pp. 1158 - 1159  What happens is that if a trait is subject to two or more selective forces, then it 'freezes' and becomes impossible to change by evolution.  This is the explanation for the "two ears, two eyes, legs".  These features are fixed in development and it is no longer possible for evolution to change them.

"But at some stages of evolution certain characters effectively "click in" and remain fixed in the descendent group of species (5-7). For instance, the chorda dorsalis (the embryonic precursor of our vertebral column) is absent in invertebrates, variably present in the relatives of vertebrates (ascidians and related groups) and absolutely fixed in vertebrates. The first who most clearly saw a connection between this pattern and increasing complexity was Rupert Riedl in the 1970s (6). He postulated that with increasing complexity some characters become more important because more and more new characters are functionally or developmentally predicated on them. Once such characters have accumulated many "responsibilities," mutational change will be detrimental and thus these characters become evolutionarily fixed. This increasing burden leads to fixation of characters. ... according to the report by Waxman and Peck (1), which shows that there is a complexity limit beyond which genes can freeze into a fixed state and where the swarm of genetic variation suddenly disappears like fog in the sun. In the Waxman-Peck model, the complexity limit is reached once the genes affect more than two characters that are under simultaneous stabilizing selection."

However, you have your prediction exactly reversed.  If God were creating each species separately, I would expect more diversity because God isn't limited to what came before.  So, small horses with wings? Why not?  God isn't limited to the tetrapod Bauplan of vertebrates.  Evolution is thru stabilizing selection.

 

[RufusAtticus]

Today at 06:32 AM Micaiah said this in Post #18 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=672767#post672767)

Much of the evidence used by evolutionists to support human descent from apes stems from the apparent likeness of apes to humans. Of course this also provides evidence they had the same Creator.

If that is true, then dissimilar designs must imply different Creators. Looks like monotheism is out the window then.

I've made an interesting observation of a number of land mammals. They all have two ears, two eyes, legs, and noses. This suggests to me that God was not seeking to provided unlimited variety in creation. Had we evolved, I would expect to see a much greater variety in lifeforms.

We do have much greater variety in lifeforms than just land mammals: insects, sponges, bacteria, fish, conifers, ferns, angiosperms, mushrooms, birds, etc.

 

[webboffin]

hmmmmmmmm, mushrooms

 

[Chris H]

Kudo's to Lady Shea for posting this excellent evidence. Reading this type of material a few years ago is why I no longer believe in a literal interpretation of Genesis or creationism.

In Darwin

Chris H

 

[lucaspa]

Today at 12:33 PM RufusAtticus said this in Post #25

If that is true, then dissimilar designs must imply different Creators. Looks like monotheism is out the window then. 

Good point, Rufus.  An example would be ichthyosaurs and dolphins. Same general shape but very different in the details. By Micaiah's logic this would be explained by different Creators, with the analogy being Dodge and Mercury minivans.

One also has to wonder why a Creator that has a good design would then discard it.  An example would be the primate or bear thumbs.  Very good design for grasping. Then along comes the panda.  It has a bear thumb but it is fused to the other digits so that instead the panda has a makeshift "thumb" from a wristbone.

This would seem to imply a Creator with Alzheimer's.

 

[LadyShea]

Today at 11:59 AM Chris H said this in Post #27

Kudo's to Lady Shea for posting this excellent evidence. Reading this type of material a few years ago is why I no longer believe in a literal interpretation of Genesis or creationism.

In Darwin

Chris H

Hey, none of this is my evidence...just trying to collect and collate the best of the best. These people amaze me, and I have learned so very much from them.

 

[Chris H]

Lday S, your still defending rational thought.

Any evidence or response, creationists?

In Darwin

Chris

 

[LadyShea]

I am very disappointed that the creationists are in other threads demanding evidence, but refuse to look at any we present.

It's as if we are debating the existence of elephants, and when an elephant is brought into the house, they hide in a different room yelling through the door that they don't see any elephant.

 

[Arikay]

Lady: I agree.
Or when they go around saying they have evidence that falsifies evolution, but they seem to be absent from the threads asking for it.

 

[LadyShea]

I am going to bump this yet again as we have not heard from the people it was meant for or any of the people asking for evidence in other threads. Does anyone have any criticism of the actual evidence presented here (not some strawman argument)

 

[Smilin]

23rd February 2003 at 01:19 PM LadyShea said this in Post #1 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=671266#post671266)

I am hoping for some evidence including maps of early human migrations and how the fossil finds match up with this migration theory.

Migration studies through DNA analysis has been performed by Dr. Spencer Wells. He is publishing his book this spring 'The Journey of Man'.

For a website link:

http://www.mdsa.com.au/nationalgeo/default.asp

His worldwide genetic research accurately mapped the migration paths of early humans from Africa to the rest of the Globe.

Enjoy my friend.

 

[Smilin]

23rd February 2003 at 06:04 PM Hector Medina said this in Post #12 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=671780#post671780)

I'd say it could be convncing but that dosen't make it true/right.

I believe my God did everything right the 1st time just like the Bible explains !!!


In Christ,

Hector

Hector,
I am a Christian as well,,, and with all due respect,,,
if God did everything right the 1st time, then why does the OT record him destroying the Earth save one family... and grieved stating that it would have been better had he not created man?

Doesn't sound like a 'working prototype design to me'

Just something to think about....

 

[Smilin]

23rd February 2003 at 01:59 PM LadyShea said this in Post #6 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=671317#post671317)

[Most everyone who has debated creationism is aware of fact one:
Humans and chimpanzees share 98% of their DNA sequences. Of course if humans and apes must each carry much of the DNA of their ancestors (all that has not been lost or changed). Finding such similar DNA patterns can easily be interpreted as evidence for evolution. Creationists have an alternate explanation. They explain this as a result of "similar structures for similar functions," then go another step to explain that similar DNA is used to build similar structures. On the surface, this explanation works. It does leave some questions open about why, exactly, God would want His "prized creation" to have so much in common (function-wise) with His "lesser" creations, but that can be chalked up to God working in mysterious ways. On a deeper examination, this explanation doesn't work on a large subset of DNA homologies (similarities).

And to add to this, the genome of the common white mouse has been mapped and it has been discovered that we share 98% of their DNA sequences as well. Thus the reason they make perfect laboratory test specimens. This fact adds more questions to the puzzle. I we share a large percentage of DNA structures with both apes and mice... what does that say about the common ancestory theory? Or perhaps is this just the beggining of evidence to point towards a common design principle?

Just food for thought.

 

[Smilin]

Yesterday at 03:25 PM Arikay said this in Post #32 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=675315#post675315)

Lady: I agree.
Or when they go around saying they have evidence that falsifies evolution, but they seem to be absent from the threads asking for it.

Agreed,

Good Luck LadyShea,
You've witnessed my attempts to draw out those who defend the YEC notion, as well as observed evolution processes to no avail. They claim they have evidence, or that MANY mainstream scientists now reject these theories... yet never show up to defend their arguments, present their evidence, and provide the lists of scientists they refer to....

 

[Smilin]

24th February 2003 at 06:32 AM Micaiah said this in Post #18 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=672767#post672767)

Much of the evidence used by evolutionists to support human descent from apes stems from the apparent likeness of apes to humans. Of course this also provides evidence they had the same Creator. I've made an interesting observation of a number of land mammals. They all have two ears, two eyes, legs, and noses. This suggests to me that God was not seeking to provided unlimited variety in creation. Had we evolved, I would expect to see a much greater variety in lifeforms.

Have you observed Neanderthals? If so, what do they suggest to you?

God was not seeking to provide unlimited variety in creation? My friend, you should study horticulture or work in the nursery industry. If unlimited variety wasn't intendended... then explain the 77,000 +/- new plant species that have appeared within the last decade in the horticulture industry? If unlimited variety wasn't intendeded, then explain selective reproduction which has produced THOUSANDS of new breeds of cats, dogs, horses, cattle, etc, etc, during the last 100 years.

Open your eyes and you'll find an IMMENSE variety in lifeforms that were not part of any original creation.

 

[Smilin]

Today at 11:48 AM LadyShea said this in Post #33 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=677324#post677324)

I am going to bump this yet again as we have not heard from the people it was meant for or any of the people asking for evidence in other threads. Does anyone have any criticism of the actual evidence presented here (not some strawman argument)

okay... to humor you...

I'm starting to believe we are descendents of an ancient alien civilization that visited Earth once it became inhabitable.

From my military experience, I'm certain the government is hiding the evidence concerning this matter in Area 51 of the Nevada desert.

 

[Smilin]

Yesterday at 02:30 PM LadyShea said this in Post #31 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=675225#post675225)

I am very disappointed that the creationists are in other threads demanding evidence, but refuse to look at any we present.

It's as if we are debating the existence of elephants, and when an elephant is brought into the house, they hide in a different room yelling through the door that they don't see any elephant.

Welcome to my world....

I feel the same frustration you're feeling when I started my "Biblical Stories that Support Evolutionary Science" thread. Amazing those who call evolution a lie or product of Satan, as well as those who claim the Bible to be literal in nature never even appeared.....