Human Evolution

[High Fidelity]

There were little populations living back then for MILLIONS of years and evolving, while today we have BILLIONS of people living and not evolving?

No our brains just grew because the weather was warmer.

Again, you can't compare this.

You're expecting presentable changes that occur over millions and billions of years to happen within a life time or even thousands of years.

Even 6000 years is NOTHING but a speck when compared to billions of years.

 

[lasthero]

What? Of course I care that's why I ask.

No, you don't. If you cared, you'd spend time looking up the answer. Go to a library, maybe read some books on the subject, check out a few articles to educate yourself. You haven't done that, so clearly you don't care. You've already come to your conclusion, and nothings changing that.

So why ask?

 

[anyathesword]

What he's saying is that over those time frames the foundations strengthen and the 'infrastructure' needed to enable us to do certain things happen gradually over incomprehensible amounts of time.

Dismissing the time frames between walking upright for example... That's like comparing Computer Processors from 1980 to Computer Processors of today.

Today's processors have better surrounding 'hardware' and technology in order to make them more effective at doing a task that would be either impossible or take much longer to complete in 1980.

That's millions of years compared to 40 years, that's a huge difference.

Incomprehensible yes with very little evidence to support such a long timeline.

I want someone to list me fossil evidence that is not disputed by evolutionists and creationists for all these species. Million of years is long and we should be able to find more evidence.

 

[Mr Strawberry]

Do you think our brains shrank during the ice age?

Actually, there was a bit in New Scientist magazine this week mentioning that human brains show evidence of shrinking ever since we started to be able to control our environment. This correlates with the shrinking of the brains of domesticated animals. Like domesticated animals, when there is no longe selection for the fittest to survive in a hostile, wild environment, the brains begin to shrink again. Thus since we have domesticated ourselves, so to speak, our brains have shrunk a bit from those of our more aggressive, wild ancestors 10-20,000 years ago.

 

[anyathesword]

No, you don't. If you cared, you'd spend time looking up the answer. Go to a library, maybe read some books on the subject, check out a few articles to educate yourself. You haven't done that, so clearly you don't care. You've already come to your conclusion, and nothings changing that.

So why ask?

I have looked up answers, but I need answers from you to see the difference in opinion and evidence!

And some subjects I need more clarification such as human evolution.

 

[46AND2]

It's based on the half-life of whatever substance is found in the fossil or rock.

But how would a scientist know the beginning composition of the rock or fossil? And how would they know if there was a catastrophic event in the past that is not the same as today, where they can test substances.

If you learned how the process worked, you would know how they know these things. Do you think they have not taken them into consideration?

So, again I ask, if you don't know how they work, how can you know they are biased? Because the objections you just made show that you don't know how it works, because you don't know that your objections are accounted for in the process.

 

[anyathesword]

Actually, there was a bit in New Scientist magazine this week mentioning that human brains show evidence of shrinking ever since we started to be able to control our environment. This correlates with the shrinking of the brains of domesticated animals. Like domesticated animals, when there is no longe selection for the fittest to survive in a hostile, wild environment, the brains begin to shrink again. Thus since we have domesticated ourselves, our brains have shrunk a bit from those of our more aggressive, wild ancestors 10-20,000 years ago.

Well that's even more confusing if our brains are shrinking and we are getting more intelligent.

 

[Mr Strawberry]

Well that's even more confusing if our brains are shrinking and we are getting more intelligent.

We aren't any more intelligent than those 10-20,000 years ago, at least, there is no evidence to suggest that. And having smaller brains suggests we may even be less smart.

 

[46AND2]

There were little populations living back then for MILLIONS of years and evolving, while today we have BILLIONS of people living and not evolving?

No our brains just grew because the weather was warmer.

Who said we aren't evolving?

 

[anyathesword]

Again, you can't compare this.

You're expecting presentable changes that occur over millions and billions of years to happen within a life time or even thousands of years.

Even 6000 years is NOTHING but a speck when compared to billions of years.

Exactly, it just makes no sense, only the sense to a biased evolutionist's story of our origins. They try and fit us into the timeline and changing it all the time.

 

[lasthero]

I have looked up answers, but I need answers from you to see the difference in opinion and evidence!

And some subjects I need more clarification such as human evolution.

You haven't looked up answers, you looked at a few slides and said 'that's silly!'

What books have you read on human evolution? What scholarly research?

 

[anyathesword]

Who said we aren't evolving?

Apparently our brains are shrinking so we might evolve into our ape like ancestors again....

 

[Mr Strawberry]

Exactly, it just makes no sense, only the sense to a biased evolutionist's story of our origins. They try and fit us into the timeline and changing it all the time.

Maybe if you studied the overall timeline of life on Earth for the last 3.5 billion years it might start to make more sense to you. Hint: The first 3 billion years aren't too thrilling, things don't really kick off until about 500 million years ago.

 

[High Fidelity]

Exactly, it just makes no sense, only the sense to a biased evolutionist's story of our origins. They try and fit us into the timeline and changing it all the time.

It can make sense.

The simple fact of the matter is that our brains simply cannot compute or comprehend such vastness.

It's unquantifiable to humans. We live short lives. 60-80 years if we're lucky. That's probably the biggest subconscious bias we have when we try and contemplate something happening over billions of years, we're hard-wired to think in short periods.

 

[anyathesword]

You haven't looked up answers, you looked at a few slides and said 'that's silly!'

What books have you read on human evolution? What scholarly research?

School textbooks and the internet. Oh a few slides really. Why don't you let me know what you know since you seem more 'studied' in this area. That's the reason for a debate.

 

[AirPo]

Actually, there was a bit in New Scientist magazine this week mentioning that human brains show evidence of shrinking ever since we started to be able to control our environment. This correlates with the shrinking of the brains of domesticated animals. Like domesticated animals, when there is no longe selection for the fittest to survive in a hostile, wild environment, the brains begin to shrink again. Thus since we have domesticated ourselves, so to speak, our brains have shrunk a bit from those of our more aggressive, wild ancestors 10-20,000 years ago.

Interesting. But doesn't that imply there is an advantage to a smaller brain or a disadvantage to a larger brain?

 

[anyathesword]

It can make sense.

The simple fact of the matter is that our brains simply cannot compute or comprehend such vastness.

It's unquantifiable to humans. We live short lives. 60-80 years if we're lucky. That's probably the biggest subconscious bias we have when we try and contemplate something happening over billions of years, we're hard-wired to think in short periods.

I agree totally with that. Just like it is hard for us to grasp how God could of created this world.

So why come up with such crazy numbers? It's only to try and fit it into te 4.5 billion year old earth.

 

[lasthero]

School textbooks and the internet. Oh a few slides really. Why don't you let me know what you know since you seem more 'studied' in this area. That's the reason for a debate.

We're not debating. Debates happen between two infomed individuals.

You're not informed, nor do you want to be.

 

[High Fidelity]

I agree totally with that. Just like it is hard for us to grasp how God could of created this world.

So why come up with such crazy numbers? It's only to try and fit it into te 4.5 billion year old earth.

Different processes take different time.

It would be like putting an iron rod outside in the rain and expecting it to be completely covered in rust as if it had been submerged in water for 200 years or left outside in the rain for 200 years.

 

[bhsmte]

School textbooks and the internet. Oh a few slides really. Why don't you let me know what you know since you seem more 'studied' in this area. That's the reason for a debate.

To have a real debate anya, would require you to have a minimum level of knowledge in regards to evolution. This is something, you clearly do not possess, judging by the commenta and questions you have.

You have seen the content of the responses to you on various levels and now, it is up to you to learn enough about the topics to make discussion worthwhile. Trying to gather knowledge by refuting evidence you dont understand to begin with, is not what i would call learning.