Human Evolution

[anyathesword]

Anthropologist Steven Mithen colorfully described the narrative as follows:


Six million years is vast span of time. In order to begin to comprehend it, to grasp its salient pattern of events, it helps to think of those events as constituting a play, a drama of our past. A very special play, for no one wrote the script: 6 million years of improvisation. Our ancestors are the actors, their tools are the props, and the incessant changes of environment through which they lived, the changes of scenery. But as a play, do not think of it as a “whodunit” in which action and ending are all. For we already know the ending—we are living it. The…Stone Age actors all died out, leaving just one single survivor, Homo sapiens sapiens (as quoted in Fagan, p. 29).
Apologetics Press - "Reasonable Science" and the Antiquity of Man

 

[anyathesword]

Evolutionary anthropologist A.L. Kroeber has acknowledged that the current system does not mesh with our own practical experience:


If we allot 25,000 of this to the Mousterian, we have left 75,000 for the continuous Chellean-Acheulian bifacial-core tradition. This is a long time…a dozen times longer than the whole of documented, authentically datable human history. And what do we know to have happened in this time? Essentially just one thing: the improvements from roughed Chellean core flints to evener, symmetrical Aucheulian ones. That is, the technological tradition remained basically unchanged: it stood still except for some degree of refinement of finish. That is sure a tremendous lot of cultural stationariness to have lasted so long, in comparison with the changeability that characterized later prehistory and all history…. Even 4,000 years without basic change in methods of human living is really wholly beyond our experience to conceive (as quoted in Whitcomb and Morris, 1961, pp. 484-485, emp. added).

 

[lasthero]

What's your point, Anya?

 

[USincognito]

Don't you think it takes alot of DNA mutation to change the joints, bone structure, bone size, brain size, skin and hair type, eye color, speaking abilities, intelligence abilities, organ size, etc. in this few million years?

Nope. Our joints, bones, organs, skin and hair isn't that different from our fellow great apes. Very minor changes in shapes and sizes. Eye color is a very recent mutation in humans - prior to ~12-15,000 years ago nearly everyone had brown eyes. speech and intelligence is directly related to brain size (and some changes to our larynx and hyoid bone) and that's pretty easy (despite what Mark Kennedy says) to explain by looking at the increase in hominan cranial capacity from ~3 million years ago to ~250,000 years ago.

It takes only one mutation of a gene to cause a disease.

It also only takes one mutation for chromosomes to fuse. So what?

So if environmental factors during the person's life affect their DNA, but the mutations can not be passed on, then why would the weather fluctuations have anything to do with human evolution?

Mutations are the engine for the car of evolution. Environment is the steering wheel. And mutations that occur in gametes can be passed on.

 

[USincognito]

Anthropologist Steven Mithen colorfully described the narrative as follows:

{Apologetics Press - "Reasonable Science" and the Antiquity of Man}

And Apologetics Press quote mine of someone who supports human evolution?

Evolutionary anthropologist A.L. Kroeber has acknowledged that the current system does not mesh with our own practical experience:

(as quoted in Whitcomb and Morris, 1961, pp. 484-485, emp. added).

A quote mine from 1961 of someone who died in 1960 and had retired from academia in 1946?

 

[Nithavela]

A quote mine from 1961 of someone who died in 1960 and had retired from academia in 1946?

It's a miracle. Praise the lord!

 

[anyathesword]

What's your point, Anya?

It's just not possible or reasonable, the evolution of man.

 

[anyathesword]

And Apologetics Press quote mine of someone who supports human evolution?



A quote mine from 1961 of someone who died in 1960 and had retired from academia in 1946?

"Alfred Kroeber is remembered as one of the major figures in the history of American anthropology. A principal proponent of Boasian Anthropology, Kroeber (who was Franz Boas' first student) was also the second American to earn a PhD in Anthropology. Kroeber taught at U.C. Berkeley from 1901 to 1946, and served as both director of the university's Anthropological Museum as well as curator of Anthropology at the California Academy of Sciences in San Francisco"
Alfred Kroeber

 

[bhsmte]

It's just not possible or reasonable, the evolution of man.

Well anya, virtually all of science (who knows more about this topic than anyone) and the majority of christians worldwide disagree with you, so you have that going for you.

Why do you think that is? Are all these people just stupid?

 

[anyathesword]

Well anya, virtually all of science (who knows more about this topic than anyone) and the majority of christians worldwide disagree with you, so you have that going for you.

Why do you think that is? Are all these people just stupid?

Absolutly not, they are being blinded to the Truth and following the pressure of the worldview and the New Age Movement.

They are far from stupid, they just don't want to face Jesus.

 

[lasthero]

It's just not possible or reasonable, the evolution of man.

That's not what the people you quoted said, Anya. They said it was counter-intuitive. But lots of things about science are counter-intuitive. In science, observation is put ahead of intuition. We go where the evidence leads.

They are far from stupid, they just don't want to face Jesus.

Yeah, theistic evolutionists just don't want to face Jesus. Scientists don't accept the evolution of man because of anything like research...they just don't want to face Jesus.

Here we are, again, Anya. Clearly, you've made up your mind on this subject and aren't willing to have it changed. So why ask questions in the first place?

 

[lasthero]

It's just not possible or reasonable, the evolution of man.

That's not what the people you quoted said, Anya. They said it was counter-intuitive. But lots of things about science are counter-intuitive. In science, observation is put ahead of intuition. We go where the evidence leads.

They are far from stupid, they just don't want to face Jesus.

Yeah, theistic evolutionists just don't want to face Jesus. Scientists don't accept the evolution of man because of anything like research...they just don't want to face Jesus.

Here we are, again, Anya. Clearly, you've made up your mind on this subject and aren't willing to have it changed. So why ask questions in the first place?

And for someone who complains about not having enough time to focus on doing proper research, you sure have enough time to find and pull quotes from crank sites off the internet.

 

[bhsmte]

Absolutly not, they are being blinded to the Truth and following the pressure of the worldview and the New Age Movement.

They are far from stupid, they just don't want to face Jesus.

How are they blinded from the truth when they base their opinion on over 100 years of empirical evidence? If they ignored the evidence, then i woukd call them blind to reality.

How do you explain the majority of world wide christians believing in evolution? Are they afraid to face jesus as well?

 

[selfinflikted]

It's just not possible or reasonable, the evolution of man.

It's more than possible. It's what happens.

 

[anyathesword]

That's not what the people you quoted said, Anya. They said it was counter-intuitive. But lots of things about science are counter-intuitive. In science, observation is put ahead of intuition. We go where the evidence leads.



Yeah, theistic evolutionists just don't want to face Jesus. Scientists don't accept the evolution of man because of anything like research...they just don't want to face Jesus.

Here we are, again, Anya. Clearly, you've made up your mind on this subject and aren't willing to have it changed. So why ask questions in the first place?

And for someone who complains about not having enough time to focus on doing proper research, you sure have enough time to find and pull quotes from crank sites off the internet.

Why are you still bothering me? I don't need to explain to you my Schedule, the way I learn, and what I learn and how much I know.

Go debate with someone else who likes being attacked personally.

 

[VirOptimus]

Absolutly not, they are being blinded to the Truth and following the pressure of the worldview and the New Age Movement.

They are far from stupid, they just don't want to face Jesus.

Science is just a way of understanding and describing reality. The spiritual beliefs does not matter when physical science is done.

To conflate the two, or setting them opposed to each other is neither scientifically or theologically sound. This as they operate on totally different frameworks with different ontological bases. As metaphysics is by definition not physics and vice versa conflating the two only leads to error.

There is nothing wrong with having spiritual beliefs but it will create dissonance when those beliefs doesnt correspond to the physical reality.

 

[CabVet]

Why are you still bothering me? I don't need to explain to you my Schedule, the way I learn, and what I learn and how much I know.

Go debate with someone else who likes being attacked personally.

Nobody is attacking you personally, and nobody cares about your personal schedule. All we want to understand is why you keep saying that you don't have time to read answers to your questions or the studies that you criticize, yet, you seem to have plenty of time to make questions and criticize all kinds of studies. Why ask the question if you don't want to hear the answer?

 

[lasthero]

Why are you still bothering me? I don't need to explain to you my Schedule, the way I learn, and what I learn and how much I know.

Go debate with someone else who likes being attacked personally.

I've not attacked you personally. But whatever excuse you need to ignore reality.

 

[bhsmte]

I've not attacked you personally. But whatever excuse you need to ignore reality.

Anya appears confused, she contradicts herself quite often and if she wants to learn, it would be best if she simply took a step back and use google to explore evidence for evolution in the most objective way possible. If she has questions and is willing to actually be open to the responses from people on this board, it would be productive. If she continues to simply deny and use confirmation bias, it will be more of the same. It is up to her which direction she wants to take.

 

[anyathesword]

How are they blinded from the truth when they base their opinion on over 100 years of empirical evidence? If they ignored the evidence, then i woukd call them blind to reality.

How do you explain the majority of world wide christians believing in evolution? Are they afraid to face jesus as well?

When was Genesis written? More than 100 years ago.

Evidence can be interpreted in the way the scientist wants.

Kind of like pareidolia.

These Christians are going with the crowd...