Humans did NOT evolve from Apes...

[miknik5]

Since this is a public forum you really have no basis for complaint.

Especially since you can't seem to follow the rule that posts should be about the topic that the OP brought up.

Now there is quite a bit that could be shared with you so that you understand how you are descended from an ape and that you still are an ape.

That would be within the topic of this thread.

I'm not an ape

 

[pitabread]

I'm not an ape

Taxonomically speaking, all humans are apes.

 

[miknik5]

Taxonomically speaking, all humans are apes.

Nope

 

[pitabread]

Nope

Yup: Hominidae - Wikipedia

The Hominidae, whose members are known as great apes or hominids, are a taxonomic family of primates that includes seven extant species in four genera: Pongo, the Bornean and Sumatran orangutan; Gorilla, the eastern and western gorilla; Pan, the common chimpanzee and the bonobo; and Homo, which includes modern Humans and its extinct relatives (e.g., the Neanderthal), and ancestors, such as Homo erectus.

 

[miknik5]

Since this is a public forum you really have no basis for complaint.

Especially since you can't seem to follow the rule that posts should be about the topic that the OP brought up.

Now there is quite a bit that could be shared with you so that you understand how you are descended from an ape and that you still are an ape.

That would be within the topic of this thread.

There you go again

 

[miknik5]

[

Yup: Hominidae - Wikipedia

I don't want to go through this again

 

[Subduction Zone]

There you go again

Yes, and you did not understand the response.

 

[Subduction Zone]

[

I don't want to go through this again

If you have no response you are then essentially saying that he is right. This is a discussion and debating site.

There is no point in being here if all you can say is that you take Genesis literally.

 

[Herman Hedning]

I dont really care about the size of the swirls in Lake Van turkey or any other lake for that matter

So, don't reply to posts dealing with such things. Maybe you should try the formal debates subforum if you want a bit more structure.

 

[VirOptimus]

I'm not an ape

By definition, yes you are. Its not debatable.

 

[miknik5]

[

So, don't reply to posts dealing with such things. Maybe you should try the formal debates subforum if you want a bit more structure.

I don't want to go through this again

Did you understand this?
It means I have given my response and I don't want to have to go thtough it again

 

[miknik5]

By definition, yes you are. Its not debatable.

It is
And I have given the reason why it is

 

[miknik5]

When you can provide the evidence that this did not indeed happen, than I'll believe that human beings really belong in the family along with primates

 

[VirOptimus]

When you can provide the evidence that this did not indeed happen, than I'll believe that human beings really belong in the family along with primates

Thats not how things work. You make a positive claim then its your task to support it.

 

[VirOptimus]

It is
And I have given the reason why it is

No it is not.

Do you even know how definitions work?

 

[Herman Hedning]

I don't want to go through this again

Did you understand this?
It means I have given my response and I don't want to have to go thtough it again

Yes, that's what I said - do not respond if you don't want to.

 

[pshun2404]

"Taxonomically speaking" refers to IF one accepts the ever changing MAN-MADE system of classification (intelligently designed) called Taxonomy as "established truth", which it is not. It is not something proven just something accepted by those who already accept the hypothesis that classification by homologous structures demonstrates descent (lineage) which it does not (again not established just accepted)...in other words to appear to support the already accepted hypothesis they had to group humans (homo) into the same camp as Pan...(the presupposition shapes the interpretation of the data...not good science)

Now any system of classification is fine for its purpose but it is not reality (astrology was also based on observation...reasons for similarity and difference, but that does not make it true)

All taxonomic classifications are a man-made system of compartmentalization DESIGNED for defining groups on the basis of shared physical characteristics, and then this outside intelligent force (man) gives names to those groups. The names given like the taxa to which they are assigned are not actually real, but made up, and then assigned.

Organisms with whatever anatomical similarities are grouped together, and then the groups are given rank, so they can be collected to form super groups of alleged higher and higher rank, thus creating the illusion of legitimate hierarchy. From this these outside intelligent forces form opinions that fit their preconceived hypotheses.

Convincing people of the truth value of Taxonomy demonstrates the power of intelligent design...

 

[miknik5]

Thats not how things work. You make a positive claim then its your task to support it.

This is how things work:

I already went through a discussion which is here on paper

You are free to look into it for yourself

I am not going through it again

 

[miknik5]

Yes, that's what I said - do not respond if you don't want to.

You do the same thing
Or don't

I don't have to do a thing
I do not want to go through it again

 

[miknik5]

Your best thing to do is no longer address me here so I won't have to respond to you