Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Again, I can't argue with this... you're making my point. According to macroevolution, there were no humans around to create a situation enticing apes to expand from a normal, natural lifestyle. My question still is... what did?Initiated sure, but what happened was that animals took advantage of a situation humans caused, not just moved into human space when their environment was destroyed.
Yes, I see your point (various reasons, overcrowded, food sources, etc). But, as I said before they still lived and acted like rabbits and toads (nothing influenced them enough to change their lifestyle dramatically, like stand up and start walking, or did it?). Please, no lots of time, explains nothing only speculation.Humans didn't have to clear the way for rabbits and cane toads to spread across the Australian continent, they took the opportunity and ran.
You really aren't making a point.Again, I can't argue with this... you're making my point. According to macroevolution, there were no humans around to create a situation enticing apes to expand from a normal, natural lifestyle. My question still is... what did?
Chimps can stand and walk on two legs can hunt in a group, or gather peacefully... Australopithecus was just a lot better at walking on two legs.Yes, I see your point (various reasons, overcrowded, food sources, etc). But, as I said before they still lived and acted like rabbits and toads (nothing influenced them enough to change their lifestyle dramatically, like stand up and start walking, or did it?). Please, no lots of time, explains nothing only speculation.
Well, sorry but too much work to go over it again.You really aren't making a point.
Yes, something we agree on... The amount of time has nothing to do with a reason for apes to decide to leave their natural habitat for a way of life they knew 'nothing' about. Were the ones who supposedly did, according to macrevolution, that brave... I bet all the apes that remained thought they were crazy. What would trigger such a move? Can you not see the simplicity of this question? It would not have been a natural response to any situation for them, I don't think. 'Oh, let's leave the jungle that is all we have ever known... who cares if the rest of them don't want to? We'll just stand up to walk and pick berries and stuff. It'll be okay.' Over-simplified I know... learned to stand-up and all is explained as occurring through necessity, but it would have had to be done right away. I wonder how many at that point would have said, heck with this, I'm going back? To me, it just doesn't seem to be as natural a move as macroevolutionists think.No lots of time necessary... it wasn't humans influence, it was mere opportunity.
You keep repeating yourself... but it happens to animals all the time. They change environments.Well, sorry but too much work to go over it again.
Yes, something we agree on... The amount of time has nothing to do with a reason for apes to decide to leave their natural habitat for a way of life they knew 'nothing' about. Were the ones who supposedly did, according to macrevolution, that brave... I bet all the apes that remained thought they were crazy. What would trigger such a move? Can you not see the simplicity of this question? It would not have been a natural response to any situation for them, I don't think. 'Oh, let's leave the jungle that is all we have ever known... who cares if the rest of them don't want to? We'll just stand up to walk and pick berries and stuff. It'll be okay.' Over-simplified I know... learned to stand-up and all is explained as occurring through necessity, but it would have had to be done right away. I wonder how many at that point would have said, heck with this, I'm going back? To me, it just doesn't seem to be as natural a move as macroevolutionists think.
Yes, something we agree on... The amount of time has nothing to do with a reason for apes to decide to leave their natural habitat for a way of life they knew 'nothing' about. Were the ones who supposedly did, according to macrevolution, that brave... I bet all the apes that remained thought they were crazy. What would trigger such a move? Can you not see the simplicity of this question? It would not have been a natural response to any situation for them, I don't think. 'Oh, let's leave the jungle that is all we have ever known... who cares if the rest of them don't want to? We'll just stand up to walk and pick berries and stuff. It'll be okay.' Over-simplified I know... learned to stand-up and all is explained as occurring through necessity, but it would have had to be done right away. I wonder how many at that point would have said, heck with this, I'm going back? To me, it just doesn't seem to be as natural a move as macroevolutionists think.
Everything in macroevolution is spread over so much time it can’t be confirmed without a doubt and some speculation. Actually, this supposed point in time so long ago can’t be confirmed either, but it is interesting to think that a group of apes would get up one morning and say ‘today is the day, we’re going to make a change, a very big change.’ If that happened, with so many other groups choosing not to… ‘why’ only remains.Why is it such a big important issue for this question of yours to be answered? Why can't you accept the answer of "because they did"?
Everything in macroevolution is spread over so much time it can’t be confirmed without a doubt and some speculation. Actually, this supposed point in time so long ago can’t be confirmed either, but it is interesting to think that a group of apes would get up one morning and say ‘today is the day, we’re going to make a change, a very big change.’ If that happened, with so many other groups choosing not to… ‘why’ only remains.
That’s a valid point. But, after a week of strained posture and being lion’s food don’t you think you would hear a ‘who’s for going back to another area of the jungle?’But why does the change have to be something they decided on? Why couldn't the change have been something beyond their control, like the loss of habitat due to forest fires or a new predator having stumbled upon their area? Why does it have to be a conscious decision by the apes?
That’s a valid point. But, after a week of strained posture and being lion’s food don’t you think you would hear a ‘who’s for going back to another area of the jungle?’
I didn't claim it was just lions; I just simplified an answer that I thought you'd understand. Guess not.Again, you're focusing too much on it being a conscious decision.
Also, your claim that it's just lions and other predators in a grassland is... well, quite dumb, I'll just say simply. There are larger prey animals in the savannah than in the jungle or forest, thus meaning more to eat. Also, spending time in trees or on rocks in a largely flat area allow for look outs to work more effectively than in a forest where you'll only find the leopard sneaking up on you until it's right in your face.
I didn't claim it was just lions; I just simplified an answer that I thought you'd understand. Guess not.
Don't you think that would be even more frightening for the apes that had just wandered out on the savannah? You're just not making sense, to me anyway.There are larger prey animals in the savannah than in the jungle or forest, thus meaning more to eat.
They were use to leopards and their hunting method I'm sure, and there were trees like three foot apart to jump or swing to.Also, spending time in trees or on rocks in a largely flat area allow for look outs to work more effectively than in a forest where you'll only find the leopard sneaking up on you until it's right in your face.
Don't you think that would be even more frightening for the apes that had just wandered out on the savannah? You're just not making sense, to me anyway.
They were use to leopards and their hunting method I'm sure, and there were trees like three foot apart to jump or swing to.
That's so absurd it smells of trolling... You've had plausible suggestions, if you have a problem with them, point it out, don't attack a ridiculous straw man.... it is interesting to think that a group of apes would get up one morning and say ‘today is the day, we’re going to make a change, a very big change.’ If that happened, with so many other groups choosing not to… ‘why’ only remains.
Dumb and dishonest... that's me according to TOE anyway; I don't care.If you're new to something and not used to it, it will be frightening at first. Familiarity breeds acceptance.
And? Also, a lot of apes aren't tree swingers. Gorillas and chimpanzees spend a lot of their time moving around on the forest floor.
Really, you aren't going to get an answer that will satisfy you because no-one can answer your question because it's a dishonest question. You believe that it couldn't happen, so it didn't happen. It's an argument from incredulity.
Dumb and dishonest... that's me according to TOE anyway; I don't care.
So have you... why don't you answer them instead of relying on your straw man defense.That's so absurd it smells of trolling... You've had plausible suggestions, if you have a problem with them, point it out, don't attack a ridiculous straw man.
Ditto post #418No, not according to the theory of evolution. I do not see how the theory of evolution has anything to you refusing to accept plausible answers to your question and you responding with dishonest strawmen.
So have I what?So have you... why don't you answer them instead of relying on your straw man defense.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?