Important interpretation? : does having been a monkey, help all future "evolutions" in a monkey way?

[Gottservant]

Hi there,

So this is a blank slate type question, I really don't know what your position is:

Does having been a monkey, help all future "evolutions" or just the evolution directly connected with it?

You can see that the interpretation is open, at the moment: right? Like there is nothing to say that having been a monkey will help a human deal with monkey type selection pressures, even if they are not technically still a monkey?

Maybe it partially helps? Could something that used to be human, go back to a tail, if it turned out that living in trees was the only way to survive?

Not trying to let the wind out of your sails, but there is a gap between changing and making the change for a reason - if you get me?

IDK just riffing on the idea that Evolution doesn't just matter now, but matters into the future...

Or of course you could keep claiming its random, and that it's just a question of which randomness wins out in the end?

Lord, help them answer!

 

[disciple Clint]

Hi there,

So this is a blank slate type question, I really don't know what your position is:

You can see that the interpretation is open, at the moment: right? Like there is nothing to say that having been a monkey will help a human deal with monkey type selection pressures, even if they are not technically still a monkey?

Maybe it partially helps? Could something that used to be human, go back to a tail, if it turned out that living in trees was the only way to survive?

Not trying to let the wind out of your sails, but there is a gap between changing and making the change for a reason - if you get me?

IDK just riffing on the idea that Evolution doesn't just matter now, but matters into the future...

Or of course you could keep claiming its random, and that it's just a question of which randomness wins out in the end?

Lord, help them answer!

Maybe it would be best to ask a monkey who recently evolved to being human, oh gosh I guess there are no monkeys changing into humans, now why is that? Why would we not be still seeing some evidence of transition in the world around us today, should be all types of variations on the stages of evolution available for us to see, after all there are still monkeys, why would they not still be evolving?

 

[samwise gamgee]

Your question seems to assume that humans evolved from some lower form of life. Contrary to what we are often told, there is no scientific evidence that this happened, and the Bible clearly teaches that this idea if false.

 

[Shemjaza]

Hi there,

So this is a blank slate type question, I really don't know what your position is:

You can see that the interpretation is open, at the moment: right? Like there is nothing to say that having been a monkey will help a human deal with monkey type selection pressures, even if they are not technically still a monkey?

Maybe it partially helps? Could something that used to be human, go back to a tail, if it turned out that living in trees was the only way to survive?

Not trying to let the wind out of your sails, but there is a gap between changing and making the change for a reason - if you get me?

IDK just riffing on the idea that Evolution doesn't just matter now, but matters into the future...

Or of course you could keep claiming its random, and that it's just a question of which randomness wins out in the end?

Lord, help them answer!

The tail is basically totally lost at this point, so if humans re-adapted to living in trees it would in all likelihood not involve a tail.

We still have good strong hands and our toes are a little nimble so those would all be fine.

However the scenario where humans move into trees for an evolutionary significant time seems almost as unlikely as re-developing tails.

 

[Shemjaza]

Maybe it would be best to ask a monkey who recently evolved to being human, oh gosh I guess there are no monkeys changing into humans, now why is that? Why would we not be still seeing some evidence of transition in the world around us today, should be all types of variations on the stages of evolution available for us to see, after all there are still monkeys, why would they not still be evolving?

Evolution happens on an extremely long period of time, and we have some excellent example of something like a monkey losing its tail and still living in a tree... they are called Gibbons and they are a kind of ape.

Your question seems to assume that humans evolved from some lower form of life. Contrary to what we are often told, there is no scientific evidence that this happened, and the Bible clearly teaches that this idea if false.

You are mistaken.

There is fossil evidence of the transition of modern humans from a common ancestor with other apes as well as the extensive pattern of genetic similarities among still living primates.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

No.

 

[AV1611VET]

You can see that the interpretation is open, at the moment: right? Like there is nothing to say that having been a monkey will help a human deal with monkey type selection pressures, even if they are not technically still a monkey?

When we lost our prehensile tails, playing on the monkey bars became too dangerous.

 

[Shemjaza]

When we lost our prehensile tails, playing on the monkey bars became too dangerous.

It's weird, they call the big motor cycle handle bars "ape hang", but the kids play equipment very named after monkeys.

 

[AV1611VET]

It's weird, they call the big motor cycle handle bars "ape hang", but the kids play equipment very named after monkeys.

Quit monkeying around and get to the point with your monkey business.

You're trying to sell monkey wrenches to us ... right?

 

[disciple Clint]

Your question seems to assume that humans evolved from some lower form of life. Contrary to what we are often told, there is no scientific evidence that this happened, and the Bible clearly teaches that this idea if false.

Actually my post is an attempt to point out that it is illogical that we evolved from a lower life form.

 

[disciple Clint]

Evolution happens on an extremely long period of time, and we have some excellent example of something like a monkey losing its tail and still living in a tree... they are called Gibbons and they are a kind of ape.



You are mistaken.

There is fossil evidence of the transition of modern humans from a common ancestor with other apes as well as the extensive pattern of genetic similarities among still living primates.

and why do we not see monkey in transition to being humans today?

 

[Shemjaza]

and why do we not see monkey in transition to being humans today?

A couple of reasons.

It's a process that happens over eons, thousands of generations, so it's visible in evidence, not happening over a season or two.

Also, it's not a set path. The environmental pressures that led to the development of apes from monkeys isn't going to be exactly the same, especially since apes exist in those environments. In addition evolution acts in variation and while selection is non random, the generation of variation is, at least partially random.

But thinking about it, there is an example. Baboons are a kind of monkey, but they do a while less tree climbing and their tails are less prehensile than son other monkeys.

 

[Shemjaza]

Actually my post is an attempt to point out that it is illogical that we evolved from a lower life form.

Can you explain your logic?

The conclusion modern biology is that humans evolved from a kind of monkey, not that moneys will always evolve in to humans.

 

[disciple Clint]

A couple of reasons.

It's a process that happens over eons, thousands of generations, so it's visible in evidence, not happening over a season or two.

Also, it's not a set path. The environmental pressures that led to the development of apes from monkeys isn't going to be exactly the same, especially since apes exist in those environments. In addition evolution acts in variation and while selection is non random, the generation of variation is, at least partially random.

But thinking about it, there is an example. Baboons are a kind of monkey, but they do a while less tree climbing and their tails are less prehensile than son other monkeys.

OK so since it would benefit a monkey to become a human why is there no indication of it going on today, what would cause it to stop, well maybe monkeys looked at how humans evolved and decided they did not want any part of that. at least that is a logical explanation and not some hype.

 

[disciple Clint]

Can you explain your logic?

The conclusion modern biology is that humans evolved from a kind of monkey, not that moneys will always evolve in to humans.

OK show one example anywhere in say the last 1000 years. 1000 years is a long time now if a monkey can become human certainly one would have done so in the last 1000 years.

 

[Shemjaza]

OK so since it would benefit a monkey to become a human why is there no indication of it going on today, what would cause it to stop, well maybe monkeys looked at how humans evolved and decided they did not want any part of that. at least that is a logical explanation and not some hype.

There is no choices involved evolution. It's a process that occurs at the species level on a near geological time scale.

Modern monkeys do not live in the same environment as the ancestral population that became apes, so even with similar variations appearing they would not have the same pressures.

Also human development is unprecedentedly strange. There is no evidence of any species being as intelligent or technological as the human lineage.

OK show one example anywhere in say the last 1000 years. 1000 years is a long time now if a monkey can become human certainly one would have done so in the last 1000 years.

1000 years is not in the slightest a long time.

Chimps are comparatively similar to humans than monkeys and that split occurred 4 to 6 million years ago.

There's also no reason to assume slightly greater intelligence, the loss of a tail, greater size and moving to a ground based lifestyle would be beneficial to any particular monkey species.

 

[Gottservant]

Yes, but does it help?!

Does recommitting to a past selection pressure get easier?

You are all for saying the population evolves, but when I say "how easy?" you have no answer?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Yes, but does it help?!

Does recommitting to a past selection pressure get easier?

You are all for saying the population evolves, but when I say "how easy?" you have no answer?

Again: all you are doing is talking nonsense.

 

[Gottservant]

Again: all you are doing is talking nonsense.

No I'm not! Does God talk nonsense?

A selection pressure of valid concern, is one that tests how much it can build on the past.

I have told you before that claiming you are "evolved" does not help you escape the problem of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil - this test springs directly out of an interest, in what Evolution can do for a thirst for change.

My thought is that you don't know or don't intend to know, what difference Evolution makes to real outcomes like work and helping people and leading and so you are tempted to write off inquiry into how Evolution can help these things to be. Don't be tempted!

Let me help you: it depends on how similar mutations are to one another? The more similar the mutations, the more likely that similar selection pressures will build on each other?

What do you think? Make sense?

 

[Shemjaza]

Yes, but does it help?!

Does recommitting to a past selection pressure get easier?

You are all for saying the population evolves, but when I say "how easy?" you have no answer?

You are describing evolution as if it is a choice made by an individual and it isn't.


I thought I made it clear in the first response: It is almost impossible to backtrack an evolutionary path.

With the example of monkeys and humans, a human has a different structure and history to a monkey so if it were adapt to a monkey niche it would necessarily do it differently.