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

[Believer000]

It's a conclusion from evidence.

The theories of physics, geology and biology are some of the most sound and verified scientific theories we have.

Lmao. I feel like debating with you is like debating with a child so I shall refrain.

 

[disciple Clint]

Absolutely.


No excuse required.

Evolution isn't a set path, it's a statistical consequence of the environment acting on available variations.



Technological intelligence has occurred a single time in Earth's history, and the particular scenario that allowed it to happen does not apply to modern monkeys.

Modern monkeys are still evolving, they just aren't evolving into humans, that would be so unlikely that it verges on impossible.

All life adapts to the environment it lives in and modern monkeys have apes to contend with even if they did start down that path.

An excellent analogy is the development of languages. The ancient Roman people who lived in what is now France spoke classical Latin... but their language developed into French. Do you also wonder why modern Italian people aren't speaking a language more like French?

- A Critique of ''29 Evidences for Macroevolution'' - Part 1 -

 

[disciple Clint]

No. 4 million years. Not to start. 4 million years to get to where we are now



There is no stop.



4 million years.



There is more evidence for man being a monkey than there is for gravity. The fact you do not have the training, education or experience to even begin to understand the most basic aspect of evolutionary evidence doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

As an aside, I earn a great deal of money, primarily from pharma companies, for my evolutionary expertise. I write papers, book chapters, even textbooks used by secondary and tertiary level students...quite possibly your children. I get invited to fly business class to New York to present work to the pharma companies I work with.

You post ignorance on an anonymous website read by 4 people, one of them me.

Feel free to comment on this. There are no mechanisms for macroevolution -

 

[disciple Clint]

What's wrong with the genetic evidence and the fossil evidence?

It is disputed by some "experts"

 

[Larniavc]

gosh I guess there are no monkeys changing into humans, now why is that?

Because no ever said that happens?

 

[Believer000]

Because no ever said that happens?

It doesn't. Yet 'scientists' continue to believe it does by believing in the (incredibly racist) THEORY of evolution.

 

[Shemjaza]

Lmao. I feel like debating with you is like debating with a child so I shall refrain.

I feel it is inappropriate to casually deny physics, biology and geology with accusation of childishness to who you are having a discussion with.

Feel free to comment on this. There are no mechanisms for macroevolution -

This article doesn't not justify the abandonment of mutation and selection as drivers of variation.

Demonstrating that other factors such as epi-genetics exist is not the same as disproving mutation.

Especially when instances of speciation, the common definition of macroevolution have been demonstrated.

It is disputed by some "experts"

In my experience with limited validity.

Thank you for the comprehensive article on the evidence of macro evolution, I will take some time to go over it and understand its contents.

 

[Shemjaza]

It doesn't. Yet 'scientists' continue to believe it does by believing in the (incredibly racist) THEORY of evolution.

I suspect you are not aware what a theory is in the context of science.

It's an explanation for a body of evidence.

I have not seen a coherent justification for labeling the theory of evolution as racist. In fact evolutionary theory explains that all humans are simply very minor variations of the same species.

 

[Larniavc]

Not from an evolutionary standpoint. From there, 1000 years is the blink of an eye.



Why? It took humans and chimps 4 million years to get to where they are now.

With respect I think it has not yet been made clear to Clint that a monkey did not spontaneously morph into a human.

I suspect that this is what he thinks. Before devoting any more time to Clint he needs to acknowledge that point, I would suggest.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

It doesn't. Yet 'scientists' continue to believe it does by believing in the (incredibly racist) THEORY of evolution.

By calling the theory of evolution racist on top of saying 'it's just a theory', you've very much forfeited your right to be taken seriously on this or any thread involving talk about evolution.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Feel free to comment on this. There are no mechanisms for macroevolution -

Comment: That's from a "ministry", not a scientific organization.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Your evidence? Please do tell.

This stuff is just common knowledge. Go find a reputable source and read it.

 

[Larniavc]

It doesn't. Yet 'scientists' continue to believe it does by believing in the (incredibly racist) THEORY of evolution.

Quote one scientist who states monkeys transformed into a human.

 

[Believer000]

Quote one scientist who states monkeys transformed into a human.

It is what they ultimately believe, though?. They are just still trying to figure out the 'missing link' which they will never find.

 

[Believer000]

This stuff is just common knowledge. Go find a reputable source and read it.

Share your wisdom, wise one.

 

[Believer000]

By calling the theory of evolution racist on top of saying 'it's just a theory', you've very much forfeited your right to be taken seriously on this or any thread involving talk about evolution.

It is a racist theory. It was used to justify slavery. Look up the origins and you may learn something.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

It is a racist theory. It was used to justify slavery. Look up the origins and you may learn something.

The Bible was used to justify slavery as well, LONG before the theory of evolution was thought of.

I know what I'm talking about. You clearly do not.

 

[Believer000]

The Bible was used to justify slavery as well, LONG before the theory of evolution was thought of.

I know what I'm talking about. You clearly do not.

Certain Bible verses were taken out of context and used to wrongly justify slavery. I can admit that. However, slavery in the Bible was different to what we view as slavery today.

Charles Darwin believed the white race to be more advanced than other races. If you believe in his theory you must also believe this?.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Certain Bible verses were taken out of context and used to wrongly justify slavery. I can admit that. However, slavery in the Bible was different to what we view as slavery today.

Charles Darwin believed the white race to be more advanced than other races. If you believe in his theory you must also believe this?.

You can believe that all you want, but the Bible has clear passages about supporting of slavery (it's to be expected since it was written at a time when slavery was a commonplace thing).

Charles Darwin believed what was commonly believed at the time. People in the Victorian era were racist, though it was massively progressive of Darwin to suggest that white people and black people came from the same place.
But just because Charles Darwin was racist does not in any way, shape or form, mean that theory of evolution is racist. To say it is is an outright lie.

 

[AV1611VET]

Quote one scientist who states monkeys transformed into a human.

QV please:

Monkey is a common name that may refer to most mammals of the infraorder Simiiformes, also known as the simians. Traditionally, all animals in the group now known as simians are counted as monkeys except the apes, a grouping known as paraphyletic; however, in the broader sense based on cladistics, apes (Hominoidea) are also included, making the terms monkeys and simians synonyms in regards to their scope.

SOURCE

Translation: tomato-tomatto.