Why are there still apes?

[James A]

Did you walk somewhere this morning? Before you got there you had to get halfway. Assuming you could do that, you then had to walk half of the remaining distance. Assuming you could do that, you then had to walk half the remaining distance. No matter how many times you walk half the remaining distance, you still had further to go. Yet somehow you managed to get where you were going. And that could only be done by an actual infinity in our world.

Zeno's paradox, correct? The Wikipedia page presents close to a dozen solutions.

"Hilbert's Hotel" explains the problem with having actual infinity in our world.

 

[James A]

If "rib" is a metaphor, why can't "God" be a metaphor?

There are many a priori arguments for God.

1) Prime mover by Aristotle
2) Aquinas's proof of God by St. Aquinas.
3) Cosmological argument

 

[James A]

That is what happens when there is one species and another evolves from the first species. It splits in two. Now there are twice as many species.

The oldest multi organ animal, Jelly fish, never under go any significant mutation in its 400+ million years of existence. There are species known as living fossils - crocodiles, turtles etc. - due to them did not undergo any significant mutation.

Where did you get this "one species split into two" observation?

 

[James A]

Check this page on Cambrian Explosion.

The Cambrian Explosion: Falsification of Darwinian Evolution

 

[James A]

Wait, this guy wasn't just a biologist, he was a Biologist? Sounds important. And he was "international"? Wow! Impressive. Who was this guy? Can you show me where he said this?

I was referring to Richard Dawkins.

Dawkins: Why Intelligent Design proponents are so fond of gaps

 

[Shemjaza]

This biota largely disappeared with the rapid increase in biodiversity known as the Cambrian explosion. Most of the currently existing body plans of animals first appeared in the fossil record of the Cambrian rather than the Ediacaran.- Wikipedia

You're using that term body plan again... it's so misleading when "squidgy worm with nerve column", "asymmetrical squidgy worn" and "squidgy worm with harder outer casing" is the reality.

 

[James A]

You're using that term body plan again... it's so misleading when "squidgy worm with nerve column", "asymmetrical squidgy worn" and "squidgy worm with harder outer casing" is the reality.

That quote was taken from the Wikipedia page in your previous post.

 

[Hans Blaster]

"uncreated" means infinite in space and/or time. Do you have a different definition of "uncreated"?

Since we're talking about species, the "uncreated" would be the ones that arose naturally like monarch butterflies and humans.

 

[Hans Blaster]

There are many a priori arguments for God.

1) Prime mover by Aristotle
2) Aquinas's proof of God by St. Aquinas.
3) Cosmological argument

Cool philosophical arguments there, but this thread is about, checks title, ummm APES.

 

[Hans Blaster]

The oldest multi organ animal, Jelly fish, never under go any significant mutation in its 400+ million years of existence. There are species known as living fossils - crocodiles, turtles etc. - due to them did not undergo any significant mutation.

Where did you get this "one species split into two" observation?

So do you believe these things you just wrote, or are they just some ammunition in an argument chosen because you think they some how defeat the thing you don't like. (Hint: they don't)

 

[James A]

So do you believe these things you just wrote, or are they just some ammunition in an argument chosen because you think they some how defeat the thing you don't like. (Hint: they don't)

Did you actually read the sub topic which I replied to? I was not the one who came up with "one species split into two" argument.

 

[James A]

"uncreated" means there never was a point in time when the thing did not exists.

With due respect, I am not going to talk about your own definition of "uncreated"

 

[Bungle_Bear]

I was referring to Richard Dawkins.

Dawkins: Why Intelligent Design proponents are so fond of gaps

I love how the link you provide in support of your claimed statement from Dawkins is specifically pointing out how Dawkins is quoted out of context. Did you even read that link or do you just not understand what it says?

 

[Shemjaza]

That quote was taken from the Wikipedia page in your previous post.

Sure, but given how you are using the information I feel like it presents an unreasonable image.

 

[Jimmy D]

Check this page on Cambrian Explosion.

The Cambrian Explosion: Falsification of Darwinian Evolution

What a load of nonsense, maybe you should attempt to learn about the Cambrian Explosion from valid sources instead of going to this sort of garbage apologetics article for "discussion" points, the author isn't even a paleontologist.

It's just a series of the tired old creationist quote mines (i.e lies) we've all seen a thousand times before. I can barely be bothered to respond to any of them but I'll pick one or two examples so you can hopefully realize how you're being mislead.

From your article...

" Evolutionary zoologist of Oxford University, Mark Ridley, went so far as to say, “[N]o real evolutionist, whether gradualistic or punctuationist, uses the fossil record as evidence in favor of the theory of evolution as opposed to special creation” (1981, 90:832)."

What Mr Ridley actually wrote was.....

`Someone is getting it wrong, and it isn't Darwin; it is the creationists and the media.' (page 830) `In any case, no real evolutionist, whether gradualist or punctuationist, uses the fossil record as evidence in favor of evolution as opposed to special creation. The does not mean that the theory of evolution is unproven. `So what is the evidence that species have evolved? There have traditionally been three kinds of evidence, and it is these, not the "fossil evidence", that the critics should be thinking about. The three arguments are from the observed evolution of species, from biogeography, and from the hierarchical structure of taxonomy.' (page 831) `These three are the clearest arguments for the mutability of species. Other defenses of the theory of evolution could be made, not the least of which is the absence of a coherent alternative. Darwin's theory is also uniquely able to account for both the presence of design, and the absence of design (vestigial organs), in nature.' (page 832)"


And your Dawkins quote....


"The Cambrian strata of rocks, vintage about 600 million years [evolutionists are now dating the beginning of the Cambrian at about 530 million years], are the oldest in which we find most of the major invertebrate groups. And we find many of them already in an advanced state of evolution, the very first time they appear. It is as though they were just planted there, without any evolutionary history (1986, bracketed comment in orig., emp. added, p. 229)."


Dawkins own comment....

I once introduced a chapter on the so-called Cambrian Explosion with the words: "It is as though the fossils were planted there without any evolutionary history." Again, this was a rhetorical overture, intended to whet the reader's appetite for the explanation. Inevitably, my remark was gleefully quoted out of context. Creationists adore "gaps" in the fossil record.

Your source is completely misrepresenting what these people wrote, by repeating this garbage you are guilty of lying. That might sound harsh, but you are quite happy to paste this stuff into your "arguments" without bothering to check what they actually said.

Very poor form.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

This biota largely disappeared with the rapid increase in biodiversity known as the Cambrian explosion. Most of the currently existing body plans of animals first appeared in the fossil record of the Cambrian rather than the Ediacaran.- Wikipedia

Yes - and? The point remains that the precambrian contained a far greater variety of creatures than the bacteria and worms you suggested.

The history of evolution is of mass extinctions followed by rapid proliferation and diversification. For example, the Great Oxidation Event (GOE) in the Paeoproterozoic was a mass extinction that resulted in the establishment of the oxygen metabolism used by all complex multicellular life since; the extinction of the dinosaurs allowed the huge proliferation and diversification of mammals and birds. Such events are characteristic of evolutionary history.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Check this page on Cambrian Explosion.

The Cambrian Explosion: Falsification of Darwinian Evolution

The Apologetics Press is not a reliable source of scientific information. If you check their 'about' page that explains their history and beliefs, they say:

"In the late 1970s, there was a need to make available more scripturally sound and scientifically accurate materials in the field of Christian apologetics. The idea for Apologetics Press was born..."
[my bolding]​

Their list of beliefs starts with:

"What We Believe

The following principles of truth are accepted by those who actively participate in the work at Apologetics Press:

1. 
   
   
   • Faith in God and the Bible must be based on evidence, and not blindly accepted..."

Looks promising, eh? But if you follow the 'evidence' link to see what they mean by evidence, you'll find it's either circular (question-begging), i.e. God gives us the evidence of his works (so - the evidence that God created the heavens and the Earth is... the heavens and the Earth), or it's something from the bible: "Perhaps the greatest evidence that Jesus presented for His divinity was His miraculous resurrection."

So, while that may be what some Christians take to be evidence, it is in no way related to or acceptable as scientific (or legal) evidence.

The Apologetics Press appears to have dropped one of the two reasons for their creation - scientific accuracy. In addition, the first statement of their beliefs (above) is itself circular - the evidence on which they say faith in God and the bible must be based, is itself based on... faith in God and the bible!!

The most remarkable thing to me is that this is all shamelessly displayed on their website for all to see.

 

[xianghua]

That quote was taken from the Wikipedia page in your previous post.

i didn't really follow the discussion but i want to point out that the majority of fossils are actually "out of place" since they dont appears in the correct order. for instance take a look at this figure:
pil1360×768 173 KB

(image from “Molecules consolidate the placental mammal tree”)

as you can see, the majority of the cases (12 out of 21 orders) in the phylogeny that base on the morphological data dont fit with the their position that base on the molecular data. it means that the majority the fossils in the fossil record are “out of place” actually (so a primitive fossil can appeare after more modern fossil). so instead of finding something like 12345 we find something like 23145.

 

[Hans Blaster]

"uncreated" means there never was a point in time when the thing did not exists.

With due respect, I am not going to talk about your own definition of "uncreated"

I really don't feel like allowing you to "win" this argument by defining "victory" into existence, i.e., if it isn't eternal (whatever that means) then it must have been created, therefore god.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Did you actually read the sub topic which I replied to? I was not the one who came up with "one species split into two" argument.

For some reason, a thread about apes and humans was discussing the Cambrian "explosion". Another poster offered a simplified illustration of how the splitting of species could rapidly (i.e. in 10 or so million years, so not really that short a period) result in the large increase of species.

You rejected that because a simplified illustration didn't have the precise details. This seems to be your problem, not ours.