Why are there still apes?

[Shemjaza]

Okay is the extinction rate then the same as the current rate?

No. Extinction goes up and down all the time with other environmental events.

Hence the concept of a "Mass Extinction" when significant numbers of species go extinct at a similar time.

Some interpretations describe the current events as the sixth mass extinction.

 

[Tone]

Sp why when we arrange them by date do we see this progression of the jaw joint and ear from reptile-like to mammal like?

Okay, so you have old stone bones that show similarities between animals that existed within the same timeframe?

Meanwhile, species are dying off.

Like, right now species are dying off. Species that look similar to other species alive today.

But we can see that they aren't evolving into one another.

So, I'm not seeing it...

 

[Shemjaza]

Okay, so you have old stone bones that show similarities between animals that existed within the same timeframe?

Meanwhile, species are dying off.

Like, right now species are dying off. Species that look similar to other species alive today.

But we can see that they aren't evolving into one another.

So, I'm not seeing it...

They aren't evolving into each other, they are related to each other.

If the last wolf died we'd be able to look at dogs and see that they were very similar. If we also had genetic evidence we'd be able to work out that dogs were a very new variety that rose to prominence at the same time as human dominance of the Earth.

 

[Tone]

They aren't evolving into each other, they are related to each other.

If the last wolf died we'd be able to look at dogs and see that they were very similar. If we also had genetic evidence we'd be able to work out that dogs were a very new variety that rose to prominence at the same time as human dominance of the Earth.

So, how is this evidence of evolution?

 

[Shemjaza]

So, how is this evidence of evolution?

The pattern of relatedness shows a family tree.

Same as if you examined your genes and all your cousins.

If you go to one of the agencies that examine your genetics and compare it to other data we have we can work out our probable ancestry. It doesn't give you your great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great grandfathers name... but they can work out what region of the world your ancestors came from.

 

[Tone]

The pattern of relatedness shows a family tree.

Same as if you examined your genes and all your cousins.

If you go to one of the agencies that examine your genetics and compare it to other data we have we can work out our probable ancestry. It doesn't give you your great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great grandfathers name... but they can work out what region of the world your ancestors came from.

Well yeah, I'm sure all DNA is related. It's a code written by the same Programmer.

 

[AV1611VET]

How do you explain all the transitional from reptile to mammal?

Mislabeling.

 

[AV1611VET]

Well, I would imagine that those transitionals are extinct species.

So if you knew these rates, you could see if it adds up.

Some think Cro-magnons and Neanderthals were transitionals.

I don't.

I believe they were diseased human beings.

 

[Shemjaza]

Well yeah, I'm sure all DNA is related. It's a code written by the same Programmer.

The point I was making earlier is that it forms a nested hierarchy like a family tree... which is something that doesn't happen normally from products of a common designer.

As a simplistic example... trucks and cars have the same kind of tires, but bats, birds and pterosaurs have different wings. It's even more obvious on a genetic level... with birds having switched off genes for teeth and whales having switched off genes for hind legs.

 

[Strathos]

Well yeah, I'm sure all DNA is related. It's a code written by the same Programmer.

Not only that, but it was written with the same method, and we can identify when the lineages of modern species diverged by identifying markers in the DNA from when they were the same species, like the insertion of retroviral DNA. The same markers in the same places in the genome showing where the virus first infected it.

 

[Shemjaza]

Some think Cro-magnons and Neanderthals were transitionals.

I don't.

I believe they were diseased human beings.

Sure... but the evidence doesn't support that.

 

[Tone]

Some think Cro-magnons and Neanderthals were transitionals.

I don't.

I believe they were diseased human beings.

Did you hear about the new babies being born? They have little coverings over their mouths and noses...

 

[AV1611VET]

Not only that, but it was written with the same method, and we can identify when the lineages of modern species diverged by identifying markers in the DNA from when they were the same species, like the insertion of retroviral DNA. The same markers in the same places in the genome showing where the virus first infected it.

I don't care if A dovetails into B perfectly.

If God created A and B separately, then the dovetails are just ... dovetails.

 

[Shemjaza]

Did you hear about the new babies being born? They have little coverings over their mouths and noses...

Joke about disease and masks? Classy.

Also not how evolution works. Traits develop and if they are an advantage they are more likely to stick around in the next generation.

We've seen evidence for this historically. Europeans had considerable exposure to small pox and other plagues so people who were particularly vulnerable had died before having surviving children and the only descendants were more resistant. When Europeans brought small pox with them to Australia and America it killed almost 90% of the people there, because those people had never had the ongoing culling that Europeans had been exposed to.

 

[AV1611VET]

Also not how evolution works. Traits develop and if they are an advantage they are more likely to stick around in the next generation.

Let'em stick around.

They're still zebras.

(Right, Kylie? )

 

[Strathos]

I don't care if A dovetails into B perfectly.

If God created A and B separately, then the dovetails are just ... dovetails.

So you think God deliberately created species separately to make it look like they evolved from a common ancestor.

 

[Tone]

Joke about disease and masks? Classy.

Did you know that medical workers are encouraged to joke about the most gruesome things as a coping mechanism?

Not only that, I had the 19 so I have diplomatic immunity...

 

[Tone]

make it look like

Is this all Evolution does--make it look like whatever one is trained to see?

Okay, so I'm sure that if I was "educated' and learned all the jargon involved, that I would begin to embrace the same beliefs as you.

It's like learning any kind of trade, or even a new game.

But, why does this carry more weight than a simple story?

*Like the Gospel

 

[James A]

Are you saying there is not enough time for evolution?

And yet the earth was here for 4500 million years. That sounds like a lot of time to me.

Earth existed for over 4.8 billion years however, there were only simple, bacteria like organisms until the late Cambrian period. It was the last 500 million years where the complex life appeared and all the diversification happened and I think it is too short a period for millions of species - 8.7 million species presently and researchers believe 99.9% species are extinct - to evolve (without Creator, of course).

Now that we talked about the life in the Cambrian period, there was this event known as Cambrian explosion which still remain as a thorn in the flesh for Evolutionists.

Cambrian explosion - Wikipedia.

 

[Shemjaza]

Is this all Evolution does--make it look like whatever one is trained to see?

Okay, so I'm sure that if I was "educated' and learned all the jargon involved, that I would begin to embrace the same beliefs as you.

It's like learning any kind of trade, or even a new game.

But, why does this carry more weight than a simple story?

*Like the Gospel

There are many devout Christians who accept Evolution.

The evidence for evolution doesn't have to be taken on faith it can be observed, described and defined. If there is a flaw in it and if it was significant, then the theory of evolution would be abandoned.

Newtonian mechanics are a useful short hand... but examining the evidence on a small or large enough scale show's that they aren't reliable. If you could present the appropriate evidence the same would happen to evolution.