• 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.

why do we not see evolution in humans?

the_gloaming

Active Member
Mar 21, 2004
188
7
41
Ingalund
✟22,844.00
Faith
Agnostic
im really not sure how skin color originated, mutations probably, but i still consider that micro evolution.

That's fine with me. In the original post you didn't discriminate between micro and macro, and of course in humans micro evolution is all you will find evidence for in a period of 6,000 years. So have you conceded evolution (even if it hasn't resulted in a new hominid species) has occured over the past 6,000 years ?
 
Upvote 0

brightlights

A sinner
Jul 31, 2004
4,164
298
USA
✟36,362.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
the_gloaming said:
That's fine with me. In the original post you didn't discriminate between micro and macro, and of course in humans micro evolution is all you will find evidence for in a period of 6,000 years. So have you conceded evolution (even if it hasn't resulted in a new hominid species) has occured over the past 6,000 years ?
evolution that does not refute creation - yes
 
Upvote 0

Nathan David

Well-Known Member
Sep 5, 2002
1,861
45
55
Saint Paul, MN
Visit site
✟2,226.00
Faith
Atheist
brightlights said:
in theory
And the theory has been validated by loads of evidence.

But that's beside the point. What you described with the development of darker skin is evolution: a change in the characteristics of a population over time. If darker skin can become prominent in a population because it confers a survival/reproductive advantage, what's to stop any other trait from becoming prominent in a population?
 
Upvote 0

brightlights

A sinner
Jul 31, 2004
4,164
298
USA
✟36,362.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Nathan David said:
And the theory has been validated by loads of evidence.

But that's beside the point. What you described with the development of darker skin is evolution: a change in the characteristics of a population over time. If darker skin can become prominent in a population because it confers a survival/reproductive advantage, what's to stop any other trait from becoming prominent in a population?
i dunno, barriers between species?
 
Upvote 0

Tachocline

Well-Known Member
Sep 1, 2004
436
11
✟630.00
Faith
Non-Denom
brightlights said:
really? legitimate ones?
Legitimate probably not. Let's face it, that's a very touchy subject. But there have been reports. The famous case of a chimp called Philip I believe turned out to be false on DNA examination (though he looked mixed) but there have been other reports over the years.

Ans let's also fact the fact that no matter how taboo it would be I am sure someone has tried or will try it.

To sum up I would doubt the veracity of the claims but it is something that has been alleged.
 
Upvote 0

UMDDogs

Active Member
Aug 17, 2004
139
2
50
Minnesota
✟22,779.00
Faith
Christian
After reading through this entire post, my faith in christianity has just shot up through the roof. I don't think people really know what they are talking about on this thread, but come on, I want to see something that brings us from a single cell organism to what we are today.

You talk about us getting bigger and our skin color being darker, that is not evolution, it is adaptation, evolution is:


A change in the genetic composition of a population during successive generations, as a result of natural selection acting on the genetic variation among individuals, and resulting in the development of new species.


Tell me, when has one species developed into another species?
 
Upvote 0