Why do you believe in the evolution theory?

[Queller]

Darwinism isn't used every day to develop vaccines and other medicines. Darwinism is a philosophical worldview, whereas vaccine development occurs apart from the view that humanity is the result of random/chance mutations producing new life forms.

We aren't talking about Darwinism, we are talking about evolution. Maybe you're in the wrong thread?

 

[justlookinla]

We aren't talking about Darwinism, we are talking about evolution. Maybe you're in the wrong thread?

What's the difference?

 

[crjmurray]

What's the difference?

Gee if you don't know the difference then maybe you should go read up on it before commenting?

 

[freezerman2000]

 

[Queller]

What's the difference?

According to you Darwinism is a philosophy. The Theory of Evolution is a foundational part of biology.

Philosophy and biology are not the same thing.

 

[thepromiseofgrace]

can someone explain to me, please excuse my stupidity, what is meant by a common ancestry with apes, are you saying we are very closely related or that at sometime men and apes were one in the same thing?

 

[ViaCrucis]

can someone explain to me, please excuse my stupidity, what is meant by a common ancestry with apes, are you saying we are very closely related or that at sometime men and apes were one in the same thing?

Let's look at a human family tree, in fact let's use mine.

So there's my grandfather, who had four children, my father, my two aunts, and my uncle.

My father had my brother and me.

One aunt had two sons.

Another aunt had two sons and a daughter.

My uncle had two sons and a daughter.

Most of my cousins now have children of their own.

So take any one of my cousins or their kids and me, what is our most recent common ancestor? That would be my grandfather.

The same principle applies on a much larger scale with regard to talking about, for example, the most recent common ancestor between humans and chimpanzees. About five million years ago the lineages that would become humans and chimps diverged, but there were neither humans nor chimps then; just the most recent common ancestor of both.

Which means we didn't come from chimps, it means that chimpanzees are our, in a sense, cousins.

We have even more distant cousins in the other great apes--the gorillas and orangutans. But go back far enough in time and you will find the common ancestor of all the great apes: humans, chimps, gorillas, and orangutans.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Split Rock]

can someone explain to me, please excuse my stupidity, what is meant by a common ancestry with apes, are you saying we are very closely related or that at sometime men and apes were one in the same thing?

Basically, we share a common ancestor in the past. We are thus closely related compared to other species.

 

[thepromiseofgrace]

Basically, we share a common ancestor in the past. We are thus closely related compared to other species.

does a common ancestry show evolution then if we were two totally seperate species were is evolution actually in action.

 

[selfinflikted]

does a common ancestry show evolution then if we were two totally seperate species were is evolution actually in action.

We can trace the lineage through genetics. Humans are a separate species from other apes.

 

[thepromiseofgrace]

We can trace the lineage through genetics. Humans are a separate species from other apes.

so the link is traced through similarities rather than saying we were the same species.

 

[selfinflikted]

so the link is traced through similarities rather than saying we were the same species.

No one says we are the same species.

Similarities, yes. While I understand the genetic evidence, I'm not very good at explaining it. For that, I apologize. You'd need Loudmouth or Splitrock (or some of the other posters here who are far more eloquent with their words than I) to give an explanation.

 

[Split Rock]

does a common ancestry show evolution then if we were two totally seperate species were is evolution actually in action.

I'm not sure what you are asking... are you asking for the evidence that we share a common ancestor with chimps? There are a number of lines of evidence:
1. Morphology
2. Genetic sequence
3. Shared E.R.V.s (endogenous retroviruses).

 

[ViaCrucis]

so the link is traced through similarities rather than saying we were the same species.

"Apes" aren't a species. "Apes" describes a grouping of closely related organisms, and is ordinarily divided among the great apes and the lesser apes. The "great apes", today, includes four genera: Pan (chimps and bonobos), Pongo (orangutans), Gorilla (gorillas), and Homo. Also known by the family name Hominidae. The "lesser apes" being the gibbons.

Homo sapiens is a species.
Pan troglodytes is a species (the common chimpanzee).
Pan paniscus is a species (the bonobo).

Both the common chimpanzee and the bonobo share a common ancestor, from which the two lineages of chimps diverged and became two species. That earlier proto-chimp shared a common ancestor with us, humans; it is from this common ancestor that the hominid line and the chimpanzee line both descend from. That ancestor was neither chimp nor human.

Bringing this back to my previous analogy, I am not my cousin, nor did I descend from my cousin. Rather my cousins and I share a common ancestor in my grandfather. My grandfather is neither me nor any of my cousins, but we nevertheless descend from him, he is our most recent ancestor.

Likewise chimps and humans did not come from one another, or one from the other, but both descend from a common ancestor millions of years ago; which was neither us nor our chimp cousins.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Astrophile]

Cats will always be cats, dogs will always be dogs.

So what were the ancestors of cats ten million generations ago?

 

[Shemjaza]

So what were the ancestors of cats ten million generations ago?

A placental mammal and lo and behold, they are still placental mammals.

Will always be and have always been are two different things. My cousin and I are both descended from my grandfather, but my great great grandfather isn't.

 

[Queller]

So what were the ancestors of cats ten million generations ago?

From what I can find, the most recent common ancestor of all cats was Proailurus, which lived about 25 million years ago (which would be about 10 million generations assuming a generation time of 2.5 years, a little long not unreasonable).

 

[justlookinla]

From what I can find, the most recent common ancestor of all cats was Proailurus, which lived about 25 million years ago (which would be about 10 million generations assuming a generation time of 2.5 years, a little long not unreasonable).

From the link....

"Not a lot is known about Proailurus"
"may have been "
"may or may not have been"
"probably"

And this folks is the language of the 'evidence' of Darwinism.

 

[Davian]

From the link....

"Not a lot is known about Proailurus"
"may have been "
"may or may not have been"
"probably"

And this folks is the language of the 'evidence' of Darwinism.

So science does not (and should not) declare truths. You knock down another straw-man.

What would you offer as an alternative explanation? Your opinion of miracles?

 

[Queller]

From the link....

"Not a lot is known about Proailurus"
"may have been "
"may or may not have been"
"probably"

And this folks is the language of the 'evidence' of Darwinism.

No one is providing evidence for a philosophy.

Why do you have such a problem with uncertainty in science? The only way to remove all uncertainty (in science and most other aspects of life) is to be God.