why humans are not primates

[Aman777]

Brain to body ratio for average specimens will give one a good idea of how intelligent a species is, even if one only has the bones. You can tell brain size from skeletal remains so long as you have a good portion of the skull.

False, since Neanderthal had a larger brain than today's Humans. iOW, you cannot measure intelligence by the size of the brain in relation to body size or encephalization, since intelligence is invisible.

Sarah:>>Actually, if you breed a border collie with a dumb breed of dog (mastiffs, perhaps), the resulting puppies would be smarter than their dumb parent, but also dumber than their smart parent. Try it if you have the resources to do so, scientists do it with rats.

God did it with Humans and the sons of God (prehistoric people). Gen 6:4 In this way God produced some 7 Billion living Humans in only 11k years. The False ToE, because godless men rejected God's Truth of the Flood, doesn't teach this, so it's assumptions that Apes changed into Humans is absolutely false.

Sarah:>>How much genetic change does it take before it transitions from "micro" evolution to "macro" evolution. Please give a number of mutations or genes rather than traits, as some singular genes impact more traits or single traits more significantly than others.

Genetic changes don't produce increased intelligence in Humans. You MUST inherit Adam's increased intelligence in order to be a Human. He is the ONLY person made with this superior intelligence which is like God's. Gen 3:22 Otherwise, you remain an Ape.

Sarah:>>Why couldn't all apes be a kind? They even have the same blood types as us, and we have fossil evidence of bipedal apes with chimpanzee sized brains.

Apes are a kind and they evolve within their own kind. The ToE, because godless men rejected God's Truth of the Flood, doesn't know that Humans were NOT made on Planet Earth, but on Adam's Earth, which was completely and utterly destroyed in the Flood. ll Peter 3:6 The ToE falsely ASSUMES that all life evolved on planet Earth and thus, it's assumptions are totally False from the beginning. Humans came from another world and Adam's entire firmament rests today at the bottom of Lake Van, Turkey, in the mountains of Ararat. That is God's Literal Truth.

Human blood was contaminated because Noah's grandsons had NO other Humans to marry. They married the prehistoric people who had diverged from Chimps some 6 Million years ago and thus Human blood became mixed with the blood of people who evolved from the common ancestor of Apes, who were NOT Humans (descendants of Adam). Amen?

 

[Larniavc]

Nope.

But you're close.

Uncle. What's you answer?

 

[AV1611VET]

Uncle. What's you answer?

GOD REST YE MERRY, GENTLEMEN

 

[Frenzy]

Such views are straight out of Disneyland since NO "so called" scientist here, can show us how and when prehistoric people changed into humans. They love to tell us it's "evolution" but FAIL to show us the mechanism for this miraculous event.

EVERY other creature MUST inherit their intelligence from their parents but NOT magical evolution humans, since we evolve and increase our parent's intelligence, over time in, a population....or so they claim. As these men fail to show ANY evidence for their "belief", God's Truth becomes more clear.

God shows that He created and brought forth, from the water, EVERY living creature that moves. Gen 1:21 These creatures change because it's the natural change (according to Evolism) which comes with ALL of God's creatures....except humans.

Humans leave the natural order of things and mystically become Mighty Men because ONLY they evolve superior intelligence which is higher than any other creature...Darwinists preach, but they don't tell us HOW, but only speak in generalities. Does ANYone here have ANY evidence of How this magic happens? Of course not. Anyone want to try? God Bless you

I will grant that evolution is completely wrong.......... now tell us why anyone should think a being in the supernatural had any part in the creation of everything out of nothing?

 

[: D]

yes a link full of discussion,
however I asked
don't tell me show me,
the claim was of "foot fossils" from Australopithecus,
do we really need Olympic sized mental gymnastics ?
either "foot fossils" exist or they don't.

now you want a subject change to Homo Naledi,
I had planned on letting you dig a hole but could not be bothered,
what do you think of the undated unclassified bones ?

wonkypedia states
"Three dating methods have been tried with inconclusive results, so local scientists are working on adapting another technique they expect can be performed in 2017"

• The research team proposes the bones represent a new species, naledi in the genus Homo; other experts contend further analysis is needed to support this classification.[9][21]

• Paleoanthropologist Tim D. White said the significance of this discovery is unknown until dating has been completed and additional anatomical comparison with previously known fossils has been done.[22]

• Rick Potts said that without an age there is no way to judge the evolutionary significance of this find.[24] He stated that "it's hard to know without a date whether it's from that period, as one of those experiments that then went nowhere, or whether it's in fact much less than one million years old. In that case, we could be talking about something that also didn't go anywhere and was just an isolated, probably very small population that persisted for a long time in splendid isolation."[22]

• New York University anthropologist Susan Anton stated that even after dating, experts will likely spend many years striving to put these fossils in the proper context because there is no consensus in paleoanthropology about exactly how such comparisons are used to define the genus Homo. "Some would argue that striding bipedalism is a defining feature, so that being Homo means using a specific way of moving around the environment. Other scholars may look more to cranial characteristics as Homo family features."[22]

• Bernard Wood, a paleoanthropologist at the George Washington University, agrees the remains represent a new species, but thinks the bones may represent a relict population that may have evolved in near isolation in South Africa, similar to another relict population, a small-brained species of Homo floresiensis from the island of Flores in Indonesia.[16]

• With the number of individuals, and the sexes and age groups represented, scientists consider the find to be the richest assemblage of associated fossil hominins ever discovered in Africa,[16] and aside from the Sima de los Huesos collection and later Neanderthal and modern human samples, it (the excavation site) has the most comprehensive representation of skeletal elements across the lifespan, and from multiple individuals, in the hominin fossil record.[1][6]

• Jeffrey H. Schwartz, an evolutionary biologist at the University of Pittsburgh in Pennsylvania, argues that the material is too varied to represent a single species"

: )

slow down,
churning out cut and paste without responding is bad form, no?
on page 23 you posted "Does Homo Naledi count as transitional?"
and then "I provided a link discussing 'feet fossils' - Homo Naledi. What do you think about these?"

my response is above ^ and I asked "what do you think of the undated unclassified bones ?"

you ran away because they don't tell us anything as yet,
are you suggesting your first cut and paste "evidence" proves transition,
appealing to authority is no good either as even they would not support your Homo Naledi "evidence" claim,

maybe we should clear this up before swiftly moving on.

: )

 

[Larniavc]

GOD REST YE MERRY, GENTLEMEN

Did not know it was parsed that way till now: thanks.

 

[AV1611VET]

Did not know it was parsed that way till now: thanks.

You betcha!

(And I forgot "merry" also means "mighty".)

 

[Larniavc]

You betcha!

(And I forgot "merry" also means "mighty".)

Fascinating. Merry Old England, Robin Hood's merry men, etc.

Again, I learn something new: thank you.

 

[Aman777]

I will grant that evolution is completely wrong.......... now tell us why anyone should think a being in the supernatural had any part in the creation of everything out of nothing?

God doesn't tell us that He made everything out of "nothing". He tells us He "created" or spoke and had energy changed into matter and vise versa. It took Albert Einstein 2k years to learn this. Here is what God actually teaches:

Heb 11:3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

God commands and energy from His world of Light is changed into matter in our universe. Einstein learned that energy and matter are two sides of the same coin. God's Truth is the Truth in every way.

In the same manner Lord God (YHWH/Jesus) changed the air, dust and water, which God created before the first Day, into energy, on the 3rd Day, thus creating the Big Bang of our Cosmos. Gen 2:4

Can you explain HOW men who lived thousands of years ago knew this? Of course not. It's empirical (testable) proof of the literal God. Amen?

 

[justlookinla]

I will grant that evolution is completely wrong.......... now tell us why anyone should think a being in the supernatural had any part in the creation of everything out of nothing?

Evolution isn't wrong. But evolution is.

 

[Aman777]

Evolution isn't wrong. But evolution is.

Amen, evolution is nothing more than changes within kinds. Godless evolution is the false assumption of men who rejected God's story of the flood. Now they are trapped in their lies since they have been force teaching their incomplete ToE to innocent children for more than 50 years now. As our babies change into the animals they are taught they are, our schools suffer.

 

[Frenzy]

Evolution isn't wrong. But evolution is.

Why cause mommy said?

 

[Frenzy]

Amen, evolution is nothing more than changes within kinds. Godless evolution is the false assumption of men who rejected God's story of the flood. Now they are trapped in their lies since they have been force teaching their incomplete ToE to innocent children for more than 50 years now. As our babies change into the animals they are taught they are, our schools suffer.

Your children are animals and so are you, if you don't like the idea just tell yourself you are not animals, you will still be animals but you will feel a whole lot better about it.
Apart from using our brains what does another ape do that we don't? and what do we do that another ape doesn't.
If an Orang-utan could imagine a heaven would there be an Orang-utan heaven? after all if it works for us why wouldn't it work for Orang-utans?

 

[Aman777]

Your children are animals and so are you, if you don't like the idea just tell yourself you are not animals, you will still be animals but you will feel a whole lot better about it.

False, since animals are innocent because they do not have the ability to know both good and evil. Only God and Humans (descendants of Adam) have this ability. Gen 3:22 It is because Humans were First made and we are destined to have dominion or rule over ALL other living creatures. Gen 1:28

***Apart from use our brains what does another ape do that we don't? and what do we do that another ape doesn't.

Humans judge and reason but NO animal does. It's because Adam, the first Human, was made more than 10 Billion years BEFORE the first bacteria appeared in the water on our planet, on the 5th Day, Gen 1:21 which was some 3.77 Billion years ago, in man's time. Humans were made with an intelligence level like God's and this superior intelligence MUST be inherited.

***If an Orang-utan could imagine a heaven would there be an Orang-utan heaven? after all if it works for us why wouldn't it work for Orang-utans?

ALL innocent creatures have a ticket to Heaven like people who put their faith in Jesus become innocent, when they are born again. Amen?

 

[justlookinla]

Why cause mommy said?

Cause there's no scientific evidence for evolution, but there's scientific evidence for evolution.

 

[Frenzy]

Cause there's no scientific evidence for evolution, but there's scientific evidence for evolution.

It seems as if you have finally got to grips with the problem.

 

[justlookinla]

It seems as if you have finally got to grips with the problem.

It'll be a great day when Darwinists actually comprehend the fact there's evidence for evolution, but there's no evidence for evolution and it's nothing more than a faith-based 'creationist' view.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Amen, evolution is nothing more than changes within kinds. Godless evolution is the false assumption of men who rejected God's story of the flood. Now they are trapped in their lies since they have been force teaching their incomplete ToE to innocent children for more than 50 years now. As our babies change into the animals they are taught they are, our schools suffer.

Sorry, that is very poor wording. Scientists did not reject the Bible's story (which is not the same as "God's story) of a worldwide flood. They showed that it never happened. No lies were needed. If you are honest and will look at the evidence even you will have to admit that there never was a worldwide flood. In fact many Christians disagree with you. Most, if they believe the Noah story at all, only believe in a local flood.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It'll be a great day when Darwinists actually comprehend the fact there's evidence for evolution, but there's no evidence for evolution and it's nothing more than a faith-based 'creationist' view.

Justa. you really should try to learn the concept of scientific evidence. It is not that hard to learn.

 

[justlookinla]

Justa. you really should try to learn the concept of scientific evidence. It is not that hard to learn.

You should actually post evidence for all to examine instead of producing empty, worthless and meaningless claims for months and months and months.