Did We Come From Monkeys

[Guest jasonparker]

A guide book for creationists: A DEFINITIVE REPLY TO EVOLUTIONIST PROPAGANDA http://www.harunyahya.com/definitivereply01.php

[JaKiri]

We didn't come from monkeys. We came from apes. There's a significant difference.

 

[edit]

 

To quote 'National Geographic' magazine:

 

WAS DARWIN WRONG?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NO

[bloodhound]

we all came from apes. and GWBush is the missing link.

[blike]

JaKiri, I saw that at the store. The title suprised me, I thought they were implying he was wrong. Definitely got my attention, which is probably what it was meant to do.

[Mr.trooper]

DEFINATELY not the way to go about this Jason. Dont know what your trying to do by posting this article, but your just making Proponents of Intelligent Design look stupid. i would sugest you go and actualy READ a book on Appologetics. You need to brush up. If you will remember, the best way to persuade or defend is NOT to club people over the head. That just doesnt work

 

Think about your approach a little more the next time you post on this subject, and try not to cause any unintentional dammage.

[Artorius]

We didn't come from monkeys. We came from apes. There's a significant difference.

Did we really......

[JaKiri]

Did we really......

 

Yes.

[Mokele]

Well, since, if I'm recalling the phylogenies correctly, apes evolved from monkeys, wouldn't it be accurate to state that humans evolved from monkeys, just as it would be to state that humans evolved from lobe-finned fish?

 

Mokele

[JaKiri]

I'm not an expert in evolutionary theory, but as far (and my source for this information) as I am aware, monkeys are a different evolutionary branch.

[swansont]

Well' date=' since, if I'm recalling the phylogenies correctly, apes evolved from monkeys, wouldn't it be accurate to state that humans evolved from monkeys, just as it would be to state that humans evolved from lobe-finned fish?

 

Mokele[/quote']

 

I think apes and monkeys also share a common ancestor. One is typically looking at the most recent common ancestor, which is an ape, though not an extant species. The monkey divergence from the rest of the primates happened ~30-40 mya, with "new world" and "old world" monkeys splitting off at different times.

[Mokele]

Ahh, found the phylogeny: Evidently, "monkeys", if it excludes apes, is a paraphyletic clade (much like "dinosaurs" is paraphyletic if it excludes birds).

 

Roughly, there's a common ancestor for all monkeys and apes. That split into New-world monkeys and another line. The other line split again into old-world monkeys and another line. That line in turn split into gibbons and apes.

 

So, just as humans are a group within the clade "apes", "apes" is a group within the clade "monkeys".

 

I think this is just one of those situations where cladistics and the English language don't line up, thereby generating confusion.

 

Mokele

[Tetrahedrite]

You will do very well to say that Darwin's theory of evolution is wrong, but no one as yet has a better theory! After reading the second paragraph of the link I reaslised this was just creationist propaganda. I will happily read any book/article that comprehensively disproves the theory of evolution, as long as creationism isn't offered up as the alternative.

[Aardvark]

You will do very well to say that Darwin's theory of evolution is wrong, but no one as yet has a better theory! After reading the second paragraph of the link I reaslised this was just creationist propaganda. I will happily read any book/article that comprehensively disproves the theory of evolution, as long as creationism isn't offered up as the alternative.

 

I agree with you about the link, complete drivel.

 

However i am intrigued by your suggestion that the theory of evolution is wrong. I rather like the theory because as rather i see it explains the natural world so clearly and is universaly applicable. What do you see as it's problems?

 

(i'm assuming your not just another fundamentalist nutcase so you might actually have some interesting opinions on the matter)

[Tetrahedrite]

Don't get me wrong, I completely believe that the theory of evolution (or a slight variation of it) is correct. What I was trying to emphasise was that I would be happy to hear out anyone who has a contrary view on the subject, as long as the rejection of evolution has absolutely nothing to do with "the word of God".

 

 

FYI, I have a geology background and have seen much supporting material for the evolutionary process, and one of my pet projects is discrediting people who try to explain stratigraphic formations in terms of "Flood geology"

[Aardvark]

Don't get me wrong' date=' I completely believe that the theory of evolution (or a slight variation of it) is correct. What I was trying to emphasise was that I would be happy to hear out anyone who has a contrary view on the subject, as long as the rejection of evolution has absolutely nothing to do with "the word of God".

[/quote']

 

I'm both happy and disappointed.

 

Happy you're not one of the nutcases, disappointed i hadn't found someone who isn't a religious fundamentalist, who had a honest dispute with evolution.

 

Almost every anti evolutionist around seems to either resort to religion or science so bad i suspect dishonesty.

[Tetrahedrite]

Any person, scientist or religious, can see that some of the original concepts suggested in the Origin of Species by C. Darwin were not exactly right. Some of the minor details of his theory have changed as we have seen improvements in various scientific methods eg genetic testing. This is why science is so much better than religion. It allows a theory to evolve (pardon the pun) and improve as better data is recovered. The basic idea that natural selection shapes the evolution of the species, however, still stands and has in fact been reinforced by modern science.

[Tetrahedrite]

Does anyone know where I can get a Darwin Fish avatar?

[Sayonara]

Tetrahedrite, when you say things like "You will do very well to say that Darwin's theory of evolution is wrong", you really aren't helping.

 

Darwin didn't have a theory of evolution as we understand it.

 

Unless you were just being tongue-in-cheek...?

[Sayonara]

Oh yes -almost forgot.

 

Jason Parker:

 

This is your seventh thread now where you have posted creationist propaganda and then fled without looking back at the replies.

 

If you are not interested in discussing these issues, we aren't interested in having you post threads here. Respond to the arguments or your account will be prevented from starting new threads.

[Tetrahedrite]

Tetrahedrite' date=' when you say things like "You will do very well to say that Darwin's theory of evolution is wrong", you really aren't helping.

 

Darwin [u']didn't have[/i] a theory of evolution as we understand it.

 

Unless you were just being tongue-in-cheek...?

 

I was being tongue in cheek, and I proly didn't word that properly.

Apologies

[Artorius]

Any person, scientist or religious, can see that some of the original concepts suggested in the Origin of Species by C. Darwin were not exactly right. Some of the minor details of his theory have changed as we have seen improvements in various scientific methods eg genetic testing. This is why science is so much better than religion. It allows a theory to evolve (pardon the pun) and improve as better data is recovered. The basic idea that natural selection shapes the evolution of the species, however, still stands and has in fact been reinforced by modern science.

you tetrasphinctus, seem to have an opinion here were you constantly champion science over religion.You do so either because you follow others opinions or you are so misdirected in your knowledge that you appear stupid.This isnt a war,apart from some creationist opinions,fundementally science and religion are not contradictory.I happen to think that apples taste nice!! this is because science has eliminated pests,genetically enhanced or manipulated the size,colour,flavour etc.But at the end of the day its an apple,nowhere do i see a contradiction in ANYONES FAITH.what i do see is constant arguing over evolution.Speaking as a non church going christian,evolution is fact!!!! it does not conflict with my beliefs in god.What is more difficult to someone of your standing to accept is that evolutionary mechanism is fiction.Its a theory that doesnt stand up to scientific methodology.In that sense it is flawed so therefore invalid.That does not mean evolution is invalid nor does it invalidate God.Please stop regurgitating its creationism verses evolutionists.Its decades old and doesnt help at all.What i find most disconcerting is the use of the word propaganda!! its used to invalidate the others opinion or facts,with no basis of fact to back it up.

The truth of the matter is without scientific approach and advancment we would not be here in our millions,but at the same time regardless of religious belief if one can prove that science or more pertantly science fact is flawed or incomplete,then that can only serve to aid our search for the ultimate truth.We are either a fluke in a fluke universe that should not exist out of inanimate matter,or that god,or some energy force(nature itself) had a grand design.We do not have to comprehend something to evaluate or devalue its existence.

 

BTA im intoxicated so forgive the spelling.....saya

[Aardvark]

Speaking as a non church going christian,evolution is fact!!!! it does not conflict with my beliefs in god.What is more difficult to someone of your standing to accept is that evolutionary mechanism is fiction.Its a theory that doesnt stand up to scientific methodology.In that sense it is flawed so therefore invalid.That does not mean evolution is invalid nor does it invalidate God.

 

Artorius, Tetrahedrite wasn't making an attack on religion, you've gone completely over the top there. He didn't make any coment at all about evolution disproving God or any other such thing

 

If you have any evidence or ideas to show why you think that evolutionary mechanism is fiction please let us know, as far as i can see the scientific methodology is just fine. Understanding of DNA is advancing rapidly and backs the theory of evolution.

[JaKiri]

Drunk! On the interweb!

 

That aside, I know not of any flaw in evolutionary mechanics, and the findings of science flat out contradict large sections of the bible.

[Artorius]

Then i repectfully suggest to you that you havent read anything about evolution.For someone to agree so readily to accept that there are no flaws or contradictions in evolutionary theory tells me that ive devoted three lines to many to a reply...

[jay geo]

Tell you what.. YOU need more faith to believe in evolution than in God. Tell me why monkeys are not evolving nowadays, they had DNA change recently??