Don't tell me there's no proof for evolution

@Setanta,

What is the proof that there was once a time on Earth that there was insufficient oxygen to poison the anaerobic, single cell organisms?

What is the proof that anaerobic, single cell organisms were ever the dominant life-forms?

2 Replies

@Setanta,

Human being: A member of the human race: being, body, creature, homo, human, individual, life, man, mortal, party, person, personage, soul. See beings.

A bit too vague since most human beings believe in a Creator. So i will just keep to evolutionists, then.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

The word "monkey" is a paraphylitic term, not to be confused with "taxa" . "Monkey" is a term like "fish" or "bug".
Monkeys are the familiy that includes (ONLY) old world and new world monkeys. They are a member of the superfamily called by a number of terms , all "Simian". The families are Old world and New world MONKEYS; PROSIMIANS (which are the lemurs and such); and APES.
SO humans evolved within the Pongid or great APE family group ,all the others evolved separately and the groups dont converge until we go way back to the Dawn of the Cenozoic.

People who want to be purposely vague are only doing so to further some religious agenda. If they dont want to understand the differences between the groups then we got us a dyed in the wool Aniti-Science type. We can show that humans did not evolve from monkeys merely by the differences in thei DNA betwen the groups and the mutations that had accumulated since the old world and new world monkeys separated as they rode the various continents apart . Whereas gorillas differ from chimps by a specific series of marker genes (about 11%) and humans differ from chimps by a very small amount (between 2 and 3 %) Further, accumulated mutations in the various groups of great apes allow us to roughly "time" the event when all these ape separations and evolution occured. Unfortunatley , we dont have any DNA from the AUstralopithecenes and early Homo sp that we conclude (by morphology) are our ancestors.

2 Replies

@farmerman,

what proof is there for accumulated mutations in the various groups of great apes ?

How can anyone accurately give genetic difference between humans and any other species when only 1/3000 of your DNA has been analyzed so far?

So really 98% of 1 million out of our 3 billion DNA bases is similar to that of chimps.

2 Replies

@Setanta,

Quote:

There is absolutely no good reason to assume that life should be as it is now, and therefore your imaginary friend "created" these conditions.

There is the very good reason actually. It explains all religions. It is that any other assumption drives us all mad. In a nice way of course. At first at least. It would have to be nice at first to tempt us to embrace it but, like the cliched irresistable and dangerous femme fatale, will an "all the way" embrace cost the embracer more than was bargained for and leave the embracee laughing all the way to the bank.

The "imaginary friend" exists in the faith. And, just as "form follows function" there a form for when that faith is strong and for shades of strength on a sliding scale down to non existent.

And if "form follows function" as Setanta declares why does his side militantly refuse to discuss the social and psychological consequences of belief/unbelief? They just want to function without reference to the forms and they lecture us that "form follows function." Forked tongue indeed.

If the faith produces a form it comes down to whether you like the form or not. If a satisfied mind is one that is happy with the form then it follows that it will be happy with the faith that produced it.

But what stupidity it is to keep banging on year after year challenging people to prove the existence of a Creator when everybody knows it can't be done and if it could faith would be abolished.

And the function follows the form as well.

Anybody who takes the trouble to read Setanta's post carefully will soon realise that it's banal. He's tricked it up a bit but it's the olde cliches.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Do you believe that evolution as taught today is Basically correct, and maybe some slight changes will be made over time. Or do you think that there could be a better theory that will explain life (besides ID)?

1 Reply

@gileet84,

theres been a complete genome of chimps, great apes, and humans since 2006.

We dont have DNA from any fossil ap[es but we have DNA from living groups and the accumulated mutations can be read easily by geneticists. Applying an accumulation rate for the entire population at something like 1 mutation per x thousand yewars, we can see what happened by mutations that are COMMON to the apes and what mutations are UNIQUE to each group (Showing us what happened to these groups SINCE they divereged)
DNA mutations are like a neat biological clock

1 Reply

@RoyMcCain,

RoyMcCain wrote:

Quote:
RoyMcCain wrote:

Quote:

Once again--and it's tedious to point this out--humans did not evolve from monkeys. Nobody with a lick of sense claims we did.

And by the way it is said that human evolved from egyptopithecus. Which is:A Miocene monkey which bridges the gap between the Eocene ancestors of Old world monkeys and Miocene ancestor of Hominoidae. Or in other words "human evolve from monkeys". (or at least that what is claimed by Evolutionists.

Humans did not evolve from the monkeys that we see today. Egyptopithecus has long been extinct. Why do you ignore extinction?

no one said the monkeys that are alive today.

You began with Setanta's response to gileet84.

This is the remark made by gileet84:

gileet84 wrote:

If we evolved from monkeys then why are they still alive ?

1 Reply

@RoyMcCain,

RoyMcCain wrote:

Joseph’s father was Jacob.

That's what Matthew 1:16 says. On the other hand, Luke 3:23 says that Joseph's father was Heli. Obviously, Matthew and Luke can't both be right. Which evangelist do you think has it wrong? And how can you logically maintain that the Bible is without contradiction, be it with itself or with scientific observation?

1 Reply

@gileet84,

C.f. this wikipedia article on the "great oxygenation event":

Click here

The second page of this "Google books" excerpt discusses the remains of anaerobic life forms in the Paleoproterozoic:

Click here

Quote:

During the beginning of the Proterozoic, the atmosphere had 100 to 1000 times the carbon dioxide content of today’s, making it more similar to the atmosphere of Mars than the present-day Earth with which we are familiar. Relatively abruptly about 2000 million years ago, oxygen-producing photosynthesizing single-celled organisms evolved, releasing tremendous amounts of oxygen in an event known as the oxygen catastrophe. This rusted all exposed iron on the surface, leaving behind geological evidence called banded iron formations. It probably also caused mass extinction among organisms unable to deal with such high oxygen concentrations.

The above comes from this page at "Wise Geek-dot-com," a site maintained by Michael Anisimov.

Quote:

First complex single-cellular life, including protists with nuclei.

Oxygen Catastrophe, aka Great Oxygenation or Oxygen Revolution, dates to approximately 2,400,000,000 years ago. During this time, an explosion of oxyphotosynthesis by evolving single-cellular life, particularly blue-green algae or cyanobacteria, resulted in a massive buildup of oxygen in the atmosphere (to approximately 21%). Prior to this time, the level of oxygen in Earth’s atmosphere (0.02%) was similar to that on Mars. This buildup was the gateway to widespread biological evolution. The Oxygen Catastrophe is clearly demarcated in the geological record by the introduction of large amounts of oxygenated iron (rust) called banded iron formations.

The above quote is from the Time Scale Project.

People with even a passing familiarity with the history of life on earth do not question this chronology, nor the great oxygenation extinction event. I take it that's a group which does not include you.

1 Reply

@RoyMcCain,

What evidence do you have that "most human beings belive in a creator?" That's mere ipse dixit. You needn't refer to "soul" when you refer to me, i don't subscribe to your superstition. You also needn't use the term "evolutionist," since that does not describe me, despite your desire to put me in a box in which you can gaze on me with contempt.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Like i said only 1/3000 of human DNA (THE HUMAN GENOME) has been analyzed (function determined).

2 Replies

@Thomas,

Things like this are the very death of the "inerrant," divinely inspired scripture dodge.

1 Reply

@RoyMcCain,

RoyMcCain wrote:

Selective breeding works because it is controlled.

So is evolution, which is controlled by non-random natural selection. Natural selection can breed animals for size every bit as much as artificial selection by humans can.

Roy McCain wrote:

The original animal would of have to have them in its DNA code.

Obviously you need to read up on sexual reproduction in general, and how Meiosis affects the DNA code.

0 Replies

If it ain't at a creationist web site, he ain'ta gonna read it.

0 Replies

@wandeljw,

Forgive my ignorance. Evolutionists say humans evolved from apes not monkeys. So why are apes still alive?

3 Replies

@RoyMcCain,

Changes to evolutionary theory are being made yearly. These changes are made when they fit the evidence. e are mostly looking at mechanisms and DNA differences, but the fossil record occasionally presents us with some neat intermediates, the most recent in my mind was the finding of the series of bird fossils that were Mesozoic ratites that showed number of reptilian features . We now have several species that parallel the great Archeopteryx (Reptili-birdie)
ANother onw was te finding of Tiiktalik rosacea in the early 200's. This Devonian "fishopod" showed nice features that suggested that this fish was well on the way as an intermediate between fish and amphibians.

0 Replies

@gileet84,

gileet84 wrote:

Forgive my ignorance. Evolutionists say humans evolved from apes not monkeys. So why are apes still alive?

No scientist said humans evolved from apes. Human beings and apes share a common ancestor. That common ancestor has long been extinct.

1 Reply

@gileet84,

Quote:

Forgive my ignorance. Evolutionists say humans evolved from apes not monkeys. So why are apes still alive?

The apes that are alive today are also descendants of their ancestor. The "common ancestor" betwen apes and humans is apparently not alive we only have fossils of those.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

I just read the articles however all they do is tell you something happened and how it happened (theory) but they provide no proof that it happened.

If a bloated dead body is said to have been on the beach 18,000 years ago, I can theorized based on scientific facts that the dead body was bloated because the person drowned in the sea, however i have not proved that a bloated dead body was actually on the beach 18,000 years ago or ever.

1 Reply

Don't tell me there's no proof for evolution

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know