CoolUsername:


Aaaand we're back to reality!
Thanks for your mature and Christ-like response.

But before I start a debate, I'll like to know where you stand. Are you arguing for creationism? Christian creationism? Or Young Earth Creationism?

Good evening my broda,
I'm on the side of reason

johnydon22:
Oh it was answered maybe it wasn't just the one you were looking for..

I pointed out to vital factors "Adaptive machanism and mutation" these are important factors in the distinction of organisms in evolutionary trend...

Maybe you were expecting something else then i can't help you there.
It did, you just have to read it ..
" Mutation, migration (gene flow), genetic drift, and natural selection as mechanisms of change; The importance of genetic variation; The random nature of genetic drift and the effects of a reduction in genetic variation; How variation, differential reproduction, and heredity result in evolution by natural selection"

You just need to pay closer attention...

Surely enough and this is one of my reasons for maintaining a sceptical position to most thesis.

That branch of study is still under heavy study..

One thing you need to understand is that there is no dogma in science.. Science do not hope to achieve immutable dogmas but through Consistent study can reach a truthful approximation without at any point in time claiming absolute truth has been reached..

There are always room for doubt, learn and find out more..

sure

Thanks.. maybe I should look deeper, but most of these theories have been disproved (Darwinism). No scientifical/laboratory test evidence supporting this for the past 150 years. I suppose we are still evolving?.


Well like you said, lets watch how this unfolds.. for me, I won't believe in evolution until it is perfect.

vooks:

Don't be a m0ron,
SPECIATION is not evolution. Evolution is ADDITION of genetic information not REARRANGEMENT or LOSS of pre-existing information. This is why we don't look at albinos as evidence of evolution

Albinism is not evidence for evolution because it is not an inheritable trait.

And it's completely disingenuous to accept speciation but not evolution. Tell me, how are you able to reconcile such intellectual dishonesty?

CoolUsername:


Albinism is not evidence for evolution because it is not an inheritable trait.

And it's completely disingenuous to accept speciation but not evolution. Tell me, how are you able to reconcile such intellectual dishonesty?

Albinism is not inheritable? How is it acquired, bleaching?
A m0ron and an idiot rolled into one

vooks:

Good evening my broda,
I'm on the side of reason

If you don't take a stand, it would be impossible to challenge each other's views.

bqlekan:


Thanks.. maybe I should look deeper, but most of these theories have been disproved (Darwinism). No scientifical/laboratory test evidence supporting this for the past 150 years. I suppose we are still evolving?.

In the scientific community evolution remains the most wildly accepted theory on the origin of species and there are tons of evidence used in support of evolutionary theory..

Evolution simply means development and it proposes this in a very long duration chain of millions of years.. So you can say yes but in a nano-change mode which means very slowly.

Well like you said, lets watch how this unfolds.. for me, I won't believe in evolution until it is perfect.

I am of the opinion that doubt drives study and this is true with science... So that position is a good one...

CoolUsername:


If you don't take a stand, it would be impossible to challenge each other's views.

Reason is my stand, what's your problem negro?

johnydon22:
In the scientific community evolution remains the most wildly accepted theory on the origin of species and there are tons of evidence used in support of evolutionary theory..

Evolution simply means development and it proposes this in a very long duration chain of millions of years.. So you can say yes but in a nano-change mode which means very slowly.

I am of the opinion that doubt drives study and this is true with science... So that position is a good one...

Would have loved to go further on this.. let's leave it for the evolutionists. How i wish I can be here for 2-3 million years.

vooks:

Albinism is not inheritable? How is it acquired, bleaching?
A m0ron and an idiot rolled into one

Ok, I admit that I should have phrased that better. Albinism is not usually observed in the parents of affected offspring.

As I was saying, you believe that animals can cross from specie to another but we cannot observe gradual change in animals among a given population?
That doesn't make any sense.

allanphash7:
This question is seen on my facebook wall and decided to share and we discuss it here


Cx: johnydon22, sonoflucifer, hahn, ichommy, frank317

[b]Look at the summary diagram below, a summary cladogram of ape relationships (from Benton's Vertebrate Palaeontology; italics are extinct apes).


Everything from node B and on is an ape - a member of the Hominoidea. This is includes extinct forms (Proconsul, Dryopithecus, Australopithecus, etc.) and extant forms (Homo, Pan, Hylobatidae, etc.).

As you can see, more basal organisms do not necessarily have to be extinct. Gibbons still exist despite the existence of the more derived orang-utans. If Proconsul were still living today, this cladogram wouldn't change. In other words, evolution doesn't replace older forms. What happens is cladogenesis: Proconsul split off from an ancestral hominoid population and evolved its own way. The last common ancestor of the hylobatids did the same, as did Kenyapithecus, all the way to Homo.

The extinction of Proconsul, Kenyapithecus, and all the Homo species isn't something that's automatically mandated by evolution, they're events that happen due to changing environmental circumstances. Proconsul and Kenyapithecus died out because of climate changes, as did most Homo species. They didn't die out because Homo sapiens suddenly evolved.

Consider it this way: every branch on here is a species or group of species in their own right. They're not stepping stones towards some goal - one can invert Australopithecus's and Homo's positions on this diagram and it would be just as valid.[/b]
**********************************************************************************************************

"Pierolapithecus catalaunicus, shown here in an artist's conception, was an ancient ape that may have been the last common ancestor of all great apes and humans. Discovered in Catalonia, Spain, the fossil of Pierolapithecus catalaunicus is roughly 13 million years old.

"Scientists believe that the newfound species's stiff lower spine and other special adaptations for climbing link this species to modern great apes."

vooks:
Reason is my stand, what's your problem negro?

Just answer the question in a straightforward manner. Are you: 1. A creationist? 2. A Christian creationist? 3. Or a Young Earth creationist.
Or maybe you don't actually know.

CoolUsername:


Just answer the question in a straightforward manner. Are you:
1. A creationist?
2. A Christian creationist?
3. Or a Young Earth creationist.

Or maybe you don't actually know.

As soon as you convince me its relevance here I will gladly do it. Do something worthwhile, focus on the wisdom of my posts...refute it if you can or zip it.

bqlekan:

Would have loved to go further on this.. let's leave it for the evolutionists. How i wish I can be here for 2-3 million years.

There are many things to learn and know, we only need a pinch of doubt and replace belief with study...

vooks:
This is a dumb question and johnydon22 is right on the money according to evolution, humans and monkeys share a common ancestor.

Now, morphologically chimps are the closest you can get to humans and this was the origin of the theory of common ancestor. But this is total bullshiet. Here is why; monkeys branched off our common ancestors 25 million years ago while chimps only bolted 6 million years ago. This theory if true would mean we are have more genetic similarity between chimps and humans than between monkeys and humans, right? Wrong! We share about 93% genes with Rhesus monkey no different from the chimps.

If this don't make any sense, consider this; bats and horses have more genetic similarity than horses and cows

So genetic similarity does not tell you anything as such, how you interpret that information depends on your presumptions. If you are into Darwinism, higher DNA similarity will point to a COMMON ANCESTOR but to me a creationist, they point to a COMMON DESIGNER.

Well put.

CoolUsername:


Ok, I admit that I should have phrased that better. Albinism is not usually observed in the parents of affected offspring.

You are still a bloody m0ron.
Does the fact that you can't 'observe' it mean that it is not inherited?

As I was saying, you believe that animals can cross from specie to another but we cannot observe gradual change in animals among a given population?
That doesn't make any sense.

First,
Species is really a vague term without precise limits. Secondly, could you please DEFINE evolution as you understand it before we proceed?

[size=1pt]

ichommy:



[b]Look at the summary diagram below, a summary cladogram of ape relationships (from Benton's Vertebrate Palaeontology; italics are extinct apes).


Everything from node B and on is an ape - a member of the Hominoidea. This is includes extinct forms (Proconsul, Dryopithecus, Australopithecus, etc.) and extant forms (Homo, Pan, Hylobatidae, etc.).

As you can see, more basal organisms do not necessarily have to be extinct. Gibbons still exist despite the existence of the more derived orang-utans. If Proconsul were still living today, this cladogram wouldn't change. In other words, evolution doesn't replace older forms. What happens is cladogenesis: Proconsul split off from an ancestral hominoid population and evolved its own way. The last common ancestor of the hylobatids did the same, as did Kenyapithecus, all the way to Homo.

The extinction of Proconsul, Kenyapithecus, and all the Homo species isn't something that's automatically mandated by evolution, they're events that happen due to changing environmental circumstances. Proconsul and Kenyapithecus died out because of climate changes, as did most Homo species. They didn't die out because Homo sapiens suddenly evolved.

Consider it this way: every branch on here is a species or group of species in their own right. They're not stepping stones towards some goal - one can invert Australopithecus's and Homo's positions on this diagram and it would be just as valid.[/b]
**********************************************************************************************************

"Pierolapithecus catalaunicus, shown here in an artist's conception, was an ancient ape that may have been the last common ancestor of all great apes and humans. Discovered in Catalonia, Spain, the fossil of Pierolapithecus catalaunicus is roughly 13 million years old.

"Scientists believe that the newfound species's stiff lower spine and other special adaptations for climbing link this species to modern great apes."

[/size]
My broda,
I minimize your wonderful lecture to ask a very simple question;
What else other than homology links these real and their imagined ancestors?

vooks:

You are still a bloody m0ron.
Does the fact that you can't 'observe' it mean that it is not inherited?

I'll let this one slide, pvssy.


First,
Species is really a vague term without precise limits. Secondly, could you please DEFINE evolution as you understand it before we proceed?[/quote]

In animals, the specie line is usually drawn when interbreeding cannot occur between two groups.

Evolution is a process whereby inheritable traits gradually change over course of generations within a given population.

You can never understand until the time of your death, where all your questions would be answered. Some things are just beyond human intelligence & comprehension. I wonder why people argue unnecessarily.
Traducianism, creationism & the theory of evolution all sound like tales by moonlight to me though.

I believe in the existence of a supreme force(s)(a higher intelligence), not the god Xtians & moors place their faith in. If you believe in Charles Darwin's dross, you are indeed very very lost & cannot reason.

How did the smallest atom come into existence?

You think something as complex as the human brain was a by-product of evolution?

What about the information contained in DNA & RNA. Did they simply happen by random luck or blind chance. If yes, then what you mean is that you can throw a stick of dynamite into a printing factory & come out with the Nigerian Constitution.

I think not. Evolution is just the most logical explanation. It's very far from the truth. Like I said, just be patient till the hour you breathe your last..argggh

CoolUsername:


I'll let this one slide, pvssy.


First,
Species is really a vague term without precise limits. Secondly, could you please DEFINE evolution as you understand it before we proceed?

In animals, the specie line is usually drawn when interbreeding cannot occur between two groups.

Evolution is a process whereby inheritable traits gradually change over course of generations within a given population.

Good night sir

Op, if no one asked, allow me to be the first.

As god made man from mud, why is there still mud?

Nubian113:

So the monkey's in the zoo have not quite got that level of intelligence but the monkey's in Hollywood for example are getting closer to being human.

Who's going to pay for the drink you made me spill?

wiegraf:
Op, if no one asked, allow me to be the first.

As god made man from mud, why is there still mud?

As God made woman from bone, why are there still bones (there are boners though) .

bqlekan:


Lol, this cracked me up.. Lola, being gifted has nothing to do with evolution jhur.. why haven't we outlived the monkeys? do you really believe we are evolving?

Personally? Hell yeah lol pun intended in my opinion my children's children will be super human, extra ordinary, the 2.2 version if you like... But that's my belief anyway. How are you?

Nubian113:


Personally? Hell yeah lol pun intended in my opinion my children's children will be super human, extra ordinary, the 2.2 version if you like... But that's my belief anyway. How are you?

Hehe more like the man from Krypton.. lol at version 2.2.. I'm okay.. hope you good? Wait lemme come have a cup of tea with you...

jayriginal:


Who's going to pay for the drink you made me spill?

Sarcasm

Nubian113:


Sarcasm

I'm not sure if you mean you were being sarcastic or if you think I was being sarcastic.

For what its worth, I found that line very funny.

You still owe me a drink.

bqlekan:

Hehe more like the man from Krypton.. lol at version 2.2.. I'm okay.. hope you good? Wait lemme come have a cup of tea with you...

Ha the kettle is on bby

jayriginal:


I'm not sure if you mean you were being sarcastic or if you think I was being sarcastic.

For what its worth, I found that line very funny.

You still owe me a drink.

I meant you being sarcy

Lol would a cuppa do?

HCpaul:
Maybe evolusion has stoped or those 21st century monkeys have acquired an IQ that surpassess the evolution theory.

I always vocalize a claime that atheism is a logical expression of haphazard state of confusion.

Don't mind them, these atheists are confused.

Think twice before displaying how ignorant you are. Evolution has nothing to do with atheism. There are some few atheist that don't accept evolution just as they are atheist that believe in a flat earth. The only thing atheist have in common is that they lack the belief in the existence of God.

In this 21st century I wonder why some people still dispute the theory of evolution while some Christian denominations fit it into their dogma so easily.

CoolUsername:


Nope, evolution is still going on very slowly as we speak.

Have you seen how new breeds of dogs are formed over time by artificial selection. That's evolution.

Have you seen the way drugs like Amalar and Quinine stopped being effective against malaria? That's the malaria parasite evolving before our very eyes.

So, no evolution hasn't stopped at all.

Talk about the nylon eating bacteria

vooks:

Good night sir

Noticed you've been missing in action . Hope sir that you are alright

Johny already said it but I'll elaborate a little.

Evolution can occur along different paths, divergent evolution being one of the most common. This is when multiple species arise from a pre-existing species, due to natural selection, genetic drift/migration of some of the population, catastrophic events that change the environment, etc.

Modern humans and chimpanzees share a common ancestral species. Phylogenetics is the study of these genetic relationships, and phylogenetic trees allow us to view them clearly. Each point between two branches is where the previous species split into two species due to the factors I mentioned above:


[img]http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/images/evograms/hominid_evo.jpg[/img]

Each species shown on a phylogenetic tree represents the entire population of that species as it existed in the past - not an individual. So there was no point where the primate ancestor morphed into a human during its life span, or gave birth to a modern human. Evolution occurs via small changes in genetically inherited traits, passed on from generation to generation. Hence the large timespans required for these changes to become obvious.