Niflheim:
"Neither do I believe man came from apes"......................................................YOU AND I ARE STILL ON THE SAME PAGE HERE!!! The only slight difference here is that we have evidence for it, so I do not need to "BELIEVE" it!!! I have accepted it as a fact!!!

@Naijaheydia,

For 2 million Naira!!! The GULO gene(and please, don't tell me that you don't know what the GULO gene is), is the reason why humans squeeze lemon on top of fish in all those fancy restaurants!!! The GULO gene is what is supposed to assist we primates in synthesizing Vitamin C, but due to the fact that it is no longer functioning, we humans and apes, must get it from outside sources!!! HOW COME, THE GULO GENE IN BOTH APES AND HUMANS IS BROKEN IN THE EXACT SAME PLACES?!!!

Again I tell you this. Evolution is said to be holistic and not simplistic just like the example u just gave which Is simplistic.

If the source is not credible then the whole thing isnt acceptable.

If yoj have no foundation can you build on air? When monkeys want to eat fish whg then don't they squeeze lemon on thftat fish first since we share the Gulo gene.

Experiment: give a monkey lemon and fish and watch what it does with it. It will only be able to reason what to do with it if you being human teaches it repeatedly.


#5million naira question; does a monkey know what vitamin C is and what it does?

naijadeyhia:


Yet evolution is supposed to explain language, intelligence and consciousness right? Same evolution that cannot trace its source?


Interesting.

Maths explains the universe; yet cannot be traced to a certain source.

Besides, Evolution has a lot of subsets.

Niflheim:
"So because we have same number of fingers with apes means we came from them?"................................................................JESUS FUCKING CHRIST!!! Now I am certain that you are just trolling!!! Are you sure you came here to learn? I shall repeat myself again!!!

I compared the following:
1.Chromosome Count
2.Near-identical skeletal frame
and 3:External features which includes the finger print count AND THE LANUGO HAIR WHICH APPEARS AT THE SAME TIME IN BOTH THE HUMAN AND APE EMBRYOS.................................AND DISAPPEARS AT THE SAME TIME IN BOTH HUMAN AND APE EMBRYOS!!!...............................................................http://ideonexus.com/2013/10/20/evolutionary-wonders-in-a-newborn-baby/

So, where do we(human) evolve from?

Niflheim:
"So because we have same number of fingers with apes means we came from them?"................................................................JESUS FUCKING CHRIST!!! Now I am certain that you are just trolling!!! Are you sure you came here to learn? I shall repeat myself again!!!

I compared the following:
1.Chromosome Count
2.Near-identical skeletal frame
and 3:External features which includes the finger print count AND THE LANUGO HAIR WHICH APPEARS AT THE SAME TIME IN BOTH THE HUMAN AND APE EMBRYOS.................................AND DISAPPEARS AT THE SAME TIME IN BOTH HUMAN AND APE EMBRYOS!!!...............................................................http://ideonexus.com/2013/10/20/evolutionary-wonders-in-a-newborn-baby/

And I have told you that NEAR IDENTICAL is not IDENTICAL. if evolution is based on natural selection and the stronger is meant to proceed while the rest off for sake of survival should humans who evolved from apes have shorter gestational periods or longer?

Ironically humans have longer gestational periods than apes. How so if the law of natural selection was at play we should have shorter gestational period so we can survive better and easier?

"It has nothing to do with a tail or a lost tail. Get that right"..........................................................................CHAI!!! This is why I insist, AND WILL CONTINUE TO INSIST, that you do not even know ANYTHING about Evolution !!!

You crucify yourself and then you scream, "YOU JUST NAILED YOURSELF!!!

SirWere:


Maths explains the universe; yet cannot be traced to a certain source.

Besides, Evolution has a lot of subsets.

If maths explains the universe then that means maths can explain evolution. However the same maths has said EVOLUTION IS LOGICALLY AND MATHEMATICALLY IMPOSSIBLE.

@tempem....................................................YOUR QUESTION: where do humans evolve from?



SO YOU THAT CLAIM THAT YOU KNOW EVOLUTION TO BE FALSE, AND YOU CLAIM THAT I KNOW NOTHING ABOUT EVOLUTION, IS NOW ASKING ME WHERE HUMANS EVOLVED FROM?


ANSWER: Both humans and apes evolved from "*PROTO-PRIMATES*"!!!

tempem:

Believe me, I know. Knowing an honest person doesnt require long effort. When one is honest, he's honest.
Take this, joor.

Thanks.

I believe we can always discuss about topics without the usual level of insults, jibes and misconceptuons.

Niflheim:
"It has nothing to do with a tail or a lost tail. Get that right"..........................................................................CHAI!!! This is why I insist, AND WILL CONTINUE TO INSIST, that you do not even know ANYTHING about Evolution !!!

You crucify yourself and then you scream, "YOU JUST NAILED YOURSELF!!!

Education is your friend bro...not evolution. Just because you saw someone doing a firedance and he says fire is nice and sweet to him does not make it so for you.

All these your hoppity hopping how many have you found out for yourself?

Niflheim:
@tempem....................................................YOUR QUESTION: where do humans evolve from?



SO YOU THAT CLAIM THAT YOU KNOW EVOLUTION TO BE FALSE, AND YOU CLAIM THAT I KNOW NOTHING ABOUT EVOLUTION, IS NOW ASKING ME WHERE HUMANS EVOLVED FROM?


ANSWER: Both humans and apes evolved from "*PROTO-PRIMATES*"!!!

And proto primates evolved from what?

naijadeyhia:



If maths explains the universe then that means maths can explain evolution. However the same maths has said EVOLUTION IS LOGICALLY AND MATHEMATICALLY IMPOSSIBLE.

Really?? Care to show me

Niflheim:
"It has nothing to do with a tail or a lost tail. Get that right"..........................................................................CHAI!!! This is why I insist, AND WILL CONTINUE TO INSIST, that you do not even know ANYTHING about Evolution !!!

You crucify yourself and then you scream, "YOU JUST NAILED YOURSELF!!!

Advice: go and research on coccyx on humans and come back and tell me its a tail that fell off.

SirWere:
Really?? Care to show me

Check my posts on this same thread. I broke it down in 2 posts there.

Niflheim:
@tempem....................................................YOUR QUESTION: where do humans evolve from?



SO YOU THAT CLAIM THAT YOU KNOW EVOLUTION TO BE FALSE, AND YOU CLAIM THAT I KNOW NOTHING ABOUT EVOLUTION, IS NOW ASKING ME WHERE HUMANS EVOLVED FROM?


ANSWER: Both humans and apes evolved from "*PROTO-PRIMATES*"!!!

And from where do we have the proto primatives.

naijadeyhia:


We are saying the same thing. Evolution does not know its origin (roots).
So why build an elaborate story on nothing?

Evolution knows its origin, dude.
Evolution has never presumed to know how the first cell got here.
It's a redudant question, in my eyes.
Those who ask usually do so when talking about religions or atheism.

And on that topic, science is silent.

SirWere:


Evolution knows its origin, dude.

Evolution has never presumed to know how the first cell got here.

It's a redudant question, in my eyes.

Those who ask usually do so when talking about religions or atheism.


And on that topic, science is silent.

If evolution cannot say how the first cell materialised or how it evolved how then can they say we all came from that same single celled organism via evolution?

I am not being Religious but logical.

I am still sipping my pepsi and munching on my popcorn here.

naijadeyhia:


If evolution cannot say how the first cell materialised or how it evolved how then can they say we all came from that same single celled organism via evolution?

I am not being Religious but logical.

Evolution is talking about HISTORY of biological organisms on earth.


Really, I don't know why people want to think evolution gives a damn about how the first cell got here.

SirWere:


Evolution is talking about HISTORY of biological organisms on earth.


Really, I don't know why people want to think evolution gives a damn about how the first cell got here.

Lol.

How would you have answered, where did we come from?

SirWere:


Evolution is talking about HISTORY of biological organisms on earth.


Really, I don't know why people want to think evolution gives a damn about how the first cell got here.

So if evolution is talking about just the HISTORY yet they presented their facts to back up that history and some here say Ape is my uncle or my grandfather yet they have no knowledge of how the first cell came about or evolved or appeared yet they say we evolved from the first single celled organism where then is their history? Their history has no authority to call itself evolution because it does not believe or rely on itself.

SirWere:


Evolution is talking about HISTORY of biological organisms on earth.


Really, I don't know why people want to think evolution gives a damn about how the first cell got here.

Why would I not be bothered about how my supposed origin was? Should I just skip that part and just trust that I evolved from a fish or an ape especially considering how intelligent I have now become?

Should I not now be asking intelligent questions regarding my origin?

tempem:
Lol.
How would you have answered, where did we come from?

I don't know.

naijadeyhia:



So if evolution is talking about just the HISTORY yet they presented their facts to back up that history and some here say Ape is my uncle or my grandfather yet they have no knowledge of how the first cell came about or evolved or appeared yet they say we evolved from the first single celled organism where then is their history? Their history has no authority to call itself evolution because it does not believe or rely on itself.

You miss the point bro.

Evolution is not abiogenesis, how many times do I have to say this.


Evolution can tell you, with accuracy, HOW organisms got to where they are now.

It can tell you of the struggles of organisms to where they are now.



Evolution has been proven, over and over again in almost every aspect of biology regarding the history of organisms.

It has answered questions as to why animals have certain features that others don't.


Evolurion is not some hocus-pocus process, it happens to every organism......and is still happening.



And regarding the apes theory; Apes and humans actually descended from the same ancestor............about 50,000 years ago!!!!!

So, unless your bloodline stretches there, forget it; you don't have an ape for a grand father- unless of course, your grandfather is a Nigerian Politican at which I would whole-heartedly agree.

SirWere:


You miss the point bro.

Evolution is not abiogenesis, how many times do I have to say this.


Evolution can tell you, with accuracy, HOW organisms got to where they are now.

It can tell you of the struggles of organisms to where they are now.



Evolution has been proven, over and over again in almost every aspect of biology regarding the history of organisms.

It has answered questions as to why animals have certain features that others don't.


Evolurion is not some hocus-pocus process, it happens to every organism......and is still happening.



And regarding the apes theory; Apes and humans actually descended from the same ancestor............about 50,000 years ago!!!!!

So, unless your bloodline stretches there, forget it; you don't have an ape for a grand father- unless of course, your grandfather is a Nigerian Politican at which I would whole-heartedly agree.

So Biologically evolution can tell me with accuracy how I evolved from fish to man or from cell to man because that fish or cell are both organism based but when you were asked of what man evolvd from your answer is "you dont know" isnt that ironical?Are you not simply going round and circles and contradicting yourself?

hahn:


You do not [size=20pt]BELIEVE[/size] in evolution, you [size=20pt]UNDERSTAND[/size] evolution.

Just like you do not [size=20pt]BELIEVE[/size] in maths but [size=20pt]UNDERSTAND[/size] it.

[size=20pt]UNDERSTAND? [/size]

It is something you understand and choose whether or not to believe because unlike math, time is involved, a lot of it. It's not like maths where 2+2 instantly gives 4. Evolution is based on a very long strech of TIME. Vu?

francis247:
It is something you understand and choose whether or not to believe because unlike math, time is involved, a lot of it. It's not like maths where 2+2 instantly gives 4. Evolution is based on a very long strech of TIME. Vu?

Personally I chose not to respond to that guy because I knew he had no explanation and just wanted to make fun of the whole thing.

SirWere:


You miss the point bro.

Evolution is not abiogenesis, how many times do I have to say this.


Evolution can tell you, with accuracy, HOW organisms got to where they are now.

It can tell you of the struggles of organisms to where they are now.



Evolution has been proven, over and over again in almost every aspect of biology regarding the history of organisms.

It has answered questions as to why animals have certain features that others don't.


Evolurion is not some hocus-pocus process, it happens to every organism......and is still happening.



And regarding the apes theory; Apes and humans actually descended from the same ancestor............about 50,000 years ago!!!!!

So, unless your bloodline stretches there, forget it; you don't have an ape for a grand father- unless of course, your grandfather is a Nigerian Politican at which I would whole-heartedly agree.

If scientists can believe that we evolved based on dead fossil samples how can they not agree we are still evolving based on living tissue? E.g

If someone is born having 12 toes and 12 fingers why is it called a deformity or a defect and not an evolutionary process?

If someone is born siamese why is it a defect and not believed to be an evolutionary process?

If an adult grows to develop 36 teeth instead of 32 why is it called a defecr and not seen as the evolutionary process.

How so? Are we no longer evolving? Or they do not believe those are evolutionary processes hence why they call them birth defects?

Niflheim:
@Ogbevireo, there is absolutely NO PLACE or SPACE, in Evolution, that talks about "Apes becoming Humans!!! Where do you people keep getting all this your false information?

Then it follows that there were always Ape & always Man in an original form - unmutated, unevolved. And that brings us to the point of - what is the origin of these originals.

naijadeyhia:



Permit me to dig deeper as an ex science freak.....yeah I used to be one. Surprised?

Our present atmosphere consists of 78% nitrogen (N2), 21% molecular oxygen (O2), and 1% of other gases, such as carbon dioxide CO2), argon (Ar), and water vapor H2O). An atmosphere containing free oxygen would be fatal to all origin of life schemes ((not if they lived underwater)) While oxygen is necessary for life ((no it isn't)), free oxygen would oxidize and thus destroy all organic molecules required for the origin of life. Thus, in spite of much evidence that the earth has always had a significant quantity of free oxygen in the atmosphere((where is that evidence?)), evolutionists persist in declaring that there was no oxygen in the earth's early atmosphere.

However, this would also be fatal to an evolutionary origin of life. If there were no oxygen there would be no protective layer of ozone surrounding the earth. Ozone is produced by radiation from the sun on the oxygen in the atmosphere, converting the diatomic oxygen(O2) we breathe to triatomic oxygen O3), which is ozone. Thus if there were no oxygen there would be no ozone.

The deadly destructive ultraviolet light from the sun would pour down on the surface of the earth unimpeded, destroying those organic molecules required for life, reducing them to simple gases, such as nitrogen, carbon dioxide, and water. Thus, evolutionists face an irresolvable dilemma: in the presence of oxygen, life could not evolve; without oxygen, thus no ozone, life could not evolve or exist.

I think you are the one who needs to enrol for Evolution 101

Cc seun, cloudgoddess am I right or am I wrong?

The sequence of events you're presenting here is incorrect, and the bolded statements are false.

The earliest life forms didn't need oxygen or ozone to arise. They were anaerobic, like many archaebacteria, bacteria, and even some eukaryotic single-celled organisms (like yeast) still are today. And since they lived in the ocean, UV protection was not required.

Cyanobacteria were one of these early life forms, and they slowly generated the oxygen in the atmosphere via photosynthesis (a process which requires only CO2 and water). Protective mechanisms to avoid oxidation began to evolve in these microbes as the atmosphere's oxygen content increased, and the microbial species that lacked said mechanisms died out (natural selection in action).

The ozone layer that formed after sufficient oxygen had been added to the atmosphere made it possible for land life to evolve. Prior to that all life was in the ocean.

EDIT:
After writing out my response I realized you copied and pasted your entire argument from the Institute of Creation Research http://www.icr.org/article/few-reasons-evolutionary-origin-life-impossible/
Really?

cloudgoddess:

The sequence of events you're presenting here is incorrect, and the bolded statements are false.

The earliest life forms didn't need oxygen or ozone to arise. They were anaerobic, like many archaebacteria, bacteria, and even some eukaryotic single-celled organisms (like yeast) still are today. And since they lived in the ocean, UV protection was not required.

Cyanobacteria were one of these early life forms, and they slowly generated the oxygen in the atmosphere via photosynthesis (a process which requires only CO2 and water). Protective mechanisms to avoid oxidation began to evolve in these microbes as the atmosphere's oxygen content increased, and the microbial species that lacked said mechanisms died out (natural selection in action).

The ozone layer that formed after sufficient oxygen had been added to the atmosphere made it possible for land life to evolve. Prior to that all life was in the ocean.

EDIT:
After writing out my response I realized you copied and pasted your entire argument from the Institute of Creation Research http://www.icr.org/article/few-reasons-evolutionary-origin-life-impossible/
Really?

And you formed evolution? where's the root? From your own source?

Engrobiorah:
"what" put the first living creature in this universe? Its came to be on its own?

Yep. The first 'living' creature is believed to be a simple self-replicating molecule, which slowly evolved into the first primitive bacteria.