felixomor:

Produce ur diagram. Or rest. No arguments.

raphieMontella:

learn to use ur phone...or wallow in illiteracy

felixomor:


First, produce ur own 'better diagram' on the evolution of homo sapiens. If u cannot produce it, wahala dey

felixomor:

Diagram.

Teempakguy:
That is easily done.

Evolution is a lot more complicated than that ridiculous image you posted that just reeks of reductive fallacy. Now, tell me what the hell that Obviously chimpanzee ape is?

raphieMontella:

bro u tried o...u had such luxury...
I assure u...even after spoon feeding him he wont still learn how to feed himself..
Having apparently no knowledge of what evolution is and claiming to be an einstein in it..
Such stupidity

ValentineMary:


That's how amazing nature can be. At least my statement about the proof of the randomness of DNA has been proven.


That's why it took about a billion years to happen.



Amino acid don't form DNA bro. They form protein which is essential to life



At the early stage of earth, the earth was very hot thus these was the energy source also they (cells) mostly survived at hydrothermal vent because of the supply of minerals. And certain organisms like hyperthermophile can survive these hot conditions. The field of evolutionary biology is still young so wait till we get the info in details then u would see ur baby.

Francis Crick, a scientist who helped to discover DNA’s double-helix structure, decided that this molecule is far too organized to have come about through undirected events. He proposed that intelligent extraterrestrials may have sent DNA to the earth to help get life started here.

Teempakguy:
That is easily done.

Evolution is a lot more complicated than that ridiculous image you posted that just reeks of reductive fallacy. Now, tell me what the hell that Obviously chimpanzee ape is?

raphieMontella:

u have a phone

Teempakguy:
That is easily done.

Evolution is a lot more complicated than that ridiculous image you posted that just reeks of reductive fallacy. Now, tell me what the hell that Obviously chimpanzee ape is?

felixomor:


So next time before you interprete what u dont know as "chimpazee" (Lol)

The diagram only highlights the absence of missing links in the fossil records, (which u r using as backup above)

Here is an explanatory culled text for the problem illustrated in that diagram:
=====================================================



"The earliest fossils of Homo, Homo rudolfensis and Homo erectus, are separated from Australopithecus by a large, unbridged gap. How can we explain this seeming saltation? Not having any fossils that can serve as missing links, we have to fall back on the time-honored method of historical science, the construction of a historical narrative.92
In light of such evidence, a paper in the Journal of Molecular Biology and Evolution called the appearance of Homo sapiens "a genetic revolution" where "no australopithecine species is obviously transitional."93 The lack of fossil evidence for this hypothesized transition is confirmed by Harvard paleoanthropologists Daniel E. Lieberman, David R. Pilbeam, and Richard W. Wrangham:

Of the various transitions that occurred during human evolution, the transition from Australopithecus to Homo was undoubtedly one of the most critical in its magnitude and consequences. As with many key evolutionary events, there is both good and bad news. First, the bad news is that many details of this transition are obscure because of the paucity of the fossil and archaeological records.94
As for the "good news," they still admit: "although we lack many details about exactly how, when, and where the transition occurred from Australopithecus to Homo, we have sufficient data from before and after the transition to make some inferences about the overall nature of key changes that did occur."95 In other words, the fossil record provides ape-like australopithecines ("before", and human-like Homo ("after", but not fossils documenting a transition between them. In the absence of intermediates, we're left with "inferences" of a transition based strictly upon the assumption of Darwinian evolution. One commentator proposed the evidence implies a "big bang theory" of the appearance of our genus Homo.96 This does not make for a compelling evolutionary account of human origins.97...........................
..
................................ the history of life shows a pattern of explosions where new fossil forms come into existence without clear evolutionary precursors. Evolutionary anthropologist Jeffrey Schwartz summarizes the problem:

We are still in the dark about the origin of most major groups of organisms. They appear in the fossil record as Athena did from the head of Zeus -- full-blown and raring to go, in contradiction to Darwin's depiction of evolution as resulting from the gradual accumulation of countless infinitesimally minute variations. . ."98
This poses a major challenge to Darwinian evolution, including the view that all animals are related through common ancestry.
References:

[65.] Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species (1859), p. 292 (reprint, London: Penguin Group, 1985).

[66.] Ibid.........................."
=============================================================================================

Read It here: http://www.evolutionnews.org/2015/01/problem_5_abrup091141.html



Next time dont be quick to call what u dont know a "chimpazee"

naijadeyhia:



Good job bro. Goes to further buttress my point that scientists agree that the evolution theory is inconclusive

tempem:

DNA came by chance?! Hug?!

You are probably new!!

felixomor:


Lol
Why are u showing only fossils(i know why u did anyway), some people are trying to be smart.
please give a more detailed picture as u claim u have.
U showed us only bones and fossils. Please show us their full stature or rest.

felixomor:


So next time before you interprete what u dont know as "chimpazee" (Lol)

The diagram only highlights the absence of missing links in the fossil records, (which u r using as backup above)

Here is an explanatory culled text for the problem illustrated in that diagram:
=====================================================



"The earliest fossils of Homo, Homo rudolfensis and Homo erectus, are separated from Australopithecus by a large, unbridged gap. How can we explain this seeming saltation? Not having any fossils that can serve as missing links, we have to fall back on the time-honored method of historical science, the construction of a historical narrative.92
In light of such evidence, a paper in the Journal of Molecular Biology and Evolution called the appearance of Homo sapiens "a genetic revolution" where "no australopithecine species is obviously transitional."93 The lack of fossil evidence for this hypothesized transition is confirmed by Harvard paleoanthropologists Daniel E. Lieberman, David R. Pilbeam, and Richard W. Wrangham:

Of the various transitions that occurred during human evolution, the transition from Australopithecus to Homo was undoubtedly one of the most critical in its magnitude and consequences. As with many key evolutionary events, there is both good and bad news. First, the bad news is that many details of this transition are obscure because of the paucity of the fossil and archaeological records.94
As for the "good news," they still admit: "although we lack many details about exactly how, when, and where the transition occurred from Australopithecus to Homo, we have sufficient data from before and after the transition to make some inferences about the overall nature of key changes that did occur."95 In other words, the fossil record provides ape-like australopithecines ("before", and human-like Homo ("after", but not fossils documenting a transition between them. In the absence of intermediates, we're left with "inferences" of a transition based strictly upon the assumption of Darwinian evolution. One commentator proposed the evidence implies a "big bang theory" of the appearance of our genus Homo.96 This does not make for a compelling evolutionary account of human origins.97...........................
..
................................ the history of life shows a pattern of explosions where new fossil forms come into existence without clear evolutionary precursors. Evolutionary anthropologist Jeffrey Schwartz summarizes the problem:

We are still in the dark about the origin of most major groups of organisms. They appear in the fossil record as Athena did from the head of Zeus -- full-blown and raring to go, in contradiction to Darwin's depiction of evolution as resulting from the gradual accumulation of countless infinitesimally minute variations. . ."98
This poses a major challenge to Darwinian evolution, including the view that all animals are related through common ancestry.
References:

[65.] Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species (1859), p. 292 (reprint, London: Penguin Group, 1985).

[66.] Ibid.........................."
=============================================================================================

Read It here: http://www.evolutionnews.org/2015/01/problem_5_abrup091141.html

=============================================================================================



Next time dont be quick to call what u dont know a "chimpazee"

ValentineMary:


Francis Crick personal belief is his personal belief. I am also a biochemist and nobody teaches in a biochemistry class that our DNA has extraterrestrial origin. We just say "We don't know" but modern finding shows that there is a great probability it came by chance and I have explained why earlier on this thread.

It's like saying because Neil deGrasses Tyson said dark matter is a spirit (as a personal belief) then all man must follow him.

Teempakguy:
Then tell me the Species of the "Not Chimpanzee" nah . . . along with evidence of it being found in "millions."

And this in no way undermines evolution. the space between the discovered fossils of australopithecenes and homo habilis is around a million years, that's about 20 000+ generations. the missing link they're looking for would lie directly in the middle of that 20 000. literally any other fossils found would lean to either side. this has already been anticipated and accounted for. So, I don't see what the problem is.

I'm still waiting for the species name!

Teempakguy:
If an Atheist calls you guys "stupidd" or "Idiot" now, you will be complaining that Atheists are rude.

Bones and fossils are THE ONLY scientific evidence of prehistoric ancestors. those "full stature" shitt you guys keep posting on forums everywhere are just artist renditions. And the fact that you think that they are tenable as remotely plausible scientific evidence goes to further show that when you talk about evolution, you actually have NO Idea of what you're doing. That is the only picture you are going to get.

You still haven't said the species of that ape. I haven't forgotten. And you had better name the species and give evidence of it being found in "millions." or you've just shot yourself in the foot.

tempem:
You definitely instituted Evolution, then.

ValentineMary:


[i] eukaryotic cells like bacteria evolved from prokaryotic cells.

naijadeyhia:


It is true that the majority of mutations fall into the categories of either nearly neutral or harmful. Silent (neutral) mutations alter the DNA sequence but do not alter the amino acids encoded by the DNA sequence. This is due to built-in redundancy in the code (also referred to as degeneracy). For example, CCC, CCT, CCA, and CCG in the DNA all code for the amino acid glycine. In a hypothetical DNA sequence that has the sequence CCC if the last base is changed to any of the remaining DNA bases (T, A, or G), it will still code for the amino acid glycine. (However, there is some evidence that indicates that even these changes may not be completely neutral and may alter the stability of the mRNA, which serves as the intermediate between DNA and proteins).

What this means is that mutation cannot alter DNA and even when it tries to do that it is detrimental to the organism as 100 out of 100 times something would go wrong with it. So in general mutation is harmful and destructive.

Thus, one mutation on a DNA will result in the human being blind (no eyes), deaf, albino, deficient immune systems, have no teeth, etc

DeSepiero:

Bacteria are prokaryotes NOT eukaryotes!!

ValentineMary:

Really?

felixomor:


So who talked about atheism here now?
U see urself and ur blindness?

Was the thread not on evolution?
u see urself?

Please how else will u show that even ur knowledge on evolution is so outdated. Please update urself.
Pictures and images and even 3D animated models of the supposed stages of the evolution of homo sapiens have long been generated using outstanding graphics.
U call them "just artist renditions". i pity u.
How many of such "renditions" have u urself produced?
Nothing, Shameful.

u r there still showing us fossils?
Please go and study abeg, I no get ur time.

raphieMontella:

im yet to see a 3d model of evolution frm ape - man as u claimed...mr felix the evolutionist...
Animated models graphics bla bla bla..they all narrow down to art...
I doubt u knw the tru difference between a scientific hypothesis and a scientific theory

felixomor:


u r yet to see because u r outdated. "They all narrow down to art", indeed

Moreover is it not the same person who has problem with grammar?

Please go and study and do ur research before u bring another blind argument here.
I refuse to stoop so low ever again to argue in the face of confounding evidence, the type u do.

And after ur research, keep the knowledge to urself,
Afterall, i didnt mention u in the previous comment.

Adios

raphieMontella:

clearly u do not knw what art is..and im not suprised...
Jst negodu
common sense eludes by all means necessary

felixomor:


And behold, the grammar just keeps on crashing down..

I just hope am not infected yet.....

raphieMontella:

u have no sense of humour..
No sense of reasoning
no common sense...
Not even the slightest sign of sense has been spotted in u..
take ur time...slow and steady read that statement..if u studied literature or didnt..doesnt matter...when u finally understand its meaning...
Then raise ur hand and
give urself a very hot slap...
Ion have silly talk time...
Ps.senseless mammal

felixomor:

Please leave me alone na.
Lord of Gbagaun!!!

raphieMontella:

yessir...buhari has spoken
weyrey