₦airaland Forum

elated177:
Your problem is copy and paste.

Why did you refuse to acknowledge the evidence presented already by me?

What is science?

Stop asking me useless questions and just provide an evidence we can test.

Which one is what's science?

Lol, you need to totally delete most of the active part of your brain to be a chosen member

gentleman82:
Do you even understand what evolution is all about. All this your points shows how ignorant you are . Evolution is taught to be the metamorphosis of a full grow orgasm from one independent specie to become another non existent being over time, which in a sense and pragmatism is impossible. Even clone organism don't survive to bear offsprings.

Even after editing your post, you still cannot spell "species" correctly. Its a sign that you didn't learn anything in biology.

There's nothing like "specie" in biology, it's called "species" whether singular or plural.

gentleman82:
Do you even understand what evolution is all about. All this your points shows how ignorant you are . Evolution is taught to be the metamorphosis of a full grow orgasm from one independent specie to become another non existent being over time.

Evolution is taught to be metamorphosis? Really? Like a a grown dog turning into a kind of lion we have never seen before?

Did you say orgasm?

Where did you see that? Which school taught you that?

Don't you think it's wise to read up on the topic? It won't take more than 20 minutes

gentleman82:
Do you even understand what evolution is all about. All this your points shows how ignorant you are .

Well, I think you are the person who doesn't understand evolution here.

Golan007:
Na wa o.

The thing tire me my brother.

How can we genuinely invest in education, especially science in this country? We have very scientifically illiterate populace hence why we have major setbacks developing.

You can imagine knd of questions one get from people who supposedly did biology in secondary school.

Buke26:
If humans evolved from ape then why hasn't an ape evolve to human since then? Or for the past 100 hundreds of years of human history?

Humans didn't evolve from apes, humans are apes. Evolution is not a deliberate process and it's aimless.
It's purpose is not to make sure that all apes evolve into humans.
Did you pass biology in SSCE?

DaInferno:
same as every other religiously illiterate person. If revolution truly exists, why haven't humans evolved further, why are the sticked in what we call homo sapiens?

if you are a good reader, you will have seen the answer to this on this thread, but because you don't read you keep asking an already answered question. Carefully read through the thread, you won't die if you do that.

And two, did you create a new term in biology called "revolution"?

DaInferno:
I choose the bible story over this crap

It's understandable.
Every scientifically illiterate person always choose religion over facts. Evolution is true whether or not you choose it over the Bible

gentleman82:
Deep within you , you know you are talking rubbish that makes no sense. A simple question as to why did apes , monkey , baboons etc have stopped evolving for thousands of years can not be answered . why did evolution stop?

who said they have stopped evolving?
How did you reach this conclusion?

elated177:
Who is arguing with you? You think I am here to convince you and your kind? I am asserting the facts and whether you accept them or not is totally irrelevant. Go your way. You are not looking for any evidence.

I'm looking for evidence, you cannot provide it. If there is evidence for god, atheist will not exist. Science would have seen it

LordTosinJ:
First of all,
GRAVITY IS A LAW.

Secondly, you are not ready for any reasonable discussion. Bye.

Well, I am very interested in a discussion with some who doesnt know that newtonian law of gravity has been superceded by Albert Einstein theory of gravity since the early 1900s, also known as the theory of general relativity.

I don't know what you really want to discuss if you are ignorant of this. You re still stuck in 1800 science and you are arrogantly stuck to it. Little wonder you are a creationist

gabrielto:
All these long talk.


You say we evolved from apes and chimps ?


And they are still apes and chimps in the zoo and jungle
What happened to them? Slow transformation
Did they miss the evolution process or they hid under the earth when evolution was taking place. Sometimes common sense is not common

We have been lied to from birth it’s time we open our eyes and don’t let postulated theories confuse us

we didn't evolve from apes, we are apes.
Try and read the articles, you won't die. Reading cures ignorance

LordTosinJ:
Looool...
Evolution is only a theory.
It is not a fact or a scientific law.

I no know why Op carry am for head like gala sausage rolls

Well, gravity is just a theory, try falling from your balcony

Cell theory is also a theory, I can see cells under the microscope.

Atomic theory is also a theory but that's what's ensuring that you can read my messages here.

Maybe you are just scientifically illiterate and you presume that a scientific theory is same as a layman's definition of a theory.

topcatking:
In your desperate bid to portray how "well-read" you are, all you did was display how "ill-bred" you are.

It's quite obvious you assume you are smart and that you think deep, unfortunately you are as shallow as stagnating water in a soup bowl.


Even your betters...the ones who postulated the theory of evolution ..Darwin et al arrived at the conclusion that evolution remains a myth.

If you still do not recognise "deliberate and intelligent design" in the "Creation " of humanity, then, my obnoxious friend, your case is hopeless.

A little knowledge is a dangerous thing,
So drink deep , of the pierian spring.

Study. Observe and "think". (It's not illegal yet.)

I'm waiting for the evidence for intelligent design in relation to HIV emergence, drug resistance, emergence of sarscov 2, lactose intolerance, lack of some cytochrome p450 enzymes in mongoloid race, presence of extinct species, hereditary, transitional fossil, E coli experiment etc.

If you can make sense out of that using creation and intelligent design, I will change my mind on evolution.

Intelligent design lol . Even the inventor of the term "Michael Behe" couldn't defend his mechanism "irreducible complexity" during the Kansas school board law case. He was humiliated in court and he had to shamefully agree before the judge that there's no evidence for intelligent design after biologists from all over America drilled him, which lead to the removal of that topic from Kansas school board biology textbooks.

I do not even think you are smart enough to even discuss this topic. I'm seriously looking for one creationist sound enough to dig deep into biology to defend creationism on nairaland. It's not a coincidence that nothing about intelligent design ever make peer reviewed papers, because it's not just scientific, it's total gibberish and a way of inserting religion beliefs into science

SEGLIZ:
reading is the issue but believing this things remain another. evolution is like change with no termination but the ape theory stop evolving when it attain human status.

human remains an entity of its own and not a byproduct of another. human existence is beyond what science can proof, more reason science keeps making new discovery about human daily.

Nope, reading is the issue. No one studies evolution and understands it then doubt it. You don't have to believe it when you understand it because you will see the evduecne everyday, hour and minutes of your life.
I think you need to calm down, read it, ask genuine questions to understand it. Firstly, unlearn all the things you have been taught in your church or mosques, they aren't a true reflection of facts.
Science is hard, that's why alot of people don't really understand it, science it's not what you read on articles and get once. It is what you have to get a sound background in to understand. It's more difficult if you had a bad biology teacher in your secondary school.

You have already shown that you do not know biology the moment you inferred that Humans are not apes. The second topic in ss1 biology "taxonomy" already treated that.

SEGLIZ:
science says human are higher animals yet science said human evolved from one of the lesser animals. confusing.

human evolved from apes yet the ape specie that produce man is still in existence. another mind bugging thought.

Humans didn't evolve from apes, humans are apes.
The ape species humans evolved from are extinct. Look up and make research, you won't die if you read

projectpro:
Op we may have striking similarities but the truth still remains that humans didn't evolve from it.

We did, that's what all evidence says. Included transitional fossils, same protein and genes, same metabolism, receptors and every form of biochemical component. It will be very ridiculous after seeing all these to say we didn't evolve because some people don't like it. We are not gaining anything from lying about evolution.
We are telling you what we are seeing because we have been trained for several years to study these things, it's up to you to accept reality or deny it

SpiritLifeNG:
where is your reference?

The reference is literally in the post. Did you read it at all?

How can you understand anything if you can't even read my post?

iLoveYouToo:
HOW COME WE HAVE NOT EVOLVED FROM THE WAY WE ARE CURRENTLY?

Well, we are evolving but rather slowly. The reason we are evolving slowly is because we have developed various mechanism to keep genes that natural selection would have taken Alive via medicine, engineering and many other innovations. For example, if we didn't develop condoms and medicine surpress HIV infection, natural selection would have taken everyone with HIV susceptibility gene and left those with HIV resistant genes, which is less than 1% of current Huamns population, other animals do not have this advantage hence you can swiftly observe evolution occur in their population. They evolutionary trend would have shifted. However,, here are some evidence for evolution currently occruing withing human race:

Genetic studies have demonstrated that humans are still evolving. To investigate which genes are undergoing natural selection, researchers looked into the data produced by the International HapMap Project and the 1000 Genomes Project.

A catalogue of human genetic variation
The International HapMap and 1000 Genomes Projects both aimed to catalogue genetic variation in DNA samples taken from individual humans from across the world.

The majority of the catalogued human variation is characterised by single base changes, referred to as single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). The location and frequency of these changes allows us to provide a list of regions in the human genome where genetic variation is common. Patterns of reduced variation help scientists to identify genes that may have recently been positively selected for by natural selection.

How are genetic variants found?

When genetic variants give us a particular advantage and improve our fitness they are more likely to be passed onto future generations.

Genetic variants can be found by comparing the genomes of different people and looking to see where there are differences in the DNA sequence and where the genes are located in their genomes. When genetic variants confer a particular advantage and improve our fitness they are more likely to survive and be passed onto future generations, thus becoming more common in a population. When this happens, a pattern or 'signature' can be found in the genomes of the population. This is because, as a genetic variant starts to spread through a population, it doesn’t come alone but brings with it some nearby genetic ‘passengers’. These passengers are bits of DNA that are located on either side of the advantageous variant. So, if scientists find this signature in lots of genomes in a population, it is one of the first signs that natural selection could be operating. It suggests that they all stem from a common ancestor and have therefore inherited the same pattern of genetic variation.

If the genomes of two populations are found to be very different, it could be a sign that selection has occurred in one population, but not the other. As the advantageous gene starts to become more common, it can influence which other genes are expressed and even reduce the overall level of genetic variation in the surrounding area of the genome, making it stand out.

Unfortunately, even in the absence of selection, any of these patterns can turn up by chance, especially when the whole genome is examined. To make things more complicated, events such as population expansion can mimic some of the same effects. There is no perfect way to recognise where selection has occurred, but we sometimes get a very strong hint.

Scientists have found that the majority of genes that have undergone recent evolution are associated with smell, reproduction, brain development, skin pigmentation and immunity? against pathogens.

Lactose tolerance
In most parts of the world, adults are unable to digest the lactose sugar in milk.

One example of recent natural selection in humans involves the ability to tolerate the sugar, lactose, in milk. In most parts of the world, adults are unable to drink milk because their body switches off the intestinal production of lactase, an enzyme that digests the sugar in the milk, after weaning. As these people cannot digest the lactose sugar they suffer symptoms including bloating, abdominal cramps, flatulence, diarrhoea, nausea, or vomiting.

Yet, more than 70 per cent of European adults can quite happily drink milk. This is because they carry a regulatory change in the region of DNA that controls the expression of the gene that codes for lactase. This DNA change enables the lactase gene to be switched on and lactase production to continue, even after weaning. This genetic change appears to have happened between 5,000 and 10,000 years ago, which is around the same time domestication of milk-producing farm animals, such as cows, was established in Europe.

This suggests that being able to drink milk into adulthood provided a strong evolutionary advantage in Europe. This may be because sun exposure was much lower in Europe and people were in greater need of the vitamin D found in cow’s milk. Or it may be because cow’s milk provides a much safer and cleaner alternative to drinking water that may cause disease. Milk may also have prevented death from starvation when crops failed and food was scarce. Those who could not tolerate lactose would die of starvation, while those who could tolerate lactose would survive.

Whatever the reason, a strong selection pressure must have favoured those people whose lactase gene remained switched on. This variant of the lactase gene is so common in Europeans that we now consider lactose intolerance to be a health condition, rather than the natural process that it is.

Infectious disease
“People who are able to survive infections are more likely to pass on their genes to their offspring.

The strongest evolutionary pressure of all comes from infectious diseases. Millions of people die from infectious diseases each year, particularly in the poorer regions of the world. People who are able to survive infections are more likely to pass on their genes to their offspring. However, genes that provide an advantage against one disease may not provide an advantage when faced with another.

The Caspase-12 gene

When infectious diseases became more common in human populations, perhaps because populations grew in size and pathogens were able to spread more rapidly, people with a genetic advantage were more likely to survive and reproduce. As a result, these genetic advantages were selected for, allowing more people to survive and fight disease. In some cases, a genetic advantage resulted from losing the full activity of a gene.

A good example of this is the caspase-12 gene. Caspase-12 works as a part of our immune system, responding specifically to bacterial infection.

“It was suggested that the caspase-12 gene was gradually inactivated in the human population because the active gene can result in a poorer response to bacterial infection.

In a study carried out by researchers at the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute in 2005, it was suggested that the caspase-12 gene was gradually inactivated in the human population because the active gene can result in a poorer response to bacterial infection. People with fully functional caspase-12 were at a much higher risk of a fatal bacterial infection (sepsis) if bacteria entered the bloodstream, than people with the inactive version of the gene.

Before improved hygiene and antibiotics, survival of severe sepsis would have been a strong selective force for the inactive gene, which would have been greatly favoured. Today, people with two copies of the inactive gene are eight times more likely to escape severe sepsis if suffering with an infectious disease and three times more likely to survive.

But the study leaves us with a key question. If it is so good to have the inactive gene, why did our ancestors have an active form in the first place? It may be because in some areas of the world having the active gene carries an equal advantage to carrying the inactive gene in other areas of the world. What is clear however, is that all organisms are dynamic and will continue to adapt to their unique environments to continue being successful. In short, we are still evolving.

HIV susceptibility

It was found that women with a certain combination of variants were better at clearing HIV infection than others.

HIV is a modern-day driving force for human evolution. In certain parts of South Africa, nearly half of women are infected with the virus. In a study in Durban, Dr Philip Goulder and colleagues from the University of Oxford found that women with a certain combination of variants in a human leukocyte antigen (HLA-B27) were better at clearing HIV infection than those with the HLA-A or HLA-C genetic subtypes. HLAs, produced by the major histocompatibility complex (MHC), are by far the most variable region of the human genome, and are an essential part of the immune system. Infected mothers with HIV-protective HLA-B genes were more likely to survive HIV infection and pass on these genes to their children.

It has been proposed that the relatively low level of HIV in Western Europe is aided by a common variation in a co-receptor for the HIV virus particle (CCR5). This variant protects people almost completely against HIV and is found in 13 per cent of Europeans. However it is extremely rare in other populations around the world, including Africans. The origin of the variant in humans dates back thousands of years ago, well before the AIDS epidemic? which only dates from the late 1970s. It is therefore likely that this variant may have been selected because it protects against other viral or bacterial infections.

thesicilian:
Nobody is denying religion, what that statement meant was that religion is not the key point here. If all evidence supports a deliberate intelligent design as against evolutionary development, then the fact that this also aligns with the views of religion doesn't take away any of the merits.

Show me the evidence that supports intelligent design.
Link those evidence to why we have fossil records, new species emerging in recent years, antibiotic resistance, antimalaria resistance, new breeds of animals, coronavirus, emergence of HIV in 1980s. If you secceessfully connect intelligent design of life to this without commiting the fallacy of apealling to ignorance. I will change my mind

When I read, I do so with the intent to understand and make independent analysis. That is what probably differentiates me from many of you who swallow everything hook line and sinker because it was written by a so called theoretical scientist somewhere.

But you are pretty cool with swallowing Tha God made you from sand and ribs. So much for a very informed person

The very same line of argument of those who support religion: there's no other way to make sense out of it unless they were created deliberately by a supreme being. You see the problem now?

I'm not arguing with you, you are arguing with evidence because the evidence disputes your relgious beliefs. Which you have not disputed.

you still don't get the point. And that's probably because you read to just regurgitate to your none-the-wiser victims/readers. Before it was disproved Lamarck was seen as a genius because of his brilliant, infallible theory. It's the same way every single "evidence" in support of evolution keeps failing to hold up to standards everyday. But you won't see it yet though, until a scientist from Oxford or Yale writes it out for you to read.

once again, lamarackian model is stale, it's literally in your modern biology textbook for secondary school student that it's stale. I wonder why you are so stuck in the past

This is neither a acknowledgement nor a denial. Remember, one cannot prove a negative. So the onus is on you to prove that evolution is indeed ongoing as we speak.
Who knows, maybe the lizards will turn to snakes in the nearest future, or antelopes to kangaroos.

There's no negative to prove here, the evidence says that we evolved from prehistoric apes and that's what evidence says, it does not respect your feelings. If you don't like the evidence you can develop a scientific method to disprove it, I'm sure you will win the novel prize for it

topcatking:
Kids these days....

Well...i promise you, you will "grow" out of this phase and know better.

Have a great life.

Growing up is the ability to follow evidence where it leads irrespective of what your prejudice, religous beliefs and population says.
This is why I respect catholic church and the church of England, irrespective of their faith, they follow evidence where it leads hence accept evolution but only uneducated religious literalists who are starved of proper educational infrastructure like in Africa still have a problems with glaring evidence.

I got to tell you to grow up like those churches. Evidence doesn't care what you believe in

thesicilian:
It's not about religion sir, there's just no evidence to support evolution.

anything that has to do with God is religion and there's no need living in denial of that

Let's forget all the grammar and scientific jargons and reason things out ourselves. Every single "fact" being put forward till date to support evolution is assumption at best.

no they are not, you don't care to read them or maybe you don't understand science, if you do you would have pointed to the assumptions in my post and counter them with evidence but suspect that you didn't even read my posts. You are typical relgious person who becomes insecure whenever he hears evolution. Knowing fully well that if evolution is true then you religion is most likely a lie.

The fact that fossils resemble one another does not mean that one evolved from the other. They keep saying that humans evolved from apes millions of years ago yet there are still apes till date that have not evolved yet. Why is that so?

There's no other way to make sense out of it unless that they evolved. Unless you want to insert magic and God into it

They say giraffes have long necks because they stretch them to eat leaves from tall shrubs/trees, are they the only animals that try to do so? Isn't it more likely that giraffes eat leaves from tall trees simply because they have long necks?

You are ignorant of evolution sir, this is lamarckian model of evolution and it has been disproven like 200 years ago. I can't believe you are still stuck in 1800s

If evolution evolved millions of years ago, why is it no longer occuring today? Why have the humans not evolved into something else?

Who says evolution is not happening?
Where did you hear that from?
Which scientist said that

thesicilian:
Human beings were created separately by God in His own image, we did not evolve from apes

I respect your religion but that's not why evidence says and we cannot say otherwise because your religion does not like it

topcatking:
Well, now that you have confirmed that you are an ape and a d3scendant of monkeys... (no insult, I'm just paraphrasing your belief). Here's a quick question for you:

Well, you simply didn't read anything I posted, this is evidence that you didn't. Or maybe you did but couldn't comprehend it

Humanity (and indeed the human body) has been as is for thousands of years ... Why has "your" evolution stalled/stopped?

Evidence found in the geological timeline inform of fossil and anatomical and DNA evidence shows that the oldest human fossil is just 300,000 years and it doesn't seem like it was created since it looks so similar to other apes in characteristics. Evidence is evidence whether or not you don't like it

One would postulate that we would have evolved physical mechanisms to cope with the environment , to fly... to protect against the sun...to generally be more....optimised for life on the planet, alas... these are pipe dreams.

this is a confused post. Maybe made up on a beer paloir gist

So...my gorilla-friend, I think you should go back to your studies, apply your mind, and all will be revealed.

Peace.

I'm not a gorrila, we both and apes but not gorrila.

It doesn't matter if you like how it sounds, evidence doesn't respect your feelings

The first comprehensive comparison of the genetic blueprints of humans and chimpanzees shows our closest living relatives share perfect identity with 96 percent of our DNA sequence, an international research consortium reported today.

In a paper published in the Sept. 1 issue of the journal Nature, the Chimpanzee Sequencing and Analysis Consortium, which is supported in part by the National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI), one of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), describes its landmark analysis comparing the genome of the chimp (Pan troglodytes) with that of human (Homo sapiens).

"The sequencing of the chimp genome is a historic achievement that is destined to lead to many more exciting discoveries with implications for human health," said NHGRI Director Francis S. Collins, M.D., Ph.D. "As we build upon the foundation laid by the Human Genome Project, it's become clear that comparing the human genome with the genomes of other organisms is an enormously powerful tool for understanding our own biology."

The chimp sequence draft represents the first non-human primate genome and the fourth mammalian genome described in a major scientific publication. A draft of the human genome sequence was published in February 2001, a draft of the mouse genome sequence was published in December 2002 and a draft of the rat sequence was published in March 2004. The essentially complete human sequence was published in October 2004.

"As our closest living evolutionary relatives, chimpanzees are especially suited to teach us about ourselves," said the study's senior author, Robert Waterston, M.D., Ph.D., chair of the Department of Genome Sciences of the University of Washington School of Medicine in Seattle. "We still do not have in our hands the answer to a most fundamental question: What makes us human? But this genomic comparison dramatically narrows the search for the key biological differences between the species."

The 67 researchers who took part in the Chimp Sequencing and Analysis Consortium share authorship of the Nature paper. Most of the work of sequencing and assembling the chimp genome was done at the Broad Institute of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass., and the Washington University School of Medicine in Saint Louis. In addition to those centers, the consortium included researchers from institutions elsewhere in the United States, as well as Israel, Italy, Germany and Spain.

The DNA used to sequence the chimp genome came from the blood of a male chimpanzee named Clint at the Yerkes National Primate Research Center in Atlanta. Clint died last year from heart failure at the relatively young age of 24, but two cell lines from the primate have been preserved at the Coriell Institute for Medical Research in Camden, N.J.

Contrary to the assumption many people have, it has not been a purely linear process. There have been many branches that died out leaving only the one that led to today’s humankind. This includes the Denisovans, Neaderthals and possibly other hominids capable of interbreeding with Homo sapiens sapiens.


Secondly, the continued comments about the “missing link” still missing. Anyone who asks this question is clearly ignorant of evolution as a whole and to try and explain how they are wrong will prove to be a waste of time. To date, I have never had anyone admit I changed their mind and they understood what I was saying and trying to demonstrate.

Thirdly, the fact that we have been able to adapt to occupy virtually every corner of the planet.

And lastly, our inherent need to create religion much to the detriment of humankind as a whole. As if tribalism and competition for resources (including women [sorry]) wasn’t enough we create systems that justify unspeakable actions and behaviors that normally one wouldn’t take or do if left to their own accord.

A tail interferes with the ability to walk upright. That is why hominids AND apes AND the monkeys and prosimians that more often move in an upright posture all have reduced or absent tails.

The genetic basis of tail-loss evolution in humans and apes
NYU researchers at the Tandon School of Engineering and the Grossman School of Medicine are trying to understand an age-old question that bedeviled most of us a
https://www.newswise.com/articles/the-genetic-basis-of-tail-loss-evolution-in-humans-and-apes
The sort of foot used to move around in trees is definitely not anything like the foot used to run on the ground. I mean, look:

The fossil record is pretty much full of gradual changes.

let’s just take a very small set of great ape fossils over the past several million years.


As you can see each skull looks fairly similar to the ones next to it and not so similar to ones further away.. They are in chronological order from several million years ago through today. This is an extremely smooth transitional process ending in areas of the species Homo Sapiens.

This pattern exists in all fossil records. If it did not exist, that would present a problem for evolution. That’s why a fossil of a Precambrian rabbit or a dragon would be a serious challenge to evolution. No such challenge has ever been found.

Hismasterpiece:
The same God that spiritually illeterate people deny..

There's no evidence for spiritual.
Show me if you have any

Obafavour:
Yeah unknown man bleeped your mom and give birth to you.

Atleast not a god that doednt exist

Obafavour:
Joseph never complained to you apes, that his wife was carrying the child of God.

Joseph was a foool, Just like people who believed this story.
So if you wife comes back home with a baby you didn't put there and tells you thr holy spirit did it, then you will take thay story. You just have to be the biggest idiott in history to accept that a spirt fucccked your wife