Darwin's Illusion

[YoursTrue]

I have no idea what else to discuss with you. Do you like auto racing? What are your thoughts on muscle cars?

Is it wrong to laugh? Actually that was the first good laugh I've had tonight. (In a good way.) Thanks! I like that. No, I don't think I like muscle cars, or auto racing anyway.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

The best branch I'd say.

I was thinking about that statement roughly paraphrased as "millions of years passed chimpanzees". That isn't accurate. We evolved along with chimpanzees. What we are passed by millions of years is the divergence that took place leading to humans and chimpanzees.

And yes, I think that many think that percent difference between two different genomes is that one has a few percent more DNA than the other as if one or the other lost some. But if you have a million dollars in pennies and someone else a million dollars in ones, you have a difference in what each has but it comes to the same amount of money. Not a great analogy, but it still fits.

It could be that one is also larger, but it is about what is shared and what is different. Each genome could have the exact same number of base pairs and be different from each other by some percentage.

It is just one more example of how confused people try to find any reason to reject the scientific findings without regard to the validity of the findings.

 

[YoursTrue]

The best branch I'd say.

I was thinking about that statement roughly paraphrased as "millions of years passed chimpanzees". That isn't accurate. We evolved along with chimpanzees. What we are passed by millions of years is the divergence that took place leading to humans and chimpanzees.

"We evolved along with chimpanzees"?? Got any backup for that belief?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Is it wrong to laugh? Actually that was the first good laugh I've had tonight. (In a good way.) Thanks! I like that. No, I don't think I like muscle cars, or auto racing anyway.

You may laugh about it, but it just makes me sad to see a rejection of valid science for no valid reason.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

"We evolved along with chimpanzees"?? Got any backup for that belief?

Not interested in hearing more about how apes are still apes or whatever. Thanks anyway.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Yup. I think it would be fair to say that evolution only stops at extinction.

Certainly it stops with the group that went extinct. But for those species that survive, think of the possibilities. Our remote ancestors would have evolved much differently had dinosaurs not been educated so significantly on the fact of near earth objects.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

"We evolved along with chimpanzees"?? Got any backup for that belief?

You already told me and everyone else reading that you reject all of this. What other point would there be to continue it unless you have some ulterior motive that was never about a rational discussion of science. Is that what you are saying?

 

[YoursTrue]

And yes, I think that many think that percent difference between two different genomes is that one has a few percent more DNA than the other as if one or the other lost some. But if you have a million dollars in pennies and someone else a million dollars in ones, you have a difference in what each has but it comes to the same amount of money. Not a great analogy, but it still fits.

It could be that one is also larger, but it is about what is shared and what is different. Each genome could have the exact same number of base pairs and be different from each other by some percentage.

It is just one more example of how confused people try to find any reason to reject the scientific findings without regard to the validity of the findings.

Obviously I'm not a scientist. I'm learning from you and a few others here sometimes. So according to the timeline of apes on the 'branch,' what was the earliest dna in the first type of ape, and how did it differ from the next one on the branch timeline?

 

[YoursTrue]

You already told me and everyone else reading that you reject all of this. What other point would there be to continue it unless you have some ulterior motive that was never about a rational discussion of science. Is that what you are saying?

Well, you might present some thought from science, of course, with details, showing that humans evolved from chimpanzees.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Yup. I think it would be fair to say that evolution only stops at extinction.

How diabolical are you? You aren't suggesting we end this debate about common ancestry by making chimps extinct are you? How would we make Tarzan movies?

 

[YoursTrue]

Not interested in hearing more about how apes are still apes or whatever. Thanks anyway.

I'm not saying that "apes are still apes," but rather that chimpanzees are still chimpanzees and bugs are still bugs.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Well, you might present some thought from science, of course, with details, showing that humans evolved from chimpanzees.

Humans did not evolve from chimpanzees. Are you descended from your cousins? We share a common ancestor with chimpanzees just as you share a common ancestor with your cousins.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I'm not saying that "apes are still apes," but rather that chimpanzees are still chimpanzees and bugs are still bugs.

Yep, you are still an ape.

It is a good thing that we did not descend from chimpanzees because if we did then you would be a chimp.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Well, you might present some thought from science, of course, with details, showing that humans evolved from chimpanzees.

You've said you reject the science. That doesn't leave anything to discuss. Doesn't give anyone any reason to discuss. Doesn't provide any reason for your remaining in the discussion other than perhaps secret reasons that are of no interest to me. The very secretive nature of which goes against what I believe, so I couldn't possible see maintaining something that is against my beliefs as well as my understanding of science.

 

[YoursTrue]

You may laugh about it, but it just makes me sad to see a rejection of valid science for no valid reason.

The reason is that some things cannot be "proved." Again, I do believe that vaccines can work. And lab tests can show various aspects of one's health. But where is the proof that humans evolved along with chimpanzees? Oh yes, I drive regularly. I like that some cars use less gasoline than others. I don't like that the atmosphere is being ruined.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Well, you might present some thought from science, of course, with details, showing that humans evolved from chimpanzees.

Why would I support a claim I never made?

Seriously, what other reason do you have to remain in this discussion after rejecting so publicly?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

The reason is that some things cannot be "proved." Again, I do believe that vaccines can work. And lab tests can show various aspects of one's health. But where is the proof that humans evolved along with chimpanzees? Oh yes, I drive regularly. I like that some cars use less gasoline than others. I don't like that the atmosphere is being ruined.

But why are you interested in maintaining a discussion about a subject that you repeatedly claim you reject? Why is that?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Humans did not evolve from chimpanzees. Are you descended from your cousins? We share a common ancestor with chimpanzees just as you share a common ancestor with your cousins.

I'm lost. Who said that humans evolved from chimpanzees? That shouldn't even be something we have to clarify. And yet, here we are.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Yep, you are still an ape.

It is a good thing that we did not descend from chimpanzees because if we did then you would be a chimp.

Clearly apes are still apes and chimpanzees are still chimpanzees. The significance of which has never been revealed. It's a secret. Don't repeat it.

 

[YoursTrue]

You've said you reject the science. That doesn't leave anything to discuss. Doesn't give anyone any reason to discuss. Doesn't provide any reason for your remaining in the discussion other than perhaps secret reasons that are of no interest to me. The very secretive nature of which goes against what I believe, so I couldn't possible see maintaining something that is against my beliefs as well as my understanding of science.

I believe I have expressed myself explicitly. I reject certain aspects of the dating process and its application. I do not reject all science. And so far from the posts here from those who believe the theory of evolution as posited by the many, I see no proof. There is proof, however, of the effectiveness of smallpox or polio vaccines.