Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The fact that generalizations of dates are given does not refute creation. Furthermore -- again -- there is simply no proof and by proof I mean actual evidence, that evolution occurred per the Darwinian model. Fossils and dates do not prove, and by proof I mean demonstrate or give concrete evidence that humans came about by means of evolution.
So you want the short, simplified version. Well, sorry, without links there is no room for a proper, evidenced explanation.
We are related to the soil. Aside from elements in the body, I know that from the Bible. Soil, however, doesn't think. Again -- have a good night.
You can give links -- just be able to explain what it says. So far from what I see in definitions, there is nothing but conjecture insofar as evolution goes.
There is voluminous evidence supporting evolution by natural mechanisms. Refusing to acknowledge, or even look at it, does not negate it.
How is your Bible any more authoritative than The Chronicles of Narnia?
There ya go, you're not willing to investigate it, that's what I see. I've "looked at it." I no longer believe the posits, the theory, DNA and cell structure in fact, would go against the theory. But why? Because anyone that says these things evolved (DNA and nucleotides) is simply going without proof, without evidence of the idea.
You may find out. Unfortunately, your idea of how life began is sad indeed. Now for the hopefully last time tonight -- have a good one, as the latest expression goes (evolved?).
OK, @John53, here's a bit more info, not just what I remember.
"Ever since researchers sequenced the chimp genome in 2005, they have known that humans share about 99% of our DNA with chimpanzees, making them our closest living relatives. What makes a bonobo different from a human? Our closest cousins, bonobos share 98.7 percent of our genetic makeup."
Short-Facts – Fresh ideas for every day › how-are-bonobos-and-humans-similar
I don't have to. it's clear. Since there is no real evidence, there is nothing to show. So please show me that the fossil record IS evidence of evolution. I'm willing to look at the evidence. Evolution is generally considered the slow progression (or evolution - change) from one organism to another.
You're right. Wrong link. Here's the right link -- sorry about that -- Bonobos Join Chimps as Closest Human Relatives | Science | AAAS[URL='https://www.science.org/content/article/bonobos-join-chimps-closest-human-relatives']Bonobos Join Chimps as Closest Human Relatives | Science | AAAS[/URL]
The lack of actual observation of humans having come from an "Unknown Common Ancestor" relating to bonobos, humans, gorillas, monkeys and look-alikes is truly the unknown. Now if someone wants to say similarity of DNA along with conjecture means evolution (obviously can't say it proves evolution) that's up to them. I no longer believe it, and for one reason in that, yes, there is no evidence that there was a "Common Ancestor," it is surmisal, and there is nothing to show that the missing or different DNA.
The point is that the claim that there is a great similarity of DNA between the organisms does not mean evolution, and it does not mean that bonobos, gorillas, and humans evolved from an "Unknown Commoin Ancestor," otherwise known as the UCA. Anyway, that's it for now, time is marching ? on. Getting late. Good night.
We don't need a direct observation to know something. Where did you get that idea from? Pluto's orbit was calculated shortly after it was first observed, we do not need a full orbit to know how long it takes to get around the Sun.
