Does anyone believe in Evolution anymore?

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Once again, I look at the total evidence, not just the fossil record. The fossil record is certainly enough to prove that species change over time, though. But genetics provides much more information and an ability to model evolutionary changes and thereby to test our ideas in detail.

So, why do you think the fossil record does NOT prove that biological species change over time?

You're wasting your time. He's been presented with evidence, he won't even look at it. He's solidly in ad hoc rationalisation/hand wave territory now. There's no point attempting intellectually honest discussion with the intellectually dishonest.

 

[ratiocinator]

You have been deceived into thinking that fossil records of extinct creatures prove evolution. extinction does not equal evolution.

Nobody says it does.

It appears you have been deceived about the evidence for evolution.

 

[LightofTruth]

That's as stupid as saying "my grandparents were humans so they can't be Americans".

Talk about stupid! That's a false analogy. All nationalities of people are humans.

 

[Polymath257]

You're wasting your time. He's been presented with evidence, he won't even look at it. He's solidly in ad hoc rationalisation/hand wave territory now. There's no point attempting intellectually honest discussion with the intellectually dishonest.

At least part of the problem (and it is a very common problem) is that you need some basic knowledge to even understand the evidence. If you think that 'ape' represents a species, there is a lack of basic knowledge that prevents going further.

There is also the strange wording in how evolution is described. I doubt any scientist would use the word 'morph' to describe evolutionary change, but it seems to be common among creationists. I'm not exactly sure what that means about how they envision evolution, but it certainly shows they aren't thinking about it in the same way as the scientists.

Maybe, just maybe, if we can get them to realize their ideas about evolution are not correct descriptions of the actual theory of evolution, we might be able to make a little progress.

Maybe?

 

[ratiocinator]

All nationalities of people are humans.

...and all humans are apes.

 

[Polymath257]

Talk about stupid! That's a false analogy. All nationalities of people are humans.

Precisely the point. And all humans are apes.

 

[LightofTruth]

Nobody says it does.

It appears you have been deceived about the evidence for evolution.

Nope. The idea of evolution suggests that adaption plays the major role in extinction. It says that eventually a certain type of "ape" will become extinct. Like the "ape" who gradually began to walk upright no longer exists.

 

[LightofTruth]

...and all humans are apes.

assumption.

 

[LightofTruth]

Precisely the point. And all humans are apes.

Assumption.

 

[LightofTruth]

No one claims it does. For a subject you seem to feel so strongly about, you sure are ignorant.

certainly they do. Scientist suggest that bones of extinct ape-like creature MAY have been what we looked like.

 

[LightofTruth]

Once again, I look at the total evidence, not just the fossil record. The fossil record is certainly enough to prove that species change over time, though. But genetics provides much more information and an ability to model evolutionary changes and thereby to test our ideas in detail.

Nobody has said that *extinction* proves evolution. What proves evolution is how the species change from one period of time to another.

So, why do you think the fossil record does NOT prove that biological species change over time?

How do fossils records show change over time?

 

[LightofTruth]

You're wasting your time. He's been presented with evidence, he won't even look at it. He's solidly in ad hoc rationalisation/hand wave territory now. There's no point attempting intellectually honest discussion with the intellectually dishonest.

Good, go away. And when/if you grow up come back.

 

[Polymath257]

Nope. The idea of evolution suggests that adaption plays the major role in extinction. It says that eventually a certain type of "ape" will become extinct. Like the "ape" who gradually began to walk upright no longer exists.

OK, your understanding of what the theory of evolution says is completely wrong.

It is because the population of apes that first started walking *didn't* go extinct that they could evolve into humans. The ones that went extinct don't have any descendants today.

 

[Polymath257]

How do fossils records show change over time?

By showing the species that existed at different times. Duh. We can determine the ages of the remains and look at the species that exist at a given time and see how the range of species changed over time.

Furthermore, we always find similar species just before any given species, which shows that the new species derived from the older one. Remember this happens in all lines and isn't a one-time thing.

 

[Polymath257]

certainly they do. Scientist suggest that bones of extinct ape-like creature MAY have been what we looked like.

That is the standard scientific caution. It is part of the culture of science to propose tentative answers at first so that other ideas can be proposed and discussed. There is *always* the awareness that some aspects of any idea could be right and some aspects could be wrong.

Don't get fooled by this use of language though. When a scientists says 'may', they typically mean 'I am sure more than 95% that this happened' and if they say that 'it seems that..', they typically mean that the probability is over 99%.

 

[Polymath257]

Assumption.

Nope. Comparative anatomy as used to classify species. We *are* apes.

 

[LightofTruth]

OK, your understanding of what the theory of evolution says is completely wrong.

It is because the population of apes that first started walking *didn't* go extinct that they could evolve into humans. The ones that went extinct don't have any descendants today.

The idea that there was a population of apes that first started walking is wrong.

 

[ratiocinator]

The idea that there was a population of apes that first started walking is wrong.

How do you know? You seem to know absolutely nothing about evolution or the evidence that supports it. You are, very obviously, speaking from a position of ignorance.

 

[Polymath257]

The idea that there was a population of apes that first started walking is wrong.

Do you think apes have always been walking?

Consider:
Australopithecus africanus or afarensis.

Definitely apes and also walked upright.

 

[LightofTruth]

How do you know? You seem to know absolutely nothing about evolution or the evidence that supports it. You are, very obviously, speaking from a position of ignorance.

How do you know?