Does evolution have a purpose?

[YoursTrue]

Trivial nonsense and nothing to the subject at hand. We do have detailed objective verifiable evidence on the evolution of shrimp. Observations and intelligence based on objective verifiable evidence is a human thing, you know science.

A human thing. Glad you mentioned it. Not a gorilla thing.

 

[YoursTrue]

Try what appears to be 6,000,000 or so years, according to the fossil evidence and genome testing. Hey, that's even older than I am!

I've read that in its present state, the formation of man is about 70,000 years. Of course, evolution would have it that homo sapiens evolved from whoever over much more time than that. Nevertheless, the idea that writing began only a few thousand years ago can be explained away -- but under frivolous circumstances as far as I am concerned. People have been put to death for crimes they did not commit. The juries decided they were guilty, based on evidence presented. It means that the presumptions of man evolving from some unknown common ancestor is based on frivolous and contested presumptions.

 

[YoursTrue]

Try what appears to be 6,000,000 or so years, according to the fossil evidence and genome testing. Hey, that's even older than I am!

Really, it is? Not according to some religious believers -- saying that your "soul" transferred from organism to organism. Do you even know? (Betcha don't... )

 

[YoursTrue]

Argument from personal incredulity?
Mankind didn't "evolve to its present state." The Romans were just as clever as we. So were the cavemen you mentioned, for that matter.

Once a useful idea develops, or impediments are removed, it can take off like gangbusters: agriculture, writing, medicine, flight &al. Just look at the scientific and technological explosion of the last century and a half -- since we adopted scientific research methods.
It wasn't any change in humans that initiated the progress.

Again -- the fact that writing and subsequent inventions took place is such a short time really proves (yup, proves) that mankind isn't as old as evolutionists would have it.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Again -- the fact that writing and subsequent inventions took place is such a short time really proves (yup, proves) that mankind isn't as old as evolutionists would have it.

No. That only proves that those inventions are recent. We have evidence of the knowledge of fire going back long before there were even Homo sapiens. What is it with creationists and writing? Why do they think that it appeared magically?

 

[gnostic]

Again -- the fact that writing and subsequent inventions took place is such a short time really proves (yup, proves) that mankind isn't as old as evolutionists would have it.

But writing have nothing to do with Evolution.

Writing is a learned skill.

Writing is not a skill that you can pass biologically pass on in DNA, from ancestors to descendants. DNA only carry genetic information of organism’s physical or biological trait.

You are comparing two very different things - the abilities of writing are not biological, hence cannot be passed on genetically.

Writings do change over times or from location to location, but the changes don’t involve genetics.

Evolution - or evolutionary biology, like Genetic Drift, Genetic Hitchhiking, Gene Flow, Mutation or Natural Selection - is biology, and involved changes in biological traits been passed from ancestors to descendants, thereby being the cause of biodiversity in population.

 

[metis]

I've read that in its present state, the formation of man is about 70,000 years.

Not true, Maybe google "Homo erectus", for example, who clearly is human, and they date back hundreds of thousands years ago.

The juries decided they were guilty, based on evidence presented. It means that the presumptions of man evolving from some unknown common ancestor is based on frivolous and contested presumptions.

We go by evidence, not presumptions, and the overwhelming evidence thus far indicates humans go back several million years ago and likely split from the evolving ape line. No other scientific explanation seems to be logical, at least at this point.

 

[metis]

Really, it is? Not according to some religious believers -- saying that your "soul" transferred from organism to organism.

The "soul" doesn't fossilize so there's no way to know how it may have occurred.

Do you even know? (Betcha don't... )

I've known this for decades now since I studied theology in college and ever since then, and I also taught it for almost 20 years, including a comparative-religions course. So, pay up!

 

[Shadow11]

For life to escape the planet and seed other worlds. It really is that simple if evolution is the path.

 

[YoursTrue]

One man's faith is another man's poison.

For some that is true. There may be reasons.
It's interesting.

 

[YoursTrue]

The "soul" doesn't fossilize so there's no way to know how it may have occurred.

I've known this for decades now since I studied theology in college and ever since then, and I also taught it for almost 20 years, including a comparative-religions course. So, pay up!

Why don't you pay up? I mean after all, is "Mother Teresa" is heaven body AND soul -- or is it her body, or her soul? Which is it? Do you know?

 

[YoursTrue]

The "soul" doesn't fossilize so there's no way to know how it may have occurred.

I've known this for decades now since I studied theology in college and ever since then, and I also taught it for almost 20 years, including a comparative-religions course. So, pay up!

By the way, after you discuss Mother Teresa if you can, as to whether her "soul" and/or her body, and/or her body and soul is in heaven, perhaps you can help out with your knowledge of what the soul is.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Not true, Maybe google "Homo erectus", for example, who clearly is human, and they date back hundreds of thousands years ago..

..could be a look-a-like

The transition out of the Stone Age occurred between 6000 and 2500 BCE for much of humanity living in North Africa and Eurasia..
-wiki-

Maybe there were lots of non-human apes who made tools etc.
What is the definition of a human?
For me, it is a Biblical one. We are not just "glorified animals".
We are much more than that. We have been given responsibility,
that other creatures do not have.

 

[Valjean]

Not true, Maybe google "Homo erectus", for example, who clearly is human, and they date back hundreds of thousands years ago.

We go by evidence, not presumptions, and the overwhelming evidence thus far indicates humans go back several million years ago and likely split from the evolving ape line. No other scientific explanation seems to be logical, at least at this point.

I think it's a question of how you define "human." Some might mean anatomically modern people, others might include erectus, habilis, or even australopithecus.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

A human thing. Glad you mentioned it. Not a gorilla thing.

But still an ape thing too.

 

[YoursTrue]

I think it's a question of how you define "human." Some might mean anatomically modern people, others might include erectus, habilis, or even australopithecus.

I've been looking up some information about mutations. Now of course, you probably consider any change from homo erectus, habilis, or australopithecus as mutations from one form of ?? to another. Now I wonder -- what do you consider these to be? On the way to homo sapiens? By mutation? Or, rather, would you or evolutionists say these types just passed out of existence without evolving.

 

[Valjean]

I've been looking up some information about mutations. Now of course, you probably consider any change from homo erectus, habilis, or australopithecus as mutations from one form of ?? to another. Now I wonder -- what do you consider these to be? On the way to homo sapiens? By mutation? Or, rather, would you or evolutionists say these types just passed out of existence without evolving.

Not exactly. I consider them population variants derived from normal reproductive variation acted upon by natural selection.
You should look up some information on natural selection, as well. The two work hand-in-hand.

Q: May I ask where you looked up this information? I have not known you to be particularly inquisitive when it involves outside sources.

Passed out of existence without evolving? Why without evolving?
Just about everything evolves. Some faster, some slower, depending mainly on selective pressures from environmental changes. Why a particular species goes extinct can be due to hundreds of different factors.

 

[shunyadragon]

Not exactly. I consider them population variants derived from normal reproductive variation acted upon by natural selection.
You should look up some information on natural selection, as well. The two work hand-in-hand.

Q: May I ask where you looked up this information? I have not known you to be particularly inquisitive when it involves outside sources.

Passed out of existence without evolving? Why without evolving?
Just about everything evolves. Some faster, some slower, depending mainly on selective pressures from environmental changes. Why a particular species goes extinct can be due to hundreds of different factors.

Gppd answer!!

 

[YoursTrue]

Not exactly. I consider them population variants derived from normal reproductive variation acted upon by natural selection.
You should look up some information on natural selection, as well. The two work hand-in-hand.

Q: May I ask where you looked up this information? I have not known you to be particularly inquisitive when it involves outside sources.

Passed out of existence without evolving? Why without evolving?
Just about everything evolves. Some faster, some slower, depending mainly on selective pressures from environmental changes. Why a particular species goes extinct can be due to hundreds of different factors.

Before I talk about or discuss with you those species that passed out of existence, what do you consider these varying whatever(s) -- not sure whether to call them species or whatever -- (homo erectus, etc.) evolving to ?? homo sapiens? I hope you understand my question, Valjean.

 

[YoursTrue]

Gppd answer!!

Except that -- there are gaps. Big ones. So now I guess (?) we go back to the different branches of the tree? Such as wolves and gorillas? Fish and humans? Different branches? Maybe not...