Evolution My ToE

[Subduction Zone]

Not sure what you mean by that last statement.
I asked if man is the latest in the evolution progression. So if I understand you correctly, you are saying no, man is not the most recent organism of the animal kingdom by the process of natural selection, there are more recently evolved animals by means of natural selection, do I understand you correctly?

Bingo! Evolution is ongoing. That means that new species are still arising. Why would it stop? Your post implied a goal and there is no such goal to evolution.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Not sure what you mean by that last statement.
I asked if man is the latest in the evolution progression. So if I understand you correctly, you are saying no, man is not the most recent organism of the animal kingdom by the process of natural selection, there are more recently evolved animals by means of natural selection, do I understand you correctly?

Homo sapiens is about 300,000 years old and a recent species in the hominid line, but there are other species in different lines of evolution that are much more recent. The cichlid superflock of species in Africa's Lake Victoria are less than 15,000 years old. That is an estimated 700 endemic species of cichlid fish.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Homo sapiens is about 300,000 years old and a recent species in the hominid line, but there are other species in different lines of evolution that are much more recent. The cichlid superflock of species in Africa's Lake Victoria are less than 15,000 years old. That is an estimated 700 endemic species of cichlid fish.

Wait for it, I can see an upcoming question if the cichlids changed 'kind'.

 

[YoursTrue]

That does not nullify all of the other criteria, sorry.

What criteria are you talking about? I said, Looking at it from a straight biological viewpoint, at the point that man's intellectual capability is greater than chimpanzees, gorillas, bonobos, etc. So what criteria are you talking about that nullifies the difference between the reasoning and learning ability of man and chimpanzees?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I read something like that, too. Maybe they'll learn (evolve) to reading and writing, too.

Anything is possible, but it would take a long time and require some rather radical evolutionary changes. Increased brain size. Development of manipulative appendages. Since there is only a single example, it is difficult to know what array of modifications would be functional for the task.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Wait for it, I can see an upcoming question if the cichlids changed 'kind'.

If I define kind to mean species, they sure did.I

But I do know what you mean. As if evolution is nullified if it does not involve single generation jumps between genera, families or classes. At the risk of claims of repetition, that sort of jump is not expected and seeing it would refute the theory. I guess that cannot be said enough though.

 

[YoursTrue]

Homo sapiens is about 300,000 years old and a recent species in the hominid line, but there are other species in different lines of evolution that are much more recent. The cichlid superflock of species in Africa's Lake Victoria are less than 15,000 years old. That is an estimated 700 endemic species of cichlid fish.

So let me see if I understand this correctly. You say homo sapiens are about 300,000 years old and a recent species in the hominid line. Are homo sapiens the most recent species that are said to have evolved in the hominid line?

 

[YoursTrue]

Anything is possible, but it would take a long time and require some rather radical evolutionary changes. Increased brain size. Development of manipulative appendages. Since there is only a single example, it is difficult to know what array of modifications would be functional for the task.

I would say.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

So let me see if I understand this correctly. You say homo sapiens are about 300,000 years old and a recent species in the hominid line. Are homo sapiens the most recent species that are said to have evolved in the hominid line?

Chimpanzees.

 

[YoursTrue]

Anything is possible, but it would take a long time and require some rather radical evolutionary changes. Increased brain size. Development of manipulative appendages. Since there is only a single example, it is difficult to know what array of modifications would be functional for the task.

And IF they learned to read and write as well as develop other languages, and if that is evolution of the natural selection kind, or simply chance, then I daresay they would have to be different species, perhaps different looking, too. Oh, and maybe build machines, you know, like cars and so forth.

 

[YoursTrue]

Chimpanzees.

Oh, I'm sorry, you can make fun of me if you like, but I'm confused. So allow me to ask you: Are you saying that chimpanzees are the most recently evolved in the hominid line, not homo sapiens? Let me rephrase. Are you saying that homo sapiens did not complete their current form after chimpanzees evolved into their presently current form? Chimpanzees evolved into their chimpanzee bodies (I can't figure how to say it more scientifically) after homo sapiens did?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I would say.

I haven't reviewed the tiny news snippet I heard, but if there is no selection for a trait, it will not evolve. I am also not an expert in penguins to even speculate on the possible changes necessary. It may be that it is good evidence for a biological basis for higher order communication. This could mean that humans are unique only in getting their first and not unique for being able to get there.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

And IF they learned to read and write as well as develop other languages, and if that is evolution of the natural selection kind, or simply chance, then I daresay they would have to be different species, perhaps different looking, too. Oh, and maybe build machines, you know, like cars and so forth.

There could potentially be a number of species evolve in that path. It is a matter of speculation on how a non-human intelligence might develop technologically and culturally. I cannot say if they would or what they would do if they did. The example we have did, so perhaps some future penguin descendants might too.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Oh, I'm sorry, you can make fun of me if you like, but I'm confused. So allow me to ask you: Are you saying that chimpanzees are the most recently evolved in the hominid line, not homo sapiens? Let me rephrase. Are you saying that homo sapiens did not complete their current form after chimpanzees evolved into their presently current form? Chimpanzees evolved into their chimpanzee bodies (I can't figure how to say it more scientifically) after homo sapiens did?

I am not making fun of you. We share a common ancestry with chimpanzees. Since humans and chimpanzee exist together now, it is reasonable to recognize that both are recent species. As to which is the most recent, I do not know.

The important piece of information here is that evolution is ongoing. It is not targeting some preconceived goal. Knowing how old either is has some value, but older, younger or equal, both evolved and are still evolving.

 

[YoursTrue]

I haven't reviewed the tiny news snippet I heard, but if there is no selection for a trait, it will not evolve. I am also not an expert in penguins to even speculate on the possible changes necessary. It may be that it is good evidence for a biological basis for higher order communication. This could mean that humans are unique only in getting their first and not unique for being able to get there.

It's possible I suppose in your mind that bats could learn higher order communication too. Of course, they do communicate differently than chimpanzees or homo sapiens, but...as you say, you just never know, isn't that right. Ok, I'm tabling this little conjectural discussion for the while. To sum up, you can believe it's possible, I do not.

 

[YoursTrue]

I am not making fun of you. We share a common ancestry with chimpanzees. Since humans and chimpanzee exist together now, it is reasonable to recognize that both are recent species. As to which is the most recent, I do not know.

The important piece of information here is that evolution is ongoing. It is not targeting some preconceived goal. Knowing how old either is has some value, but older, younger or equal, both evolved and are still evolving.

I didn't ask about sharing a common ancestor. I asked if homo sapiens are the latest in the (present) line, even from that "shared ancestry". I still don't quite get your answer. Are they, or aren't they? The latest, i.e., most recent assemblage of that which is of the hominid order or however you want to phrase it? What do you believe? Did homo sapiens evolve in the current form after, before, or at the same time chimpanzees did to their "current forms" from that rather unknown LCA?
So it seems that you just don't know when chimpanzees or humans of the homo sapiens kind came to their present forms and they might have come to their present forms at the same time. In other words, evolutionists think that homo sapiens might have come to their present forms before chimpanzees did, is that what you think could be as a possibility?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

It's possible I suppose in your mind that bats could learn higher order communication too. Of course, they do communicate differently than chimpanzees or homo sapiens, but...as you say, you just never know, isn't that right. Ok, I'm tabling this little conjectural discussion for the while. To sum up, you can believe it's possible, I do not.

I suppose they could. Bats use high frequency sound for echo-location. It is for gathering information about their environment. I don't know that they communicate with each other any differently than any other mammal.

You simply do not understand or do not want to understand for ideological reasons.s

Evolution has been established. The evolution of echo-location doesn't even require a change in kind as creationists try to define it. Seems silly to me not to recognize the possibilities when examples abound in nature.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I didn't ask about sharing a common ancestor. I asked if homo sapiens are the latest in the (present) line, even from that "shared ancestry". I still don't quite get your answer. Are they, or aren't they? The latest, i.e., most recent assemblage of that which is of the hominid order or however you want to phrase it? What do you believe? Did homo sapiens evolve in the current form after, before, or at the same time chimpanzees did to their "current forms" from that rather unknown LCA?
So it seems that you just don't know when chimpanzees or humans of the homo sapiens kind came to their present forms and they might have come to their present forms at the same time. In other words, evolutionists think that homo sapiens might have come to their present forms before chimpanzees did, is that what you think could be as a possibility?

If two different things share a common origin and one is relatively recent, what do you think the odds are that the other is going to be of a similar age?

You do not get what 'I don't know ' means? Now I am confused.

Bingo! I don't know. Maybe the information is available. I have not looked. I also do not know why it matters in the context of the discussion. Older, younger or the same, the evidence says evolved and still evolving.

 

[dad]

Perhaps you make up random statements. No it is incorrect, you do make up random statements.

Perhaps you think a big Doberman barking and running at a little kitten would not result in some action?

 

[dad]

Evolution has been established. .

Not the theory of evolution. Only the reality of evolving and adapting in the present world.