Evolution of Human

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

There is of course a touch of the random in almost all things.

Some animals flourish in the heat.....some in the cold.
As the climate and weather have random factors....so does the life within the territory.

Evolution isn't for all forms of life.
Some things never made it out of the water.

I hear some species have been the same.....a very long time.

Shall we say the more lasting forms are better forms??????

Evolution isn't about better...even Darwin mentions in
The origin of species that you cant say on organism is superior to another. However some are better suited for their environment. However an introduction of a predator can result in something
That was once fit no longer being fit. Look at the DoDo bird which survived on it's island until the introduction of humans and it couldn't compete.

These changes effect the ability of the organism to adapt. People also tend to assume that all life originates through natural selection. Natural selection is just one of the ways that evolution works. That's why the argument of randomness and accident are not a critique of evolution.

 

[Thief]

Evolution isn't about better...even Darwin mentions in
The origin of species that you cant say on organism is superior to another. However some are better suited for their environment. However an introduction of a predator can result in something
That was once fit no longer being fit. Look at the DoDo bird which survived on it's island until the introduction of humans and it couldn't compete.

These changes effect the ability of the organism to adapt. People also tend to assume that all life originates through natural selection. Natural selection is just one of the ways that evolution works. That's why the argument of randomness and accident are not a critique of evolution.

Seems a little vague here.
Some organisms ARE superior.

Random events....like shark attack....doesn't mean the predator was superior.
Just lucky.
Such is the random factor.

As for evolution and the human condition.....
We didn't need to develop such brain power to survive.
We were going to over run the planet by number....as we were made....Day Six.

And the mind and heart of Man is like nothing else on the planet.
And we don't need to know as we do....to dominate this planet.

The mind of Man is moving on....to Something Greater.

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

Seems a little vague here.
Some organisms ARE superior.

Random events....like shark attack....doesn't mean the predator was superior.
Just lucky.
Such is the random factor.

As for evolution and the human condition.....
We didn't need to develop such brain power to survive.
We were going to over run the planet by number....as we were made....Day Six.

And the mind and heart of Man is like nothing less on the planet.
And we don't need to know as we do....to dominate this planet.

The mind of Man is moving on....to Something Greater.

How is a shark
Attack Random? And how are some organisms superior? We didn't need such brain power to survive?

Given
What happened to Neanderthals and other groups of Homo sapiens I think it helps that we were, but again natural selection "survival of the fittest" is not the only way evolution works. There are multiple factors that go into it so to make the claim "we didn't need to be smart to survive" is true but us being smart can still have occurred through evolution without having to attribute it purely to natural selection.

 

[Thief]

How is a shark
Attack Random? And how are some organisms superior? We didn't need such brain power to survive?

Given
What happened to Neanderthals and other groups of Homo sapiens I think it helps that we were, but again natural selection "survival of the fittest" is not the only way evolution works. There are multiple factors that go into it so to make the claim "we didn't need to be smart to survive" is true but us being smart can still have occurred through evolution without having to attribute it purely to natural selection.

I bet if you look around....there are plenty of scientists.....
having devoted their life studies and efforts.....
and now lean to 'some kind of intervention' to explain what we are.

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

I bet if you look around....there are plenty of scientists.....
having devoted their life studies and efforts.....
and now lean to 'some kind of intervention' to explain what we are.

What??

When I say more than natural selection I mean things like genetic drift or mutations. Those are forms of evolution on the cellular level you have things like symbiosis. Natural selection is the most and so far only known way for adaptation but it is not the only way for creatures to evolve.

 

[Thief]

What??

When I say more than natural selection I mean things like genetic drift or mutations. Those are forms of evolution on the cellular level you have things like symbiosis. Natural selection is the most and so far only known way for adaptation but it is not the only way for creatures to evolve.

Opposed to the notion that a Creator might 'tweak' His creation?

It would no great effort for a Creator to 'pop' a molecule here and there....
now and then....

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

Opposed to the notion that a Creator might 'tweak' His creation?

It would no great effort for a Creator to 'pop' a molecule here and there....
now and then....

No one is saying it wouldn't be. But in the realm that science operates these can be explained naturally. A creator is one explanation but in science if holds no weight.

All are welcome to believe a creator did it, but when you start debating about it like a science...then you drag your belief into a realm that it just can't compete.

 

[Thief]

No one is saying it wouldn't be. But in the realm that science operates these can be explained naturally. A creator is one explanation but in science if holds no weight.

All are welcome to believe a creator did it, but when you start debating about it like a science...then you drag your belief into a realm that it just can't compete.

God created all the many things that science seeks to know.

Whose realm?.....did you say?

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

God created all the many things that science seeks to know.

Whose realm?.....did you say?

Asserting your reality I see.

Regardless in the realm of science it bears no fruit as gods existence is neither falsifiable or testable in any manner beyond personal belief.

 

[Ouroboros]

Franklin,

I must give you kudos for such patience and tenacity. :bow:

 

[outhouse]

Asserting your reality I see.

Regardless in the realm of science it bears no fruit as gods existence is neither falsifiable or testable in any manner beyond personal belief.

Exactly.

One has faith and nothing more.

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

Franklin,

I must give you kudos for such patience and tenacity. :bow:

I have no issues with their belief and I believe in God but I am aware of what science approaches and what religion approach and I wouldn't try to argue against something scientific with my own personal belief.

So I won't ever say their beliefs are wrong but when it's asserted as if it's scientific I'll ask for evidence.

 

[johnhanks]

Where did i make a scientific mistakes ?
please point them one by one.

Well, here are a few for starters.

Animals are incomparable to humans.

Humans are members of the animal kingdom.

If intelligent enough then with very very short time,less than a thousand year as maximum,but if still monkeys,then they won't be able to write regardless of time.

Hominids were never monkeys; the phylogenetic split happened far earlier.

All of you agree that animals talk and they have their own languages

No animal "talks" or has a language in the sense that humans do.

Telling that humans were here on earth millions of years ago and then Adam was a myth, so where are their ruins..

The hominids - not humans - that were on earth millions of years ago did not possess a technology capable of leaving ruins.

Telling that humans lived for millions of years on earth while they act as monkeys...

No hominids have ever acted as monkeys. Both New World and Old World monkeys have behaviour patterns radically different from hominids.

Do you call it science,the random mutations that causes DNA to be randomly change that bring a better species by chance..

Speciation does not result from single mutations; there is no such thing as a "better species", just one that is temporarily better adapted to prevailing conditions.

Originally posted by FearGod
We are developed from liquid forms to humans in the mother's womb

This is pure nonsense: from fertilisation onward we are never "liquid form".

 

[Monk Of Reason]

IMO,those are delusions and is related to our souls,such as the feel of pain.

Those things are indeed enigmatic,for example how the signal sent to brain will result in a feeling,such as the taste or smell ...etc,those things are programmed with the soul which react according to what she feels.

The reason I ask is because we can map out emotions in our brain. We can literally see that it is electrical impulses. We viewed for the very first time, memories being formed in the brain (just a few weeks ago).

There are mental disorders that are purely physical that affect how happy we are, our emotional pain, ect. An unethical but brilliant brain surgeon could change your personality via alterations to you physical brain.

So again why do you assume that anything we experience has to be a soul rather than the physical brain? There is zero evidence to support your ideas in the first place but now we have a large amount of evidence to the contrary. How do you reconcile this?

 

[FearGod]

Well, here are a few for starters.

Few for starters. :biglaugh:

Humans are members of the animal kingdom.

I said human's intelligence is incomparable to animals, except if you want to accept that you and the donkey are comparable.

Hominids were never monkeys; the phylogenetic split happened far earlier.

Really,i wonder if you were jumping with them at that era and hence you are very sure of what you are saying.

Apes and Humans
Study of Human and Monkey Brains Reveals Surprising Similarity Yet Major Differences : Science : Nature World News

[youtube]igq_niFmXNs[/youtube]
Human Evolution: Did We Come From Monkeys? - YouTube

No animal "talks" or has a language in the sense that humans do.

Who said they do.

The hominids - not humans - that were on earth millions of years ago did not possess a technology capable of leaving ruins.

How long have we been here? | Natural History Museum

No hominids have ever acted as monkeys. Both New World and Old World monkeys have behaviour patterns radically different from hominids.

What is your evidences for how they acted,they lived hundred thousands of years not yet writing or even building.

Speciation does not result from single mutations; there is no such thing as a "better species", just one that is temporarily better adapted to prevailing conditions.

Where did i say a single mutations.


Evolution is the process of change over time to become a better species, where as survival of the fittest is the method in which this evolution takes place.
Reference : Survival of the Fittest by Paul Peters - 483623 | Sciences 360

This is pure nonsense: from fertilisation onward we are never "liquid form".

So how you describe the mixed sperm with ovum (Zygote),do you call it solid or gaseous state.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Moving your hand quickly from a hot object is programmed and that is a proof that our bodies are well designed,that is to protect parts of your body as much as possible from damage.

No, it isn't. It could be evidence that our bodies have evolved to respond to heat in a particular way. In order to demonstrate design, you first must demonstrate the existence of a designer.

 

[FearGod]

The reason I ask is because we can map out emotions in our brain. We can literally see that it is electrical impulses. We viewed for the very first time, memories being formed in the brain (just a few weeks ago).

There are mental disorders that are purely physical that affect how happy we are, our emotional pain, ect. An unethical but brilliant brain surgeon could change your personality via alterations to you physical brain.

So again why do you assume that anything we experience has to be a soul rather than the physical brain? There is zero evidence to support your ideas in the first place but now we have a large amount of evidence to the contrary. How do you reconcile this?

Did i say it isn't electrical impulses which goes to brain,but did the brain feel happy or did the brain feel the pain of an injured leg or did the brain smell the flower,yes it is all pulses,we can map it and the soul can interpret it in the delusion we feel,pain,taste...etc.

One example is the twins,their souls receive and interpret the same signal and they can share the same feelings even from distance.

[youtube]SBVq2BcO9eU[/youtube]
Twin-Tuition: A Telepathic Connection? - YouTube

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Did i say it isn't electrical impulses which goes to brain,but did the brain feel happy or did the brain feel the pain of an injured leg or did the brain smell the flower,yes it is all pulses,we can map it and the soul can interpret it in the delusion we feel,pain,taste...etc.

One example is the twins,their souls receive and interpret the same signal and they can share the same feelings even from distance.

[youtube]SBVq2BcO9eU[/youtube]
Twin-Tuition: A Telepathic Connection? - YouTube

I am a twin, and I have never in my life experienced anything like what you are describing.

 

[FearGod]

No, it isn't. It could be evidence that our bodies have evolved to respond to heat in a particular way. In order to demonstrate design, you first must demonstrate the existence of a designer.

You are entitled to your own opinion as well as i

 

[ImmortalFlame]

You are entitled to your own opinion as well as i

You are correct. The question is, how do we go about ascertaining whose interpretation of these facts is more likely be true?