Evolution of what?

[Aupmanyav]

But we do know enough to know that the Bible is wrong.

IMHO, it is quite an understatement.

 

[Aupmanyav]

The basic definition of abiogenesis is that life arose from nonlife.

That is (for atheists like us) true. But were these compounds were formed on earth or they came from space is an important question.
Kindly read Abiogenesis - Wikipedia (if you would care to read and understand that view-point. The link opens the particular discussion. I am not asking you to read the whole Wikipedia article, that might be too taxing for you).

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I never said "Sumer did rise in a vacuum".

So you acknowledge that the civilization of Sumer was preceeded by a loooong history of growing settlements?

I said there is not any gradual mental advances of apes to become humans later.

If by that you mean the evolution from the common ancestors with chimps to modern humans, then Sumer shouldn't even come up.
By the time Sumer existed, homo sapiens was already roaming the earth for some 150.000 years. The evolution of the common ancestor with chimps to homo sapiens took ~7 million years.

And there's plenty of evidence of that evolution.
Australopethicus, homo erectus, etc.

With also plenty of artefact evidence of the gradual advancement in tool making etc etc.

Intellect is being in humans since the very beginning, and the intellect (capacity to reason, create, etc) belongs exclusively to humans form their very beginning.

If by that you mean that Homo Sapiens was intelligent and had capacity of reasoning etc, sure. Humans of 100.000 years ago had this capacity.
Their ancestors like homo erectus had this to a lesser extent.
Their ancestors like australopethicus had this to a lesser extent still.

But yeah, homo sapiens is homo sapiens.

You can easily find a human from 6 millennia ago more intelligent than one from today.

Nonsense.

Those ancient humans gave rise to the ideas that we still use today, many of them in the same development or even more backward, such as the construction of megalithic buildings.

Or the construction of satellites, skyscrapers, micro-computers, nuclear power stations.. ow, wait......................

There was no process of increasing human mental capacity at any time in history

But there was a tremendous increase in knowledge about the nature and workings of the world.
This is not the accumulation of intelligence / intellectual capacity, but the accumulation of knowledge. Each generation building further on the discoveries of those that came before them.

, only some were isolated and therefore remained less developed, but with the same mental capacity... Humans were never apes.

Humans ARE apes.
Just like they are mammals and vertebrates.

 

[Eli G]

An increase in knowledge does not mean an increase in human mental capacity.

No one has found a settlement of apes who made houses, made fires for cooking, drew animals, or named their children, ...

Only evolutionists consider themselves apes.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

An increase in knowledge does not mean an increase in human mental capacity.

I didn't say otherwise...
As explained, the increase in mental capacity / intellect occurred gradually long before that, during the 7 million year evolution.

No one has found a settlement of apes who made houses, made fires for cooking, drew animals, or named their children, ...

Since humans are apes, every human settlement and building was made by apes.
But once again, I assume that by "ape" you mean the common ancestor with chimps and perhaps some descendents thereof like australopethicus etc.
Those indeed did not build houses etc. Such structures are unique to homo sapiens.

For the most part of homo sapiens history, humans were nomadic and lived in caves etc. They did not engage in construction. That's a fairly recent development ("fairly recent" in geological time, that is....)

Only evolutionists consider themselves apes.

No, actually.

Humans were classified as primates long before Darwin came up with evolution theory.


You seem to be very ignorant of human history and biology in general.



PS: if you reply to someone, you might want to hit the "reply" button on the post you reply to and leave the post as a quote. That, or add the username with a "@" prefix. As such, the user you are replying to will get a notification that someone is talking to them.

 

[Eli G]

Only evolutionists consider themselves apes. Who brainwashed them and put that idea into their heads?

There are not millions of years when apes learned how to cook, to count, to saw, to name things, to build, etc. That's the fantasy that is in evolutionists mind, but they don't have any evidence of it.

They will continue to fall into the same void as always: "there were millions of years in which this thing became such a thing, in which the apes learned to do such things, blah blah, blah.... "

...but they never present any proof of what they say so sure of themselves. Evidently they live within a mental fantasy that they never stop feeding.

Have a nice one.

 

[sayak83]

Reading and counting arose after cities were built. There was little need for those abilities before then. Once knowledge could be preserved by reading and writing that was when man began to advance quickly.

This is actually a mistake. Monkeys can add, subtract and multiply in their heads. It's an ancient pre-existing skill. One can at Max say that specialized counters arose with urbanization , as is expected.

 

[sayak83]

Only evolutionists consider themselves apes. Who brainwashed them and put that idea into their heads?

There are not millions of years when apes learned how to cook, to count, to saw, to name things, to build, etc. That's the fantasy that is in evolutionists mind, but they don't have any evidence of it.

They will continue to fall into the same void as always: "there were millions of years in which this thing became such a thing, in which the apes learned to do such things, blah blah, blah.... "

...but they never present any proof of what they say so sure of themselves. Evidently they live within a mental fantasy that they never stop feeding.

Have a nice one.

Since you are back..
When did humans first began to live on earth according to you? You have not answered yet.
Thanks.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Only evolutionists consider themselves apes. Who brainwashed them and put that idea into their heads?

The person who originally classified humans as primates was a christian who lived at a time when nobody had ever even heared about evolution as this was before Darwin.

There are not millions of years when apes learned how to cook, to count, to saw, to name things, to build, etc. That's the fantasy that is in evolutionists mind, but they don't have any evidence of it.

The only fantasy here, is your blatant strawman and misrepresentation of what has JUST been explained to you in the very posts you are replying to. Well.... not that you are actually replying to them since you didn't follow my advice of using the forum features properly.

They will continue to fall into the same void as always: "there were millions of years in which this thing became such a thing, in which the apes learned to do such things, blah blah, blah.... "

I also provided you with all the tools and terms you required to do a simple google so that you can see the mountains of evidence of that.
But alas. Sounds like you aren't willing to learn anything. All you seem to be interested in, is preaching your religious dogma's while completely ignoring the evidence and lying about the science.

...but they never present any proof of what they say so sure of themselves.

The 10 Oldest Human Fossils Ever Found

Uncover the oldest human fossils, learn their age, discoveries & where they were found. Get a glimpse into our evolution.

a-z-animals.com

Origins - Exploring the Fossil Record

Origins - Exploring The Fossil Record provides an overview of the evolutionary tree of hominids, with fossil evidence of the various genus species. We explore key questions raised in the fields of paleoanthropology, archaeology and genetic science in the search for our earliest ancestors.

www.bradshawfoundation.com

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168010219304882

Stone toolmaking difficulty and the evolution of hominin technological skills - Scientific Reports

Stone tools are a manifestation of the complex cognitive and dexterous skills of our hominin ancestors. As such, much research has been devoted to understanding the skill requirements of individual lithic technologies. Yet, comparing skill across different technologies, and thus across the vast...

www.nature.com

Denial and handwaving in 3....2.....1....

 

[Eli G]

I also got some pictures of different skulls:

https://ec.aciprensa.com/newwiki/images/6/69/Razas_tipo_jpg.gif

bignosepithecus, foreheadpithecus, longnosepithecus, etc ...

 

[Eli G]

It is not that fossils of different types of skulls do not exist.

The real issue is who they attribute those bones to, what dating they give them and how they try to interpret the findings and connect them with each other.

Obviously, evolutionists let their imagination run wild every time they find something. Almost everything they assume and upon which they support their evolutionary doctrine is subjective.

Actually, they can put a face and a body on a piece of jaw, skull and even on a simple tooth.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Denial and handwaving in 3....2.....1....

I also got some pictures of different skulls:

https://ec.aciprensa.com/newwiki/images/6/69/Razas_tipo_jpg.gif

bignosepithecus, foreheadpithecus, longnosepithecus, etc ...

I rest my case.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Many evolutionists are so obsessed with the idea of a chain of related animals [...]

I'm not "obsessed" with such an idea, nor do I even think about the theory of evolution on most days. I just accept that evolution is a scientific fact with an enormous amount of evidence backing it.

 

[Eli G]

According to the Bible, animals were made long before the first human couple, so it is very normal for fossils of any type of ape to be found that predate human beings by thousands of years. That absolutely does not contradict what the Bible teaches about the origin and creation of living beings.

It is the evolutionists who want to relate apes to humans. That relationship does not exist and never existed. Humans have only existed for 6 millennia, as I explain in my post #802, and animals (including apes) were created long before humans.

PS: Jehovah's Witnesses do not believe in the literal 6-day doctrine, but rather each creative day refers to a very long stage of possibly thousands or more years each "creative day." So according to this way of understanding the biblical account, apes may have existed many thousands of years before humans.

 

[Eli G]

I'm not "obsessed" with such an idea, nor do I even think about the theory of evolution on most days. I just accept that evolution is a scientific fact with an enormous amount of evidence backing it.

In your imagination ... as in mine, it is a scientific fact that living beings do not genetically interbreed with each other.

 

[sayak83]

It is not that fossils of different types of skulls do not exist.

The real issue is who they attribute those bones to, what dating they give them and how they try to interpret the findings and connect them with each other.

Obviously, evolutionists let their imagination run wild every time they find something. Almost everything they assume and upon which they support their evolutionary doctrine is subjective.

Actually, they can put a face and a body on a piece of jaw, skull and even on a simple tooth.

I have fun question for you.
What fraction of scientists (total out of 100% who have a PhD degree) believe that humans have evolved from other animals?
Guess.

 

[Eli G]

How many people think Michael Jackson was a ped***?

 

[Mock Turtle]

In your imagination ... as in mine, it is a scientific fact that living beings do not genetically interbreed with each other.

So Lions and Tigers don't? Try looking up this - and the rest.

Ligers, zorses, and pizzlies: How animal hybrids happen

Interbreeding between animals of different lineages is widespread in nature—and may reveal some of the mysteries of evolution.

www.nationalgeographic.com

 

[Eli G]

That is the criterion many used to know which animals belong to the same group: whether they can interbreed with each other.

Genetics is very clear about that. Evolutionists totally ignore the laws of genetics, since humans cannot interbreed with any apes.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

That is the criterion many used to know which animals belong to the same group: whether they can interbreed with each other.

Correct, that is one criteria we use for establishing whether or not two populations belong in the same or different species designation.

However, are you aware the existence of ring species? They are observed instances of a single population of a single species, able to interbreed, over time separating into two separate populations that can no longer interbreed. We already know, because it has been directly observed, that a single species can become two distinct species. Did you know that?

There's also the simple fact that these designations are fairly loose; they're not based on ineffable facts about the nature of biology - they're just designations that WE decide the limits of. There is no hard-and-fast line separating one species from another species, but it is a series of criteria determined by multiple factors. The "interbreeding" line is generally agreed upon, but there are obviously even exceptions to that. It turns out biological classification is very complex because, as we would expect, biology itself is very complex.

Genetics is very clear about that. Evolutionists totally ignore the laws of genetics.

What "law of genetics" is being ignored, specifically?