Humans did NOT evolve from the common ancestor of Apes

[idav]

Well, after examining what you claim to be actual genes, I am no closer to belief than before I examined them. Perhaps you're right. Perhaps my knowledge of genetics is insufficient to understand the conclusions that you have accepted as truth, even though it is likely that you don't understand them either. But, I will for the sake of argument accept that you fully understand these findings, and that you accept them as being conclusive evidence that human beings and chimpanzees and gorillas and gibbons have a common ancestor. Perhaps if I understood perfectly what I was looking at, I might agree. But I don't. I'm sorry, I can't believe stuff without evidence I can believe. But don't worry, I'll be okay. I don't need to know everything, neither do I feel overly compelled to believe everything. If a time should come when I have greater understanding, perhaps I will know the truth. But right now, I must rely upon reason, and it seems most reasonable to me that God created everything.

That evidence could go either way and could be an out for human evolution but wasn't. All it really shows is we can see in our genes how it could have happened naturally. Why only human genes fused and what sorta difference it made is studied in very fine detail. If humans didn't have those same genes we would be our own special kind.

 

[Sonofason]

That evidence could go either way and could be an out for human evolution but wasn't. All it really shows is we can see in our genes how it could have happened naturally. Why only human genes fused and what sorta difference it made is studied in very fine detail. If humans didn't have those same genes we would be our own special kind.

I appreciate the clarification.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Well, after examining what you claim to be actual genes, I am no closer to belief than before I examined them.

.

That's fine. My sharing the information with you was not to make you believe nor was it to win a debate. It's was just to share the information.

Perhaps you're right. Perhaps my knowledge of genetics is insufficient to understand the conclusions that you have accepted as truth, even though it is likely that you don't understand them either.

Well it's not a problem that you don't understand. It only beomes a problem when you believe you do but display to us that you don't. To your second point....I understand evolution and the data very well.

But, I will for the sake of argument accept that you fully understand these findings, and that you accept them as being conclusive evidence that human beings and chimpanzees and gorillas and gibbons have a common ancestor.

Again, that's understandable. I just wish you could understand the years of research that's gone into the genome project that shows this link.

Perhaps if I understood perfectly what I was looking at, I might agree. But I don't. I'm sorry, I can't believe stuff without evidence I can believe. But don't worry, I'll be okay. I don't need to know everything, neither do I feel overly compelled to believe everything.

I can accept that.

If a time should come when I have greater understanding, perhaps I will know the truth. But right now, I must rely upon reason, and it seems most reasonable to me that God created everything.

When you see the world through dogmatic shades it's hard to accept information that contradicts your world view.

 

[Sapiens]

So, are we to be shackled to the beliefs of the least intelligent or lest educated amongst us? That does not bode well for the future of the human race. Here we have one "Sonofason" who claims to not understand genetics at a sufficient level that he can believe what 99.99999% of the scientists in the world will tell him is the case, and who who claims to not understand radiometric dating at a sufficient level that he can believe what 99.99999% of the scientists in the world will tell him is the case, yet we are expected to take his objections seriously because they are tied to his religious belief system? I submit that this approach is foolish in the extreme. Talk about arguing from ignorance.

 

[Riverwolf]

The above is a really good example of goat herder theology.

The Bible was written by shepherds; i.e., sheep herders, not goat-herders.

We have all heard it but it does NOT agree with Scripture, Science nor History,

Your theology, which I've only seen from you and you alone, agrees even less with these three things, at least two of which you have demonstrated absolutely no understanding of.

 

[Riverwolf]

Well, religion is an organized system of beliefs, ceremonies, and rules used to worship a god or a group of gods. Religion is the service and worship of God or the supernatural.
Religion - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Organized religion, maybe.

My meditations, on the other hand, have convinced me thus far that the only core elements needed for religion are ritual, mythology, and philosophy.

After all, there are plenty of atheistic religions and non-organized religions.

I do not "follow" any particular organized set of beliefs about God in order to worship God. I believe in God, and I worship God. I do not "follow" an organized system of ceremonies and rules in order to worship God. I employ particular behaviors in my worship of God. I do not follow an organized system of rules used to worship God. I follow the example of my Savior in my worship of God. I do not follow the worship of God. I worship God

I follow Christ. In following Christ, I adore my Creator. So, I do not follow religion, I have religion. I do not follow the religious, I am religious.

Either way, not by your definition. By the logic you presented above, you can't possibly anything except your own personal name.

I am what I am. You are free to define what I am however you choose to define me. That is your prerogative. What ever you consider me to be, it won't change what I am.

I consider you to be many things. Just like me. And everybody else.

 

[Riverwolf]

So, are we to be shackled to the beliefs of the least intelligent or lest educated amongst us? ... yet we are expected to take his objections seriously because they are tied to his religious belief system? I submit that this approach is foolish in the extreme.

Uh... who are you talking to?

I'm not shackled to any beliefs but my own, based loosely on those of my distant ancestors. I don't take uneducated objections seriously when no attempt to allow for self-correction and criticism is apparent.

So.... I wonder exactly from whence this outburst originates.

 

[Sonofason]

So, are we to be shackled to the beliefs of the least intelligent or lest educated amongst us? That does not bode well for the future of the human race. Here we have one "Sonofason" who claims to not understand genetics at a sufficient level that he can believe what 99.99999% of the scientists in the world will tell him is the case, and who who claims to not understand radiometric dating at a sufficient level that he can believe what 99.99999% of the scientists in the world will tell him is the case, yet we are expected to take his objections seriously because they are tied to his religious belief system? I submit that this approach is foolish in the extreme. Talk about arguing from ignorance.

And here we have one Sapiens who has never understood God at any significant level that he can believe what 99.9999 percent of believers will tell him about God, and the nature of God, yet we are expected to take his objections seriously because they are tied to his vast scientific understanding. I submit that this approach is foolish in the extreme. Talk about arguing from ignorance.

 

[Sapiens]

Uh... who are you talking to?

I'm not shackled to any beliefs but my own, based loosely on those of my distant ancestors. I don't take uneducated objections seriously when no attempt to allow for self-correction and criticism is apparent.

So.... I wonder exactly from whence this outburst originates.

Obviously not you, and I mean that sincerely, just a general observation.

 

[Riverwolf]

Obviously not you, and I mean that sincerely, just a general observation.

Well, frankly it's an observation I do not share on any level of generality in the context of this thread.

In the Bible Belt, maybe, but that's not relevant to this thread.

 

[Thief]

So, are we to be shackled to the beliefs of the least intelligent or lest educated amongst us? That does not bode well for the future of the human race. Here we have one "Sonofason" who claims to not understand genetics at a sufficient level that he can believe what 99.99999% of the scientists in the world will tell him is the case, and who who claims to not understand radiometric dating at a sufficient level that he can believe what 99.99999% of the scientists in the world will tell him is the case, yet we are expected to take his objections seriously because they are tied to his religious belief system? I submit that this approach is foolish in the extreme. Talk about arguing from ignorance.

And we should follow those of no belief into the next life?
Talk about ignorance.

If you choose to ignore the possibility of a next life....too bad for you.
Lay in your grave....and rot.

Children will do more than you.
"....of such as these is made the kingdom of heaven."

 

[Dirty Penguin]

And we should follow those of no belief into the next life?
Talk about ignorance.

But no one is asking you to follow non-believers.....

If you choose to ignore the possibility of a next life....too bad for you.
Lay in your grave....and rot.

Have you considered the "possibility" there is no "next life"..? I know you hven't. See, this thread is not about "faith". Faith is something you can neither prove or disprove. Depending on the underline subject there's no evidence for it nor is there any against it. In this instance we're talking about something that is peer revieved, testifiable, verifiable and falsifiable. Neither faith or "God" meet these criteria.

Children will do more than you.
"....of such as these is made the kingdom of heaven."

If that's what your book tells you then fine...as long as you will accept a quote from the Satanic Bible or the Necronomicon. Will you? I'm sure you won't...so why should we accept quotes from yours?....

 

[The Neo Nerd]

And here we have one Sapiens who has never understood God at any significant level

What is it that he does not understand about god?

And how would we verify that this "understanding" is true?

 

[Sapiens]

I understand god(s) perfectly.

 

[Looncall]

The Bible was written by shepherds; i.e., sheep herders, not goat-herders.

Your theology, which I've only seen from you and you alone, agrees even less with these three things, at least two of which you have demonstrated absolutely no understanding of.

This brings to mind an expression I read somewhere, maybe the book Small Gods by Terry Pratchett: approximately "Sheep are stupid and must be driven but goats are smart and must be lead.".

I have worked with sheep and can verify that they are stupid. I have always thought that calling Christian followers sheep is a grotesque insult.

 

[Thief]

But no one is asking you to follow non-believers.....



Have you considered the "possibility" there is no "next life"..? I know you hven't.


If that's what your book tells you then fine...as long as you will accept a quote from the Satanic Bible or the Necronomicon. Will you? I'm sure you won't...so why should we accept quotes from yours?....

Did own a copy of the satanic bible.

Conceding an argument is not much different than following.
(it has the effect of allowance)

And yes I have considered a state of nonexistence.
It's what happens when heaven won't allow your continuance.

 

[Thief]

I understand god(s) perfectly.

Really?.....and yet you make denial?

Seems a contradiction unto itself.

 

[Aman777]

So, are we to be shackled to the beliefs of the least intelligent or lest educated amongst us? That does not bode well for the future of the human race. Here we have one "Sonofason" who claims to not understand genetics at a sufficient level that he can believe what 99.99999% of the scientists in the world will tell him is the case, and who who claims to not understand radiometric dating at a sufficient level that he can believe what 99.99999% of the scientists in the world will tell him is the case, yet we are expected to take his objections seriously because they are tied to his religious belief system? I submit that this approach is foolish in the extreme. Talk about arguing from ignorance.

Dear Readers, The above is foolish ignorant atheism which cannot understand that Faith, in the Truth of God's Holy Word, is what overcomes the changable Theories of mankind. Scientists call them Theories because they KNOW that they will change as they learn more, so they hedge their bets by NEVER being too specific. God's Word changes NOT, since He got it right the FIRST time.

The DNA of Humans was contaminated by the blood of animals (prehistoric people who were very Violent) when Noah's Human grandsons Gen 6:4 married and produced today's Humans, with these Violent prehistoric people. That is WHY God, Who KNOWS the outcome of the current Violent Human Race, tells us that ALL Flesh will go Extinct unless Jesus returns to stop it. Mat 24:22 NO Flesh saved, includes EVERY creature of Flesh and not just Humankind. God Bless all of you.

In Love,
Aman

 

[Aman777]

The Bible was written by shepherds; i.e., sheep herders, not goat-herders.

Dear Riverwolf, The Bible was penned by ancient men, but it makes the point better IF you call them Goatherders. These ancient men wrote what they were moved to write from inside them, by the Holy Spirit, the TRUE Author of Scripture. 2Pe 1:21

Your theology, which I've only seen from you and you alone, agrees even less with these three things, at least two of which you have demonstrated absolutely no understanding of.

Thanks for confirming, as a non-believer in Jesus, Scripture, which tells us that you call evil good, and good evil. IOW, You turn things around and ALWAYS take the opposite position to God's Truth. God warns us of this in Isa 5:20 God Bless you.

In Love,
Aman

 

[Sapiens]

Really?.....and yet you make denial?

Seems a contradiction unto itself.

With such knowledge comes the obvious conclusion ... do not take such foolishness seriously. Santa, the Tooth Fairy, the Easter Bunny, all gods, they all come from the same place ... human imagination. When you throw power and control into the mix you turn sweet mythologies into tyrannical religion.