Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Because your arguments are based on falsehoods such as your straw man version of evolution. Evolution 101You're not in my ignore list. But you don't seem to understand my arguments. What I am not asking for is for indoctrination.
Have a good one.
You are confirming my point: you don't understand that I try to reason as a rational individual with my own criteria, not because someone has taught me how to reason. Evidently, you are seeing me as a representative of some group and not as a person who thinks for himself and comes to reasonable and intelligent conclusions... Somehow that is prejudice, and it prevents you from understanding my reasoning.
Actually, with the above, it is you that's questioning my reasoning, and I have never implied that you can't think for yourself or that I am "prejudiced" against you.
Then tell me what I meant here:
There are many limits on the reproduction even of individuals of the same species.
A pair of humans, for example, cannot always manage to generate a new generation for many reasons, and many times the offspring does not survive for reasons that are beyond the control of the couple.
Evolutionists want us to believe that the conditions in which a supposedly advanced male ape found and reproduced with a female individual compatible with him were something so easy to achieve, that not only a couple of advanced apes managed to produce one human, but an entire population of humans emerged as if by magic.
Think about it, and later answer: why does that argument make a lot of sense?
No. Evolution says no such thing.There are many limits on the reproduction even of individuals of the same species.
A pair of humans, for example, cannot always manage to generate a new generation for many reasons, and many times the offspring does not survive for reasons that are beyond the control of the couple.
Evolutionists want us to believe that the conditions in which a supposedly advanced male ape found and reproduced with a female individual compatible with him were something so easy to achieve, that not only a couple of advanced apes managed to produce one human, but an entire population of humans emerged as if by magic.
Your arguments don't make any sense and reflect your utter lack of understanding of basic biology and evolutionary theory.You're not in my ignore list. But you don't seem to understand my arguments. What I am not asking for is for indoctrination.
Have a good one.
It makes zero sense if you understand evolution.
which brings up a good question perhaps for scientists to investigate: if a chimpanzee is taught to recognize human language, as I understand they can be taught to recognize some sign language, have scientists decided if the genetic structure might change even in the slightest degree as they're taught by humans or otherwise? Of course the following involves humans, not chimpanzees, but scientists have not determined the particular genes that determine particular intelligence levels. And I wonder if the genes change as an organism like a chimpanzee grows older, meaning as they become more aware of their surroundings.And yet, monkeys do not become humans.
that seems correct to me. But who am I? (It doesn't make sense to me that after a looonnngggg period of time, some UCA (unknown Common Ancestor) of apes mated enough with enough mutations to branch out to gorillas, humans, chimpanzees, etc.
That is because you still have many fundamental misunderstandings with respect to evolution. Evolution 101
The traditional view is that the oldest known piece of writing we have is the Kish document, a Sumerian text dating to about 3500 BCE. However, there are some scholars who say we have older writing from the Danube Valley Civilization dating to 8000 BCE. This is less clear, as scholars debate whether the 700 or so symbols are actually writing or not.
The "explanation above" is a strawman, it is false because it is set up to be false so that you can deny its rationality in good conscience while never addressing the the argument that the Theory of Evolution actually makes. Evolution 101
with out even reading your link we know it does not support your idea. Look up Lamarckism which was discarded as a theory well over a hundred years ago. Evolution 101
Nope. That's not how it works. Hence the reason we keep having to tell you that populations evolve, rather than individuals.
The fact that human beings have bred the wide variety of dogs that are now in existence, demonstrates that evolution is a fact of life.
No we are just waiting for a biological definition of ape that does not include humans. If you could actually provide one, we would have to seriously consider it.Those indoctrinated in the teaching of the evolution of apes into humans believe that in order to reason on the basis of that doctrine one must be indoctrinated in it.
For some reason they believe that those who do not consider themselves apes cannot reason correctly.