Is the evolutionary doctrine a racist doctrine?

[Eli G]

Evolutionists seem to forget it, but it is a fact that two different species do not interbreed with each other. The only way two living beings can procreate is if they are completely compatible, and that has never happened between a human and an ape. Assuming that something like that ever happened is a leap of faith. So a female human and a male human have to have met in exactly the same place.

That's amazing, how people forget about reality when they are imagining things.

 

[Eli G]

All obstetricians know that a human birth of less than 40 weeks is risky because it is not normal. Less than that is the norm in apes. Even the weight of the babies is very different.

It seems evolutionists ignore too many things. They need to escape out of that box.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Evolutionists seem to forget it, but it is a fact that two different species do not interbreed with each other. The only way two living beings can procreate is if they are completely compatible, and that has never happened between a human and an ape. Assuming that something like that ever happened is a leap of faith. So a female human and a male human have to have met in exactly the same place.

Humans are apes. Whenever two humans mate that is two apes mating. This is a rather simple concept and you cannot seem to understand it.

There is not one biological trait shared by the other great apes that man does not have as well. That is not the case with man and dogs. Or man and cats. Or man and giraffes. We know that we are apes.

If you deny being an ape then you are also denying that you are a man.

 

[Subduction Zone]

All obstetricians know that a human birth of less than 40 weeks is risky because it is not normal. Less than that is the norm in apes. Even the weight of the babies is very different.

It seems evolutionists ignore too many things. They need to scape from inside that box.

Yes, now it would be. But to evolve a minor change like that over 7 million years is rather minor. You keep demonstrating that you do not understand the sciences at all. Are you willing to learn the basics of science?

 

[Eli G]

Evolutionists seem to believe in an imaginary old world where non-human apes and humans interbred.
They've been so brainwashed ... and I am so sorry about that.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

It would be reasonable to suppose that apes moved in to any suitable habitat that they could reach.
However that would be limited by large stretches of water or desert and high mountain ranges, in the same way that very early man would have been. It could be considered an aspect of human kind that they were able to overcome such obstacles.

There are numerous factors that might initiate or support migration to potential new ranges. Equally, there are numerous factors that might inhibit or prevent migration. Ring-necked pheasants, for instance, are limited by low soil calcium levels and do not fare well in areas with such soils. It doesn't have to be a mountain range, river or ocean that acts as a barrier.

Humans have the benefit of a number of traits that promote the ability to migrate to regions of varying localized and regionalized environments.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Yes, now it would be. But to evolve a minor change like that over 7 million years is rather minor. You keep demonstrating that you do not understand the sciences at all. Are you willing to learn the basics of science?

I'm not certain why the recognition and mention of the obvious ignorance of science that forms the basis of many of these meaningless posts amounts to persecution, when that knowledge or lack of it is a significant factor governing the direction of this thread. Mentioning it isn't persecution and seems rather ironic and hypocritical to me coming from a direction that keeps calling others brainwashed, disgraceful and whatever other ridicule that can be mustered.

It is clear to me that the only reason being used to reject this science is a personal view of a literal interpretation of the Bible and not facts, understanding or any evidence at all.

Considering this rejection of science and the basis for it, the only thing I can figure is that those rejecting the science are here to do is ridicule others and make ridiculous and empty claims about the science.

 

[Argentbear]

And if you know the differences in male and female apes, according to you what is the sex of this ape you post here?

I didn't post a picture of an ape. Try to pay attention.

The facial reconstruction of homohabilis was done from a cast of a fossil housed at the Smithsonian and it is a female skull. They know that it is female because of the lack of a supraorbital notch.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

How many times must it be explained to you that science is in the business of evidence and not "proof"?

At least a billion, billion more times I would say.

 

[Eli G]

I didn't post a picture of an ape. Try to pay attention.

The facial reconstruction of homohabilis was done from a cast of a fossil housed at the Smithsonian and it is a female skull. They know that it is female because of the lack of a supraorbital notch.

And do you really think that this is a human female, a woman?

no early human's didn't look all that different

Homohabilis for example

... cause I don't. Actually, do you know that there is a lot of artistic imagination in those drawings and no much of "reconstruction"?

Actually, I wonder how many bones of a real skull they used to draw that. Sometimes they use just a tooth.

 

[Argentbear]

All obstetricians know that a human birth of less than 40 weeks is risky because it is not normal. Less than that is the norm in apes. Even the weight of the babies is very different.

It seems evolutionists ignore too many things. They need to escape out of that box.

Obstetricians also know that anything past 37 weeks is full term.

 

[Argentbear]

Evolutionists seem to believe in an imaginary old world where non-human apes and humans interbred.
They've been so brainwashed ... and I am so sorry about that.

I'm sorry you feel it's OK to just make stuff up

 

[Eli G]

Back to this article Human and ape ancestors arose in Europe, not in Africa, controversial study claims

I was thinking on this dialog:

One question these findings raise is why, if hominines arose in Europe, they are no longer there, except for recently arrived humans, and why ancient hominines did not also disperse into Asia, Begun said.

"Evolution is not very predictable," Begun said. "It happens as a series of unrelated and random events interact. We can assume that the conditions were not right for apes to move into Asia from the eastern Mediterranean in the late Miocene, but they were right for a dispersal into Africa."

As for why "we do not find African apes in Europe today, species go extinct all the time," Begun said.

Interesting answers:
"Evolution is not very predictable"
and
"species go extinct all the time".

It's Ok. Evolutionists are happy with that anyways.

 

[Eli G]

I'm sorry you feel it's OK to just make stuff up

Are you sure I am "making stuff up"?

Evolutionists say that the first human-ape female was interbreeding non-human male apes and her descendants after her, until after several centuries of descendants, the first ape-human male met one of her genetic descendants, so they formed the first truly human couple.

If I am wrong an expert evolutionist will surely "educate" me.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

As far as I know, modern human populations with their current diversity arose in humans that migrated out of Africa. The changes being driven by environmental differences in the various parts of the world that these migrant populations settled in.

Questions about apes moving out and different human ethnic groups developing from them independently is ridiculous and the product of those ignorant of their own history and of science.

And there is no indication that those individuals are at all interested in learning the facts or what is actually said in science.

I think the entire point of this thread is to ridicule anyone that accepts science, ridicule science and promote the idea that an uninformed opinion is the equivalent of an informed opinion.

 

[McBell]

"A stupid man's report of what a clever man says can never be accurate, because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand."​

-- Bertrand Russell​

 

[Argentbear]

And do you really think that this is a human female, a woman?

... cause I don't. Actually, do you know that there is a lot of artistic imagination in those drawings and no much of "reconstruction"?

Actually, I wonder how many bones of a real skull they used to draw that. Sometimes they use just a tooth.

Not a drawing.


If you woudl take just a few moments to educate yourself on the topic you are posting on you minght not come off as a laughing stock

Facial reconstruction

 

[Eli G]

Not a drawing.

So what is it? A photo?

 

[Argentbear]

Are you sure I am "making stuff up"?

Yep

Evolutionists say that the first human-ape female was interbreeding non-human male apes and her descendants after her,

This is made up

until after several centuries of descendants, the first ape-human male met one of her genetic descendants, so they formed the first truly human couple.

This is just stupid

If I am wrong an expert evolutionist will surely "educate" me.

You can lead a horse to water....

 

[Argentbear]

So what is it? A photo?

I guess a few minutes to educate yourself was way to much to ask.