• 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:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Neat Video Explaining the Evidence of Our Relationship To the Other Great Apes

Skwim

Veteran Member
I'm not sure, but I believe the trial he's talking about is the Kitzmiller, et al. v. Dover Area School District trial.


Interesting, but not surprising, that the creationists at the trial were dumbstruck by this news, but perhaps we have an intrepid creationist here who would like to take up the challenge and show where the evidence fails.

Anyone?
 

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
I did not know that part about 48->46 so that satisfied some scientific interest. But at the very end he also said that he was a Catholic who believed in a designer but not one that would "fool us". I would have loved to ask him about his beliefs.
 

YmirGF

Bodhisattva in Recovery
I'm not sure, but I believe the trial he's talking about is the Kitzmiller, et al. v. Dover Area School District trial.


Interesting, but not surprising, that the creationists at the trial were dumbstruck by this news, but perhaps we have an intrepid creationist here who would like to take up the challenge and show where the evidence fails.

Anyone?
But, but... what does this have to do with Adam & Eve?
 

It Aint Necessarily So

Veteran Member
Premium Member
I'm not sure, but I believe the trial he's talking about is the Kitzmiller, et al. v. Dover Area School District trial.


Interesting, but not surprising, that the creationists at the trial were dumbstruck by this news, but perhaps we have an intrepid creationist here who would like to take up the challenge and show where the evidence fails.

Anyone?

Yes, that's Kenneth Miller, and he was talking about the Kitzmiller trial. Human chromosome 2 is smoking gun evidence for common ancestry with the other great apes.
 

Muslim-UK

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Interesting, but not surprising, that the creationists at the trial were dumbstruck by this news, but perhaps we have an intrepid creationist here who would like to take up the challenge and show where the evidence fails.

Anyone?

In the 10th Century a famous Muslim Scholar wrote, “You think that Allah (swt) hasn’t created humans other than yourselves; but He has. He has created a thousand thousand [a million] “Adams”, and you are the descendants of the final “Adam”.

Book of Tawhid of Sheikh Saduq pg. 231
Al-Tawhid (book) - WikiShia

We come from Adam and Eve, peace be upon them, the final creation of 'man' kind, the Homo Sapiens dating approx 7,000 years ago. If we share common ancestry with apes, then that makes no difference to Muslims sharing the heritage of Abraham pbuh. Christians too shouldn't be worried unless their Bible says different?

1,400 Years ago God revealed the following verse:

Say, "Shall I inform you of [what is] worse than that as penalty from Allah? [It is that of] those whom Allah has cursed and with whom He became angry and made of them apes and pigs and slaves of <aghut, (idols). Those are worse in position and further astray from the sound way." Qur'an 5:60
 

The Holy Bottom Burp

Active Member
In the 10th Century a famous Muslim Scholar wrote, “You think that Allah (swt) hasn’t created humans other than yourselves; but He has. He has created a thousand thousand [a million] “Adams”, and you are the descendants of the final “Adam”.
So what? Is that meant to prove that a 10th century religious 'scholar' had any understanding of genomics or evolution? Dude, you need more than that to persuade people in the 21st century.
We come from Adam and Eve, peace be upon them, the final creation of 'man' kind, the Homo Sapiens dating approx 7,000 years ago. If we share common ancestry with apes, then that makes no difference to Muslims sharing the heritage of Abraham pbuh. Christians too shouldn't be worried unless their Bible says different?

Thanks for the religious unsupported assertions. As a man once said, what can asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. Religious text does not count as evidence btw, people don't buy it just because it is written in a holy book, would you accept that or do you think we should all believe the Quran just because you do?
1,400 Years ago God revealed the following verse:
Translated as "this was written by superstitious people 1,400 years ago":
Say, "Shall I inform you of [what is] worse than that as penalty from Allah? [It is that of] those whom Allah has cursed and with whom He became angry and made of them apes and pigs and slaves of <aghut, (idols). Those are worse in position and further astray from the sound way." Qur'an 5:60
Mate, I know nothing about you (how could I?) but from what you write you seem to be an intelligent chap, perhaps here to challenge Christians more than atheists like me? Whatever, I'd advise you to do a bit more work if you want to persuade anyone that what you say is true. There are some Christians on this forum who seem to think quoting bible verses adds weight to their argument. It doesn't. Similarly, quoting from the Quran adds nothing to what you assert. The simple fact is that people in educated first world countries are not prone to blindly accept the assertions made in religious scripture, you need a little more "supporting evidence".
 

The Holy Bottom Burp

Active Member
Hi,

I'm only pointing out to the OP, Evolution does not affect my faith in the slightest.
Sure, but I'd point out the OP was by somebody who does not subscribe to a religion (correct me if I'm wrong Skwim), and I agree that evolution should not effect your religious beliefs. It has no bearing on my lack of religious beliefs either. If evolution is proved false today, that does not prove a deity exists, correct? Theists sometimes seem to think that atheism is dependent on evolution. It isn't.
 

Muslim-UK

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Even though we have evidence of anatomically modern humans dating back 160,000 years?
200,000 years according to the latest discovery in Africa. Ultimately there were likely several species of Humans related to us going back God knows how far. Islam, Christianity and Judaism trace our routes back to Adam and Eve pbut and our history starts from approx 7,000 years. We don't need to know what those before Adam and Eve pbut followed or believed, it's irrelevant for our guidance.
 

Muslim-UK

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Sure, but I'd point out the OP was by somebody who does not subscribe to a religion (correct me if I'm wrong Skwim),
Whatever his beliefs, he asked for creationists to comment. I obliged.

and I agree that evolution should not effect your religious beliefs. It has no bearing on my lack of religious beliefs either. If evolution is proved false today, that does not prove a deity exists, correct? Theists sometimes seem to think that atheism is dependent on evolution. It isn't.
Correct as atheists want verifiable evidence for the existence of God.
 

Nietzsche

The Last Prussian
Premium Member
200,000 years according to the latest discovery in Africa. Ultimately there were likely several species of Humans related to us going back God knows how far. Islam, Christianity and Judaism trace our routes back to Adam and Eve pbut and our history starts from approx 7,000 years. We don't need to know what those before Adam and Eve pbut followed or believed, it's irrelevant for our guidance.
But these are not another species. These are modern humans. Genetically, anatomically and such the same as we are.
 

Muslim-UK

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
But these are not another species. These are modern humans. Genetically, anatomically and such the same as we are.
Can you provide a link to studies done?

I did a quick search:

Oldest Homo sapiens bones ever found shake foundations of the human story

In the first of two papers published in Nature on Wednesday, the researchers describe how they compared the freshly-excavated fossils with those of modern humans, Neanderthals and ancient human relatives that lived up to 1.8m years ago. Facially, the closest match was with modern humans. The lower jaw was similar to modern Homo sapiens too, but much larger. The most striking difference was the shape of the braincase which was more elongated than that of humans today. It suggests, said Hublin, that the modern brain evolved in Homo sapiens and was not inherited from a predecessor.

Apart from being more stout and muscular, the adults at Jebel Irhoud looked similar to people alive today. “The face of the specimen we found is the face of someone you could meet on the tube in London,” Hublin said. In a second paper, the scientists lay out how they dated the stone tools to between 280,000 and 350,000 years, and a lone tooth to 290,000 years old.

That sounds incredible, then further on we read,

Shea was also uneasy with the scientists combining fossils from different individuals, and comparing reconstructions of complete skulls from fragmentary remains. “Such ‘chimeras’ can look very different from the individuals on which they are based,” he said.

For me, claiming these remains are Homo sapiens stretches the meaning of that term a bit,” Shea added. “These humans who lived between 50,000-300,000 years ago are a morphologically diverse bunch. Whenever we find more than a couple of them from the same deposits, such as at Omo Kibish and Herto in Ethiopia or Skhul and Qafzeh in Israel, their morphology is all over the place both within and between samples.”

Interesting area of discovery none the less.
 
Last edited:

Nietzsche

The Last Prussian
Premium Member
For me, claiming these remains are Homo sapiens stretches the meaning of that term a bit,” Shea added. “These humans who lived between 50,000-300,000 years ago are a morphologically diverse bunch. Whenever we find more than a couple of them from the same deposits, such as at Omo Kibish and Herto in Ethiopia or Skhul and Qafzeh in Israel, their morphology is all over the place both within and between samples.”

Interesting area of discovery none the less.
Even if we do not date back 100,000+ years, 7,000 is far too late. There are civilizations older than 7,000 years, and we most certainly did not just "show up" biologically as we are now and immediately begin work on agriculture, civilization and the like. That just doesn't make sense.

Not saying this means your faith is wrong. It's just there are a number of things that are better taken metaphorically, poetically or simply seen as misunderstandings by a people who frankly weren't very knowledgeable, like any other group of people from the same era.
 

omega2xx

Well-Known Member
I'm not sure, but I believe the trial he's talking about is the Kitzmiller, et al. v. Dover Area School District trial.


Interesting, but not surprising, that the creationists at the trial were dumbstruck by this news, but perhaps we have an intrepid creationist here who would like to take up the challenge and show where the evidence fails.

Anyone?


Once upon a time...and they live happily ever after.

I wonder why he didn't tell us all how we developed speech and apes can still only grunt.
 
Last edited:

Muslim-UK

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Here's a press release from Berkley about a specific anatomically modern human fossil;

160,000-year-old fossilized skulls uncovered in Ethiopia are oldest anatomically modern humans

Interesting and not conclusive, much like what I posted from the Guardian Science story. I also had a look at what Christian creationists had to say about it. They are in quite the pickle over it as they advocate a young Earth: Ethiopian 'earliest humans' find - creation.com

"the Ethiopian skeletal remains are not totally dissociated anatomically from ‘earlier’ type human bones, i.e. despite being clearly Homo sapiens, they show some features reminiscent of ‘archaic human anatomy. Hence the suggestion that they be given the fuller name Homo sapiens idàltu, indicating that they are a subspecies (i.e. subgroup) of our species."
 
Top