Proof of evolution -at last-

[Dan From Smithville]

You might think we owe our lives to other humans. In a sense that's true. Otoh, evolution means death of the being.

That is wild speculation and nothing claimed by science or by the theory. The theory is about change in living things over time. Now you are speculating that it is about death and that makes no sense.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Yeah an unknown starter that burgeoned off to bonobos, chimpanzees, gorillas, etc. And maybe last? Humans. Just nothing but supposeds left. No proof, nothing.

Can you clarify and simply this? Perhaps set the stage a little so I can know what you are talking about? Are you on about common ancestry and your confusion about proof again?

 

[YoursTrue]

That is wild speculation and nothing claimed by science or by the theory. The theory is about change in living things over time. Now you are speculating that it is about death and that makes no sense.

You don't owe your life to a sperm joining with an egg?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

You don't owe your life to a sperm joining with an egg?

I have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[gnostic]

Different discipline but equally important to evolutionary biology in my opinion.

You don’t need Abiogenesis to understand Evolutionary Biology, setarcos.

Most biologists and biology teachers/students only focus on evolution, because Abiogenesis is very narrowly focused deal with how cells form from organic matters (biological macromolecules, eg proteins (which themselves made of chain of biological compounds, amino acids), nucleic acids (RNA, DNA), carbohydrates)

...and the chemical origin of each these biological macromolecules, through explanations, predictions and testings.

“Tests” as in experiments, eg Miller-Urey experiment (1952), that used inorganic chemicals to make amino acids; as in observations of physical evidence, eg a number of different organic matters discovered inside the Murchison Meteor (1969), eg

• amino acids, of which 15 of these found in meteorite, are naturally occurring on Earth, since they are building blocks of number different types of proteins.
• carboxylic acids, which you would find in fatty acids and in amino acids,
• a couple types of hydrocarbons,
• nucleobase chemicals like purines and pyrimidines; compounds, where nucleobase is one of components in nucleic acids, etc).

As the Murchison meteorite was undisturbed for billions of years before it crashed near the town of Murchison, Victoria (Australia) in 1969, some Abiogenesis researchers have explained in their model, that other asteroids and meteorite have seeded the young Earth with organic compounds, over 4 billion years ago. Hence the extraterrestrial model of Abiogenesis, is a valid hypothesis.

Abiogenesis is not just about the origin of life, but also the origin of any organic compounds, especially those 3 biological macromolecules I have already mentioned.

 

[gnostic]

Rather than a denier of evolution being thought of as heathen, seems that uneducated or stupid fits. But you're right in that someone who doesn't believe in the ToE is generally waved off as dumb.

You continued to be confused as to not being able to distinguish Evolution from Abiogenesis, proofs from evidence, so when you keep repeating the same mistakes over and over again, refusing to make the effort to learn what they each and to learn from your mistakes so you don’t repeat, than that’s very definition of “ignorance”.

And when you ask for evidence and people show them to you these evidence that you ask for, but a few days, weeks or months later, you repeat the same requests again, then you are in self-denial or you have deliberately ignore them, claiming no evidence were shown, then you are making things up.

And when you make up claims about biologists saying things that no biologists would say, thinking we won’t know you are trying to deceive us, which you do quite often, no one is going to take you seriously. Here are some examples of you doing exactly that:

Assumptions of life, that's interesting. Now now wonder why one has to assume something or other about how life on the earth got started. Maybe a martian can land and explain.

Yeah an unknown starter that burgeoned off to bonobos, chimpanzees, gorillas, etc. And maybe last? Humans. Just nothing but supposeds left. No proof, nothing.

You have no one else to blame for your ignorance, self-denial and dishonesty, except yourself.

 

[YoursTrue]

I have no idea what you are talking about.

I said that we all owe our lives in part to our parents. You were talking about common ancestry. I said that the ToE always has death of the organism as the final result of a being. Gorillas have gorilla parents, humans have human parents and the ToE has death as natural outcome. Death is the natural outcome.

 

[Mark Charles Compton]

You might think we owe our lives to other humans. In a sense that's true. Otoh, evolution means death of the being.

@Dan From Smithville

I was pondering this myself. I would say through genetic procreation, we carry along with us the shadow of our ancestors. So, perhaps evolution in addition to genetic progenitors, it's the next best thing from immortality.

 

[YoursTrue]

Can you clarify and simply this? Perhaps set the stage a little so I can know what you are talking about? Are you on about common ancestry and your confusion about proof again?

Once again, the common ancestor of the beings that triggered the outgrowth of gorillas, bonobos, humans, etc. Is unknown. Which is one reason I said we owe our lives (in part) to the meeting of sperm and egg. Human, that is. Gorillas have gorilla parents.

 

[YoursTrue]

@Dan From Smithville

I was pondering this myself. I would say through genetic procreation, we carry along with us the shadow of our ancestors. So, perhaps evolution in addition to genetic progenitors, it's the next best thing from immortality.

The Bible explains that God can overcome death by resurrection. Gorillas, elephants, cows, etc. do not talk about or write about why they die.

 

[shunyadragon]

it remains that until I examined more thoroughly the theory yes, after I began to believe what the Bible says, I believed in evolution. Now I do not as the reason we are alive.

You have never revealed the knowledge necessary nor the references supporting your supposed examination 'thoroughly?' the theory, which you reject. It is glaringly apparent that you never evaluated the science of evlution in an unbiased way based on the knowledge of science. All you have revealed in this and all other threads is your intentional ignorance concerning the sciences of evolution.

By the way it is not really a theory in contemporary scientific sense.

 

[shunyadragon]

You might think we owe our lives to other humans. In a sense that's true. Otoh, evolution means death of the being.

Huh? Incomprehensible.

 

[Mark Charles Compton]

Gorillas, elephants, cows, etc. do not talk about or write about why they die.

Well, I can only give gravity to the idea of your stance that evolution represents species' finality, if I view it through the lens of metaphor.

Same as my stance that it's closer to extension of life. Closer to immortality, not further. My anecdotal to back my metaphor: I have ~0.2% Neanderthal DNA according to the 23andme test I took.

This makes me one of many whom are technically keeping the torch lit for their segment of the hominid family, no? As long as a living successor holds a sliver of our DNA, they're keeping our flame alive. Does that make sense, metaphorically?

 

[Valjean]

We don’t even have the same flesh as apes, think a little about the practical application of what you propose with evolution, how could this work?

Same flesh as apes??? What does that mean?
Practical application? How are you using "application?" Do you mean utility? What does utility have to do with taxonomy? Do you understand how biological taxonomy works?

Even start with the ape community, they mate and have other apes. When did this transition happen to human? You can’t see the obvious problem with your theory?

No, please explain.
Chimp apes mate with other chimps, and make more chimps. Orang-utan apes mate with other orangs, and make more orangs. Human apes mate with other humans and make more humans. Every ape species mates with other apes of the same species, and makes more apes. How is this not obvious?

When did this transition happen? The 1st H. sapiens

Overview of Hominin Evolution | Learn Science at Scitable

No one has ever observed evolution, there are no transitional fossils at all, see my article on the missing transitional fossils here. Evolution either has to be drawn, illustrated, or animated, which means evolution is only true in a virtual world, or someone's imagination.

This is just flat-out wrong, and is easily demonstrated to be wrong.
Evolution is observed every day, Humans have been using it in agriculture and animal husbandry for thousands of years.
We have witnessed new species arise within human memory. You've already seen the links -- are you ignoring them?

Every fossil is transitional. Every fossil had previous forms, and most generated later forms. Every form along a timeline is a transition to the next.

Seriously?!
They are extinct. How do you not know this?
Species go extinct all the time. Few last very long, geologically speaking.

 

[Valjean]

Well you can classify yourself as an ape if you like but that’s not me so…
Definition of APE

How does that definition further your case?

We are not plants, bacteria or fungi, we are ANIMALS.
We are not fish or birds, or insects, we're are MAMMALS
We are not ungulates, rodents or canids, we're PRIMATES.
We're not lemurs, monkeys or tree shrews, we're APES.

Well it’s a bogus assumption to believe or classify humans in the same category as apes or any animal seen as we are in a totally different class, made in the image of God our Creator. He gave us authority and rule over the animal kingdom as we see right now in the Earth.

You're preaching.
Your only source of these beliefs is ancient writings by men who knew nothing about biology.
Apart from folklore, there's not an iota of evidence supporting any of this. You're belief is entirely emotional.

 

[Valjean]

Can’t take this as a serious comment

Does mankind rule over the animals? Yes without dispute we do yet you say we don’t. How is that a rational thought you had?

The animal kingdom thrived for hundreds of millions of years before humans ever appeared on the scene. We've only been here ~200,000 years, and we're already on the verge of extinction.
It doesn't look like we're a very successful species.

Nobody rules any kingdom. There is no administration, jurisdiction or laws.

Does mankind rule over the animals? Yes without dispute we do yet you say we don’t. How is that a rational thought you had?

How the heck are you defining "rule over?" You're using it in a very odd sense.
How many animals are aware that they're ruled by humans?

 

[Valjean]

Rather than a denier of evolution being thought of as heathen, seems that uneducated or stupid fits. But you're right in that someone who doesn't believe in the ToE is generally waved off as dumb.

Rather, ignorant.

It is obviously dependent on something that supposedly started the process.

And automotive engineering depends on the stellar nuclear fusion that created the materials it works with, so is nuclear physics or cosmology considered part of automotive engineering?

Yeah an unknown starter that burgeoned off to bonobos, chimpanzees, gorillas, etc. And maybe last? Humans. Just nothing but supposeds left. No proof, nothing.

No, you know perfectly well that there is overwhelming, consilient evidence, and you know you're using "proof" as a strawman, as well.
We've explained this in dozens of threads for over a decade. I think you're being deliberately obtuse.

You might think we owe our lives to other humans. In a sense that's true. Otoh, evolution means death of thebeing

???? -- Please explain.

 

[Valjean]

Yeah an unknown starter that burgeoned off to bonobos, chimpanzees, gorillas, etc. And maybe last? Humans. Just nothing but supposeds left. No proof, nothing.

No, you know perfectly well that there is overwhelming, consilient evidence, and you know you're using "proof" as a strawman, as well.
We've explained this in dozens of threads for over a decade. I think you're being delberately obtuse.

You might think we owe our lives to other humans. In a sense that's true. Otoh, evolution means death of the being.

I said that we all owe our lives in part to our parents. You were talking about common ancestry. I said that the ToE always has death of the organism as the final result of a being. Gorillas have gorilla parents, humans have human parents and the ToE has death as natural outcome. Death is the natural outcome.

OK... But I don't see your point.

 

[Valjean]

The Bible explains that God can overcome death by resurrection. Gorillas, elephants, cows, etc. do not talk about or write about why they die.

And the scriptures of other religions and cultures paint different pictures.
Please explain why the Bible is any more authoritative than any other religious narrative.
All are folklore. None has any empirical evidence supporting their theology.

 

[Valjean]

No I didn’t say that, but I will say like begets like. A fish will not change into an ape, human or an insect.

And a seed will not change into a tree?