No boundaries have ever been found. As long as the selection pressure is less than the mutation rate, the changes can continue to add up over the generations.
-
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!
Scientific Evidence for Universal Common Descent
- Thread starter usfan
- Start date
- Status
No boundaries have ever been found. As long as the selection pressure is less than the mutation rate, the changes can continue to add up over the generations.
YoursTrue
Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
IF I were to go along with the classifications of evolution, I would agree that I am what you say. On the other hand, apes are still apes and not on their way in any shape or form to either becoming human or another type. Maybe with another eye, etc.
You know for its betterment perhaps?Here is one definition of ape:
"Apes are humanity's closest living relatives. In fact, people are apes; humans share about 98 percent of their DNA with chimpanzees. The non-human types of apes are divided into two groups: great apes — gorillas, bonobos, chimpanzees and orangutans — and lesser apes — gibbons and siamangs.May 29, 2015
Facts About Apes | Live Science"
Facts About Apes
Shall I say from that explanation that apes are not human <smile>, but are "humanity's closest living relatives." And, according to that definition, people are apes. But of course, apes are not people. again -- <smile> Well, there's more. But that they are said to share about 98% of their DNA does not prove that humans evolved from -- apes.
YoursTrue
Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
Again, humans remain humans and apes are apes. Or shall I say, chimpanzees are not humans. (or are they? <g>)
YoursTrue
Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
I don't see any evidence that chimpanzees are evolving into something else, do you? They, for all recognizable observances, remain chimpanzees, not currently morphing into another genetic form.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
IF I were to go along with the classifications of evolution, I would agree that I am what you say. On the other hand, apes are still apes and not on their way in any shape or form to either becoming human or another type. Maybe with another eye, etc.
Here is one definition of ape:
"Apes are humanity's closest living relatives. In fact, people are apes; humans share about 98 percent of their DNA with chimpanzees. The non-human types of apes are divided into two groups: great apes — gorillas, bonobos, chimpanzees and orangutans — and lesser apes — gibbons and siamangs.May 29, 2015
Facts About Apes | Live Science"
Facts About Apes
Shall I say from that explanation that apes are not human <smile>, but are "humanity's closest living relatives." And, according to that definition, people are apes. But of course, apes are not people. again -- <smile> Well, there's more. But that they are said to share about 98% of their DNA does not prove that humans evolved from -- apes.
IF I were to go along with the classifications of evolution, I would agree that I am what you say. On the other hand, apes are still apes and not on their way in any shape or form to either becoming human or another type. Maybe with another eye, etc.
Here is one definition of ape:
"Apes are humanity's closest living relatives. In fact, people are apes; humans share about 98 percent of their DNA with chimpanzees. The non-human types of apes are divided into two groups: great apes — gorillas, bonobos, chimpanzees and orangutans — and lesser apes — gibbons and siamangs.May 29, 2015
Facts About Apes | Live Science"
Facts About Apes
Shall I say from that explanation that apes are not human <smile>, but are "humanity's closest living relatives." And, according to that definition, people are apes. But of course, apes are not people. again -- <smile> Well, there's more. But that they are said to share about 98% of their DNA does not prove that humans evolved from -- apes.
You really need to do more than to merely read the title and the first sentence of the articles you use. From your own source:
" In fact, people are apes; humans share about 98 percent of their DNA with chimpanzees. "
The author of that paper knew that people were apes and made it clear.
Humans are a type of ape. So yes, apes have stayed apes and some have become human.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
What do you mean by "evolving into something else"? That does not describe evolution. You appear to be making the error of assuming that there is a goal to evolution. The concept of "change of kind" is incorrect. There is no change of kind in evolution. You refute your own arguments by using such poor terminology.
Again, over the course of millions of years, yes they have. Modern chimps did not exist 4 million years ago.
These processes take a *long* time. They don't happen in a couple of centuries, or even in a few thousand years.
I have previously posted this a few times. Enjoy!
1) Are you made of complex cells with internal organelles? If so, you are a eucaryote.
2) Do your cells have membranes made of lipids rather than walls made from glucosides and are they surrounded by an extracellular matrix composed of collagen and glycoproteins? Then you are an Animal.
3) During embryo development, does the blastopore (the first opening) become the anus? Then you are a Deuterostome.
4) Do you have a head, backbone, brain, red blood cells, and kidneys? Then you are a Vertebrate.
5) Are air-breathing, have hair, three ear bones, sweat glands, the ability to regulate internal temperature and specialized teeth? Then you are a Mammal.
6) Do you lack an epi-pubic bone and do females like you have a uterus which produces a placenta during pregnancy? Then you are a placental Mammal.
7) Do you have a collar bone, opposable fingers, a flat nail on fingers and toes, eye sockets made from bone, stereoscopic vision, an enlarged cerebral cortex? Then you are a Primate.
8) Do you have a narrow nose and downward pointed nostrils, broad rib cage, a fused frontal bone, convoluted cerebral hemispheres, a large brain for his size of mammal, color vision, a lack of tail, and a lack of cheek pouches? Then you are an Ape.
So, yes, if you are human, then you *are* an ape.
1) Are you made of complex cells with internal organelles? If so, you are a eucaryote.
2) Do your cells have membranes made of lipids rather than walls made from glucosides and are they surrounded by an extracellular matrix composed of collagen and glycoproteins? Then you are an Animal.
3) During embryo development, does the blastopore (the first opening) become the anus? Then you are a Deuterostome.
4) Do you have a head, backbone, brain, red blood cells, and kidneys? Then you are a Vertebrate.
5) Are air-breathing, have hair, three ear bones, sweat glands, the ability to regulate internal temperature and specialized teeth? Then you are a Mammal.
6) Do you lack an epi-pubic bone and do females like you have a uterus which produces a placenta during pregnancy? Then you are a placental Mammal.
7) Do you have a collar bone, opposable fingers, a flat nail on fingers and toes, eye sockets made from bone, stereoscopic vision, an enlarged cerebral cortex? Then you are a Primate.
8) Do you have a narrow nose and downward pointed nostrils, broad rib cage, a fused frontal bone, convoluted cerebral hemispheres, a large brain for his size of mammal, color vision, a lack of tail, and a lack of cheek pouches? Then you are an Ape.
So, yes, if you are human, then you *are* an ape.
YoursTrue
Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
That is his viewpoint. Again, that humans share about 98% of their DNA with chimpanzees does not prove that chimpanzees evolved to humans, humans are not chimpanzees. And chimpanzees are not humans. If you think so, then that is your viewpoint. It's not mine, and I don't see science to back that up.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
You would be wrong. Humans remain apes because the ancestor that we share with chimpanzees and bonobos was an ape. And we are apes because the ancestor that humans, chimps and bonobos share with a gorilla was also an ape. And we are still apes because the ancestor that humans, chimps, bonobos, and gorillas share with orangutans was an ape.
Let me put it this way, populations cannot evolve out of their heritage.
No chimps did not evolve into humans. But chimps and humans both evolved from a common ancestor. And that common ancestor was an ape also.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Once again, chimpanzees did not evolve into humans. Why do you continue to make that poor argument?
And the fact is that you just admitted that you do not even understand the basics of science. That is why I always end up offering to go over the basics of science, no need to even bring evolution into it yest, and creationists always run away and then complain when people point out their ignorance.
So would you like to go over the basics of science first?
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
This is akin to saying that the French language evolved into Spanish. Perhaps I should have used the similarity of how languages arise to how species arise.
YoursTrue
Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
No, perhaps my terminology is not up to scientific par, but then I am not a scientist or expert in evolution. I do not think or say there is a goal to evolution. But, if evolution is an ongoing concept, meaning it doesn't stop, still so far sparrows remain sparrows, chimps remain chimps, and humans remain humans.
P.S. OK, maybe evolution does stop. <g> What do you think? Does or can evolution stop? Meaning, chimps remain chimps, humans remain humans, elephants remain elephants without evolving, like from chimps to eventual humans? Don't know what animal scientists claim came before just before elephants and evolved (I sometimes say morphed) into an elephant.
Jim
Nets of Wonder
Actually, at this point I’m not questioning anything else in evolution theory, other than viewing a common ancestor for all living creatures as a part of the history of life on earth. In fact, I’m not even objecting to that. All I’m objecting to is stigmatizing people who don’t believe that.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
And that is why you should at least learn the basics of science, it will not take to terribly long, before you try to claim that there is no evidence for evolution. When the facts are that there is only scientific evidence for evolution. That fact is why it is so well accepted by scientists. There has been evidence against minor hypotheses within the theory. That is how science advances. Hypotheses and theories are formed and then tested and when necessary changed.
And of course chimps remain chimps. And humans remain humans. But they both remain apes as well. Even if a sparrow later evolved so that it was as large as an ostrich it would still be a "sparrow".
By the way, that is why sparrows are also dinosaurs. When scientist realized that birds are descended from dinosaurs they clarified the K-T extinction a bit. That was when non-avian dinosaurs went extinct.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Jim
Nets of Wonder
I told you, I don’t play that game. My online games are WoW and some phone games.
YoursTrue
Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
OK, let's get down to basics. Which animal prior to what you would call the human animal evolved into what you would call the human animal?
- Status