Why has man never evolved?

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Evolution implies a change for the better, doesn't it?

No, not necessarily. It can also favor the neutral, meaning something that is neither beneficial nor harmful.

Also, it only implies "better" in the sense of "better adapted to the immediate environment". There's no steady march of progress or anything like that. If a species can find a niche where less complexity makes it better adapted (as many parasites have), it ends up less complex.

 

[Autodidact]

Ok that is a faith statement (nothing wrong with that). But most people on this forum seem to talk about science but remember science is knowledge from observation, we can not observe evolution (this always gets brought up by creationists). Nobody was there to observe this so called evolution over "thousands and millions of years" (this gets brought up by creationists). So at the end of the day creationism and evolution they are both faith based. The thinker has to choose between which one he/she believes is truth. I believe humans have been on earth for 2 billion years. No evolution for me. : hamster :

Evolution is science. Are you in favor of science, or opposed?

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Evolution is science. Are you in favor of science, or opposed?

that's a trick question

 

[jarofthoughts]

Is it only considered "evolution" when it's the body that is changing?

Not all genetic changes give rise to phenotypical expressions and even those that do may or may not be neutral, positive or negative.
See here for more on phenotypes: Phenotype - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What about evolution of the mind?

The mind, whatever you choose to put under that label, is a result the reactions, mainly electrochemical but also physical, that take place in the brain and are as such a phenotypical expression.

What about spiritual evolution?

I have no idea what you mean by that. Elaborate please.

 

[Midnight Pete]

No, not necessarily. It can also favor the neutral, meaning something that is neither beneficial nor harmful.

Interesting ...

It's easy to think that evolution has a mind of its own. Fire is like this, too.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Is it only considered "evolution" when it's the body that is changing?

It is considered evolution when the offspring cannot or will not mate with their predecessors which does bring into consideration if, when in one's mind they will not mate with ugly people, is this speciation.

 

[jarofthoughts]

Evolution implies a change for the better, doesn't it?

Not necessarily. The textbook definition of Biological Evolution is change in allele frequencies over time, which, by the way, is an observable fact.

That means, somewhat simplified, that if 10% of a population has blue eyes at a certain point in time and ten years later that number has changed to 11%, that evolution has taken place.

Also, "change for the better" is a tentative term. In short, evolution does not mean a constant uphill struggle for more complexity but rather that natural selection works on the overall adaptation of a species with regards to its environment. And if less complex works better than more complex, less complex is often the direction it takes. This can be seen in certain cave dwelling animals that have degenerate non-functioning eyes as having eyes in an environment without light is a waste of resources.

 

[painted wolf]

Evolution implies a change for the better, doesn't it?

Nope, just change... "better" and "worse" are useless metrics when addressing a species evolution.
Is a lion "better" than a tiger or an eagle or an amoeba? How would one judge "betterness"?

Evolution is simply a change in allele (gene variants) frequencies in a population over time.
A good human example is the spread of adult lactose tolerance genes in the human population. Or the blue eye gene which has been traced to a single mutation in one person between 6,000 and 10,000 years ago.

wa:do

 

[Midnight Pete]

Spiritual evolution is the challenge we face today, yet so overlooked in favour of technology.

 

[Willamena]

Evolution implies a change for the better, doesn't it?

Are legs better than fins?

 

[painted wolf]

Spiritual evolution is the challenge we face today, yet so overlooked in favour of technology.

However, that is not necessarily an issue for biological evolution.

Unless you view spirituality as a genetic trait.

And IMHO we face a great number of challenges today, not all of them involving the appropriate use of technology.

wa:do

 

[Midnight Pete]

Are legs better than fins?

For a human they are. But not for a fish.

 

[Autodidact]

If evolution is true why has man never evolved? I collect alot of old paintings and ornaments now when you look at these some of which are 1000s of years old, man still looks exactly the same as he did then as today, so when exactly are humans meant to evolve? If you go to your local art gallery or history museum and compare how people looked 1000s of years ago to today, we have not changed at all in physical appearance. There is no change. There clearly is no evolution. So to the evolutionists on this forum when are humans meant to evolve?

Humanity has been around for 100,000 to 200,000 years. We have been evolving all that time. Pictures from 1000 years ago will not show you that. We are continuing to evolve today, as is every species on earth.

 

[Autodidact]

Ok that is a faith statement (nothing wrong with that). But most people on this forum seem to talk about science but remember science is knowledge from observation, we can not observe evolution (this always gets brought up by creationists). Nobody was there to observe this so called evolution over "thousands and millions of years" (this gets brought up by creationists). So at the end of the day creationism and evolution they are both faith based. The thinker has to choose between which one he/she believes is truth. I believe humans have been on earth for 2 billion years. No evolution for me. : hamster :

The facts that the Theory of Evolution is based on are observed. Science is not just what we observe--it's what we figure out based on what we observe. So, again, science: for or against?
Oh, and we do observe evolution all the time.
My guess is that you know almost nothing about the subject have never studied Biology, and don't know what science is or what the Theory of Evolution says. Am I right?

 

[outhouse]

Humanity has been around for 100,000 to 200,000 years. We have been evolving all that time. Pictures from 1000 years ago will not show you that. We are continuing to evolve today, as is every species on earth.

actually homo sapiens have been here 200,000 years

We can be traced back to a region in africa when we were all one species.

we evolved before that time, we have evolved since then, we are evolving now.

Some poster said we cant see evolution happening and in all cases that is false

 

[Autodidact]

They have found skeletons of giants.



Giant human skeleton found in Saudi Arabia



And you are saying people used to be smaller... lol:fox:

Sorry, you've been punked.

This classic leg-pull has now been circulating via email, blogs and forums for several years and has even been published by some news outlets as factual. In fact, the "giant skeleton" images that travel with these messages are not photographs depicting real discoveries but instead clever manipulations. A lot of recipients would be quick to doubt the authenticity of the images. However, submissions indicate that the high quality of the fake images coupled with the vaguely plausible explanations that accompany them are apparently enough to convince many recipients that the "discoveries" are genuine.

from here.

In reality, the picture was created in 2002 by "IronKite," a member of Worth1000.com who had submitted it as an entry in an "Archaeological Anomalies" photo contest. The contest rules challenged entrants to "create an archaeological hoax... show a picture of an archaeological discovery that looks so real, had it not appeared at Worth1000, people might have done a double take."

from here.

Ever visited a museum with actual mummies or even medieval knights? They're considerably smaller than modern Egyptians or Europeans.

 

[Autodidact]

They have found giant skeletons they have been dug up. What has this got anything to do with "Poe's law"? Do you call anyone a poe who doesn't fit in with your own beliefs? I read a book last week from an evolutionist who said humans evolved from fish (i thought it was a crackpot idea) but i didn't mock the author, i respect that people have different ideas and beliefs, parody is not involved clearly people do believe in different things. You need to learn to respect the fact that people have different beliefs.

Do you have a source for such giants that is not a hoax?

I respect that you have beliefs. They happen to be false.

 

[Autodidact]

I do not believe all of them are fakes. Many interesting anomalies over the years have been dug up they are not fake. I will be making a post on this in a few months listing alot of dug up anomalies which evolutionists can not explain.

O.K., find one.

 

[Autodidact]

Evolution implies a change for the better, doesn't it?

No. It means change that more successfully adapts to the environment.

 

[Tristesse]

Spiritual evolution is the challenge we face today, yet so overlooked in favour of technology.

Spititual evolution has no meaning until you can demonstrate that spirituality is something.