If we evolved from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?

a reply to: Wolfenz

hmm Interesting, thanks for that.

There's a lot to read here, this will take some time.

So, what's your take on this place we call reality?

I tend to believe it's all subliminal in nature, everything we see touch and feel, in fact experience.

But that's just what i acknowledge about it. There's more but perhaps for another thread.

originally posted by: georgeglass
a reply to: secretboss

Great question. I have asked the same thing many times.

I think we are alien to this planet!

No it's a horrible question. Have to go way back in the evolutionary tree to see the split. Didn't they teach you this stuff in school? And yes the world is far older than 5000 years. Don't believe the hype.

a reply to: ScoobyWho

It presumes that they were taught any natural history, evolution, or the like at school. Given certain states histories of banning evolution being taught, is it a shock people either do not know, or can't understand it?

originally posted by: Noinden
a reply to: ScoobyWho

It presumes that they were taught any natural history, evolution, or the like at school. Given certain states histories of banning evolution being taught, is it a shock people either do not know, or can't understand it?

That's nothing! Imagine the shock you get when you finally leave your sheltered hometown, go off to college and learn just about everything you've been told about life was a lie.
This is why we have so many new atheist, their pissed and understandably they feel betrayed.
The reality is that these creationist are doing and have done more damage to their faith than any atheist ever could. Their failure to understand lies have short legs, will be their undoing.

a reply to: flyingfish

Thats a somewhat Americentric view of the western world Though this is an almost totally US specific problem. Our (New Zealand) young earthers tend to form AMish like communities to hide or are the angry ones (when the bulk of the population look at them like they are idiots).

originally posted by: spy66
a reply to: Barcs


There is no doubt in my mind. Non of us will be a live to see the day.


We can at best only manipulate and exstract from what is already alive. Building a code from scratch that will form a single life that will sustain it self....naaa..

If you tried to talk to somebody 500 years ago about cell phones and computers, they would probably have the same doubts as you right now. You are certainly welcome to that opinion, but we are far from the pinnacle of human understanding and it's a bit shortsighted to claim it will never happen, just because you don't understand it, today.

On top of that the code would have to include the formula for the lifeform to grow and evolve to become something functional.

But this formula is not included in modern DNA, so why would we need to be able to program this? Genetic mutations happen due to external factors. They don't just happen without cause and it certainly isn't programmed to mutate. It happens, and when it does it can change the code. It's like eating a steak and being unable to understand how a burger is different, and claiming that you need to program the steak to be able to be ground into a burger. That's not how it works.

Yes we can build machines (AI's) that are programed to produce, but to build something organic like a cell and have it programed to becomming something usefull is a different reality. Just the Word usefull is a wide definition.

We can program computer software today to be useful, plus normal cells aren't even programmed to be useful. They have functionality that is determined by the code, and that code can change due to external factors. You are inventing some magical programming that is not necessary. All something like that needs to be able to do is reproduce. I bet humans could produce something better than DNA given enough time. DNA is faulty and leads to countless mutations per generation in a single individual. Many of these are due to problems with copying. Are you trying to say that they are intentionally designed to have problems replicating?

a reply to: Barcs


In 20 years i will be Reading this same old story. And you People will have the same old arguments.

originally posted by: spy66
a reply to: Barcs


In 20 years i will be Reading this same old story. And you People will have the same old arguments.

Not very likely. People like you made similar statements regarding Clovis first and the impossibility of Pleistocene hominid admixture just 20 years ago. 30 years ago, I was told We would never be able to image an extrasolar planet. They're all singing a different tune these days though. At the rate advancements are being made, 20 or 30 years might as well be a millennia because today's improbable is tomorrow's fact

a reply to: spy66

So you reread the same old crud over and over? Science changes, with the information. Creationism relies on a single, dubious source

originally posted by: Noinden
a reply to: spy66

So you reread the same old crud over and over? Science changes, with the information. Creationism relies on a single, dubious source

What we will read asbout is the evolution of Technology. What does that have to do With human evolution?

originally posted by: spy66
a reply to: Barcs


In 20 years i will be Reading this same old story. And you People will have the same old arguments.

Science has actually changed quite a bit in the past 20 years. 20 years from now there will be new arguments, based on new evidence, because no doubt there will be more evolutionary evidence found and the picture will keep getting more and more complete.

In the meantime creationists will still be clinging to the same old outdated arguments that they have been saying for well over a hundred years now. They have been blindly fighting Darwin and evolution every step of the way. Many still use the same archaic terminology from the 1800s (Darwinist, Darwinism, evolutionist, etc) and laughably attack Darwin today, ignoring a century's worth of discoveries and evidence.

a reply to: Barcs



In 20 years we might not even have the Technology to communicate like we do today. All it takes is a world war. And its back to clean sheets.

a reply to: spy66

Gee whats is the topic of the thread? But to answer this a little: as technology has advanced, we have delved deeper into the mysteries of evolution, and found it confirmed as the most likely thing that causes speciation

originally posted by: secretboss
Why are there still monkeys? Shouldnt they have all "evolved" into humans, or human-like beings by now?

How come chimpanzees, gorillas, orangutans and other types of monkeys aren't building their own primitive civilizations? Where are their cave paintings?



If evolution was true, shouldnt monkeys be resembling primitive cavemen by now?

I think the universe saw that after it spawned humans, and saw them become dumber than monkeys, that it went back to making monkeys and just ignored humans, so we are now like a missing link

a reply to: Noinden


I have never said that evolution never tok Place. I just dont think humans have evolved from a different animal. And we have not evolved since we started to record history. And there is no recorded history to this day that prove we have evovled from something else.

The only thing that have evolved is what we have written, made and built.

a reply to: secretboss

Perhaps some Monkey's thought evolving into Humans was a step backward

The monkeys think they do a bit better.

That's a Excellent Question and I would Like the Answer as well ???

originally posted by: bobw927
That's a Excellent Question and I would Like the Answer as well ???

Then read the thread. It's been answered in multiplicity over the course of 23 pages.

originally posted by: spy66
a reply to: Noinden


I have never said that evolution never tok Place. I just dont think humans have evolved from a different animal.

Why are humans special and different from every other animal that has lived on Earth the last 500 million years or so?

And we have not evolved since we started to record history.

And there is no recorded history to this day that prove we have evovled from something else.

What is your threshold for recorded history? Written language? Pleistocene cave art? What is it that YOU are willing to accept as a historical record?

If your cutoff for acceptable method of recording is written language, how much evolution do you expect to see in less than 6 KA? Do you understand that there are genetic differences and changes in you that did not exist in your own parents? Evolution, in simplified terms, is a measurement of the change in allele frequency over time.

The only thing that have evolved is what we have written, made and built.

So sickle cell anemia which protects young against Malaria and only appeared in the last 3-4 KA doesn't count? What about the variation the emerged independently in Pakistan and N. India, confers the same protections and arose quite recently? Lactase persistence in people of Northern European descent. Does that exist? It only appeared recently in human history with the advent of animal husbandry. Average cranial capacity has slowly become less over the last 10 KA. Or does that not count because there was no written word? Just trying to understand the rationale on play here.