I have a question for some of you creationists-why do you find it so insulting to be related to apes

I just read a good book that you all might find interesting here, "Journey into Light" by wells

IF we evolved from other animals, why are those animals still on earth?

Zacharia Sitchin has an interesting take on evolution.

I guess it is similar to the alien issue, so many disbelieve the possibility because that would mean changing our perspective of the universe.

I read an interesting interveiw of a man who claimed to be a security guard at the Dulce New mexico underground facility with aleins and they claim to be the first inhabitants on earth, so many they did DNA manipulation with apes and created us. Or maybe we are their decendants.

In till we know absolute truth on our exisstence, does it really matter who believes what? Until it is proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, then they may be right also.

ShiningSabrewolf:
creationists-why do you find it so insulting to be related to apes

From what I've gathered from my christian friends, they're taught that animals were placed here on earth specifically to serve as food and slaves for us. They're taught that animals are lesser beings.

Revolution-2012:
I just dont see the link from cave man to man, like the episode from south park, some fish had a retarded baby that walked on land and that retarded baby had a retarded baby with a mouse then all of them some how manifested into a human??

If you choose to look at something in a way specifically with the intent of making it look foolish, you're likely to have a different perception of it that if you look at something specifically with the intent to try to relate to it. For example, "God loves you so much that he sent his own son to die in your place" probably sounds more reasonable than "God has multiple personalities, and one of his personalities made a rule that you have to kill animals to pay for breaking his rules, and eventually he decided to change that rule and killed one of his other personalities to pay for you breaking his rules."

But both are simply different perspectives of the same idea. You can look at evolution in a way that seems reasonable or ridulous, too.

Conclusion:
if evolution from a different type of animal has occurred,
then evolution would be an on going process.

It is. Simply on a scale that isn't practical to view with a single lifetime. If you want to see evolution in action, it may be helpful to look at creatures with a shorter lifespan.

Taz4591:
Generally, atheists, agnostics, creationist, etc choose their
beliefs based on proof exhibited to them.

I'm not certain this is true. An athiest saying "Oh, I believe in evolution and that there's no god because it was proven to me" isn't much different than a religious creationist say "Oh, sure both my parents are religious, and taught me religion from birth, but I believe it because I sat down and intelligently decided to, not because I was indoctrinated to."

It's never been convincing when religious people say it. Why would it be convincing when athiests say it?

reply to post by spiritwomyn


But who created the aliens?!?!?! haha.

Creationists = Christians
Christians = Adam and Eve
Christians + Adam and Even > Apes

So...

If Apes > Adam and Eve the Creationists math ends up being whacked.

reply to post by brocket99


lol. Didn't mean to get your panties in a bunch disagreeing with ya. I just think that if we evolved from apes then like you said the ones that evolved would be here and the ones that didn't would die out. Where are the ones that the apes evolved into first. By your claims they would have more of a chance surviving up to now rather than the ones they evolved from. Am i missing something?

reply to post by LordBucket


The part Creationists leave out is the MASSIVE amount of time it takes for the evolutionary process.

You don't end up with a freak walking fish coming from a swimming fish, or two apes end up with a human.

Its unfathomably small changes over an exponentially long period of time. Change and adaptability to survive.

The reason THIS doesn't work with Creationists is because they think the Earth is something like 45 years old(sarcasm.) and for my explanation to happen it would have to be 10000000 years old....or whatever crazy big number you want to choose.

In some parts of the south there are museums that show humans riding dinosaurs so whatever.

reply to post by LordBucket


Thanks for the reference.

Originally posted by MrAbernathy
*snip*

What hell?

You're not just ignorantm, you're also a racist moron

Totally reported to mods





Mod edit: removed previously removed quote.

[edit on 24-8-2009 by GAOTU789]

reply to post by Conclusion


I don't have a concrete answer, but my guess is we could have killed them, and left the ones who were less like us alone, since they weren't competing directly with us?

So in this case we killed off the retards, so the retards didn't kill us, thus leaving a void in the evolutionary scale on earth.

Your guess is as good as mine, I was just getting the evolution thing outta the way.

reply to post by LordBucket


I would have to disagree with the indocterned part of you post. Both my parents where hardshell baptists who took everything in the bible literally. They did not make me go to church. I did go sometimes when i was younger, but never once did they make me go. I was taught that if or when i go to church it would be when i was called by God. So i lived my life studying science and mathematics, this was way back mind you not now, and debating with them what science has done.

The took it with a grain of salt, just as i took their view.

Long story short one day it happened. I cant explain it in conventional means but something spiritually happened and changed my view of life.
Now i know the truth that their is a God. Its a journey into understanding. Does that mean science is wrong.....I dont think it does. I think there is way more to this universe than science though.

reply to post by brocket99


Not a bad guess.

Now what about the chimps who kill their newborns if they show any signs of birth defects, as if they were evolving?

Also as i have just learned today, chimps have 2 more chromosomes than humans. To me that says de-evolution.

[edit on 24-8-2009 by Conclusion]

reply to post by ShiningSabrewolf


Humans are usually considered to be apes themselves, and if humans are defined as apes, then according to "evolution theory", humans by definition evolved from NON-human apes.
And relatively speaking, I wonder what is so terrible about saying that humans evolved from apes and monkeys when Darwinism says that humans evolved from much lower forms of life, going down to protozoa.

Silly Rabbit Trix are for kids! LOL!!!

Originally posted by Conclusion



Also as i have just learned today, chimps have 2 more chromosomes than humans. To me that says de-evolution.

[edit on 24-8-2009 by Conclusion]

Or merely streamlining

The question immediately coming to mind regarding the 46/48 chromosome issue that HAS to be answered is, how?

It's never been seen to occur in any other species, aside from when WE as humans, in a lab, DO it to them. Otherwise, never.

What does that tell you? Logically?

reply to post by Conclusion


I don't know enough about chimp life, but again drastic differences would have to be present more then likely. Like I said, the changes over millions of years would be so subtle, nobody would notice much changes.

You would have to take snapshots 1000's of years apart to see any chance, maybe 1000000's.

Chimps don't sound too much different then our own society, but our modern medicine screens for defects now through amnios etc...and the choice to abort is given.

reply to post by Jomina


It logically tells me interference from a source outside.
yeah thats right our fused chromosome.

[edit on 24-8-2009 by Conclusion]

reply to post by brocket99


Another response to your answer would probably be about all the ancient texts that describe events that leads one to think that a great technological race has been here before.

Originally posted by ShiningSabrewolf
I've actually got a few questions to ask you, but this is a start. It's always puzzled me how humans could be insulted to be told they are related to apes, that we had a common ancestor and so are in the same family. Why would you be insulted that it be suggested the human species be related to some of the smartest, gentlest, family minded and let's face it, sometimes brutal and explicit creatures on Earth?
Is it because they are hairy or something?

Please excuse me if I garbled or made this unclear, I am doing this on my phme

Nothings funnier to OT than a smart guy articulating a stupid idea....and from your phone, that's a cherry on top!

btw, could I have some MORE of that hair?

OT: www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by OldThinker


. comedian in the house.

reply to post by Conclusion


Impossible, as I believe I am the smartest person ever to exist. Ever.

Best creationist site out there

www.creationsafaris.com...