Missing link between man and apes found

page: 2
11
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 08:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by hippomchippo

Originally posted by masonicon
I think both man and apes are come from Adam

But you have no evidence.
Evolution from a common ancestor, on the other hand, has alot of evidence.

Then wouldn't that fact be in the bible?




posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 08:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by srsen

Originally posted by hippomchippo
Before this it was in question? I'm pretty sure human evolution is pretty firm in saying we evolved from an ape like ancestor.


Not really. Evolution seems to work reasonably well (though many holes still remain in theory) for most species but it tends to fall apart to a degree for us, man.



Which holes in the theory? and how does it fall apart for man?



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 08:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by AccessDenied

Originally posted by hippomchippo

Originally posted by masonicon
I think both man and apes are come from Adam

But you have no evidence.
Evolution from a common ancestor, on the other hand, has alot of evidence.

Then wouldn't that fact be in the bible?

If the bible was written by an all knowing god, it probably would have been in it. But I believe the bible was written by people of the time it was written, hence why there's no theory of microbial disease, nor evolution.



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 08:36 PM
link   
Woah this debate it sensitive and extemely complex. When I was a big fan of richard dawkins, chris hitchens etc. I was like many athiests convinved of evolution, at no time did the crazy notion of intelligent design cross as being plausible because then it begs the question how did the intelligent designer evolve. But realization of the existance of et's has changed my view. Yes evolution can be used to explain how the et's came about but I think we had intervention to accelerate the intelligence of ape a process that would have occured naturally anyway, it just got catalyzed, the ape chosen for its bipedal upright opposable thumb body great for a tool making preiod to begin civilization. And no I dont think this because of zacharia sitchin, it is our dna which gives it the most credibility. My father is a proffessor of genetics and has hepled explain the anomalies surrounding junk dna etc. although I didnt mention my alien theory it would not go down too well.
One has to understand that a space fairing race would have the tech to invoke the change in an almost untraceable manner if they didnt want us to know, our technology is still very primitive compared to et's, just 200 years ago we were using horse and cart, so its only fair to say we are not yet at a level of tech where we can unravel this completely so the evolution from apes is the best we have so far.

But even if the missing links are found, they will be seen to have evolved too quickly for natural selection, the progression taking only a few generations between the closest of humaniod ancestor. Leaving unatural selction or mutation, but if the chance of such a favourable mutation occuring naturally is calculated, it is just more "one in a million" factors such as goldilocks principle suggesting the whole scenario too good to be true, and the chance of a higher force in the universe which favours an increase in novelty or creation begins to seem more plausible.



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 08:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by hippomchippo

Originally posted by AccessDenied

Originally posted by hippomchippo

Originally posted by masonicon
I think both man and apes are come from Adam

But you have no evidence.
Evolution from a common ancestor, on the other hand, has alot of evidence.

Then wouldn't that fact be in the bible?

If the bible was written by an all knowing god, it probably would have been in it. But I believe the bible was written by people of the time it was written, hence why there's no theory of microbial disease, nor evolution.

Completely agreed on that fact..hence why pointed it out.
I don't care what "evidence" is found..I don't believe in either evolution from apes, nor creationism.



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 08:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by AccessDenied

Originally posted by hippomchippo

Originally posted by AccessDenied

Originally posted by hippomchippo

Originally posted by masonicon
I think both man and apes are come from Adam

But you have no evidence.
Evolution from a common ancestor, on the other hand, has alot of evidence.

Then wouldn't that fact be in the bible?

If the bible was written by an all knowing god, it probably would have been in it. But I believe the bible was written by people of the time it was written, hence why there's no theory of microbial disease, nor evolution.

Completely agreed on that fact..hence why pointed it out.
I don't care what "evidence" is found..I don't believe in either evolution from apes, nor creationism.

Thats your choice, but evolution has stockpiles of evidence.



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 08:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by hippomchippo
Which holes in the theory? and how does it fall apart for man?


The idea of uniformitarism (or gradualism as it is also known) states that evolution occurs gradually over generations and generations, over long periods of time.
That as new 'mutations' occur in species, the most successful of these genetic changes allow the species to adapt and evolve in ways most beneficial to the species.
The hole lies in that this theory is completely laughable when it is stated that this SLOW process can suddenly and unpredictably speed up whenever it wishes.
In other words, evolution is a slow and predicable process, except for when its not. Not really science.

Woodpeckers. Explain their precise features and characteristics which appear so suddenly. How can you have a 'normal' bird (woodpecker ancestor) which just suddenly, coincidentally spawn the raft of changes necessary for the woodpacker to exist as it does when it does. THis even puzzled Darwin himself.

What about man's sudden evolutionary leap? One minute we are (supposedly) cave-dwelling simpletons then in a cosmic heartbeat we are cultured, have developed the cerebral cortex, have art, culture, forms of writing, etc, etc. This is unexplained.

Of course, there also remains no ACTUAL proof of man to ape evolution. Yes, It is absolutely likely and, in time, i think will be shown to be true, but it will need some caveats. Our 'evolution' was IMMENSELY slow but then suddenly we have this cosmic leap in awareness and no-one questions why the process sped up so insanely.

Don't get me wrong, i have studied evolution in University and there is definitely a good reason for it being so widely accepted. The Galapagos Finches is a case in point. But i do not think it is perfect and i do not think it works perfectly for us - man.



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 08:55 PM
link   
reply to post by polarwarrior
 


This in part is what im trying to get at. Our evolution sped up like crazy and there is no explanation for that. Hence, evolution has holes in it



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 09:03 PM
link   
Double post, sorry.

[edit on 3-4-2010 by hippomchippo]



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 09:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by srsen

Originally posted by hippomchippo
Which holes in the theory? and how does it fall apart for man?


The idea of uniformitarism (or gradualism as it is also known) states that evolution occurs gradually over generations and generations, over long periods of time.
That as new 'mutations' occur in species, the most successful of these genetic changes allow the species to adapt and evolve in ways most beneficial to the species.
The hole lies in that this theory is completely laughable when it is stated that this SLOW process can suddenly and unpredictably speed up whenever it wishes.
In other words, evolution is a slow and predicable process, except for when its not. Not really science.

Woodpeckers. Explain their precise features and characteristics which appear so suddenly. How can you have a 'normal' bird (woodpecker ancestor) which just suddenly, coincidentally spawn the raft of changes necessary for the woodpacker to exist as it does when it does. THis even puzzled Darwin himself.

What about man's sudden evolutionary leap? One minute we are (supposedly) cave-dwelling simpletons then in a cosmic heartbeat we are cultured, have developed the cerebral cortex, have art, culture, forms of writing, etc, etc. This is unexplained.

Of course, there also remains no ACTUAL proof of man to ape evolution. Yes, It is absolutely likely and, in time, i think will be shown to be true, but it will need some caveats. Our 'evolution' was IMMENSELY slow but then suddenly we have this cosmic leap in awareness and no-one questions why the process sped up so insanely.

Don't get me wrong, i have studied evolution in University and there is definitely a good reason for it being so widely accepted. The Galapagos Finches is a case in point. But i do not think it is perfect and i do not think it works perfectly for us - man.


What do you mean woodpeckers? Do you mean their tongue? It's just an elongated tongue that most birds have, you can look to the chicken for similiar features.

And yes, there is no absolute proof that man evolved from a common ancestor, but as you've rightly said, it'll probably be confirmed. The evolution of consciousness has also been well documented, but may still be considered a mystery to some, but in no way discredits the theory of evolution, which still holds water regardless.

Evolution is a fact, I don't even know what you're arguing here, are you saying that we somehow bypassed evolution in our ancestry? Or that it works for some animals but doesn't for others?



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 09:08 PM
link   
reply to post by hippomchippo
 


Based on science that uses a flawed system called "carbon dating".
We aren't meant to know how/why we are here anymore than any other creature that walks the Earth.
Just because we are self aware, does not mean even our search for knowledge will give truthful answers.



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 09:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by AccessDenied
reply to post by hippomchippo
 


Based on science that uses a flawed system called "carbon dating".
We aren't meant to know how/why we are here anymore than any other creature that walks the Earth.
Just because we are self aware, does not mean even our search for knowledge will give truthful answers.

How do you know that carbon dating is wrong then?

[edit on 3-4-2010 by hippomchippo]



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 09:12 PM
link   
Evolution often makes "leaps" and it is not unusual nor contrary to the way Evolution works. There are plenty of examples if you wish to learn and educate yourself. Someone earlier mentioned "Junk DNA" but there is no such thing, merely a misunderstanding of how apparently non-coding DNA actually gets used during development and evolution. A great deal of new information has come out recently on so called Junk DNA, particularly from the Human Genome Project and various affiliations. I suggest you research a bit more as the material is quite interesting.



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 09:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by hippomchippo
What do you mean woodpeckers? Do you mean their tongue? It's just an elongated tongue that most birds have, you can look to the chicken for similiar features.

And yes, there is no absolute proof that man evolved from a common ancestor, but as you've rightly said, it'll probably be confirmed. The evolution of consciousness has also been well documented, but may still be considered a mystery to some, but in no way discredits the theory of evolution, which still holds water regardless.

Evolution is a fact, I don't even know what you're arguing here, are you saying that we somehow bypassed evolution in our ancestry? Or that it works for some animals but doesn't for others?


What im saying is that evolution is not perfect and should not be considered the holy grail of our origins. It has holes.
Though yes, i feel it is correct for pretty much everything but man.

If evolution was a perfect theory then all scientists would agree on it - they don't.

Also, if evolution was perfect and WAS a FACT then we, as we are today, would not exist. We would barely have invented the wheel at this point.

What i meant by saying that it will eventually be proven correct is that it only takes one fossil to be found for all of science to jump on board and state that we did evolve from apes. HOWEVER, i am not so sure they will ever satisfactorily explain the jump in evolutionary speed we experience on our (man's) path. (at least not with our current mindset)

What i meant with the woodpecker is that natural selection and evolution dont really explain its many features which combine to make it a feasible being. (its tongue is much longer than normals bird's.)

Interesting you mention spiritual evolution. It is my personal belief that SPIRITUAL evolution is THE SINGLE driver for physical evolution.



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 09:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by hippomchippoThat seems like a cop-out to me, and it isn't supported by any holy books.

Not a cop out at all. As I said, I'm not religious. I have more than my share of doubts about religion in general but being open-minded and not omniscient leaves me curious to learn as much as I can. And even learning something false is knowledge nonetheless. Their is a difference between learning false knowledge and accepting false knowledge as truth though.


Another interesting question would by why does the OT never give any helpful advice? Such as bacteria and viruses causing disease, it would have saved billions.

Does the OT not suggest things along the line of not eating pork, and other similar things that at the time were unhealthy? We were then a primitive, stubborn species and in many ways still are. As a species we've evolved technologies, learned how to prevent many illnesses and deaths.


If God had experienced our evolution in 6,500, why would he give US HIS time? why not tell us the correct time? Surely a God could do that? Unless this god is a tad weak.

Which "time" is more correct? They are both correct and equally valid within their respective frame of reference. Telling it to us in God's time leaves us with a puzzle to solve, and hopefully the motivation to discover the means to connect the two and explain our existance.




posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 09:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Terapin
Evolution often makes "leaps" and it is not unusual nor contrary to the way Evolution works. There are plenty of examples if you wish to learn and educate yourself.


But it flies directly in the face of gradualism - a theory which in central to theory of evolution. From the horses mouth. I just question why issues like this have not been explored by the scientists. Suspicious to me



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 09:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by srsen

Originally posted by hippomchippo
What do you mean woodpeckers? Do you mean their tongue? It's just an elongated tongue that most birds have, you can look to the chicken for similiar features.

And yes, there is no absolute proof that man evolved from a common ancestor, but as you've rightly said, it'll probably be confirmed. The evolution of consciousness has also been well documented, but may still be considered a mystery to some, but in no way discredits the theory of evolution, which still holds water regardless.

Evolution is a fact, I don't even know what you're arguing here, are you saying that we somehow bypassed evolution in our ancestry? Or that it works for some animals but doesn't for others?


What im saying is that evolution is not perfect and should not be considered the holy grail of our origins. It has holes.
Though yes, i feel it is correct for pretty much everything but man.

If evolution was a perfect theory then all scientists would agree on it - they don't.

Also, if evolution was perfect and WAS a FACT then we, as we are today, would not exist. We would barely have invented the wheel at this point.

What i meant by saying that it will eventually be proven correct is that it only takes one fossil to be found for all of science to jump on board and state that we did evolve from apes. HOWEVER, i am not so sure they will ever satisfactorily explain the jump in evolutionary speed we experience on our (man's) path. (at least not with our current mindset)

What i meant with the woodpecker is that natural selection and evolution dont really explain its many features which combine to make it a feasible being. (its tongue is much longer than normals bird's.)

Interesting you mention spiritual evolution. It is my personal belief that SPIRITUAL evolution is THE SINGLE driver for physical evolution.

I never once mentioned spiritual evolution, I said the evolution of consciousness, which is self awareness, which is well documented.
I don't know why you think its tongue being longer makes it unfeasible as a being, or its relationship to the trees and insects inside.

I suggest reading the book ''The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind'' by Julian Jaynes, it explains it very well.

[edit on 3-4-2010 by hippomchippo]



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 09:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by hippomchippo
I never once mentioned spiritual evolution, I said the evolution of consciousness, which is self awareness, which is well documented.
I don't know why you think its tongue being longer makes it unfeasible as a being, or its relationship to the trees and insects inside.

I suggest reading the book ''The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind'' by Julian Jaynes, it explains it very well.

[edit on 3-4-2010 by hippomchippo]


Sorry, my bad. When i read consciousness my brain kind of links it to spirit. In my mind, the two are one-in-the-same to a degree. I consider self-awareness to be a 'trait' of a certain level of spiritual awareness (the level we are all at), hence my error.

That book would actually be an interesting read



Unrelated, I find it funny we keep ending up in debates here of late



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 09:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by srsen

Originally posted by hippomchippo
I never once mentioned spiritual evolution, I said the evolution of consciousness, which is self awareness, which is well documented.
I don't know why you think its tongue being longer makes it unfeasible as a being, or its relationship to the trees and insects inside.

I suggest reading the book ''The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind'' by Julian Jaynes, it explains it very well.

[edit on 3-4-2010 by hippomchippo]


Sorry, my bad. When i read consciousness my brain kind of links it to spirit. In my mind, the two are one-in-the-same to a degree. I consider self-awareness to be a 'trait' of a certain level of spiritual awareness (the level we are all at), hence my error.

That book would actually be an interesting read



Unrelated, I find it funny we keep ending up in debates here of late

No problem, I understand the confusion as consciousness is used frequently here as a synonym for spirit.
The book is amazing, and quite cheap for the information it has.



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 09:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by hippomchippo

Originally posted by AccessDenied
reply to post by hippomchippo
 


Based on science that uses a flawed system called "carbon dating".
We aren't meant to know how/why we are here anymore than any other creature that walks the Earth.
Just because we are self aware, does not mean even our search for knowledge will give truthful answers.

How do you know that carbon dating is wrong then?

[edit on 3-4-2010 by hippomchippo]

www.abovetopsecret.com...
Any "theory" can be proven correct with enough funding behind it.





new topics
top topics
 
11
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join