Missing link between man and apes found

page: 3
11
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 09:26 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?

Why would it need to be? Pardon the leap of "faith" here but what good would it serve an advanced being with knowledge that as a species we would eventually evolve and discover such things on our own... what good would it do to enlighten humans to their method of existance at a time when they were intellectualy and technologically incapable of understanding it?




posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 09:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by AccessDenied

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.




Well said mate.



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 09:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by AccessDenied

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.

Like the opening post in that thread says, we don't use C14 after 57000 years, so it hardly discredits evolution, and fossils are not the only form of evidence for evolution.

[edit on 3-4-2010 by hippomchippo]



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 09:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by abecedarian

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?

Why would it need to be? Pardon the leap of "faith" here but what good would it serve an advanced being with knowledge that as a species we would eventually evolve and discover such things on our own... what good would it do to enlighten humans to their method of existance at a time when they were intellectualy and technologically incapable of understanding it?

Not what I was referring too..
The point of both Humans and Apes coming from Adam..THAT FACT would have been stated in the bible just as the lineage of all others is noted.



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 09:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by hippomchippo

Originally posted by AccessDenied

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.

Like the opening post in that thread says, we don't use C14 after 57000 years, so it hardly discredits evolution, and fossils are not the only form of evidence for evolution.

[edit on 3-4-2010 by hippomchippo]


True..but they are the only form being argued FOR it.
You cannot say that humans evolved from apes, and dinosaurs evolved into birds and modern reptiles..yet nothing else on the planet evolved.
What would the argument for selection be? Why some and not others?
Why are there still modern apes?
What "sparked" an evolution to occur then, but has not sparked another in our species or any other?
There is evidence of more than one type of hominid existing simultaneously..that in itself cancels out evolution, unless you include the theory of interbreeding.



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 09:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by AccessDenied

Originally posted by hippomchippo

Originally posted by AccessDenied

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.

Like the opening post in that thread says, we don't use C14 after 57000 years, so it hardly discredits evolution, and fossils are not the only form of evidence for evolution.

[edit on 3-4-2010 by hippomchippo]


True..but they are the only form being argued FOR it.
You cannot say that humans evolved from apes, and dinosaurs evolved into birds and modern reptiles..yet nothing else on the planet evolved.
What would the argument for selection be? Why some and not others?
Why are there still modern apes?
What "sparked" an evolution to occur then, but has not sparked another in our species or any other?
There is evidence of more than one type of hominid existing simultaneously..that in itself cancels out evolution, unless you include the theory of interbreeding.

What ''sparked'' evolution was natural selection, i don't know what you're trying to argue here, that some things evolve and others don't?
More than one hominid existing does not cancel evolution, that is ridiculous and laughable, you're saying that because there's apes, humans didn't evolve.

[edit on 3-4-2010 by hippomchippo]



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 09:53 PM
link   
reply to post by hippomchippo
 


Well then..laugh at what is wrong..move along.



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 10:24 PM
link   


No explanation.

— Doc Velocity



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 11:25 PM
link   
I love how everybody gets so excited when they find the "missing link" lets forget for a minute Carbon Dating is only really accurate if the test subject is less the 10,000 years old. After That it is really only guess work. Lets just focus on how Proud we can all be that we have Ape ancestors, instead of intelligent design. We can also forget how many fossils that the Smithsonian throws away because it doesn't fit with evolution. Serious for not believing in anything, Atheist sure do spend a lot of time worrying about God
Happy Easter, He has Risen....



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 11:25 PM
link   
John 18:36

Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world

Jesus is telling you and the rest of the human race that he is not from this world.

Modern human was created in the likeness and image of the beings who visited this planet thousands of years ago. There will never be a definitive link between modern humans and any of the humanoids that walked this planet before because we (modern humans) did not evolve on this planet.

For more information, visit my posts below:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 11:43 PM
link   
Here is what I find interesting with the current theory of evolution: The dinosaurs were the dominant species for 160 million years (that's 32 times longer) and none "evolved" into something else, while we have apes and humans evolving on separate paths merely 5 million years ago.

Someone's been tinkering with the monkey genome for such lightning speed "evolution", if you ask me.



posted on Apr, 3 2010 @ 11:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by tungus
Here is what I find interesting with the current theory of evolution: The dinosaurs were the dominant species for 160 million years (that's 32 times longer) and none "evolved" into something else, while we have apes and humans evolving on separate paths merely 5 million years ago.

Some one's been tinkering with the monkey genome for such lightning speed "evolution", if you ask me.


You are wrong about that.
Dinosaurs kept evolving right up to they got hit on the head with a big rock.

T-Rex and Stegosaurus were from the last bunch. They did not exist for about a hundred million years after the first dinosaur.
There are still dinosaurs living today. Birds have almost all of the characteristics a lot of predatory dinosaurs had. Somewhere in the dinosaur era they got split from their dino heritage and started roaming the skies.

Edit Humans and apes did not split. Their was a common ancestor which evolved into different species.

[edit on 3-4-2010 by Sinter Klaas]



posted on Apr, 4 2010 @ 03:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Sinter Klaas
 


There are no missing links in existence. There are only missing fossil remains.

Among those missing fossil remains are those of the common ancestor of humans, chimpanzees and gorillas, which lived between seven and ten million years ago. This ancestor forms the genetic link between the human lineage and all other life on this planet, and it is missing. Missing because, as you say, we haven't found any fossilized remains of it yet.

One potential candidate for this 'missing link' is Nakalipithecus nakayamai, but it's a bit early, and no-one knows for sure. You can't do DNA testing on a fossil, more's the pity.

The remains mentioned in the news story are too recent - just two million years old - to be that common ancestor. It is just one of many ancestral species that carried the torch of human lineage, passing it on to its descendant species when its own race was run.

*


reply to post by srsen
 


It is not a complete skeleton as the opening paragraph suggests.

Complete fossil hominid skeletons have never been found. Fossils - any fossils - are rare and hard to spot; they look a lot like rocks. In fact, they are rocks. And two million years is a long time for bones to lie undisturbed.

The most spectacular hominid find ever was Lucy, an almost half-complete skeleton of a female Australopithecus afarensis, an early ancestor of humans. It wasn't found buried in a single piece, the way you probably imagine it...


I decided to make that small final detour. There was virtually no (fossilized) bone in the gully. But as we turned to leave, I noticed something lying on the ground partway up the stone.

'That's a bit of a hominid arm,' I said.

'Can't be. It's too small. Has to be a monkey of some kind.'

We knelt to examine it.

'Much too small,' said Gray again.

I shook my head. 'Hominid.'

'What makes you so sure?' he said.

'That piece right next to your hand. That's hominid too.'

'Jesus Christ,' said Gray. He picked it up. It was the back of a small skull. A few feet away was part of a femur: a thighbone. 'Jesus Christ,' he said again. We stood up, and began to see other bits of bone on the slope: a couple of vertebrae, part of a pelvis - all of them hominid. An unbelievable, impermissible thought flickered through my mind. Suppose all these fitted together? Could they be parts of a single, extremely primitive skeleton? No such skeleton had ever been found - anywhere.

'Look at that,' said Gray. 'Ribs.'

A single individual.

'I can't believe it,' I said. 'I just can't believe it.'

- from Lucy, by Donald C. Johanson and Maitland A. Edey

The proof that human beings are apes (not 'evolved from' apes) is encyclopaedic and undeniable, except to creationists who refuse to accept it.



posted on Apr, 4 2010 @ 04:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sinter Klaas

You are wrong about that.
Dinosaurs kept evolving right up to they got hit on the head with a big rock.

T-Rex and Stegosaurus were from the last bunch.


Nemind them! Had they not been wiped out, Velociraptor would have taken over the world.

Imagine a dominant species evolved from velociraptor!


There are still dinosaurs living today. Birds have almost all of the characteristics a lot of predatory dinosaurs had. Somewhere in the dinosaur era they got split from their dino heritage and started roaming the skies.


So the as yet unproven catalyst for dinosaur extinction was exclusively connected to Terra Firma! Perhaps the dinosaur genome predicted the pending catastrophy and split so that the species had a sanctuary in the air, where it was cooler. Perhaps the split was in the genetic blueprint.



posted on Apr, 4 2010 @ 04:30 AM
link   
On the sixth day, God checked into the cosmic lab to see how evolution was doing and found the self-aware animal the Bible names as Adam.

God was delighted!

He touched the mechanical brain wiring that He had written into the blueprint of the evolved animal, the brain wiring that the scientists have now identified as being very active in peoples of faith, and awakened the Spirit within.



posted on Apr, 4 2010 @ 04:50 AM
link   
reply to post by brainwrek
 


Why the hell do so many people have such a hard-on to find out and prove we came from Apes?

You all clap and eooooooo and ahhhhhhh over any old ass bone that only adds more questions to the age old mystery of "did we come from a monkeys stinky vagina?".

Why?.....WHY?

LOL you guys remind me of crazy religious nuts who crumble to the floor in a fetal position every time a peperoni looks like Jesus on a pizza.

I'll tell you one this if by chance I some how by total mistake discover I am a descendant of a god damn ape.....I'm keeping that in the closet.....

Some things are just to embarrassing for people to find out about.



posted on Apr, 4 2010 @ 05:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by _BoneZ_...will never be a definitive link between modern humans and any of the humanoids that walked this planet before because we (modern humans) did not evolve on this planet.

The Bible says man was created from the dust. It does not say the steps from dust to man are many and varied nor short and direct.
To assume the hominids weren't occupants on the varied steps and branches on the ladder of evolution without attribution to history is very short-sighted.


[edit on 4/4/2010 by abecedarian]



posted on Apr, 4 2010 @ 05:27 AM
link   
Originally posted by teapot



Nemind them! Had they not been wiped out, Velociraptor would have taken over the world.

Imagine a dominant species evolved from velociraptor!

Take a look at an ostrage and compare it with a raptor.



So the as yet unproven catalyst for dinosaur extinction was exclusively connected to Terra Firma! Perhaps the dinosaur genome predicted the pending catastrophy and split so that the species had a sanctuary in the air, where it was cooler. Perhaps the split was in the genetic blueprint.


Terra firma ?
My understanding is the dinosaurs became extinct because of an asteroid impact or things were already in motion and the impact finished it.

The problem with flying in the air and an asteroid impact are clearly a problem. Not all dinosaurs became extinct and some of them probably evolved into something else. But a raptor like dinosaur developed long before extinction feathers.

However I do not reject your idea about the predicted catastrophe.
All over the world animals show signs that they know something is about to happen. A major storm, earthquake, tornado.
There is speculation that every living cell is in contact with an overall force. A force which communicates threw DNA. I have read somewhere that science found within DNA a language. One of two or three which test positive on what we define a language. Only difference is it's not artificial but biological.

The problem with fossil remains is that the animal remains have to be buried quickly preferably in an oxygen low environment. Did you ever looked at the African savanna ? Chances are slim that remains survive long enough. Their could be millions of animals that just did not leave any remains that became fossilised.
Look at humans. If there ever was an intelligent dinosaur ( intelligent enough to bury there death.) There would not be any remains left. Under normal conditions it only takes decades to become dust.

[edit on 4-4-2010 by Sinter Klaas]



posted on Apr, 4 2010 @ 05:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by AccessDeniedNot what I was referring too..
The point of both Humans and Apes coming from Adam..THAT FACT would have been stated in the bible just as the lineage of all others is noted.
When did I imply humans and apes came from Adam?

Where does the bible state that scorpions and spiders are descendant from isopod and other crustacean?

The relevance being in that the bible does not state those things, leaving us to fill in the blanks.


[edit on 4/4/2010 by abecedarian]



posted on Apr, 4 2010 @ 06:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Target Earth
I love how everybody gets so excited when they find the "missing link" lets forget for a minute Carbon Dating is only really accurate if the test subject is less the 10,000 years old. After That it is really only guess work.

Arguing from ignorance is lame. There are dozens of different radiometric dating methods that don't require any carbon.

en.wikipedia.org...





new topics
top topics
 
11
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join