It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
If we are actually children of the Creator, then having the false belief that we are mutant monkeys would detract us from what we actually are, missing out on exploring the depths of the gift of God while we live. Whereas if we are actually mutant ape progeny, then it really doesn't matter what we believe because we are the children of indifferent processes and will return to nothingness once we pass.
originally posted by: Out6of9Balance
a reply to: Phantom423
I can't figure out this word salad. Come again?
originally posted by: Phantom423
Could you please post a link to a biology book that says that humans are descendants of mutant apes. You can't because the science of evolution never said that, does not say that and will never say that.
originally posted by: cooperton
originally posted by: Phantom423
Could you please post a link to a biology book that says that humans are descendants of mutant apes. You can't because the science of evolution never said that, does not say that and will never say that.
The ancestor of humans was in the great ape family. This predecessor in the ape family is theorized to have mutated over the years into homo sapiens. That is exactly what the theory says. Humans are descended from a mutated predecessor from the ape family.
You don't even understand your own theory.
originally posted by: Out6of9Balance
a reply to: Akragon
That's true for your kind.
originally posted by: cooperton
originally posted by: Phantom423
Could you please post a link to a biology book that says that humans are descendants of mutant apes. You can't because the science of evolution never said that, does not say that and will never say that.
The ancestor of humans was in the great ape family. This predecessor in the ape family is theorized to have mutated over the years into homo sapiens. That is exactly what the theory says. Humans are descended from a mutated predecessor from the ape family.
You don't even understand your own theory.
originally posted by: Phantom423
5, 4, 3, 2, 1 -- okay you lost. Once again, for the umpteenth time, you can't post a valid link that supports your position.
Did humans evolve from mutants apes? NO.
Do apes and humans have 96%+ of their genes in common? YES
originally posted by: Out6of9Balance
They say we even have genes in common with the banana plant.
The banana plant is the common ancestor.
originally posted by: cooperton
originally posted by: Phantom423
5, 4, 3, 2, 1 -- okay you lost. Once again, for the umpteenth time, you can't post a valid link that supports your position.
Did humans evolve from mutants apes? NO.
You're developing a psychosis trying to kill Moby Dick. Humans are in the family of Great Apes, meaning their theorized ancestors were also in the great ape family. A line of creatures within the Ape family are theorized to have mutated over time into the modern homo sapien.
Do apes and humans have 96%+ of their genes in common? YES
This is a silly myth. Humans have a genome that is 4% smaller than chimpanzees, how could they have more than 96% of their genome in common hahaha? (chimpanzee genome length, homo sapien genome length) And also, how could losing 130,000,000 base pairs from the chimpanzee to the homo sapien cause developmental advances? It is absurd. The theory is wrong. It's just a matter of time until the blind zeal settles down.
originally posted by: Phantom423
If you knew anything about molecular genetics you would know that it's the SEQUENCING of functional genes which is compared.
originally posted by: Out6of9Balance
a reply to: Akragon
So educated and non-religious is what you highly value. I'm not sure what you think of that to be. It must be good.
originally posted by: Phantom423
But I'll remember what you said - 96% is a deceptive number - in other words, the comparison is real, it's just a different interpretation. Thanks again.
originally posted by: TzarChasm
originally posted by: TzarChasm
The problem here as I see it, is not that the theory of evolution isn't compelling enough. It is that a system of beliefs based on prophecies and medical miracles and other supernatural events can't muster the mind boggling substance that is retold through centuries of incredible literature but simply can't be reproduced in the modern age. It would be so easy to just do a simple performance as a gesture of good will and proof of concept, and there is no risk or cost at all. It would convert millions in a single day. But for some reason, it has not happened. We take that silence as an omen, a fact of reality the same way seeing a dead body is a fact. Absence of evidence is evidence of absence. Surely an earth stopping display of divine authority and unrivaled philanthropic force is exactly what this species needs to persuade us. So what's keeping your god from showing his or her hand and winning the whole debate with literally zero effort? That's my big question.
Still waiting on an actual answer to my big question. Since this is a creationist debate and all.
originally posted by: puzzlesphere
a reply to: edmc^2
I did no such thing! I think Dr Venter's research is great!... based on 15 years of evolutionary research... it adds to the already substantial evidence that evolution works. Creationists also pointed to cell "machinery" plus DNA as being inseparable in the past (one of their examples of irreducible complexity)... this research blows that out of the water!
Your point in the OP is invalid because creationists don't produce any research themselves. By not producing any original, testable hypotheses, and only referring to evolution research, creationists put themselves squarely in the evolution court.
You choose to play in the scientific arena (evolution court) by doing nothing but referring to evolutionary research.
You can step outside that court at any time by providing some verifiable creationist research (one of those 200 citations you mentioned?... guess not?) to discuss.
So yes, your OP is invalid.
Cheers