[_ Old Earth _] Evolution claims...

[Heidi]

The theory of evolution claims, in a nutshell, that one species can turn into another species on their own through "mutation" through millions of years. By their reasoning, then man can turn into tigers or birds into lions over millions of years, provided that the exact number of accidental mutations happens to us to turn us into birds, lions and tigers .

But they try to get around this by claiming that apes and humans are in the same species. Not so according to the Oxford Dictionary and Thesaurus American Edition which defines a species as; "A classification of living organisms consisting of individuals capable of exchanging genes and interbreeding." So since we humans cannot interbreed with primates, then we cannot be the same species.

Therefore, evoltuonists are claiming that one species can turn into another species on their own without mating with the animals who carry the genes of the species they turn into. But some evolutionists do claim that primates bred with humans, others don't, although they can't prove this, nor can they tell us when we stopped being able to breed with primates. :wink:

They completely overlook the faqct that genes are passed along to offspring from their parents and that's what propogates each species, not simply turning into other species on their own.

So the contradictions in evolution are endless and their stories change each season. But that's what happens when theories are based on lies. A 2nd lie has to be told in order to believe the 1st lie, then a 3rd, and a 4rth, etc. until no one can remember the first lie! And this is why the theory of evolution is the most convoluted, contradictory, and complex theory that was ever invented. But the truth is always simple. It is absolute. It doesn't invent, avoid, or contradict anything because it is infallible and absolute. There are no changing stories and no contradictions in the truth.

 

[cubedbee]

The theory of evolution claims, in a nutshell, that one species can turn into another species on their own through "mutation" through millions of years.

Finally, you’ve made a correct statement about evolution. Thank you for listening to us.

By their reasoning, then man can turn into tigers or birds into lions over millions of years, provided that the exact number of accidental mutations happens to us to turn us into birds, lions and tigers.

No, our reasoning doesn’t say this at all. Mutations aren’t magicâ€â€they can’t do anything in your imagination. Evolutionists believe man will change and evolveâ€â€but evolution does not believe man could evolve to “turn into†another animal that we see nowâ€â€the chances of the exact mutations happening are so small that it is impossible.

But they try to get around this by claiming that apes and humans are in the same species. Not so according to the Oxford Dictionary and Thesaurus American Edition which defines a species as; "A classification of living organisms consisting of individuals capable of exchanging genes and interbreeding."

Here you go again Heidi. This is a falsehood. Nobody has said this except you.

Thou shalt not bear false witness. Are you familiar with this commandment?

So since we humans cannot interbreed with primates, then we cannot be the same species.

Heidi, this has been explained to you numerous times.

There are multiple levels of classification. Species, the one you’ve defined, is the most specific category. A person is of the species is “Homo sapiens.â€Â

A family is a broader classificationâ€â€it is a collection of related species. A person’s family is “Hominidaeâ€Â. Members of the family Hominidae include humans, chimps, gorillas and organtans.

An order is an even broader classificationâ€â€it is a collection of related families, and remember that a family is itself a collection of related species. A person’s order is Primate. That’s right, a person is a both a human (homo sapiens) and a primate---the two things are not contradictory but describe different things. Primates include all those I already mentioned in the great apes I already mentioned as well as lemurs and monkeys.

Humans are primates. Humans (primates) can only mate with other humans (primates). Monkeys (primate) can only mate with other monkeys (primates). Gorillas (primates) can only mate with other gorillas (primate). Each species of primate can only mate with it’s own species. But the word PRIMATE is not a species and so it is LITERALLY MEANINGLESS for you to say “humans and primates are not the same speciesâ€Â

Therefore, evoltuonists are claiming that one species can turn into another species on their own without mating with the animals who carry the genes of the species they turn into. But some evolutionists do claim that primates bred with humans, others don't, although they can't prove this, nor can they tell us when we stopped being able to breed with primates. :wink:

Heidi, please stop bearing false witness. If you’re doing so out of ignorance, then please just don’t speak, because you are responsible for lies you say, even if they are because of a misunderstanding. Please stop bearing false witness.

They completely overlook the faqct that genes are passed along to offspring from their parents and that's what propogates each species, not simply turning into other species on their own.

You completely overlook the fact that you’re just making things up, putting false words into the mouths of evolutionists, words they have never nor will ever say, and that you refuse to respect others enough to read their posts that point out how what you say is in error.

So the contradictions in evolution are endless and their stories change each season. But that's what happens when theories are based on lies. A 2nd lie has to be told in order to believe the 1st lie, then a 3rd, and a 4rth, etc. until no one can remember the first lie!

Precisely Heidi, you’ve trapped yourself in a web of lies. It’s not too late to get outâ€â€just back off with the false slander and admit that you do not understand evolution. Feel free to talk spiritual matters which you do understand, but please stop bearing false witness and making false claims about science.

 

[Heidi]

The theory of evolution claims, in a nutshell, that one species can turn into another species on their own through "mutation" through millions of years.

Finally, you’ve made a correct statement about evolution. Thank you for listening to us.

[quote:1d2b5]
By their reasoning, then man can turn into tigers or birds into lions over millions of years, provided that the exact number of accidental mutations happens to us to turn us into birds, lions and tigers.

No, our reasoning doesn’t say this at all. Mutations aren’t magicâ€â€they can’t do anything in your imagination. Evolutionists believe man will change and evolveâ€â€but evolution does not believe man could evolve to “turn into†another animal that we see nowâ€â€the chances of the exact mutations happening are so small that it is impossible.

But they try to get around this by claiming that apes and humans are in the same species. Not so according to the Oxford Dictionary and Thesaurus American Edition which defines a species as; "A classification of living organisms consisting of individuals capable of exchanging genes and interbreeding."

Here you go again Heidi. This is a falsehood. Nobody has said this except you.

Thou shalt not bear false witness. Are you familiar with this commandment?

So since we humans cannot interbreed with primates, then we cannot be the same species.

Heidi, this has been explained to you numerous times.

There are multiple levels of classification. Species, the one you’ve defined, is the most specific category. A person is of the species is “Homo sapiens.â€Â

A family is a broader classificationâ€â€it is a collection of related species. A person’s family is “Hominidaeâ€Â. Members of the family Hominidae include humans, chimps, gorillas and organtans.

An order is an even broader classificationâ€â€it is a collection of related families, and remember that a family is itself a collection of related species. A person’s order is Primate. That’s right, a person is a both a human (homo sapiens) and a primate---the two things are not contradictory but describe different things. Primates include all those I already mentioned in the great apes I already mentioned as well as lemurs and monkeys.

Humans are primates. Humans (primates) can only mate with other humans (primates). Monkeys (primate) can only mate with other monkeys (primates). Gorillas (primates) can only mate with other gorillas (primate). Each species of primate can only mate with it’s own species. But the word PRIMATE is not a species and so it is LITERALLY MEANINGLESS for you to say “humans and primates are not the same speciesâ€Â

Therefore, evoltuonists are claiming that one species can turn into another species on their own without mating with the animals who carry the genes of the species they turn into. But some evolutionists do claim that primates bred with humans, others don't, although they can't prove this, nor can they tell us when we stopped being able to breed with primates. :wink:

Heidi, please stop bearing false witness. If you’re doing so out of ignorance, then please just don’t speak, because you are responsible for lies you say, even if they are because of a misunderstanding. Please stop bearing false witness.

They completely overlook the faqct that genes are passed along to offspring from their parents and that's what propogates each species, not simply turning into other species on their own.

You completely overlook the fact that you’re just making things up, putting false words into the mouths of evolutionists, words they have never nor will ever say, and that you refuse to respect others enough to read their posts that point out how what you say is in error.

So the contradictions in evolution are endless and their stories change each season. But that's what happens when theories are based on lies. A 2nd lie has to be told in order to believe the 1st lie, then a 3rd, and a 4rth, etc. until no one can remember the first lie!

Precisely Heidi, you’ve trapped yourself in a web of lies. It’s not too late to get outâ€â€just back off with the false slander and admit that you do not understand evolution. Feel free to talk spiritual matters which you do understand, but please stop bearing false witness and making false claims about science.[/quote:1d2b5]

I've always maintained that evolutionists believe that apes change over time into humans. And I've always pointed out the fallacy of this as I did again in my OP. Evolutionists have simply incorrectly claimed that I thought that humans came directly out of apes.

And you are saying that one species breeds another because as I've pointed out the Oxford dictionary says that humans and apes or animals are not the same species since they cannot interbreed. And since breeding is what passes genes along from one generation to another, humans could not have come from apes. But evolutionists do not understand this simple principle of biology. So evolutionists do calim that primates did turn into other animals. And calling a human an animal makes him no more an animals than it makes him a tiger. But evolutionists do not see this simple fact either. 8-)

Animals can be found in their natural habitats or in zoos where man put them. Humans can be found running the world and ruling over the animals. Again, all one has to do is look at reality to see the difference between humans and animals. But unfortunately, evolutionists can't do that either. 8-)

So how can an animal produce human genes without being able to mate with humans? :o So again, you are contradicting yourself and making up impossible scenarios.

So you think I'm making up the fact that offspring are produced by the mating between their parents which is how they acquire their genes? If so, then you not only need to study biology 101 but go out and observe how animals produce offsrping.

Again, it is simply a fact that offspring cannot be produced by parents who are not capable of interbreeding. And that is precisely why tigers cannot produce creatures that turne into human beings, Horses cannot produce creatures that turn into human beings, apes cannot produce creatures that turn into human beings, bees cannot produce human beings and neither can any animal produce a creature that turns into a human being. Again, this is basic biology and shows the theory of evolution to be false.

 

[Heidi]

Evolutionists simply claim that the genes of a human can get into the genes of an ape over time on their own through "mutation." They call it "evolving" (which is simply a fancy word for ape genes magically changing into human genes on their own). But they neglect to remember that genes can only come from one's parents who already had those genes and that is how they are passed along to their offsrping. But evolutionists deny this because obviously if humans were created by apes, then human parents didn't exist in the first place to pass along their genes to offspring to create the human being! So how did these human genes get into the ape if there were no human parents around to pass them along? :o

And this is where the magic comes in. The genes simply "changed" into human genes on their own. Of course this isn't how biology works because no animal genes have ever accidentally changed into human genes. Biology works by genes being passed along to offspring by parents. And since human parents weren't around before the ape created them to pass along their genes to their offspring, then evolutionists have to simply say that genes can turn into other animal genes on their own.

And this is the biggest fallacy behind evolution. It conradicts the reproductive process and tries to make genes turn into other animal genes by themselves, which is impossible.

 

[cubedbee]

I've always maintained that evolutionists believe that apes change over time into humans.

And that’s the problem Heidi, you maintain this despite the fact that it has been explained to you over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again. HUMANS ARE APES. Evolutionists believes that one non-human species of the ape FAMILY changed over time into our current human species of the ape FAMILY. Why can’t you understand this? Why do you instead keep maintaining your own false stance about what evolutionists believe?

And I've always pointed out the fallacy of this as I did again in my OP. Evolutionists have simply incorrectly claimed that I thought that humans came directly out of apes.

No, evolutionists have claimed that you don’t know what the word ape means. This claim is trueâ€â€your posts have demonstrated it beyond a shadow of a doubt.

And you are saying that one species breeds anotherbecause as I've pointed out the Oxford dictionary says that humans and apes or animals are not the same species since they cannot interbreed.

Human is a species. Ape IS NOT a species. Animal IS NOT a species. In order for the phrase “not the same species†to have any meaning, for it to be more than a nonsense statement, the two things being talked about must both be species. “humans and apes or animals are not the same species†is precisely as meaningful of a statement as “Ketchup and airplanes and yellow ribbons are not the same speciesâ€Â---none of those things are even species to begin with. You are literally speaking nonsense, putting words together in ways that have no meaning. This is what the evolutionists are trying to explain to you---this is beyond debating about the facts of evolutionâ€â€this is evolutionists trying to inform you of the basic meanings of scientific words so that you can put them together in intelligible sentences. Why do you refuse to listen?

. And since breeding is what passes genes along from one generation to another, humans could not have come from apes. But evolutionists do not understand this simple principle of biology. So evolutionists do calim that primates did turn into other animals. And calling a human an animal makes him no more an animals than it makes him a tiger. But evolutionists do not see this simple fact either. 8-)

Heidi, we’ve been over the fact that words have meanings and that you can’t just pick and choose your own meanings for words. Both tiger and animal have very precise definitions to scientistsâ€â€and by these very precise definitions a human is an animal and a human is not a tiger. Definitions aren’t things that are for debate, literally they must be the starting point that all human discussion begins upon.

Animals can be found in their natural habitats or in zoos where man put them. Humans can be found running the world and ruling over the animals. Again, all one has to do is look at reality to see the difference between humans and animals. But unfortunately, evolutionists can't do that either. 8-)

Humans can be found in their houses or in their cars. President Bush can be found jetting around the world and ruling over the humans. All one has to do is look at reality to see the difference between President Bush and humans.

So, do you really believe Bush isn’t a human Heidi? He’s clearly different and has more power than any other human I see. Oh wait, it’s not how powerful you are that defines if you are human, is it? It’s having human DNA that defines if you are human. Neither is it how powerful you are that defines if you an animals. Humans are the most powerful of the animals, the rulers of creation, but they are animals.

So you think I'm making up the fact that offspring are produced by the mating between their parents which is how they acquire their genes? If so, then you not only need to study biology 101 but go out and observe how animals produce offsrping.

No, Heidi, you’re not making this fact up. Nobody ever said you did. But I think that every single sentence that you utter based off this fact is nonsense, totally ignores the scientific definitions and theories actually held by evolutionists, and doesn’t even remotely raise an objection to evolution.

Again, it is simply a fact that offspring cannot be produced by parents who are not capable of interbreeding.

And that is precisely why tigers cannot produce creatures that turne into human beings, Horses cannot produce creatures that turn into human beings, apes cannot produce creatures that turn into human beings, bees cannot produce human beings and neither can any animal produce a creature that turns into a human being. Again, this is basic biology and shows the theory of evolution to be false.

Heidi, you don’t understand what basic biology is, let alone the theory of evolution, and as such are entirely incapable of making judgments about its truth or falsehood. Please just stop spewing forth your ill-informed slander against a theory you don’t understand.

 

[Late_Cretaceous]

And this is the biggest fallacy behind evolution. It conradicts the reproductive process and tries to make genes turn into other animal genes by themselves, which is impossible.

If that was true, don't you think biologists would have noticed. How exactly do you explain that most major universities have departments of "evolutionary biology" or "evolutionary ecology" in thier biology faculties? Wouldn't the geneticists and other biologists have said something by now. Surely at least one of them would have gone to the dean and said "hey those guys in evolutionary biology don't know what they are talking about".

 

[cubedbee]

Evolutionists simply claim that the genes of a human can get into the genes of an ape over time on their own through "mutation."

False

They call it "evolving" (which is simply a fancy word for ape genes magically changing into human genes on their own).

False

But they neglect to remember

False

that genes can only come from one's parents who already had those genes and that is how they are passed along to their offsrping.

True

But evolutionists deny this because obviously if humans were created by apes, then human parents didn't exist in the first place to pass along their genes to offspring to create the human being!

False and Nonsensical

So how did these human genes get into the ape if there were no human parents around to pass them along? :o

It has been explained to you that HUMANS ARE APES. It can’t be explained any simpler, you either refuse to or are unable to comprehend this.

And this is where the magic comes in. The genes simply "changed" into human genes on their own.

False

Of course this isn't how biology works because no animal genes have ever accidentally changed into human genes.

Nonsensical and False

Biology works by genes being passed along to offspring by parents.

True.

And since human parents weren't around before the ape created them to pass along their genes to their offspring, then evolutionists have to simply say that genes can turn into other animal genes on their own.

Evolutionists do say genes mutate, and indeed, we directly observe genes mutate, thousands of different times in hundreds of different species. This isn’t a controversial factâ€â€every knowledge Young Earth Creationism site acknowledges that genes mutate.

And this is the biggest fallacy behind evolution. It conradicts the reproductive process and tries to make genes turn into other animal genes by themselves, which is impossible.

False again.

 

[pfilmtech]

You may as well be arguing with a brick wall man.

 

[jwu]

Heidi, do you even consider it to be possible that your understanding of evolution may not be correct?

 

[Late_Cretaceous]

Of course she hasn't considered that. Talking about something that one does not understand goes against biblical teachings (see psalms), and well all know that Heidi would never do that.

 

[reznwerks]

correct

Of course she hasn't considered that. Talking about something that one does not understand goes against biblical teachings (see psalms), and well all know that Heidi would never do that.

You are correct. Heidi cannot allow herself to understand evolution for if she did she would no longer be Heidi.

 

[Heidi]

Heidi, do you even consider it to be possible that your understanding of evolution may not be correct?

The first response to my Op said it was correct. So again, an evolutionist disagreeing with another evolutionist. If evolutionists themselves can't get their stories straight, then how can anyone ever know what the theory sates? :o Is it or is it not true that evolutionists claim that the genes of apes or primates turned into the genes of humans? Or don't evolutionists themselves know the answer? :o

 

[Heidi]

Re: correct

Of course she hasn't considered that. Talking about something that one does not understand goes against biblical teachings (see psalms), and well all know that Heidi would never do that.

You are correct. Heidi cannot allow herself to understand evolution for if she did she would no longer be Heidi.

Then please tell me if evolutionists believe that the genes of apes turned into the genes of humans. yes or no. Is there any statement about the theory of evolutionists about which they themselves do not change their minds? :o If so, then please state one.

 

[pfilmtech]

Re: correct

Of course she hasn't considered that. Talking about something that one does not understand goes against biblical teachings (see psalms), and well all know that Heidi would never do that.

You are correct. Heidi cannot allow herself to understand evolution for if she did she would no longer be Heidi.

Then please tell me if evolutionists believe that the genes of apes turned into the genes of humans. yes or no. Is there any statement about the theory of evolutionists about which they themselves do not change their minds? :o If so, then please state one.

You need to pay attention a little better. You seem to refuse that in scientific classification humans are apes but thats another issue.

No evolutionist claims that chimps magically turned into humans one day. The fossil record has found dozens of other humanlike species that existed in the past. It's pretty hard to defintively draw the line where "ape" ends and "human" begins. However it is clear that humans are not direct decendents of modern apes. There's are many other now extinct species that bridge that gap.

 

[WillyGilligan]

Re: correct

Of course she hasn't considered that. Talking about something that one does not understand goes against biblical teachings (see psalms), and well all know that Heidi would never do that.

You are correct. Heidi cannot allow herself to understand evolution for if she did she would no longer be Heidi.

Then please tell me if evolutionists believe that the genes of apes turned into the genes of humans. yes or no. Is there any statement about the theory of evolutionists about which they themselves do not change their minds? :o If so, then please state one.

I believe that statement would be "organisms change over time". That one has held pretty steady, though disagreements crop up over the mechanism involved and other things. You have to remember, the term 'evolutionist' covers quite a lot of people, many of whom differ on the nuts and bolts of it. Sort of like how the Holy Spirit can only be interpreted one way, yet there are multitudes of Christian (and other) sects all over the world who all disagree on this or that point and each maintains that they are the only correct ones.

 

[Late_Cretaceous]

"Ape" is not a scientific term it is a generic term. Heidi, we already went through this exact same debate at christianforums.com with you.

Asking "what is the difference between and ape and a human" is a little like asking "what is the difference between a fruit and a vegetable".

A few months ago it was clearly laid out for you that humans, gorillas, chimps, bonobos oranutangs and a number of exinct species belong to a group of organisms called hominoides.

When some people say "ape" they are refering only to existing species (chimps, gorillas, bonobos and orangutangs) and excluding humans plus any extinct species. When other people say "ape" they are refering to all hominoids. I would consider myself within the latter group. Neither is technically write nor wrong since "ape" is not scientific.

That is why there is an apparent contradiction.

Some people would say a tomato is a fruit others would say it is a tomato. Are they contradicting one another? Maybe. Does it mean that tomatoes therefor don't exist? Of course not, but then since these are not scientific terms - who cares.

If you want scientific terminology, it was already given to you and you decided to ignore it.

 

[Late_Cretaceous]

Then please tell me if evolutionists believe that the genes of apes turned into the genes of humans. yes or no.

Yes, but it is more complicated then a simple one word answer will allow.

For the purpose of this discussion lets say that "ape" = hominoid, and that "Great ape" = gorillas, chimps, orangutangs and bonobos.


Humans and great apes actually share most of our genes. Well over 90% in fact. There is actually more genetic variation amongst chimpanzees then there is between chimps and humans. Looking strictly at a genetic tree of humans and great apes it appears that humans are a side branch of chimps. Of course, the few genes responsible for the divergence manifest themselves in an apparent greater degree of difference because not all genes are going to have equal effects on morphology and development.

 

[Late_Cretaceous]

For those interested in a little light reading on Human - Chimp divergence.

http://www.evolutionpages.com/homo_pan_divergence.htm

 

[Heidi]

Then please tell me if evolutionists believe that the genes of apes turned into the genes of humans. yes or no.

Yes, but it is more complicated then a simple one word answer will allow.

For the purpose of this discussion lets say that "ape" = hominoid, and that "Great ape" = gorillas, chimps, orangutangs and bonobos.


Humans and great apes actually share most of our genes. Well over 90% in fact. There is actually more genetic variation amongst chimpanzees then there is between chimps and humans. Looking strictly at a genetic tree of humans and great apes it appears that humans are a side branch of chimps. Of course, the few genes responsible for the divergence manifest themselves in an apparent greater degree of difference because not all genes are going to have equal effects on morphology and development.

You still have not explained how the genes of one animal can turn into the genes of a human by themselves.

And what do the characteristics that we have in common with an ape have to do with apes ever changing into humans on their own?Once again, cats have more characteristics in common with dogs than humans have with apes. They both have 4 legs, 2 eyes, 2 ears, a nose, a mouth, whiskers, mammary glands, hair all over their bodies and neither of them can form complex analyses, build bridges or rule over the animals. But a dog cannot change into a cat without being able to mate with it! Why do you not understand that? :o

And because evolutionists do not understand that mating and breeding are what passes along genes to offsrping, they literally claim that the genes of animals can turn tino the genes of humans on their own, which is not only impossible, but there is zero proof for it anywhere in reality.

So I was right that evolutionists claim that the genes of apes turned into human beings, even though I am constantly told I am wrong about it, which is just a smokescreen for evolutionists not being able to logically explain their impossible theory.

 

[jwu]

Heidi, do you even consider it to be possible that your understanding of evolution may not be correct?

The first response to my Op said it was correct.

No Heidi. He only agreed to the part of your OP that he quoted above that statement. That does not mean that he agreed to everything.
I believe you are fully aware of that, and are just trying to squirm your way out.

Furthermore you did not answer my question at all, but merely threw a red herring.

Do you even consider it to be possible that your understanding of evolution may be faulty? Please answer with nothing but "yes" or "no".

Once again, cats have more characteristics in common with dogs than humans have with apes. They both have 4 legs, 2 eyes, 2 ears, a nose, a mouth, whiskers, mammary glands, hair all over their bodies and neither of them can form complex analyses, build bridges or rule over the animals. But a dog cannot change into a cat without being able to mate with it! Why do you not understand that?

These are superficial similarities, and there is significant genetic difference between them.
Furthermore, the a dog turning into a cat would actually disprove evolution.

And one does not change into something else by mating with it either, that only happens in your fantasy of what evolution says. But evolution does not actually say that.