[_ Old Earth _] Evolution claims...

[Heidi]

Oh I get that all the time from evolutionists. If I disagree with them, they always say that i simply don't understand evolution. But then when I ask them what their premise about human origin, they always say that ape genes turned into human genes on their own. But then when I repeat that, they say it's false. Are they lying about this? If not, then how do they explain evolution?

But it won't matter anyway because they'll tell me and I'll quote them exactly and they'lll say that I'm lying. They take back every statement they make. Soryy but saying others who don't agree with them simply don't understand that they're talking about is simply another smokescreen to avoid their own contradictions. I have still not yet heard one statement by evolutuionists that they have not taken back. Not one.

 

[jwu]

You still haven't answered the question. Is it really that hard to type a response that isn't longer than three letters at most?

If I disagree with them, they always say that i simply don't understand evolution.

Aren't you noticing a pattern there? Perhaps that's because you in fact do not understand it.

But then when I ask them what their premise about human origin, they always say that ape genes turned into human genes on their own.

That can be said that way, except for the detail that humans are still apes. Because "ape" is a family of species, not a species, and we are still part of that family of species.
Just not the same species that we used to be in the past anymore.

I have still not yet heard one statement by evolutuionists that they have not taken back. Not one.

These statements are not taken back, they just reject your misrepresentations of the actual statements. E.g. your opinion that evolution supposedly states that an "ape" mated with a "human" to get humans or something like that.

 

[Heidi]

Actually, the pattern is the contradictory answers I receieve. I again still have not received one statement about the premise of human origin that evolutionists themselves have not taken back. So until I hear anwsers that do not contradict reality or other evolutionists, I simply cannot believe a theory that contradicts itself. but since you don't understand that the truth does not contradict itself, you will also not understand why rational people do not believe theories that the people who believe in them take back!

So you can continue to live in your fantasy world that animal genes can turn into human genes on their own, but I prefer to live in reality where that does not happen. Therefore, since I'm in reality and you're in your imagination, we will always disagree. But that can never make animals genes turn into human genes, which is a fact that you simply don't understand yet. Therefore, we'll simply have to agree with disagree. :wink:

 

[armed2010]

Actually, the pattern is the contradictory answers I receieve. I again still have not received one statement about the premise of human origin that evolutionists themselves have not taken back. So until I hear anwsers that do not contradict reality or other evolutionists, I simply cannot believe a theory that contradicts itself. but since you don't understand that the truth does not contradict itself, you will also not understand why rational people do not believe theories that the people who believe in them take back!

So you can continue to live in your fantasy world that animal genes can turn into human genes on their own, but I prefer to live in reality where that does not happen. Therefore, since I'm in reality and you're in your imagination, we will always disagree. But that can never make animals genes turn into human genes, which is a fact that you simply don't understand yet. Therefore, we'll simply have to agree with disagree. :wink:

Heidi, the theory only contradicts to you because you bring out strawman arguments and we have to explain why those are not what evolution is. For years we have been explaining this stuff to you, and for reasons I cannot begin to contemplate you still do not get it. I have no idea how you're able to function in the world if you lack such basic comprehension skills.

 

[jwu]

Still no answer to my simple question!

I simply cannot believe a theory that contradicts itself.
but since you don't understand that the truth does not contradict itself, you will also not understand why rational people do not believe theories that the people who believe in them take back!

Oh, i do understand that very well, the problem is that there is no self-contradiction in the ToE except in your private twisted version of it.

So you can continue to live in your fantasy world that animal genes can turn into human genes on their own, but I prefer to live in reality where that does not happen. Therefore, since I'm in reality and you're in your imagination, we will always disagree. But that can never make animals genes turn into human genes, which is a fact that you simply don't understand yet. Therefore, we'll simply have to agree with disagree.

Sigh...if some animal species, e.g. a group of gorillas, began evolving in a way so that they became humans after a long time, then the theory of evolution would be in severe trouble.

It's a part of reality that genes change, slowly. The genes of our anchestors did change, and after a long time the result of these changes was us humans. Had other changes happened, then we'd be respectively different today.
Evolution isn't a directed process, it has no goal in mind which it begins working towards. The evolution of humans happened only once, just like the evolution of any other species on earth, simply because something had to evolve, whatever it be. Wondering about that makes as much sense as throwing a billion dice and then wondering about why exactly that oh so unlikely result came up. It makes no sense because some result had to come up.

 

[Late_Cretaceous]

they always say that ape genes turned into human genes on their own. But then when I repeat that, they say it's false. Are they lying about this?

Links to examples please. I would really like to hear an "evolutionists" say exactly those words Heidi

 

[reznwerks]

taken back

Actually, the pattern is the contradictory answers I receieve. I again still have not received one statement about the premise of human origin that evolutionists themselves have not taken back.
Perhaps you could enlighten us as to WHAT statements these so called evolutionists have taken back.


So until I hear anwsers that do not contradict reality or other evolutionists, I simply cannot believe a theory that contradicts itself. but since you don't understand that the truth does not contradict itself, you will also not understand why rational people do not believe theories that the people who believe in them take back!
I think you are bluffing and have no examples to share. You again have made claims but offer nothing in so far as we can tell if you have a point. Bring the issues to the table so we can discuss them. I for one am anxious to clear your mind of any inconsistancies you may have.

So you can continue to live in your fantasy world that animal genes can turn into human genes on their own, but I prefer to live in reality where that does not happen.
Man is an animal so the genes did not change. As to your reality everyone is entitled to their own opinion but not their own facts.


Therefore, since I'm in reality and you're in your imagination, we will always disagree.
No, I'm part of your reality.

But that can never make animals genes turn into human genes, which is a fact that you simply don't understand yet. Therefore, we'll simply have to agree with disagree. :wink:
Man is an animal, man breeds like other animals and his body functions like other mammals. You know what they say if it walks like a duck and quaks like a duck it must be a duck.

 

[Let it be]

Dude apes didn't just become humans, there is an ancesteral link between chimps, gorilas, orangatangs, and man. Its not like a monkey is going to turn into a human in the zoo over nigt, that seems to be your logic on evolution. Evolution isn't a 100% fact yet but it is a very good explanation of how we got here and is backed with countless proof that backs it up. Im guessing your a theist, well evolution is much more believable than poof god put us here.

 

[Heidi]

Still no answer to my simple question!

I simply cannot believe a theory that contradicts itself.
but since you don't understand that the truth does not contradict itself, you will also not understand why rational people do not believe theories that the people who believe in them take back!

Oh, i do understand that very well, the problem is that there is no self-contradiction in the ToE except in your private twisted version of it.

So you can continue to live in your fantasy world that animal genes can turn into human genes on their own, but I prefer to live in reality where that does not happen. Therefore, since I'm in reality and you're in your imagination, we will always disagree. But that can never make animals genes turn into human genes, which is a fact that you simply don't understand yet. Therefore, we'll simply have to agree with disagree.

Sigh...if some animal species, e.g. a group of gorillas, began evolving in a way so that they became humans after a long time, then the theory of evolution would be in severe trouble.

It's a part of reality that genes change, slowly. The genes of our anchestors did change, and after a long time the result of these changes was us humans. Had other changes happened, then we'd be respectively different today.
Evolution isn't a directed process, it has no goal in mind which it begins working towards. The evolution of humans happened only once, just like the evolution of any other species on earth, simply because something had to evolve, whatever it be. Wondering about that makes as much sense as throwing a billion dice and then wondering about why exactly that oh so unlikely result came up. It makes no sense because some result had to come up.

Slowly? :o I'll say. Chimps still look like chimps and humans look like humans after... how long have you said man became the human he is today? Do evolutionists even know when the human of today was actually completed? :o

When did the skin of men become less porous than an ape? When were his cognitive skills developed enough to build huge temples, speak, monuments, and buildings? When did his eyes change to blue, green, hazel and when did his hair change to be able to be blond? When was he finally able to walk on 2 legs? Were Abraham, Ishmael, Sarah, and isaac all apes? So again, precisely when was it that the human being as we know it today was completely formed? And the idea that people today are smarter than those who were not born in generations l;ong after previous minds gathered information for him is not only absolutely ludicrous, but arrogant as well.

If you're saying that the genes for blue eyes simply appears in a cell without being passed along by parents, then you are saying the breeding is completely meaningless. But this is how absurd the theory of evolution is. It completely makes up the way that offspring are created. :wink: Sorry, but monkeys look no more like humans of ancient times and of today than an ant does. They are still monkeys who are in the jungle or in zoos where man put them. Only in science fiction books and movies to animals change into human beings. :wink:

 

[cubedbee]

Sorry, but monkeys look no more like humans of ancient times and of today than an ant does.

Are you blind? Have you seen both monkeys and ants? Because I don't know how a sighted person could possibly say a monkey looks no more like a human than an ant does. I would be willing to bet I could get 100% results if I did a survey on the street.

 

[jwu]

how long have you said man became the human he is today?

The last common ancestor of today's e.g. chimps and humans lived about 7 million years ago if i recall correctly.

Do evolutionists even know when the human of today was actually completed?

There is no "completion" in evolution. As long as there is modified descent and differentiual reproductive success it will continue.

So again, precisely when was it that the human being as we know it today was completely formed?

That question makes little sense. The humans of fifty years ago were a slightly bit different. Not different enough to be a different species, but the frequency of some allele was different.

Were Abraham, Ishmael, Sarah, and isaac all apes?

In the way as you understand the term "ape" (non-human apes), no. They didn't live long enough ago, today's humans would be able to procreate with them, making them count as humans according to the definition of species.

Today's humans however would most likely not be able to procreate with our ancestors that lived about 500.000 years ago.

If you're saying that the genes for blue eyes simply appears in a cell without being passed along by parents, then you are saying the breeding is completely meaningless.

Do you now deny that mutations happen?

Edit: Changed a few choices of words to be less prone to being misread.

 

[reznwerks]

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. quote]
No it doesn't Heidi. It is time to get it right and be honest with yourself.

 

[bladed-truth]

Ok, here is evolution simplified as much as I possibly can:

Organisms DNA mutates slightly over time, most of these mutations have no effect upon it's ability to survive, those that effect it negatively hinder that animals ability to survive and reproduce and so animals with hindering traits are less likely to survive and continue their gene line.

Some mutations have a beneficial effect (ie./ Longer legs, longer claws, stronger jaws, higher intelligence etc) and mean that such an animal and it's genetic decendants have an easier time suriving and passing their genes along.

Man did not evolve from monkeys. That's like saying my brother is my grandfather. An early ape may have gained a mutation that endowed it with higher than normal intelligence, this increased it's chances to survive, further generations meant further mutations, different bone structure more adapted to land based living increased odds for survival as well. None of this happened overnight, it took literally millions of years.

A belief in God and acceptance of evolutionary theory (I refuse to say 'belief in evolution', it's not a religion, it happens whether we believe in it or not, saying 'I believe in evolution' is like saying 'I believe in gravity') are not incompatible. God made the universe, let's use the ID perspective on this: Say you were making an engine, would you make it so that you had to reach inside every now and then to push a button otherwise it stopped working? No, you'd make it work by it's own.

 

[KaerbEmEvig]

Heidi, spiecies do not define genes - genes define spiecies. There is no such a thing as the fact that evolutionists think that humans are 100% perfect beings while other animals are <100%. Thus you cannot say animal genes turning into human genes. Humans are animals; animals do not have a purpose in their existance to become a human.

Bottlenose Dolphins are probably as intelligent as humans - does that make them non-animal beings? Or maybe that makes them humans in your eyes?