[_ Old Earth _] If humans evolved from apes, where is our tail?

[jasoncran]

i stand corrected however if you break it you will feel much pain, i have fallen on it it freaken hurts.

jason

 

[Crying Rock]

Jeez, I’ve been waiting (over a month now) for unequivocal evidence that fleshy mutations that protrude from human spinal columns are proof of that humans once had tails, and the even deeper issue: did humans evolve from apes.

This doesn't illuminate anything about human/ape evolution, since apes also have vestigial tails, like humans.

Thank you, B. This is he most intelligent response so far. The rest weren't worth answering. So let's compare ape (x human) and human "vestigial" tails. Is there further degradation as one would expect, under TOE. Or are ape(x human) and human "tails" equally degraded?

 

[Barbarian]

Thank you, B. This is he most intelligent response so far. The rest weren't worth answering. So let's compare ape (x human) and human "vestigial" tails. Is there further degradation as one would expect, under TOE. Or are ape(x human) and human "tails" equally degraded?

I don't understand what you mean by "further degradation." Chimp pelvises are lengthened relative to those of humans, and the sacrum/coccyx are also longer, but proportionately, they are about the size we would expect.

http://www.boneclones.com/images/sc-003-d-lg.jpg

This would indicate that tails became vestigial prior to the last common ancestor of humans and chimps, something also indicated by the vestigial tails of other apes (which have a last common ancestor with humans and chimps earlier than the human/chimp divergence)

 

[lordkalvan]

Thank you, B. This is he most intelligent response so far. The rest weren't worth answering....

Does this include answering questions that were asked in the hopes of illuminating your own understanding so that the discussion could progress?

 

[Crying Rock]

Thank you, B. This is he most intelligent response so far. The rest weren't worth answering. So let's compare ape (x human) and human "vestigial" tails. Is there further degradation as one would expect, under TOE. Or are ape(x human) and human "tails" equally degraded?

I don't understand what you mean by "further degradation." Chimp pelvises are lengthened relative to those of humans, and the sacrum/coccyx are also longer, but proportionately, they are about the size we would expect.

http://www.boneclones.com/images/sc-003-d-lg.jpg

This would indicate that tails became vestigial prior to the last common ancestor of humans and chimps, something also indicated by the vestigial tails of other apes (which have a last common ancestor with humans and chimps earlier than the human/chimp divergence)

Is Australopithecus afarensis an ape?

http://anthropology.si.edu/humanorigins/ha/a_tree.html

Did Australopithecus afarensis eventually evolve into H.s.s.?

Compare Australopithecus afarensis tail to H.s.s. tail.

http://www.vanderbilt.edu/AnS/Anthro/An ... s_lucy.jpg

 

[Barbarian]

Is Australopithecus afarensis an ape?

Like us. Hominins, including anatomically modern humans, are apes.

Did Australopithecus afarensis eventually evolve into H.s.s.?

It's certainly close to the line from which we evolved.

Compare Australopithecus afarensis tail to H.s.s. tail.

http://www.vanderbilt.edu/AnS/Anthro/An ... s_lucy.jpg

In this specimen, the coccyx is missing except for the first caudal vertebra. However, what is present looks more human than any other modern ape bones do. Take a look:
http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/ada ... icture.jpg

 

[Crying Rock]

In this specimen, the coccyx is missing except for the first caudal vertebra. However, what is present looks more human than any other modern ape bones do.

O.K., no Australopithecus afarensis coccyx are available for study. So no conclusions can be made. How about H. habilis? Was he an ape? Let's see his "tail" compared to H.s.s. "tail".

 

[Barbarian]

Barbarian observes:
In this specimen, the coccyx is missing except for the first caudal vertebra. However, what is present looks more human than any other modern ape bones do.

O.K., no Australopithecus afarensis coccyx are available for study.

In this one, part of it is missing. What's there, however, is quite human-like.

So no conclusions can be made.

The evidence indicates a vestigial tail in A. afarensis. Not surprising; the innominate bone, sacrum, etc. are more humanlike than any other modern ape.

How about H. habilis? Was he an ape?

Right.

Let's see his "tail" compared to H.s.s. "tail".

Not sure we have an example. Those tiny bones tend to get lost. But fortunately, there is all that other evidence for it.

 

[Crying Rock]

Barbarian observes:
In this specimen, the coccyx is missing except for the first caudal vertebra. However, what is present looks more human than any other modern ape bones do.

O.K., no Australopithecus afarensis coccyx are available for study.

In this one, part of it is missing. What's there, however, is quite human-like.

[quote:3k4e5fwr]So no conclusions can be made.

The evidence indicates a vestigial tail in A. afarensis. Not surprising; the innominate bone, sacrum, etc. are more humanlike than any other modern ape.

How about H. habilis? Was he an ape?

Right.

Let's see his "tail" compared to H.s.s. "tail".

Not sure we have an example. Those tiny bones tend to get lost. But fortunately, there is all that other evidence for it.[/quote:3k4e5fwr]

So, in other words, you have no evidence of vestigial tails in Homo habilis or Australopithecus afarensis.

How about Homo rudolfensis?

 

[Barbarian]

So, in other words, you have no evidence of vestigial tails in Homo habilis or Australopithecus afarensis.

I don't know what the evidence is for H. habilis. But as you see, your specimen of A. afarensis has a portion of the coccyx remaining on the sacrum. There is little or no difference between that part and that of anatomically modern humans.

How about Homo rudolfensis?

Don't know. Such tiny bones are hard to find, unless one is very lucky. But what evidence exists shows that there wasn't much variation within Homo and Australopithecus.

BTW, the bonobo coccyx looks more like that of anatomically modern humans than that of other chimps.
http://www.boneclones.com/images/ko-123-p-md.jpg

 

[lordkalvan]

So, in other words, you have no evidence of vestigial tails in Homo habilis or Australopithecus afarensis.

How about Homo rudolfensis?

You seem to be very good at asking questions, but not so good about answering them.

 

[Crying Rock]

Because I'm putting your belief system on trial.

Everybody already knows my belief system and it's tenets.

 

[Barbarian]

Everyone who posts here, is putting his "belief system" on trial. Some here just haven't figured that out, yet. ;)

 

[lordkalvan]

Because I'm putting your belief system on trial.

Everybody already knows my belief system and its tenets.

Are you addressing me? Most of my questions did not reference your belief system and it's tenets; they were for clarification of certain aspects of this discussion. If, for example, your reply to the question What observational evidence would meet your demands? is None because of my belief system and its tenets, you could at least say so so that those of us hoping to present you with some could stop wasting our time. As Barbarian pointed out, it's not just 'our' belief system on trial here.

 

[VenomFangX]

We have a vestigial tail. Oh and we did not evolve from apes, we are apes. Lets not monkey around on this one, it is a fact.
yours
VFX

 

[VenomFangX]

Gorillas nor chimps have tails. I am NOT advocating man evolving from apes. But neither of the 'great apes' or orangutangs have tails.

We did NOT come from apes. NEVER has it been shown that ANY species 'changed' from one to another. Apes are apes and humans are humans. Our DNA and theirs are DIFFERENT. And DNA are THE building blocks that determine the characteristics of a species.

Blessings,

MEC

This is incorrect, we are apes: you cannot choose to accept some parts of science and reject others to fit in with your notion of what should be. The reality is out there and you accepting it or not is a little morose but is not the issue. Species as they currently are, evolve into new form depending on the conditions for survival. You are correct Deoxyribonucleic acid does determine a species or an individual, but is open to change which is called mutation. Most mutations perhaps die but many also survive and those who do pass on the DNA. Pretty likely scenario to me. This is Gods design and not yours or mine.
yours
VFX

 

[Crying Rock]

"...This is incorrect, we are apes..."

Delineate the species of apes that resulted in H.s.s.

 

[VenomFangX]

Posting a pile of emotional U tube videos does not add much to the discussion at all except for me to enjoy the videos. From one ape to another: thank you.
yours

ÒõýþüäðýóÖ

 

[Crying Rock]

So you can't delineate the apes that purportedly lead to H.s.s.?

The YouTube videos are part of my signature. They're in everyone of my posts.

I glad you enjoy them. I enjoy them also.

 

[VenomFangX]

We are apes..fact. :yes