Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 52 (9179 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Happy Birthday: Theodoric
Post Volume: Total: 918,150 Year: 5,407/9,624 Month: 432/323 Week: 72/204 Day: 14/34 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Why are there no human apes alive today?
Percy
Member
Posts: 22687
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 571 of 1075 (622369)
07-02-2011 4:21 PM
Reply to: Message 564 by Mazzy
07-02-2011 4:01 PM


Re: Apes have ventured into space and animals that have built automatons.
Hi Mazzy,
You didn't respond to anything I said. This seems to be yet another repeat of your claim that evolution is false and in a horrendous mess.
When you click on a message's reply button there's a kind of expectation that you'll be replying to the contents of that message, but good for you for thinking out of the box!
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 564 by Mazzy, posted 07-02-2011 4:01 PM Mazzy has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22687
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 572 of 1075 (622371)
07-02-2011 4:35 PM
Reply to: Message 570 by Mazzy
07-02-2011 4:17 PM


Re: Apes have ventured into space and animals that have built automatons.
Mazzy writes:
The problem being genetic and morphological homology between non related species. means evos get to accept what suits them and then have a theory to explain what doesn't fit.
You keep repeating stuff like this, but that's all you ever do is repeat the same assertions over and over again. When it comes to actually supporting those assertions, meh! Maybe you could try explaining what those links have to do with the classification of humans as apes.
Why is it that the classification of humans as animals, vertebrates, mammals and primates, just like chimps, gorillas and orangutans, doesn't bother you, but including humans in the ape family drives you crazy?
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 570 by Mazzy, posted 07-02-2011 4:17 PM Mazzy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 574 by Mazzy, posted 07-02-2011 5:34 PM Percy has replied

ZenMonkey
Member (Idle past 4620 days)
Posts: 428
From: Portland, OR USA
Joined: 09-25-2009


Message 573 of 1075 (622373)
07-02-2011 4:41 PM
Reply to: Message 545 by Percy
07-02-2011 12:30 PM


Re: Apes have ventured into space and animals that have built automatons.
I really do know how to use effect and affect correctly both as nouns and also as verbs. I assume that Theodoric does as well, and his error was just an oversight. However, in the interest of historical accuracy, I let the original stand.
Gosh, this is so much nicer than trying to get some sense out of (or into) Mazzy.
/off-topic
Edited by ZenMonkey, : No reason given.

Your beliefs do not effect reality and evidently reality does not effect your beliefs.
-Theodoric
Reality has a well-known liberal bias.
-Steven Colbert
I never meant to say that the Conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative. I believe that is so obviously and universally admitted a principle that I hardly think any gentleman will deny it.
- John Stuart Mill

This message is a reply to:
 Message 545 by Percy, posted 07-02-2011 12:30 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 579 by Mazzy, posted 07-02-2011 8:34 PM ZenMonkey has replied

Mazzy 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4700 days)
Posts: 212
From: Rural NSW, Australia
Joined: 06-09-2011


(2)
Message 574 of 1075 (622375)
07-02-2011 5:34 PM
Reply to: Message 572 by Percy
07-02-2011 4:35 PM


Re: Apes have ventured into space and animals that have built automatons.
I thought the implication of homoplasy & homology was self evident.
Many of your systems for classification are flawed at their inception by the fact that any shared trait you want to use as a criteria for clasification of apes, humans or any other organism could have nothing to do with ancestry at all.
Although even creationists need some way of identifying kinds and naming them, the presumption of ancestry is not there for us. In other words the fact that several kinds meet your class of mammals, does not imply ancestry between all of them. It means a similar system was used in various kinds like humans and cows.
I am sure the names would have been quite different if the naming had of been left to creationists. We could have used a name to describe any shared function or trait similalry, however the implication that this relates to ancestry is not required.
The mammalian middle ear and mamalian teeth for example evolved twice according to evolutionists. You have mammals bunched together in with synapsids. Let's face it most of your evidence in from chards of fossils in may cases and assumptions made in their reconstructions.
This bunching is where the huge assumptions are mostly made. Hence you presume mammals arose once rather than having being created that way. In fact several lines of mammals evolved 210mya. Again the explanation is all but one line survived. Do you not get sick of hearing the same excuse?
Science
So Percy, the sad fact is that by your own evolutionary researchers hands any shared human/chimp trait may or may not be a result of ancestry. Your classifications are biased in favour of common ancestry to apes. Forward facing eyes and any method that implies ancestry is flawed. Homoplasy and homology research is my evidence of confounding factors in any trait based classification system
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/...071031-new-mammal.html
http://mygeologypage.ucdavis.edu/.../HistoryofLife/CH15.html
Now do you get it?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 572 by Percy, posted 07-02-2011 4:35 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 575 by Coyote, posted 07-02-2011 5:42 PM Mazzy has not replied
 Message 577 by Percy, posted 07-02-2011 6:37 PM Mazzy has not replied
 Message 578 by ZenMonkey, posted 07-02-2011 7:20 PM Mazzy has replied

Coyote
Member (Idle past 2216 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 575 of 1075 (622378)
07-02-2011 5:42 PM
Reply to: Message 574 by Mazzy
07-02-2011 5:34 PM


Third time
Let's face it most of your evidence [is] from chards of fossils in [many] cases and assumptions made in their reconstructions.
I ask again:
Have you ever taken an evolution course? Have you ever studied human osteology? Have you ever handled many of the casts of these fossil man specimens?
I am beginning to think you have no direct experience with this field beyond creationist websites.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 574 by Mazzy, posted 07-02-2011 5:34 PM Mazzy has not replied

Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 576 of 1075 (622379)
07-02-2011 5:49 PM
Reply to: Message 554 by Mazzy
07-02-2011 2:49 PM


Re: More evolved?
Yes I have heard of 'PROBABLY out competed'.
Now your statement re Neanderthal says modern decendants "were PROBABLY instrumental in the demise of Neanderthal".
Creationists do not need 'probably'.
How nice for you.
So, please give us the 100% certain definite creationist answer as to why Neanderthals are extinct, and explain why you can be so certain.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 554 by Mazzy, posted 07-02-2011 2:49 PM Mazzy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 586 by Mazzy, posted 07-02-2011 9:22 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22687
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 577 of 1075 (622381)
07-02-2011 6:37 PM
Reply to: Message 574 by Mazzy
07-02-2011 5:34 PM


Re: Apes have ventured into space and animals that have built automatons.
Mazzy writes:
I thought the implication of homoplasy & homology was self evident.
I guess not. Could you explain the implications, please? In your own words instead of just links?
Mazzy writes:
Many of your systems for classification are flawed at their inception by the fact that any shared trait you want to use as a criteria for clasification of apes, humans or any other organism could have nothing to do with ancestry at all.
As I've said a number of times, I'm talking about classification based upon shared characteristics, not ancestry. Since any mention of ancestry or descent sends you off on another tirade about the "assumption of ancestry" I've been avoiding such terms. The Linnaean system is based upon structure, not ancestry as you've mistakenly stated at least a couple times, and that system works pretty well for the categories of life we've been talking about.
I am sure the names would have been quite different if the naming had of been left to creationists.
So it's the name you object to? It's just the "ape" label that drives you crazy? What's in a name? Why do you care? That gorillas, chimps, orangutans and humans all bear live young, have teats, have opposable thumbs, etc., is a fact, and these shared characteristics require that at some level of classification they be in the same group. It just so happens that that group is called Hominidae, or more popularly, apes.
Now do you get it?
I get that you post links you never explain. You may as well give up the practice in replies to me because I checked out a few of them early on and they didn't seem to support your position at all. Requests that you explain how they proved your point were ignored, so I gave up looking at your links a long time ago.
By the way, what you're doing is covered in the Forum Guidelines:
  1. Bare links with no supporting discussion should be avoided. Make the argument in your own words and use links as supporting references.
All you do is make an assertion with no supporting evidence or argument, followed by a link. You never describe any evidence or state any rational chain of reasoning or argument. You might find it illuminating trying to construct effective arguments from the information in your links.
--Percy
Edited by Percy, : Add additional sentence at the end.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 574 by Mazzy, posted 07-02-2011 5:34 PM Mazzy has not replied

ZenMonkey
Member (Idle past 4620 days)
Posts: 428
From: Portland, OR USA
Joined: 09-25-2009


Message 578 of 1075 (622382)
07-02-2011 7:20 PM
Reply to: Message 574 by Mazzy
07-02-2011 5:34 PM


Re: Apes have ventured into space and animals that have built automatons.
Mazzy writes:
Although even creationists need some way of identifying kinds and naming them, the presumption of ancestry is not there for us. In other words the fact that several kinds meet your class of mammals, does not imply ancestry between all of them. It means a similar system was used in various kinds like humans and cows.
That's nice. I again invite you over to the The Creationist Challenge - Can You Identify Kinds? thread and demonstrate the creationist method for distinguishing kinds.

Your beliefs do not effect reality and evidently reality does not effect your beliefs.
-Theodoric
Reality has a well-known liberal bias.
-Steven Colbert
I never meant to say that the Conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative. I believe that is so obviously and universally admitted a principle that I hardly think any gentleman will deny it.
- John Stuart Mill

This message is a reply to:
 Message 574 by Mazzy, posted 07-02-2011 5:34 PM Mazzy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 584 by Mazzy, posted 07-02-2011 9:11 PM ZenMonkey has not replied

Mazzy 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4700 days)
Posts: 212
From: Rural NSW, Australia
Joined: 06-09-2011


(2)
Message 579 of 1075 (622384)
07-02-2011 8:34 PM
Reply to: Message 573 by ZenMonkey
07-02-2011 4:41 PM


Re: Apes have ventured into space and animals that have built automatons.
I have already established common sense has no place in evolutionary thinking.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 573 by ZenMonkey, posted 07-02-2011 4:41 PM ZenMonkey has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 580 by ZenMonkey, posted 07-02-2011 8:41 PM Mazzy has not replied
 Message 581 by anglagard, posted 07-02-2011 8:47 PM Mazzy has not replied
 Message 583 by Percy, posted 07-02-2011 8:52 PM Mazzy has not replied
 Message 619 by AdminModulous, posted 07-03-2011 4:59 AM Mazzy has not replied

ZenMonkey
Member (Idle past 4620 days)
Posts: 428
From: Portland, OR USA
Joined: 09-25-2009


Message 580 of 1075 (622385)
07-02-2011 8:41 PM
Reply to: Message 579 by Mazzy
07-02-2011 8:34 PM


Re: Apes have ventured into space and animals that have built automatons.
Edited by ZenMonkey, : No reason given.
Edited by AdminModulous, : picture hidden. use peek if you are curious

Your beliefs do not effect reality and evidently reality does not effect your beliefs.
-Theodoric
Reality has a well-known liberal bias.
-Steven Colbert
I never meant to say that the Conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative. I believe that is so obviously and universally admitted a principle that I hardly think any gentleman will deny it.
- John Stuart Mill

This message is a reply to:
 Message 579 by Mazzy, posted 07-02-2011 8:34 PM Mazzy has not replied

anglagard
Member (Idle past 946 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 581 of 1075 (622386)
07-02-2011 8:47 PM
Reply to: Message 579 by Mazzy
07-02-2011 8:34 PM


Re: Apes have ventured into space and animals that have built automatons.
Mazzy writes:
I have already established common sense has no place in evolutionary thinking.
Are you Amish, or a hypocrite? Electricity?
Do you use gasoline, derived from oil, which is discovered through principles of the very geology and biology you have already declared as lacking common sense?
Ignorance is not a virtue, neither is bearing false witness.
Troll.
And your avatar is hideous.
Why can't you answer Percy's comments?
Knock, knock, anyone home?

The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas - uncertainty, progress, change - into crimes.
Salman Rushdie
This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. It’s us. Only us. - the character Rorschach in Watchmen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 579 by Mazzy, posted 07-02-2011 8:34 PM Mazzy has not replied

Portillo
Member (Idle past 4270 days)
Posts: 258
Joined: 11-14-2010


Message 582 of 1075 (622387)
07-02-2011 8:49 PM
Reply to: Message 524 by Nuggin
07-02-2011 9:19 AM


Re: More evolved?
quote:
I gave you an example of an animal which has oral speech. Is it exactly the same language that we use? No. Or maybe it is, and we can't tell. Doesn't matter. It's communication.
And that's for a small rodent. It just happens to be a language that we've decoded. Elephants and whales talk, we just aren't exactly sure what they are saying.
And, we DIDN'T evolve speech suddenly. Speech evolved slowly over time, just like everything else.
But that's beside the point. Your premise was that animals couldn't think, invent or assess.
I've proven your wrong, so instead you say that animals are inventions.
Let's get back to the ACTUAL discussion.
I gave you an example of ONE animal which was doing ALL The things you had said that animals can't do. Yes or no?
Theres no doubt that animals have intelligence. And I marvel at the magnificent technology and abilities that animals have. Animals tend to make no progress and are restricted to the inbuilt abilities they have. Animals have instinct not a creative mind.
It goes back to the way you think. Is man an accident, pond scum, a product of chance or an intricately formed, intelligent, responsible, purposely made creature? This contrast is the belief that everything is specially made with meaning and purpose. You see how the way of thinking can change depending on your foundation?
Evolution proclaims the amazing world around us. But the true miracle of evolution is the evolution of human affairs! Education teaches human physiology, anatomy, anthropology, psychology. Universities take man apart, study him and take the human brain apart. Why does man have the thinking and reasoning ability and knowledge that is impossible for other animals to have?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 524 by Nuggin, posted 07-02-2011 9:19 AM Nuggin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 589 by Dr Adequate, posted 07-02-2011 9:46 PM Portillo has not replied
 Message 591 by DrJones*, posted 07-02-2011 10:17 PM Portillo has not replied
 Message 597 by Nuggin, posted 07-02-2011 11:26 PM Portillo has replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22687
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 583 of 1075 (622388)
07-02-2011 8:52 PM
Reply to: Message 579 by Mazzy
07-02-2011 8:34 PM


Re: Apes have ventured into space and animals that have built automatons.
Mazzy writes:
I have already established common sense has no place in evolutionary thinking.
What you've established is a definite impression in the minds of the other participants, but it has nothing to do with common sense or evolution. All this one sentence post does is add yet another unsupported assertion to your long list. To help move the discussion forward you should respond to one of the messages about classification with the evidence and rationale for your position. Or to one of the messages about the fossil evidence for human ancestry. Or to one of the messages about classification of fossils. Or to one of the messages inquiring how your links support your position.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 579 by Mazzy, posted 07-02-2011 8:34 PM Mazzy has not replied

Mazzy 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4700 days)
Posts: 212
From: Rural NSW, Australia
Joined: 06-09-2011


(1)
Message 584 of 1075 (622390)
07-02-2011 9:11 PM
Reply to: Message 578 by ZenMonkey
07-02-2011 7:20 PM


Re: Apes have ventured into space and animals that have built automatons.
I am happy to take the challenge, when I find time later.
Let me say that I have put forward a definition of kind already.
A kind refers to the initial creation of God and its' decendants.
However there are others I have mentioned such as Baraminology. Given all the contradiction in the definition of species I expect you are not requesting any more clarity than you yourselves can provide.
What are the Genesis kinds? - ChristianAnswers.Net
It is about interpretation of the data, the weight you place on conflicting research, and what you choose to accept. I at least can display a balanced view, although I do not accept TOE as fact. Not all evo researchers accept the dino to bird thing and have redated modern birds much earlier, although they all believe birds evolved from something else.
So even within creationist research there will be debate and research based on different assumptions than TOE. There will be refute and so on. However, in the end both are based on interpretation of research, assumptions and faith in what you choose to accept.
The definition of a kind has nothing to do with the topic.
According to biblical creationists an apobaramin sees humans, chimps and gorillas as three separate kinds. Rather than 'almost humans' evolving all around the place and being displaced etc by modern man, there were no 'almost humans' or part ape/human ever.
Your so called mid species within Homo and before are either mankind, chimps, gorillas or other variations of apes. This is why today you still see distinction between humans and other apes and there are no mid human/ape species getting around today.
I see flat faced apes such as Lluc around 12 mya, and huge variety in skull shapes and morpholgy. Although todays chimps have similar skeletal morphology or genetic similarities to mankind, side by side, they are obviously far removed from each other.
Given it is all theoretical and based on assumptions I think it ignorant of some evolutionists to not learn about the creationists stances they belittle, when we bother to learn what evos base their belief system on.
You believe ape men were here then all dissappeared due to possibilities. I believe there never were any in line with observed data and fossil evidence.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 578 by ZenMonkey, posted 07-02-2011 7:20 PM ZenMonkey has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 585 by jar, posted 07-02-2011 9:17 PM Mazzy has not replied
 Message 587 by Coyote, posted 07-02-2011 9:40 PM Mazzy has replied
 Message 596 by Percy, posted 07-02-2011 11:09 PM Mazzy has replied

jar
Member
Posts: 34136
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 585 of 1075 (622391)
07-02-2011 9:17 PM
Reply to: Message 584 by Mazzy
07-02-2011 9:11 PM


Re: Apes have ventured into space and animals that have built automatons.
A kind refers to the initial creation of God and its' decendants.
Which is totally without content, worthless and utterly *** until you provide us god's list of the initial created critters.
AbE:
And Bariminology is certainly not science and anyone claiming it is science is quite simply a liar. When you start out by saying some book written by unknown authors thousands of years ago must be considered as over riding reality, you are NOT doing science.
Edited by jar, : add information on Bariminology.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 584 by Mazzy, posted 07-02-2011 9:11 PM Mazzy has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024