Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 52 (9179 total)
3 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?
Mazzy 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4700 days)
Posts: 212
From: Rural NSW, Australia
Joined: 06-09-2011


(1)
Message 586 of 1075 (622393)
07-02-2011 9:22 PM
Reply to: Message 576 by Dr Adequate
07-02-2011 5:49 PM


Re: More evolved?
Your own researchers sometimes classify Neanderthal as Homo sapiens Neanderthalis.
These were just mankind that adapted to varying conditions. After the supposed 700,000 year separation even your own researchers suggest these could mate and dispute if they did not not. This is irrelevant. They were just humans that, as usual, evos have given a different species name to like they do every variation of anything.
Neanderthal - Wikipedia
Do not foget that the Neanderthal was your ape man for a long time untill he 'poofed' into humanity with the Neanderthal Genome Project......now there is magic and hand waving if ever I have seen it!!!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 576 by Dr Adequate, posted 07-02-2011 5:49 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 588 by Dr Adequate, posted 07-02-2011 9:41 PM Mazzy has replied
 Message 590 by jar, posted 07-02-2011 9:47 PM Mazzy has replied

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


Message 587 of 1075 (622394)
07-02-2011 9:40 PM
Reply to: Message 584 by Mazzy
07-02-2011 9:11 PM


Baraminology and other dogma
However there are others I have mentioned such as Baraminology...
Baraminology is simply religion pretending to be science.
From the article you cited in your post:
Guidelines
In accomplishing the goal of separating parts of polybaramins, partitioning apobaramins, building monobaramins and characterizing holobaramins, a taxonomist needs guidelines for deciding what belongs to a particular monobaraminic branch. These standards will vary depending upon the groups being considered, but general guidelines which have been utilized include:
  • Scripture claims (used in baraminology but not in discontinuity systematics). This has priority over all other considerations. For example humans are a separate holobaramin because they separately were created (Genesis 1 and 2). However, even as explained by Wise in his 1990 oral presentation, there is not much relevant taxonomic information in the Bible. ...
You might be fooling yourself with this nonsense, but the rest of us can see through your obfuscation. You're pushing religion and dogma, the exact opposite of science.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 584 by Mazzy, posted 07-02-2011 9:11 PM Mazzy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 593 by Mazzy, posted 07-02-2011 10:23 PM Coyote has replied

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


Message 588 of 1075 (622395)
07-02-2011 9:41 PM
Reply to: Message 586 by Mazzy
07-02-2011 9:22 PM


Re: More evolved?
Your lies and gibberish do not constitute an answer to my question.
Try again. There are no living Neanderthals. Apparently you creationists rejoice in a 100% certainty as to how they became extinct.
So tell us how they became extinct.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 586 by Mazzy, posted 07-02-2011 9:22 PM Mazzy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 594 by Mazzy, posted 07-02-2011 10:32 PM Dr Adequate has replied

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


Message 589 of 1075 (622396)
07-02-2011 9:46 PM
Reply to: Message 582 by Portillo
07-02-2011 8:49 PM


Re: More evolved?
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?
Neither: he's a product of evolution.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 582 by Portillo, posted 07-02-2011 8:49 PM Portillo has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 600 by Mazzy, posted 07-03-2011 1:38 AM Dr Adequate has replied

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


Message 590 of 1075 (622397)
07-02-2011 9:47 PM
Reply to: Message 586 by Mazzy
07-02-2011 9:22 PM


Mazzy, stop posting falsehoods.
Do not foget that the Neanderthal was your ape man for a long time untill he 'poofed' into humanity with the Neanderthal Genome Project......now there is magic and hand waving if ever I have seen it!!!
Homo neanderthalensis was named in 1863, one hundred and forty three years before the Neanderthal genome project.
Poof, there goes yet another off your false assertions.
Edited by jar, : fix bolding

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 586 by Mazzy, posted 07-02-2011 9:22 PM Mazzy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 592 by Mazzy, posted 07-02-2011 10:18 PM jar has replied

DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2299
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 4.0


Message 591 of 1075 (622398)
07-02-2011 10:17 PM
Reply to: Message 582 by Portillo
07-02-2011 8:49 PM


Re: More evolved?
Why does man have the thinking and reasoning ability and knowledge that is impossible for other animals to have?
And your evidence that it is impossible for other animals to have these abilities is?

It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds
soon I discovered that this rock thing was true
Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil
Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet
All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world
And so there was only one thing I could do
Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod Ministry
Live every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan
Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On
*not an actual doctor

This message is a reply to:
 Message 582 by Portillo, posted 07-02-2011 8:49 PM Portillo has not replied

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


(1)
Message 592 of 1075 (622399)
07-02-2011 10:18 PM
Reply to: Message 590 by jar
07-02-2011 9:47 PM


Re: Mazzy, stop posting falsehoods.
I think you find it hard to swallow your past embarrassments.
The Wiki site clearly shows the ape man neanderthal once depicted, not to mention the once upon a time knucklewalking ancestry.
If you want to give every variety of human a new species name, or race name, that's just fine. In the end they are all the mankind related to Adam and Eve.
Edited by Mazzy, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 590 by jar, posted 07-02-2011 9:47 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 620 by jar, posted 07-03-2011 8:47 AM Mazzy has not replied

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


(1)
Message 593 of 1075 (622400)
07-02-2011 10:23 PM
Reply to: Message 587 by Coyote
07-02-2011 9:40 PM


Re: Baraminology and other dogma
It is only the ignorant that calls the support for TOE a science. TOE and creationism are likewise both faiths.
There is alot of science behind baraminology. Your being ignorant to it does not change that fact. Evolutionists refutes from researchers that likewise refute each other is hardly a robust basis for discreditation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 587 by Coyote, posted 07-02-2011 9:40 PM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 595 by Coyote, posted 07-02-2011 10:56 PM Mazzy has not replied
 Message 601 by Dr Adequate, posted 07-03-2011 1:40 AM Mazzy has replied

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


(1)
Message 594 of 1075 (622402)
07-02-2011 10:32 PM
Reply to: Message 588 by Dr Adequate
07-02-2011 9:41 PM


Re: More evolved?
You are too caught up in species names. Yiur own science has bamboozled you.
Neanderthals are just humans, that appear to have set up camp away from others for a while. There is no distinction in the kind Mankind. They are all human. Neanderthal, as such did not disappear. Rather the human race adapted to new environments. Creationists do not need to use the continuing species myth to explain why a Chinese may or may not mate with another human that is called by another name, because they are all human.
The Neanderthal debate of how, when and why, is an evolutionists mess ..not mine.
The point being there are no ape men around of any sort and that is an inescapable fact that supports creation and a huge disappointment for evolutionists whoSE theory HAS room for such intermediate homonids to have survived till today...BUT DIDN'T. How unfortunate!!!!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 588 by Dr Adequate, posted 07-02-2011 9:41 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 599 by Dr Adequate, posted 07-03-2011 1:20 AM Mazzy has not replied

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


Message 595 of 1075 (622403)
07-02-2011 10:56 PM
Reply to: Message 593 by Mazzy
07-02-2011 10:23 PM


Re: Baraminology and other dogma
It is only the ignorant that calls the support for TOE a science. TOE and creationism are likewise both faiths.
That's a flat-out lie.
And you have three times now avoided answering my question about your qualifications to make such sweeping pronouncements as you have been making on this thread.
I can only assume that you have no formal training in evolution, human osteology, and that you are not familiar with the casts of the various fossil man specimens. Rather than having a vast knowledge of this subject, it appears your knowledge is more half-vast.
There is alot of science behind baraminology. Your being ignorant to it does not change that fact. Evolutionists refutes from researchers that likewise refute each other is hardly a robust basis for discreditation.
I have probably read more baraminology than you have, and probably understand it better than you do.
One of its main proponents, Wayne Friar, admits that "Scripture claims (used in baraminology but not in discontinuity systematics). This has priority over all other considerations." I cited a larger piece of this in my previous post. This is religious apologetics, not science. Religious apologetics is the exact opposite of science.
But if you want another opinion we can consult Dr. Kurt P. Wise, who states:
Various methods can be used to divide larger groups into smaller ones. One would be to consider Biblical evidence. Here, for example, organisms created on different days would not be related to one another. This reasoning leaves us with the following groups: 1) Day 3 organisms (land plants); 2) Day 5 organisms (sea creatures and birds); and 3) Day 6 organisms (land animals and man). Separate listings of organismal groups after their kind in Genesis One would indicate further division of these groups (KJV translation): 1a) trees bearing fruit; 1b) herbs bearing fruit; 1c) grass; 2a) great whales; 2b) every living creature in the sea; 2c) fowl; 3a) cattle; 3b) creeping things on the land; 3c) beasts of the earth; and 3d) man. Other methods of dividing groups of organisms would include fundamental differences in genetic code, chromosomes, cell structure, metabolism, cell organization, and development. As research continues many more methods will probably be discovered.
Wise also notes:
Although few specific baraminology studies have been performed on specific organismal groups, it seems at this early stage that on the average the baramin might turn out to correspond rather closely to the biological familytwo levels up from the species (species within genera within families) and four levels down from the kingdom (families within orders within classes within phyla within kingdoms).
That's interesting--Wise claims that family Hominidae includes humans, chimps, gorillas, and orangs. I guess you'll have to revise your opinion about our relationship to apes now, eh?

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 593 by Mazzy, posted 07-02-2011 10:23 PM Mazzy has not replied

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


(1)
Message 596 of 1075 (622404)
07-02-2011 11:09 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.
Mazzy writes:
A kind refers to the initial creation of God and its' decendants.
Are you making a religious or a scientific statement?
If you're making a religious statement then save it for church.
If you're making a scientific statement then where's the evidence of God and of how he created the kinds?
Given all the contradiction in the definition of species...
You never provided any evidence or rationale for any contradiction in the definition of species. All you did was make empty and unsupported assertions. If debate only required making baseless assertions then you'd be doing fine, but it requires evidence and a explanation of how the evidence fits within a framework of understanding.
I at least can display a balanced view...
When? Where?
The definition of a kind has nothing to do with the topic.
On this we agree. You should have led with this.
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.
This is your opinion about the topic of this thread, but you have never given any indication of interest in discussing any evidence that might support your opinion. You just make declarative statements left and right: "That's an ape, that's a human." But evidence and rationale? Never.
How about you turn over new leaf and respond to the evidence against your exceedingly odd claim that Homo erectus is an ape and Turkana boy is a human. Here are the three skulls yet again, with Homo erecuts on the left, Turkana boy in the middle, and a human skull on the right:
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 584 by Mazzy, posted 07-02-2011 9:11 PM Mazzy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 604 by Mazzy, posted 07-03-2011 2:24 AM Percy has replied

Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2602 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


(1)
Message 597 of 1075 (622405)
07-02-2011 11:26 PM
Reply to: Message 582 by Portillo
07-02-2011 8:49 PM


Re: More evolved?
Animals tend to make no progress and are restricted to the inbuilt abilities they have.
So, it is your premise that crows have always had the inbuilt desire to place nuts on roads so that cars will run over them and crack them.
Boy, it's really lucky for crows that we came along and invented cars to fit this ability of theirs.
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?
Do you understand that your foundation is meaningless in the face of evidence?
You could believe that humans are absolutely not mammals. That could be your foundation. However, humans produce milk. The _foundation_ doesn't matter if the facts are against it.
Why does man have the thinking and reasoning ability and knowledge that is impossible for other animals to have?
Let's review the previous 5 posts in this conversation:
1) You claim that man has this reasoning ability which is impossible to be found in other animals.
2) I demonstrate that it is found in other animals, giving you specific examples.
3) You ignore my evidence and make the claim again.
4) I point out that you've ignored the evidence and ask you to directly address the evidence.
5) You repeat your claim again, still ignoring the evidence.
How exactly does repeating your *** make it true?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 582 by Portillo, posted 07-02-2011 8:49 PM Portillo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 598 by Portillo, posted 07-02-2011 11:29 PM Nuggin has replied

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


Message 598 of 1075 (622406)
07-02-2011 11:29 PM
Reply to: Message 597 by Nuggin
07-02-2011 11:26 PM


Re: More evolved?
Just because animals are intelligent does not mean they are as advanced as humans. The very thing we are discussing, science, is precisely the difference between humans and other animals.
Edited by Portillo, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 597 by Nuggin, posted 07-02-2011 11:26 PM Nuggin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 603 by Nuggin, posted 07-03-2011 2:00 AM Portillo has replied

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


Message 599 of 1075 (622411)
07-03-2011 1:20 AM
Reply to: Message 594 by Mazzy
07-02-2011 10:32 PM


Re: More evolved?
* falsehoods and gibberish snipped *
Neanderthal, as such did not disappear.
* falsehoods and gibberish snipped *
Uh ... there aren't any living Neanderthals. Neanderthals, "as such", whatever you mean by that, did disappear. That's why there aren't any Neanderthals any more.
Try again. Tell us with your wonderful creationist certainty why Neanderthals disappeared, and tell us how you can be so certain.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 594 by Mazzy, posted 07-02-2011 10:32 PM Mazzy has not replied

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


(2)
Message 600 of 1075 (622412)
07-03-2011 1:38 AM
Reply to: Message 589 by Dr Adequate
07-02-2011 9:46 PM


Re: More evolved?
Evolution boils down to chance which is not very scientific, nor predictive.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 589 by Dr Adequate, posted 07-02-2011 9:46 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 602 by Dr Adequate, posted 07-03-2011 1:42 AM 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