Why are there no human apes alive today?

Yes. And here's what's interesting.If we do a tree based on bone morphology it looks exactly like a tree based on DNA which looks exactly like a tree based on ERVs which looks exactly like a chronology tree.In other words, approaching the question of taxonomy from COMPLETELY different angles and you get the EXACT SAME results.Meanwhile, draw us a timeline of Creationism based on Jewish mythology and a timeline of Creationism based on New Guinea tribal religions. How much do you think they have in common?

How does "created kinds" explain DNA?Humans and chimps share a lot of the same DNA. Why?
Thylocines and Tazmanian Devils share more DNA than Thylocines and wolves or Tazmanian Devils and Badgers. Why?If humans and chimps have DNA in common because they are similiar is shape and form, then why don't thylocines and wolves share DNA? Why don't Devils and badgers?Do you have a rational answer for this?

Wow, and I thought you were a worthless bitch BEFORE you wrote this.If you "don't have the time to waste educating us" you are free to go back to serving french fries or whatever you do for a living.You've consistently demonstrated than in EVERY SUBJECT on which you posted, you've been the least educated person. Need we remind you that YOU live in Australia and know less about Australian history than the rest of us?I'm done with you. You are just too fucking retarded to even understand the basic science needed to carry on a conversation much less a debate.

This will likely come as a surprise to you, but "simple" does not equal "true".Where do babies come from? Storks bring them.FAR simpler than a discussion of sexual education, or heaven forbid, the education you would need to become an obstitrition.But, if you're ***, I guess "easy is more gooder" is the only way you can handle things.

I'm talking of storks and babies because I'm trying to talk down enough so that you understand.Apparently I can't even pretend to be *** enough to get through to you, but I'll try again.Lazy, uneducated people such as yourself would rather say "magic did it" than find out the real answer.How does a remote control work? Magic.
How does a car work? Magic.
How does a microwave work? Magic.See, it's VERY simple, and EXTREMELY lazy.It's also dead wrong.Why do all birds have feathers? Magic.
Why do some fish breath air and walk on the land? Magic.
Why do humans and chimps share so much DNA? Magic.See? Just as ***. Just as lazy. Just as wrong.

And I will again restate that abiogenesis is a part of chemistry, not a part of evolution.Evolution does NOT require abiogenesis.If I PERSONALLY put life on Mars, then I created life on Mars. That life STILL evolves regardless of how it got there.But let's talk abiogenesis, shall we? All life on this planet is made up of and runs on chemistry. We can demonstrate chemistry in detail. We can break down anything into it's chemical components.What about God? What is he "made up of"? What does he eat for energy? Can you demonstrate the power of God? Can you break him down into his God components?Who created God? Edited by AdminModulous, : minor content hiding. see 'peek' etc

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. Actually, no. Google ornathopter. Those suckers do not work.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?Edited by AdminModulous, : content hidden etc etc

I already gave an example of an animal reasoning. Reasoning was needed for the raven to figure out how to fashion the hook from the wire and use it to fetch the food.As for turtles and books, I suspect the reason we haven't read any books written by turtles has as much to do with their inability to hold a pen or use a typewriter.And as for apes in space, lest your forget, humans are apes. We've ventured into space.Oh, and if by "apes" you mean "chimps", you should remember chimps were in space before we were.

This post marks the 40th time someone has explained this to Mazzy.Anyone think it's gonna sink in this time?

RE: Your perspectiveUnfortunately for you, your perspective is simply wrong.I can say that my perspective is that trout are not fish. Doesn't make it so.

It's extremely easy to be certain when you don't hold to the facts.For example, I am absolutely certain that you only have one arm.Since other people on the forum would say that you PROBABLY have two arms, and they are uncertain - then, in fact, you have only one arm.That may come as a surprise to you, given that you have access to the facts. But, we're using your logic now.And you better be careful, lest I proclaim your other arm gone and you can no longer type.

yes, and I can clearly see that you have only one arm. Therefore you have only one arm.

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. 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. 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?

Why is it that Christians simply can't debate in good faith? Seriously, is there some secret part of your religion that requires dishonesty.You made the claim that NO OTHER ANIMALS were capable of reason, assessment, invention, etc.I gave you an example of a bird who did ALL the things you claimed animals could not do.So, NOW your story is that they aren't "as good at it".Do you know the difference between ZERO and SOME?
Do you know what the phrase "Moving the goal posts" means?Are you intentionally dishonest, or is this just some dark blight on your soul that you can't help?

So, you want evidence that animals play make believe. Just when I think you couldn't get dumber, you take out a drill and poke another hole in your skull. Well, given that you haven't understood a single thing that anyone has written so far, what difference would it make if I was?So far a dozen posters have provided with with 10-20 posts EACH explaining why you've been wrong in all aspects of every post you've made. It hasn't stopped you from repeating those errors.So, either you are profoundly *** or just a typically dishonest Christian.This is the part where you swear you are telling the truth, but it's a fools charade. The sad truth is you know you are ***, we know you are ***. It's all a waste of time.If we were wrong about evolution, then we would necessarily have to be wrong about all aspects of science, in which case nothing science has ever produced would actually exist.The fact that you are using a computer to post your drivel is evidence in and of itself that you're wrong.