Human's evolution in the most simple way . (faith, layman, evidence)

[MysticPhD]

Originally Posted by AREQUIPA

I believe that I showed quite clearly that you either failed to understand or somehow chose to misrepresent the very simple basic purpose and operation of Occam's razor. If you choose to take that as a personal attack, I regret it. I'm trying to make you see sense, not denigrate you.
As you denigrate the dreamer, here
When he mentions the rational evidence - based default. You attack him with you 'non- explanation' nonsense and insult his intelligence, and all of ours for that matter.

Because they explain nothing . . . simply report what is observed to occur SEEMINGLY without an observable organizing principle involved . . . except that the universal field IS the organizing principle for ALL of it and we have no explanation for that in your atheist world. The use of the prefix "self-" means "we have no fricking idea why it does what it does . . . but it does it seemingly all on its own."

"The most robust and unambiguous examples[1] of self-organizing systems are from the physics of non-equilibrium processes. Self-organization is also relevant in chemistry, where it has often been taken as being synonymous with self-assembly" (Wiki)

ALL observational . . . NOT explanatory!

Why you choose to sneer at this, I cannot understand as there is evidence that it does occur and is a obviously feasible mechanism for abiogenesis and the 'evilution' of the cosmos, too. Well, as you often appear to be theist with evident creationist leanings, perhaps I can understand why you sneer it.
And we seem to drifting off biological evolution let alone human evolution.

No sneering . . . just pointing out the euphemisitc (non-explanatory) status of it. You clearly do not understand the difference.

[Shankapotomus]

Originally Posted by squall-lionheart

chimps and gorillas didn’t need to be clever in order to be a successful species.
But we need it ..
right ?
Why ?
We were living in the same environment .

You forget we were competing with the ancestors of chimps for the same food. Also notice, that we are able to control our environment now a lot more than chimps can, including deciding whether our ancient competitor will live or die. Because we have developed a more evolved conscious, we can empathize with the chimps struggle as well as understand the symbiotic relationship of all living things. Developing more intelligence is an evolutionary advantage when you consider that some animals, like elephants, sometimes eat themselves into famines by gorging on their food supplies without understanding the long term repercussions. Evolving more intelligence was also a survival behavior because maybe we couldn't compete in terms of strength against our adversaries and it enabled us to think about how to control food, which lead to figuring out how to grow it ourselves so we wouldn't have to fight the other stronger primates for it.

That still doesn't mean it's not totally based on random mutations. We were just lucky and mutated first.

[rifleman]

There's also pretty good evidence now that, several times in our historic past, we (humans) have almost become extinct through natural catastrophies. which can and likely will happen agin (like, say, "merely" a mid-sized meteorite, not enough to totally wipe out everything, but enough to cause global shortages, vast starvation and, let's say, a resulting 5 year long global "nuclear winter" scenario.) Insufficient food supplies, sunlight for crop growth,vast panic and struggling amongst the world's existing masses of dependents... etc.

But in the end, those of us who bury ourselves into the Colorado Mountains (the US Military, for instance), or the Chinese who apparently have some large well-stocked underground caverns established..) would survive and repopulate the earth.

But hopefully, this time, without the gross and illiterate stupidity of some assumed Wooden god icon.

[TRANSPONDER]

Originally Posted by squall-lionheart

Thank you very much I really appreciate all your efforts on the topic , I learned new information that I did't know about it before .
Now ...
If someone ask me to write a summary of the topic in 5 or 6 sentence (with a sense of humor ) it would be something like this :
From millions of rare mutations that mostly don't give an advantage & among millions of species we were lucky time after time mutations after another to have new traits from mutations that gives us (out of luck again) the exact advantage we need despite that we can not choose it because it is a random process that happen for known reasons which is not random in the sense of occurring without any reasons & the best example of genetic mutation of a human which can be seen to increase the information in the geno & change the body shape naturally in a world population of 7 billion people is a family with a strong bones .
Is that it ?

that's not quite how I'd put it myself but but it's a huge improvement from where you were where we first began.

[squall-lionheart]

Originally Posted by AREQUIPA

that's not quite how I'd put it myself but but it's a huge improvement from where you were where we first began.

Thank you AREQUIPA

[TRANSPONDER]

Originally Posted by squall-lionheart

Thank you AREQUIPA

In fact, thinking about that while I was sorting out the 2nd Intermediate dynasties, I can see where you are coming from. I can see how all the evidence looks rather ...ah...minute. The transitionals are a few bits of bone where the jaws look a bit similar. The mutations are there and sure, malaria and rats develop resistance to the things we design to kill them, but then we heal when we get hurt - how's that evolution? And actual examples of evolutionary change (let alone speciation) in humans seems as elusive as dark matter.

I can understand your skepticism. Aren't the scientists over - interpreting some rather arguable evidence? And can such a hit and miss method of a few mutation giving ...what was it you said...'the exact advantage we need'..? work without something making sure it works?

I sometimes wonder myself, but the way I look at it is - the evidence, slender as it might seem to me, sometimes, all points that way and the mechanism stacks up, no matter how deep you look. All the evidence found fits - not a thing contradicts - and in fact makes the case stronger.

When one looks for an alternative explanation, there just isn't one. Not one that has anything like all that evidence to support it. So I'll go with evolution until some better theory comes along.

[squall-lionheart]

* "Just a little bet more of my fantasies and hallucinations"!!

1-Why does science community & the media sleep on any (discovery,falsification, new studie) that could refute a particular aspect of the theory of evolution ?
Any news that supports the theory will spread & any one against it ( true ) will not spread at the same level !!!
ــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ ــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ ــــــ
2- If we all came from a single cell then there must been thousands of fossils of transitional creatures ... where are those fossils ?
for example :
Humans and horses share a common ancestor around 65 million years ago.
Is there any fossil record to prove it in both lines ( Horses & Humans ) ?
1= common ancestor =1
2= ........................ =2
3=......................... =3
4=......................... =4
5=...Modern human ... 5= modern horse
Fossil record for 2=2 ,3=3,4=4 ?
ــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ ــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ ــــــ
3-How did the species knew the accurate knowledge of what their bodies need in the development proces of their organs ?
For example :
How does the first creature that has an eye & could actually see know the mechanism of the eye in order to evolve one with all the necessary parts ?
I mean the functions between the lens and the cornea and retina, the light-sensitive cones, & there for knew that no part can work without the other parts ?
Who or what gave it that complex and precise knowledge ???
Thank you

[Eusebius]

Originally Posted by squall-lionheart

*Can you handle just a little bet more of my fantasies and hallucinations ?!!
1-Why does science community & the media sleep on any (discovery,falsification, new studie) that could refute a particular aspect of the theory of evolution ?
Any news that supports the theory will spread & any one against it ( true ) will not spread at the same level !!!
ــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ ــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ ــــــ
2- If we all came from a single cell then there must been thousands of fossils of transitional creatures ... where are those fossils ?
for example :
Humans and horses share a common ancestor around 65 million years ago.
Is there any fossil record to prove it in both lines ( Horses & Humans ) ?
1= common ancestor =1
2= ........................ =2
3=......................... =3
4=......................... =4
5=...Modern human ... 5= modern horse
Fossil record for 2=2 ,3=3,4=4 ?
ــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ ــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ ــــــ
3-How did the species knew the accurate knowledge of what their bodies need in the development proces of their organs ?
For example :
How does the first creature that has an eye & could actually see know the mechanism of the eye in order to evolve one including all the necessary parts ?
I mean the functions between the lens and the cornea and retina, the light-sensitive cones, & there for knew that no part can work without the other parts ?
Who or what gave it that complex and precise knowledge ???
Thank you

It's all magic. It doesn't have to make sense. You just have to bamboozle them with fancy words.

For instance, I was watching "History of the World in Two Hours" and these evolutionists went from a single celled amoeba to other critters to the fish and this fish crawled out of the pond and didn't like its swim suite so it grew hair, a neck, a head, arms and legs and eventually became a human. Of course they didn't say anything about it needing a mate. Maybe it was a hermaphrodite? Or maybe just magic?

[TRANSPONDER]

Originally Posted by squall-lionheart

* "Just a little bet more of my fantasies and hallucinations"!!

1-Why does science community & the media sleep on any (discovery,falsification, new studie) that could refute a particular aspect of the theory of evolution ?
Any news that supports the theory will spread & any one against it ( true ) will not spread at the same level !!!
ــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ ــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ ــــــ
2- If we all came from a single cell then there must been thousands of fossils of transitional creatures ... where are those fossils ?
for example :
Humans and horses share a common ancestor around 65 million years ago.
Is there any fossil record to prove it in both lines ( Horses & Humans ) ?
1= common ancestor =1
2= ........................ =2
3=......................... =3
4=......................... =4
5=...Modern human ... 5= modern horse
Fossil record for 2=2 ,3=3,4=4 ?

There are many 'common ancestors' leading to various branches of mammals. Horses went one way to Eohippus and the primate branch went another way. I can perhaps look up the particular fossils on the relevant lines, but that's quite a big job and the nature of incremental evolution means that you don't get one crossroad creature where you can say 'that's where it changed'. That too simple 'missing link' scenario is a bit of a misconception.

ــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ ــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ ــــــ

3-How did the species knew the accurate knowledge of what

their bodies need in the development proces of their organs ?
For example :
How does the first creature that has an eye & could actually see know the mechanism of the eye in order to evolve one with all the necessary parts ?
I mean the functions between the lens and the cornea and retina, the light-sensitive cones, & there for knew that no part can work without the other parts ?
Who or what gave it that complex and precise knowledge ???
Thank you

You seem to have forgotten the explanation of unplanned mutations giving a survival advantage where the ecological opportunity was. It is a misapprehension to imply that the creature or indeed evolution 'knew' what their bodies needed to do. The only need was to survive.

The eye is shown today in many forms of development from light sensitive blobs in shrimps to open pits to admit light directionally in octopi and onto eyes with protective shields which through the survival advantage of getting a non- distorted image of the possible predator became a natural lens.
A small survival advantage is the only mechanism one needs to account for the development of the eye.

We also have other types of eyes in separate developments - the trilobites developed compound eyes which we now have in insects today.

[rifleman]

While a simple expression of Evolutionary statistics can cover this off, I don't know off the top of my head where this intro stuff exists. It does of course; I just don't know right this moment. But I will try to find it.

And, ignoring the blunt-headed attacks b our scientifically oblivious and super-stubborn Big-E's simplistic and unsupported refutations here, it does happen, obviously.

Unless one blatantly denies...

√ that DNA works as we know it does;

√ that mutations happen as we've now regularly recorded them;

√ that they have any effect on the hosting organism's phenotype (please... look it up...)

√ that the environment would not then naturally test the resulting new phenotypes out against prevailing conditions,

√ that simple and very easily demonstrated exponential population growth of more-suitable and thus more-successful offspring naturally occurs;

√ that these better-suited offspring would then out-compete the less-fit versions, and finally;

√ that the Evolution process somehow knew it would be tested by scientific incompetents in this millenium, and thus did not preserve and toe-tag, along with the species' age, each and every transitional species. Of which, obviously, there are literally millions in each species' past history.

Heck; you and I are transitionals. We incur genetic variations (obviously!) with each and every new generation of humans, and they are (lightly) exposed to ecological fitness testing. Of course, the :"lesser" ild animals do not get to modify their environment a we do, which obviously tends to alleviate any net gains in evolutionary advances with us.

What's so hard about all this I wonder?

Unless, of course, it decimates and eliminates ones hokus-pokus spiritual world-view all to death! For some, it's just to much to bear, and they go off and offer up silly alternate mystical solutions...