Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If Man Evolved From Ape, Then Why Are There Still Apes?
Firstly, man did not evolve from modern apes. Man and modern apes share a common ancestor, which is extinct. However, the question comes from a flawed understanding of how evolution works. Evolution is not a straight line, where entire populations change into new species all at the same time. Often times, a small group breaks away from a population and begins to evolve independently of the source group. The source group does not need to go extinct, and is generally unaffected by the development of the smaller group. This is called "Allopatric Speciation," and it is just one of many ways that new species can evolve. There is nothing in evolutionary theory which states a source population must go extinct in order for new species to evolve.
There were NO computer models in any of the studies I've linked to that used fMRI. But then you might know that if you ever actually read any of them. Seems to be a habit of yours to ignore the facts presented and make up your own 'facts' to knock down (ie strawman fallacy).
What's even funnier, is you don't even seem to read your OWN links and get the facts right either.
You really are a funny dude.
ALL fMRI requires computer modeling. You must stay totally restrained during imaging so error correction algorithms have to be used. You don't even understand fundamentals of the bs you champion.
No I don't think they were joking. My guess would be the guy who said this:
I'm still laughing at someone who tells 'leftists' that they don't really understand what evolution means and then makes these stunning comments:
"We still have apes, and they look much like they always have." and "it violates the laws of physics"
or this poster:
You're correct, they were most likely serious. Sad or funny...I cannot make up my mind. I remember seeing a post on a thread on the subject where a poster actually said that evolution was ridiculous because you don't see animals in the middle of evolving right before your eyes...as if you would see a mouse with its ears shrinking while you are looking at it...or something like that anyway.
You're correct, they were most likely serious. Sad or funny...I cannot make up my mind. I remember seeing a post on a thread on the subject where a poster actually said that evolution was ridiculous because you don't see animals in the middle of evolving right before your eyes...as if you would see a mouse with its ears shrinking while you are looking at it...or something like that anyway.
Fact is if one uses something to the extreme such as weight lifter lifting weights they look different than your average man. One can develop an attribute by use..
If someone doesn't walk because they can't, their legs look different with atrophy and shrivel.. Is that evolution too?
If one does not develop their mind or their spirit they are underdeveloped.. If one is not spoken to in their early years such as children who are neglected in extreme cases, that part of their mind cannot be developed and the ability to speak is lost.
This is not evolution but can be looked at as evolution. If something is under used it becomes underdeveloped.. common sense should prevail in understanding this basic principle.
Fact is if one uses something to the extreme such as weight lifter lifting weights they look different than your average man. One can develop an attribute by use..
If someone doesn't walk because they can't, their legs look different with atrophy and shrivel.. Is that evolution too?
If one does not develop their mind or their spirit they are underdeveloped.. If one is not spoken to in their early years such as children who are neglected in extreme cases, that part of their mind cannot be developed and the ability to speak is lost.
This is not evolution but can be looked at as evolution. If something is under used it becomes underdeveloped.. common sense should prevail in understanding this basic principle.
Not that I don't believe in it...I accept natural selection and genetic drift as fact. I have issues with the starting points.
Starting points? The big bang ain't evolution or biology. Abiogenesis isn't the theory evolution either. Evolution is simply the underlying mechanism of biology diversity.
Starting points? The big bang ain't evolution or biology. Abiogenesis isn't the theory evolution either. Evolution is simply the underlying mechanism of biology diversity.
I said "I accept natural selection and genetic drift as fact" those are the two components of evolution...obviously
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
