Evolution

[Ray Jones]

It is pretty sure than many different humanoid species, some similar and some different, existed at the same time throughout mankind's entire evolution. So it was in Neanderthal.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal

[Achilles]

Of course that's what the theory evolution is about, don't most people know about it?

No.

 

No, there isn't any theory of micro or macro-evolution, they're simply terms, whether they were made up by us creationists or not (check reference.com for encyclopedia entries on the words).

I have.

 

From your own source:

 

"Since the inception of the two terms, their meanings have been revised several times and even fallen into disfavor amongst scientists who prefer to speak of biological evolution as one process."

 

And yes your right, we can't really argue evolution in the lab, or work, or school, or at least not all the time (http://www.expelledthemovie.com/), but scientists sure can, don't they often change the "lineage" of animals every 5 or 10 years, and haven't they constantly argued and been divided about animals and their lineages in the past constantly coming up with their own lineages?

Yes, scientists do often make discoveries that cause them to have to remap/revise lineages, however:

 

1) This is not only allowed/encouraged in the scientific process but is expected and actively sought out and

 

2) has nothing to do with the biological Theory of Evolution.

 

In fairness, I haven't seen Expelled, but that's only because I refuse to reward Ben Stein's drivel with part of my hard-earned cash. The trailers and interviews were sufficient to cause me to think that the movie would be garbage and the reviews put forth by legitimate biologists (which Stein is not) seem to confirm my suspicions. I expect that I'll be able to watch it for free on YouTube at some point and then I'll be seeing it.

 

Also, how does the fossil record make our position incredible and untrue?

Because that position does not posit a testable hypothesis of it's own or offer anything scientific that refutes the existing theory which does match the evidence, is testable, and has been tested...repeatedly.

 

Does it really have any transitional/intermediate forms, any creatures with half-formed feet, or half-formed wings?

All fossils are transitional/intermediate forms.

 

If I give you 1 and 2, you'll ask "where is 1.5?". If I find 1.5, you'll ask "where are 1.25 and 1.75?", and so on. At some point the "game" becomes a little silly.

 

Can't the neanderthal man and the rickets in his jaw bone be explained by disease and calcium deficiencies?

Perhaps an expert on neanderthal man would be a better source for a response on this.

 

Weren't many modern-looking skulls found that were believed to be older than the neanderthal?

Good question. What is your source? What explanation did they offer? Is it testable? Does it match other evidence? Are there alternate explanations that have also been tested?

 

Weren't human jaws found in deposits in Kenya in 1932 older than the jaws with rickets found in Neander?

Again, I'm not sure what this has to do with the Theory of Evolution. When they dated said bones, what were the dates? Doesn't seem that we can go much of anywhere without that information.

 

Wasn't it proven that Neanderthals walked erect? According to my book here, it says that in 1947 Neanderthal was discovered to have lived in a cave that had been previously inhabited by a modern human before him.

At this point, I'm terribly interested in knowing what book you have there.

 

So doesn't that mean that either the Neanderthal was a seperate creature by itself, or more likely a modern man with calcium deficiency or some disease?

Of course that's a hypothesis. That Neandethal was actually a poorly adapted alien species from another galaxy is another one. So the question becomes how do any hypothesis we come up with stand up to the scientific process?

 

How come in the fossil record new groups of plants and animals appear suddenly and abruptly, and how come they seem to stay pretty much the same until they disappear altogether if/when they do?

I would need specific examples to understand what you're talking about. I suspect that you're talking about frequent mass extinctions that paleontologists are well aware of, and again, have very little (if anything) to do with the Theory of Evolution.

 

Here's my question to you: If life was designed by an intelligent designer, then why would such a designer not only make so many mistakes, but leave evidence of said mistakes, and even repeat them in newer versions. If you need a specific example, I'd submit vitamin c deficiencies in primates (including humans). Seems odd that a designer would intentionally do this, and not only to us, but those animals which most closely match our genome.

 

Thanks for reading.

[M@RS]

super quick point here's something from school, this is word for word

 

One product of economic specialization was the wheel. The oldest known wheel dates back to about 3,500 B.C. With wheeled wagons much larger loads could be carried for longer distances, which helped stimulate long-distance trade. The invention of the wheel also led to the development of the war chariot, a technology that along with bronze and then iron weapons enabled civilizations to conquer larger territories.

 

 

Scientists believe that humans started living along the Nile's banks in about 6,000 B.C

 

Old, Middle, New

 

Historians divide ancient Egypt into three major eras: Old Kingdom, Middle Kingdom, and New Kingdom. Study the timeline below to learn more about each of these eras.

Old Kingdom

c.2700-2200 B.C. During the Old Kingdom, powerful pharaohs created a strong, centralized government managing irrigation systems, large armies, pyramid construction, and local governments.

Middle Kingdom

c.2050-1800 B.C. Troubles struck Egypt, marking the beginning of the Middle Kingdom. Egyptians experienced crop failures, political power struggles, and raids from foreign invaders such as the Hyssops. With powerful war chariots, the Hyssops defeated the Egyptian army and ruled over parts of lower Egypt for more than 100 years.

New Kingdom

c.1550-1100 B.C. During the New Kingdom, powerful pharaohs took the throne, forcing the Hyssops out of Egypt and expanding the Egyptian Empire. The Egyptian Empire stretched around the Mediterranean Sea, covering Palestine and reaching Asia Minor. In Asia Minor, the Egyptian army faced a tough foe, the Hittites. The New Kingdom slowly declined as Egypt was invaded by other groups of foreigners.

 

now why is it that all of the dates are under 6,000 years old? maybe the Earth really is not millions of years old...why wasn't the wheel invented earlier? The "missing links" should've been smart enough to make wheels?

[Det. Bart Lasiter]

super quick point here's something from school, this is word for word

 

 

 

now why is it that all of the dates are under 6,000 years old? maybe the Earth really is not millions of years old...why wasn't the wheel invented earlier? The "missing links" should've been smart enough to make wheels?

wow m@rs you just blew my ****ing mind it's so simple i mean where were all these archeologists who go around blathering about dinosaurs existing millions of years ago when their 5th grade teacher or whatever taught a lesson on early man i mean it's right in the textbook there's nothing about humans existing before 6000 years ago case closed evolution has been disproven by m@rs: master internet poster and doctor of biology, biochemistry, and education (he's educatin' all y'all fools ).

 

 

oh wait there's other species besides humans that could have existed well before we came to be. my bad

 

 

On a more serious note you should try doing research and gathering facts from reputable sources before you debate instead of stuff you happened upon or regurgitating crap you've heard from zealots and idiots with no scientific credibility or experience. Perhaps then people would be inclined to take you more seriously?

[M@RS]

wow m@rs you just blew my ****ing mind it's so simple i mean where were all these archeologists who go around blathering about dinosaurs existing millions of years ago when their 5th grade teacher or whatever taught a lesson on early man i mean it's right in the textbook there's nothing about humans existing before 6000 years ago case closed evolution has been disproven by m@rs: master internet poster and doctor of biology, biochemistry, and education (he's educatin' all y'all fools ).

For once we actually agree

 

 

oh wait there's other species besides humans that could have existed well before we came to be. my bad

 

Tell me about one.

 

 

On a more serious note you should try doing research and gathering facts from reputable sources before you debate instead of stuff you happened upon or regurgitating crap you've heard from zealots and idiots with no scientific credibility or experience. Perhaps then people would be inclined to take you more seriously?

 

I totally agree with you, some of the stuff I've posted was irrelevant, my apologies

[Tyrion]

 

now why is it that all of the dates are under 6,000 years old? maybe the Earth really is not millions of years old...why wasn't the wheel invented earlier? The "missing links" should've been smart enough to make wheels?

 

The Aztecs didn't invent the wheel, either.

[Ray Jones]

Tell me about one.

As a stab in the dark: most dinosaur-species.

[Det. Bart Lasiter]

Tell me about one.

Woah there pal you got me there back off with all the knowledge us common folk don't have multiple PhDs and whatnot.

 

 

 

The Aztecs didn't invent the wheel, either.

Aztecs = Mexicans and M@rs thinks Mexicans are sub-human because he is a racist.

[M@RS]

As a stab in the dark: most dinosaur-species.

 

I figured jmac was talking about missing links..

[Ray Jones]

Not really a missing link, but: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australopithecus

[M@RS]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/32/A.afarensis.jpg

 

how could they tell how the feet looked, I didn't see any bones for the feet.

 

also the Laetoli footprints are interesting, did you know that a scientist did a test with people who never wore shoes, he had them walk through mud, sand, and some other stuff, their footprints looked almost exactly like the footprints at Laetoli...

[Inyri]

Educated guess, M@RS. Scientists do that.

[M@RS]

Educated guess, M@RS. Scientists do that.

 

I know, but just wanted to point it out, for kicks really.

[Det. Bart Lasiter]

I know, but just wanted to point it out, for kicks really.

This is the ultimate argument seriously guys stop arguing logic has no chance of conquering such an ironclad counter.

[Ray Jones]

how could they tell how the feet looked, I didn't see any bones for the feet.

You look at thousand feets and go from there.

 

also the Laetoli footprints are interesting, did you know that a scientist did a test with people who never wore shoes, he had them walk through mud, sand, and some other stuff, their footprints looked almost exactly like the footprints at Laetoli...

That's not very surprising regarding that both species are hominids, is it?

[M@RS]

Now, I have a yes, no question...

 

Don't Lucy's bones indicate that their feet would be smaller?

[Ray Jones]

These are not Lucy's footprints.

[Inyri]

You can't/shouldn't make an educated guess based on one single organism. Lucy's skeleton had no feet either, though.

[M@RS]

These are not Lucy's footprints.

 

But they were very closely related...

[Ray Jones]

Gee. Not the same person. Possibly not even the same species. Get it?

[M@RS]

I never said they were Lucy's footprints, I said that her bones should indicate that her relatives wouldn't be much different, in a drawing I saw, they were very different, taller, and "more evolved"

[Inyri]

Drawings are not science. Drawings are art.

[M@RS]

That were made by artists who were told to recreate what the creatures looked like who made the footprints...

[Ray Jones]

Seriously, her bones indicate how a related species would look like? Hm.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laetoli#Hominid_footprints

[Inyri]

That were made by artists who were told to recreate what the creatures looked like who made the footprints...

 

Do I win yet?

 

Drawings are art, regardless of their best intentions.