Computer Hope
Other => Other => Off topic => Topic started by: Raptor on May 18, 2007, 09:50:56 PM
-
Watch this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZFG5PKw504)
They've got a really good point!
;D
-
Current Biology Unit: Theory of Evolution (treated as law). This brightened my day after people preach evolution as unmistakable. :)
(On a more serious note, I do believe that species can adapt to climate, and eventually adapt to the point that they can be called different species. The idea that humans descended from apes I cannot accept.)
-
That is a really good clip, explains a lot. Nice find Raptor.
-
Current Biology Unit: Theory of Evolution (treated as law). This brightened my day after people preach evolution as unmistakable. :)
(On a more serious note, I do believe that species can adapt to climate, and eventually adapt to the point that they can be called different species. The idea that humans descended from apes I cannot accept.)
No problem accepting adaptation in Nature...
But to say a fish crawled out of a swamp and eventually walked upright as something else that's a different hill of beans.
Thanx for the link.
-
Thats sort like the Big Bang theory being the beginning of time and the universe. If the bang occurred, there had to be at least two dissimilar substances to make a bang. Where did they come from?
If apes evolved into man, why do we still have apes?
-
Did anyone ever take the time to open a jar of peanut butter and check it for single-celled beings? I bet not even these guys who thought up the theory that if live can't begin in Peanut butter, it can't begin anywhere else, have done so.
-
single celled being??
I actually just opened a jar of peanut butter to make myself a sandwich and i didn't find anything but peanut butter in it...
-
No problem accepting adaptation in Nature...
But to say a fish crawled out of a swamp and eventually walked upright as something else that's a different hill of beans.
Precisely.
The biggest problem with that portion of the Theory of Evolution is two-fold. One: Apes have sufficient intelligence. They are capable of living in communities, making tools and using them, and they have the ability to adapt, without evolving, to most climates of the world. So can we. However, once these are in effect, the need to walk upright and build buildings seems almost superfluous. Why bother increasing the complexity and the potential for disaster, when a perfectly capable mammal already exists?
Two: There had to have been a first human. Sure, there were the Neanderthals, but someone had to be first in being a human as we know it. Meaning that there was, at one time, only *one* human. Now, even today in our "civilized" world, there is hate, prejudice, genocides. Back then, I can only imagine that it was worse, thanks to the trends back in time (the further in the past you look at, the more of this there is).
Excuse me for using the classic "what are the odds" argument, but this bears looking at. Let's say that in a family of Neanderthals, the first homo sapiens sapiens was born. The chance of this happening are... well, the genetic difference is about 0.5% of our DNA. Our DNA contains 3 billion base pairs. .5% of that is
150,000,000 base pairs. The odds of all these changes occurring, at once, is 1/150,000,0002, or:
1/22500000000000000
(Or is it "150,000,000!"? If so, the denominator is even larger...)
Okay, now, this baby is born. I can't give definitive odds on how likely it is that a completely different baby is accepted by their parents (even today we don't always accept differences from the norm), the chances that a sufficiently similar baby of the opposite gender is available for procreation, the odds that they will procreate at all, and the chances that both are fertile and healthy and produce offspring. However, the odds I've already given are so out of this world that I can't wrap my mind around it and accept it.
-
Dilbert,
I'm glad you got that off your chest !
Wheww !
Does this mean you are throwing out the humanoid ascension, and excepting the ape evolution to human theory ?
Jp
-
Right. I am saying that humans didn't evolve, but animals do.
-
Oh, . .OK !
I tend to agree, however, my thoughts are, even though apes may have a
highly relevant DNA relationship with humans, I stll think that if they evolved into humans, that isn't any reason they didn't learn to stand on two feet reaching into the apple tree.
Jp
-
So this comes to a monkey sitting in a tree.
Imagine this is the first one who lost it's tail..
It falls over on the limb expecting to hold on
by it's tail...
Smack! it hits the ground.
Imagine the look on it's face... ;D
Getting back up....Priceless.
-
Right. I am saying that humans didn't evolve, but animals do.
Nothing evolves...things adapt but nothing evolves.