you don't get it. You can ask for evidence that cats and lions evolved from a common ancester, you can't ask for evidence that cats are Felidae, because they belong to the group felidea by definition of the word felidae. Just like human are hominidae and by extention Hominoidea (apes). This is just words to help scientist classify species. It is called Linnaean taxonomy, set up by Carl Linnaeus, who actually was a christian creationist and a scientist. His system of classification is still used today (adapted)
Carl Linnaeus lived before Darwin, and had classified humans along with other apes in the "homo" genre. He also had a classfication for supernatural beings like god, angels, demons, etc...
I guess my point is it is hard to show evidence of something when you don't even understand that your question doesn't make sense. You should learn by yourself a little bit on the matter before coming asking for evidence and look like a fool in the process

Edited 12/26/2015 23:45:34

None of this crap is about what the terms for humans are, Colonel said he didn't believe that humans were descended from apes and wct said that humans are classified as apes. I said that instead of just saying their classification he should provide evidence for man descending from other apes. You should stop trying to make a thing about something it's not about, before you start insulting people by calling them fools.

While I agree that it's disgraceful that there are people who find evolution improbably, I agree with Smedley, wtc answered a question different from that asked.

What if evolution was a mechanism created by God? This is a compromise (although not evidenced) that gives me comfort in the apparent contradiction between my dual belief in God and Science.

what wtc did was pointing the fact that we are classified as apes, and then proceeded to copy/paste the definition of the word "ape" as proof to that, and therefore the sentence "if my kid came home thinking humans evolved from apes" doesn't make any sense. It is like saying "if my kid came home thinking that we are homo sapiens, i would be mad". It is stupid and ignorant. And how can anyone have a productive conversation about evolution when some people in the discussion don't even have a basic understanding of the matter?

@Jai

I think you'll like this video, and probably think that it makes sense :)

intelligent design and evolution
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxOEz9aPZNY&index=3&list=PL7A9646BC5110CF64

Edited 12/27/2015 00:05:17

I've recently become enamored with the concept of Deism. Since I myself prefer the scientific explanation to most things, but was always frustrated that a few things seemed to slip out of reach. The concept is that there was once a god, and he created the Universe long ago, and set up all the little things, like scientific laws and theories. But then he left. He didn't pay any more attention to his creation. Maybe he had better things to do. Maybe he felt no need to interfere. Kind of like how a watchmaker never needs to mess with his watches, because if he made it right, it should work perfectly without him. So while there might be some higher power, and certain things could be attributed to him, he has no concern with us, and therefore it's less likely we need to pray, or really do any religious work at all, because he doesn't care. Seems pretty straightforward to me.

wct...you can't police thoughts or opinions.

What's your point? Do you think I'm trying to police thoughts or opinions? If you do, you are mistaken.

No matter what a person believes under the first amendment as long as he carries out no actions that imperatively harm that person, you can do nothing against him or her in holding that belief.

Um, I can ridicule them and hold them up to public scrutiny for their public statements of their ridiculous beliefs. That's also protected under the first amendment in the US, BTW.

British voting public*

My bad, I should have checked his profile. Still, it is actually a common attitude in the US. [ETA: Also I apologize to Col. for insinuating he's American; not that there would be anything wrong with that! ;-) ]

Edited 12/27/2015 00:54:43

Wct, you should present evidence for the theory that man evolved from apes if you want to convince Colonel, not just quote people saying humans are apes.

What makes you think I'm trying to convince Colonel?

@OnlyThePie
Deism make more sense than theism, i'll grant you that, but why do you absolutely need to have a supernatural being in you explanation of the world? Why not just being OK with not knowing everything, instead of making up stories for the thing we don't know? Also if you think there is no alternative hypothesis to the god hypothesis concerning the creation of the universe, then i encourage you to read (or listen as an audio book): A Universe from Nothing, from Lawrence Krauss. In my opinion, i have always thought that scientific explanations (even at a hypothesis stage), are more beautiful, awe-inspiring and revelatory of the magnificence of our universe, than the simple "god did it" explanation. But that's just me

Edited 12/27/2015 00:23:26

Colonel said that he'd be mad if his child was taught that people evolved from apes, and wct quoted a few people stating that people are apes. If wct wants to convince Colonel that people have evolved from apes then he should provide evidence then stating something over and over again through quotes.

More to the point, Major General Smedley Butler, do *you* believe that humans did not evolve from apes, or are not currently apes? Would you be mad if your kid came home from school having learned that humans are apes?

While I agree that it's disgraceful that there are people who find evolution improbably, I agree with Smedley, wtc answered a question different from that asked.

Since we're getting all pedantic (which I *love* by the way! Be careful what you wish for ;-) ), I didn't 'answer' a question because Col. made a statement, not a question.

I contradicted (without evidence, it is true; my intent was not to persuade Col.) the implied belief system behind the statement, and added an additional observation that humans *are* still apes; since the idea that we have evolved 'from' apes leaves an ambiguity that many people misinterpret as saying that humans are *no longer* apes anymore. Quite simple and uncontroversial among those who understand the basic science of it.

Great, another debate on evolution, i've been wanting to make use of this list i made a few months ago :)

https://www.warlight.net/Forum/86257-proof-evolution

What if evolution was a mechanism created by God? This is a compromise (although not evidenced) that gives me comfort in the apparent contradiction between my dual belief in God and Science.

What if? You would end up with a God that explains nothing and has no predictive power whatsoever. You might as well hypothesize a race of invisible gnomes who conspire to make evolution appear to work exactly as a non-conscious stochastic process would work. Why don't you believe in these gnomes? They are exactly as useful a hypothesis as a 'god'; i.e. not at all. Occam's Razor. We have no need for that hypothesis.

I've recently become enamored with the concept of Deism. Since I myself prefer the scientific explanation to most things, but was always frustrated that a few things seemed to slip out of reach. The concept is that there was once a god, and he created the Universe long ago, and set up all the little things, like scientific laws and theories. But then he left. He didn't pay any more attention to his creation. Maybe he had better things to do. Maybe he felt no need to interfere. Kind of like how a watchmaker never needs to mess with his watches, because if he made it right, it should work perfectly without him. So while there might be some higher power, and certain things could be attributed to him, he has no concern with us, and therefore it's less likely we need to pray, or really do any religious work at all, because he doesn't care. Seems pretty straightforward to me.

I have no issue with Deism, except for, again, Occam's Razor. But since it has no real practical consequences in the real world (except perhaps as being a stepping-stone towards atheism) I have no real reason to debate for or against Deism, other than simple intellectual exercise and curiosity.

I myself prefer to maintain disbelief in any particular belief until I have good reasons to maintain a particular belief. So, I see no good reasons to believe in a Deist god, so I don't. Same as the Christian gods and any other gods. For me this is the most consistent belief policy.

More to the point, Major General Smedley Butler, do *you* believe that humans did not evolve from apes, or are not currently apes? Would you be mad if your kid came home from school having learned that humans are apes?
I do believe in evolution. And I would be shocked to find out I have a child.

but why do you absolutely need to have a supernatural being in you explanation of the world?

Maybe I don't have an answer to that, except that theoretically the stakes are infinite costly for not believing in the Divine. Pascal's Wager is my only semi-valid counter. All things in life require faith...it just depends on what you put your faith in. This is what makes humans different.

@125ch I remember that :P

Believing is a win-win. If you believe there is an afterlife, then you were right the whole time. If you believe and there is no afterlife, there will be no chance for atheists to say "I told you so."