heres where it ends: animals with completely different charactersistics. I.E>, horses zerbras donkeys in one group, wolves and dogs in another, felines in another, etc., etc.

What are the characteristics? 2 eyes? 4 legs?
All these denomination of "felines", "Equidae", "insects", etc are just arbitrary groups made to represent a group of "close evolutionnary relative". So any characteristic you chose to separate your groups are just arbitrary

as there is NO REAL EVIDENCE OF MACRO EVOLUTION OCCURING.

Keeping saying it doesn't make it true.

also, u dont seem to understand that micro evolution is changes from the enviroment

you are right, by micro evolution, i didn't understand "changes from the environment", since this is not the usual definition for microevolution....maybe you should research it a bit more?

Edited 4/21/2015 02:56:21

*facepalm*

heres the line:

in all the cases of microevolution, the characteristics were already in the gene pool. They just became more common as animals without the correct characteristics died.

macroevolution = new characteristic.

*facepalm*

heres the line:

in all the cases of microevolution, the characteristics were already in the gene pool. They just became more common as animals without the correct characteristics died.

macroevolution = new characteristic.

Oh ok, so you believe in Natural Selection, but you don't believe random mutations and genetic drift, is that it? (both can be observed in a lab fyi)

edit: you should stop facepalming, it might further damage your brain

Edited 4/21/2015 03:10:31

Sorry I haven't responded yet tonight; I've been studying for a math competition tommorrow. I am on my phone; I'll give you a better response tommorrow.

I think DNA is an argument that leans toward a god rather than atheism. That is mainly because of the complexity of the DNA. I will try to find a video tommorrow that demonstrates the math behind this.

The fossil records and anatomy may have good evidence. I have not yet seen the 7th link, so maybe I will find it in there (and possibly the other videos I have yet to see).

I do not believe I am qualified to draw the line between micro and macro evolution and would likely embarrass myself if I did try. That said, I do believe there needs to be a concrete line drawn; I just have not yet discovered what exactly it is. Perhaps kinds is what I mean? I don't simply think it is between species; there is evidence that evolution goes farther than that that I have seen. Wolves/dogs, etc. all came from the same ancestor. Horses/zebras came from the same ancestor, etc. I want to see evidence that a cat can become a dog, or something like that. Or that both evolved from the same thing. Perhaps this is found in the videos that I have not looked at yet.

So what I'm not understanding is why there are no beings that are somewhat between apes and humans. If humans are really apes, why are we so much more intelligent than other apes? I know of the social darwism idea, which would answer this question. I obviously don't believe in social Darwinism but I'm wondering how evolution connects humans and apes with creatures that are still around today. I don't know if you understand what I'm asking, but I just wanted to write down my thoughts.

Also, I mentioned that in job, he writes about an animal that sounds a lot like a dinosaur. How is this possible unless creatures like dinosaurs were still around?

I think DNA is an argument that leans toward a god rather than atheism

evolution is not about religion or atheism, you are free to believe that there is a deity behind the design of evolution. (in fact, i'll link below a very good video on the matter, maybe you can tell me your thoughts on it)

Perhaps kinds is what I mean?

I know exactly what you mean, this is the same argument that Ken Ham has for Noah ark. The problem is that "kind" is not a scientific term, it means whatever you want it to mean. and like i said on previous post, any kind of denomination for a group of animal has to be arbitrary, isn't it?
edit:For example, DNA analysis shows that the hippo is the closest living relative to the whale. Does that mean that Hippos and Whales are of the same "kind"? Can you put up with the fact that they share a common ancestor?

So what I'm not understanding is why there are no beings that are somewhat between apes and humans. If humans are really apes, why are we so much more intelligent than other apes?

ok so here is what i understood from the various videos i've seen.

In the cosmos serie (an incredible serie of 13 episodes), if i recall correctly, some millions years ago, there was a big climate change in africa. I think what is believed to be the cause of this climate change was the unification of south and north america, thus "closing" the atlantic ocean, and creating a big change in the climate (I can't explain why tho)

So what used to be a land filled with tree, became sort of a desert, and in order to survive, the original primates had to climb down their trees to go find food. Therefore the ability to walk long distances became an selective trait.

So these original primate evolved and started gradually to walk on two feet. Our hands became free, and started to evolve allowing us to become efficient with our hands. We eventually changed our diet as we started hunting, and cooking stuff. Wich allowed us to eat more nutrients, wich in term made our brain larger and larger.

Now you can imagine that another group of the same original primates migrated to another environement less desertic, and that group evolved into gorillas and champanze for exemple.

edit: another hypothesis for our brain becoming bigger than the brain of other apes is because of a genetic defect that humans have (probably from a random mutation). One of our gene is missing 2 DNA letters. The gene responsible for the jaw muscle. The other apes don't have these missing letters on the same gene, wich give them a more powerful jaw. And to power this powerful jaw, a big powerful muscle is needed. This jaw muscle doesn't allow the brain to grow as much as with human, that have more space for their brain to grow. (you'll find a lot of DNA evidence for evolution in the "what Darwin never knew documentary)

this is just the idea that i have on how it happened. It might be wrong on some level, but i'm sure you will find better quality information in the videos.

I obviously don't believe in social Darwinism but I'm wondering how evolution connects humans and apes with creatures that are still around today

Social Darwinism is just the ideology of "survival of the fittest" applied to human society. It has nothing to do with science, it is a social model that was used to justify things like capitalism. The theory of evolution explains how we got here, it doesn't dictates how we should behave as a society.

Also, I mentioned that in job, he writes about an animal that sounds a lot like a dinosaur. How is this possible unless creatures like dinosaurs were still around?

I had this discussion on another thread. I think you are refering to leviathan and Behemoth or something. If you see the description of these mythical monsters, you will see that for example leviathan has multiple heads and is breathing fire. Behemoth has also some other supernatural caracteristics. So saying that these were dynosaurs is a big claim imo. (from what i understand, leviathan was inspired by a crocodile (lizard skin and yellow eyes, and Behemoth was inspired by a Hippo). Plus in the Bible i think they are described as being single monsters unnable to reproduce (if i am not mistaken).

edit: but lets say humans and dino coexisted, then you have a big problem. What could possibly have killed the dino and not humans? (in fact, the way science sees it, if the dino hadn't died, we wouldn't be here; as the dino dying is what allowed mammals to come out of their trees and conquer the land previously dominated by dino)


Anyway, the problem here is that people denying evolution also denie radioactive dating, i might start linking videos on that too :)


Intelligent Design and Evolution (11 min)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxOEz9aPZNY&index=3&list=PL7A9646BC5110CF64

edit: the 7th link is not the 7th link anymore, but i was talking about this link;=:
What is the Evidence for Evolution? (11min)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lIEoO5KdPvg&index=19&list=WL

Edited 4/21/2015 12:32:25

You guys haven't realised something... when there are multiple points of view, only one can be correct, even though none of them may be correct.

How eyes evolved (45min)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_s1cmOjvAQ

OMG... WE ARE NOT GORILLAS, WE WILL NEVER BE GORILLAS, WE WERE NEVER GORILLAS!

IF YOU WANT TO PERSIST IN THINKING YOU ARE A GORILLA, GO LIVE WITH 'EM IN A ZOO...

You still sound like a gorilla.

Also, I'm surprised no one has thought about this :L

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo#List_of_species

Do male gorillas partner up with male gorillas?

If yes, I think that answers why the whole "LGBT" thing exists... there's a gorilla somewhere in your blood.

Neil deGrasse Tyson (atheist) on Intelligent Design (40 min)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASmQmYX-71Q

Eric Holvind (creationnist) on Evolution (30 min)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vHwq4u8b1wg&list=PLBAE82586B7EABD77

I think Colonel is actually a gorilla o.O

Edited 4/21/2015 22:21:41

The Genius of Charles Darwin - Full (140 min)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0VnuhHq5m0

Part 1 - Life, Darwin & Everything (0 - 50 min)
Part 2 - The Fifth Ape (50 - 96 min )
Part 3 - God Strikes Back (96 min - end)

Richard Dawkins Interviews Creationist Wendy Wright (66min)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-AS6rQtiEh8

How many dang videos do you have?

an overwhelming number, just like the evidences for evolution :P

What about white people? If we're descended from apes, how comes some of us are white and some of us are black and some of us are of varying shades of "in-between"...?

What about white people? If we're descended from apes, how comes some of us are white and some of us are black and some of us are of varying shades of "in-between"...?

- first of all, we are not descended from ape, we are an ape.

- second, your question seems legit and actually interesting. In your world view of Adam&Eve as father and mother of all humanity and natural selection is bullshit, how do YOU explain skin color?


- Now here is how evolution explains skin pigmentation:

The differences in the skin colors of human are due to environmental adaptation.
If you look at the population distribution, you see that there is a strong correlation between the light level of the environment and the color of the skin. So our skin pigmentation (level of melanine) seems to be correlate with the level of UV our skin recieve.

From what i researched, there is no conclusive answer to the why.

A hypothesis to why people living in an area with high level of UV have a dark pigmentation would be that a dark pigmentation protects you against skin cancer (melanoma) and hypervitaminosis D (too much vitamine D). At least that was what people thought, but more recent studies seems to indicate that this is not the cause, the selective pressure isn't strong enough to explain skin pigmentation.

Instead, another study shows that folate (folic acid) one of the B vitamins that plays a crucial role in biosynthesis, including DNA synthesis and repair, is destroyed by sunlight in the blood vessels of the skin. An absence of folate could cause neural tube defects (NTDs) in human embryos, serving as a potent selective pressure.

Now the reason why people living in areas with less solar radiation are lighter is that we need vitamine D for a lot of things (building bones, immune system, brain, etc ). When the light level is strong, we recieve enough vitamine D even if our skin pigmentation is dark and blocks most of the light. So when people migrated to places with less light, they got vitamin D deficiency, and our skin gradually adapted to be lighter in order to ensure an adequate amount of vitamin D.

You will probably find more info in this video (the speaker is the author of the studies i refered to):

The Evolution of Human Skin Pigmentation (60min)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfZHikOARc8

Edited 4/22/2015 08:43:28

If skin colour evolved, that would mean that some people are "more evolved" than others, making Hitler correct.