IF WE REALLY COME FROM MONKEYS CAN SOMEBODY EXPLAIN TO ME WHY MONKEYS DON'T CHANGE TO HUMAN TODAY COME ON PEOPLE STOP LISTEN TO WHAT UR LEARNT AND THINK FOR YOURSELVES I DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.
@booesha2 "I DOESN'T MAKE SENSE." Well at least you're right about one thing. Now I have a question for you using your logic, if Americans came from Europe why are there still Europeans? Why don't Europeans become Americans? The reason we have so many different species is because of group isolation over long periods of time not allowing all animals within a species to evolve to be the same.
mans worst invention ever is religion, its what seperates man and stops mans accomplishments. imagine if religion never restricted us, we'd already being living on mars
@domisthebomb09 IF WE REALLY COME FROM MONKEYS CAN SOMEBODY EXPLAIN TO ME WHY MONKEYS DON'T CHANGE TO HUMAN TODAY COME ON PEOPLE STOP LISTEN TO WHAT UR LEARNT AND THINK FOR YOURSELVES I DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.
I saw only the first to min of the video and stopped. Enough with the lies.Quit keeping the truth concealed! There is no longer point in doing it. We don't derive from the apes; we don't have the same number of chromosomes. Even if we do, part of our genes originates from outer space.
I believe we might be a genetic mix of local mammals (namely, apes) and higher intelligence beings coming from other planets. All the signs of ancient civilizations certify this!
@0rioni Our chromosomes and chimps are almost identical. Our chromosome number 2 is a direct fusion of chimmps chromosomes 2A and 2B. And what is your evidence that we are descendants of extra-terrestrials? Faith? Or fuzzy feelings? Sorry, we need proof. The video accurately presents the evidence as we have it as of now. Sorry to burst your bubble. The evidence is that We are the outcome of over 4 billion years of evolution from a common we share with all other organisms.
@ofosusam And the concept of science is also created by humans too, so what gives you the right to declare god to be just a concept when you believe in something that is also a concept? you need to educate yourself too.
@Jake4595 Did you actually sit in a science class and study and pass the exam? Science is a PROCEDURE for analyzing and testing claims. Through science methods you can sit at your computer and criticize science. Pathetic. The same process yields no evidence of gods, none, anywhere. So yes we can conclude that the concept is not supporterd by any proof. Nobody is to "believe" science, the evidence speaks for itself. Medicine, TV, cars, planes, electricity, fridge, etc etc
@ofosusam LOL your quite a rough talker,you need to calm down, and yes ofcourse they say everything about science is true, thats what they have been saying the past 100 of years and every year they bring in new ideas which alters what have been said by previous scientists. Tell me, do you base your thoughts on logic or reasons?
@Jake4595 Science never claims 100% on anything, there is always room for improvement, more accuracy and better theories as more evidence comes in. That is what science is. It is a self correcting, self improving process. We used to use typewritters, today we dont we use computers, an improvement. So yes we will always alter and improve on previous scientists if we have compelling evidence to do so. Please read up on the scientific method, I think that is where you are getting confused.
@Jake4595 Yes, logic reason and EVIDENCE. In science we call it data. And why are you questioning that? Because I reject gods, fairys, demons, goblins, elves, easter bunny and others? Again show me the evidence and I will join you in worshipping them. Untill then, they are not important because their existence has not been demonstrated.
@ofosusam I don't believe i ever said anything about wanting you to worship with me. And, if logics, reason and evidence is what made you believe in science then doesn't this have no difference from the concepts of religions? believing just because it is "true" ,other than the fact that science is the work of what already existed while religion is the pursue of the unknown?
@Jake4595 You keep saying belief. I atheists dont believe stuff. We accept stuff based on evidence. We dont faith in say gravity, germs, or evolution, we accept the claims because overwhelming evidence exists to support them. Atheists take the claims of gods as presented by the religious and we ask for the evidence to back it up. So I have not seen any, that is why I do not accept claims about gods. Religion is the opposite, it is based on faith not evidence
@Jake4595 The evidence shows that humans created religion and not vice versa. Therefore gods were invented by humans. That is why every god and follows the cultural pracises of the region where it was invented, and not vice versa. Science is not a belief, it is a methodology for studying the evidence from the natural world. Nobody needs a special right against gods. Just show us the evidnce, else we reject the claim. You got it now?
@ofosusam oh so who created humans and animals nature please we would all think the same and not be this complex god created us I dont expect you to belive me but
why not think about it crhistianity is true just think about it
@XgamerlogicX christianity is true because you say so? So Islam is true because my middle eastern friends say so? you have to back up your claim. we call it evidence. There is no evidence for any religions or gods, that is why you need faith to keep believing them. I quit believing them. I dont know how humans came about? well I do, but even if I did not, simply inserting gods to fill my knowledge deficit is does not make sense either.
@ofosusam hey man i got jessuse crhist the old testimate written in stone we got alot of things to back us up. but its your choice leave that void in your life dont fill it with any thing when you are down so deep thinking no one loves you and i am down there i know some one loves me god, jesus christ you will most likely drown in sarrow and fear to come back up
@XgamerlogicX I know, you believe what you want to beleive and that gives you fuzzy feelings that some father figure in the sky loves you and you will drink beer with him in the after life if you do what he tells you now, I mean what the priest tells you. For me, its not about what I want. I will base my life on the evidence. And there is no evidence to support any religious claims. I would love that afterlife party too but there is no proof for it. Sorry. Religion is a crutch.
@ofosusam 1. i dont have a priest i read the bible.
2. i understand the need of proof but just because we have no proof doesnt mean its not there. I have proof only a crhistan can have its not big but its enough.
@XgamerlogicX Keep defending the indefensible. Do you apply this logic to all gods or only your favorite god? Because in that case you cannot rule out Allah, or the hindi god Ganeesh. And the muslims will tell you only they have the faith in the only true god and nobody else. I say you all are bonkers and deluded, untill you show me the proof. Sorry, no ifs or buts. Untill then religion continues to be a stupid and hallucinogenic enterprise. I am glad I grew out of it.
@ofosusam you are technicly in an religion right now your an athist and like i said before READ THE BIBLE, can you get that through your thick skull their is alot of historic facts to back it up. besides if nature created us doesnt nature repeat its sealf where are the people from the bushes and stuff like that why would nature make us reproduce think about that
@XgamerlogicX NO I am not in a religion. Is being a non-stamp collector also a hobby? Why the bible and not the Quran or Bhagavad Gita? They all have some historicity or at least claim so. Nature is indifferent. That is why gazelles keep getting eaten by lions no matter how hard they pray to the gazelle god. And viruses will keep making humans sick no matter how hard we pray to our favorite geography-based gods. There are no gods. Religion is bunk.
@ofosusam 1. you are in a group of people with belief 2. your god is nature in a way.
im not dening that those have facts. every thing has facts and if we continue this anyfarther you arent going to shake me just so you know before you keep going
@XgamerlogicX No for the umpteenth time atheism is not a belief, just like not liking basket ball is also sports enthusiast. Nature is not a god, nature is what it is and atheists are interested to study it based on the evidence.
Never my intention to get into back and forth with you either. I quit believing in childish geography-based phantom beings a long time ago, like gods, demons etc. But if you inject falsehood into any debate some of of us may just call you out on it. Ciao
@ofosusam ciao really, you think il'l leave that easily look i dont care what you say it still dosnt sway me lets say you are right nture did create us where is nature with all these other people doesnt nature repeat it self like a cycle wich sience proved nature cant just stop making us because it isnt a living thinking anything also why are there monkeys or gorrillas here today didnt we grow and advance from them?? now Ciao
@XgamerlogicX OK. So white Americans are the descendants of europeans, so why are there still europeans? black Americans are the descendants of Africans, so why are there still Africans? So yes, humans and chimpanzees share a common direct ancestor and yes there can, will and are chimpanzees still around. Please think for yourself and stop quoting these creationist arguments, those airheads could not even pass math test yet they claim they are experts, no wonder they beleive in talking snakes
@ofosusam ok thats it i cant handle all these comments to me asking me why this why that heres a solution read the bible what do you have to lose exactly?
religion ... is an invention of human beings...its purpose was .. n is .. to control our behaviour .. to help us to right things ... nor wrong ones.. but some of us use it as a tool .. to satisfy their personal wants ,, that y there is war .. mostly ,, people ..extremists are blindfold by belief .. supposedly given by the "almighty"
I always love coming here to witness the idiocy over whether we are created from evolution or if God created everyone... XD I'm sorry, but you people don't have proof that your God created you...only a book that was MANMADE in the first place says so. I'd rather believe scientific evidence/fossils than to believe everything that's preached from a book. Religion isn't the answer to everything...yet some of you think this idea of evolution is brainwashing. How about you open up your mind a little.
@Crystasorrow How dare you to utter those words. Bible was created by humans, but theby were guided by the holy spirit. And those theories, were proposed by scientists and the scientists were guided by?
@itsmechisti What? Now we have to be guided by something in order for it to be right? I have a right to utter those words thank you very much. Just because you can't accept and believe in this, doesn't mean I need to believe that a holy being created everyone and everything in a matter of days. Seems impossible even for a God. If you ask me, God is depended on way too much.
@Jake4595 No problem. I also hope you will stop indoctrinating innocent children and also stop trying to legislate religion or pushing it into our face through politics, intimidation and fearmongering. If not atheists will challenge you every step of the way.
Aren't the Stonehenge and the Pyramids of Egypt enough evidence for you? You call yourself a scientist; move your ass, do your research, explain to us ignorants why they exist, and how they were built. If an ignorant religious man sees an alien, he thinks he saw god; that's how I explain god. Don't just read and repeat theory -you don't contribute to science by doing that. Earth-is-Flat was e theory too, but we laugh at it now. Soon people may end up laughing at what you call science.
@0rioni Pyramids? The evidence suggests they were built by humans. Some details remain to be worked out. What is the big deal that makes you defer it to gods? NO earth is flat was commanded by a god in his text. BUt today we know it is false, plus other untenable claims is what makes us laugh at and dismiss the idea of gods creating stuff. Science builds on prior knowledge. Religion claims it already has all the answers, but they keep coming up short. So we laugh at it.
@Crystasorrow i just have one question for you thoe. nature can make rocks but they are not alive though. so how can nature make humans with every single cell is alive our blood stream our skin our imune system our diffrent thoughts and yet why did nature stop making humans nature usually has a prosses cycles and stuff like that. why are we the ones making humans where is nature with more?
@sbambic Apes and monkeys still exist but they are not the same apes and monkeys that were always around. And we were never the same kind of apes and monkeys that are living today. We are simply descended from a common ancestor.
Too put it simply: There was one group of ancestors; part of this group went west, part went east, part went north, part went south, and part stayed put. Each of these branches of the same common ancestor went on to evolve to fit into the environments they left to; etc.
God created animals on the 5th Day! God created man a man, not an ape or whatever! WAKE UP! Do not degrade yourselves. So you want to be compared to apes huh?
@itsmechisti oh and learn about evolution before you start trying to refuting it. because you cant. i bet if you learned more about you learned about it. and im glad to be a great ape. better than being born a sinner and the only wait to go to heaven is to accept a jewish zombie to be my savior because some rib lady ate a magical fruit because some talking snake pressured her into
"God created man in His own image. Man and woman, He created them."
God created MAN and WOMAN. Not apes evolving to man or woman. This is not true. Please don't be deceived. PLEASE DON'T! :( Why do some people like to be APES? You are degrading yourselves! Wake up! Charles Darwin, the one who proposed evolution became a Christian when he died! He disregarded ALL his research. SO WHY DO YOU BOTHER TO BELIEVE IN SOME PIECE OF CRAP THAT HAS BEEN DISREGARDED BY ITS PROPOSER? God Bless!
@TheEricoCorleone Haven't you ever wondered, where do fossils come from? And if you know where it did, then where did that come from? Even if you say that everything come from a single cell, then where did that cell come from? There must be a supernatural being behind all that. And I am telling you, it is God. Genesis 1:1, "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth." That verse was written years before those things were proposed.
@itsmechisti well those fossils came from dead organism and a single single cell was made by chemicals and just because we don't know where the universe came from doesn't mean we have to say some magical sky daddy did it and there were other religions before christianity, judaism, or islam such as greek and roman polytheism and if you say everything had to be created then what created god and created who created god why cant we just stick with the more simple conclusion, the universe is eternal
@itsmechisti We are all animals. We are the human species. We are "Homo Sapiens." Their where many different kinds of humans before us. But their all extinct, with only their fossils left to tell their story. And one day, we will become extinct, and our bones will be left for something else to find. What makes animals so much better than humans? Personally, i think we are no better then animals.
People who believe bible theory don´t accept a facts like that man is from ape. i know few jehovas witnesses and i must say there aint bigger fools like them. Evolution theory explain more about human history than bible rubbish.
well we can all guess what religiuos folks would say "god put those bones there to test are faith" dont make me laugh god put nothing there to test us because there is no invisable man putting things on earth to test us
i wish i can go back in time back to the dinosaur age and just watch evolution till today and the future, of course that would mean id have to be alive for ever. im gona do this actually, im gona figure out how to live forever, probably turn myself into a cyborg, then ill discover time travel.
@zoso1234 Actually we are all part 'common ancestor', apes, men, gorillas, etc. etc. You may, however, be an exception, given your obviously low intellect and inability to form rational arguments
@TheBinary000 i thought it was to see better. but thats a good argunment to. also, walking upright would give us more freedom to move about, traveling further distances, etc
i got a million questions...ok heres an example now...you see how when u get a kitten and raise it as a house cat even tho it wasnt raised by other cats it still grows up and has that hunter instinct..were if it sees a fly or a mouse it gets low and the ears go up or w/e...how come we dont have that? we have to be taught survival... so how could have man lasted in those times of all those predators?when animals produce in way faster numbers than humans do...
@coquitoabkk how could we have lasted from 1 man or woman--- to 100,000 men and women and how did it starting at 1 turn into different races...u know how hard it would be to F a ape...the female ape would snap our penis off lmaooooo
oh btw.. see the skulll they found... y do they assume automatically that it was a white skinned male with a big nose????why couldnt he be black? And if we evolved from monkeys then wouldnt every1 have dark skin? where did white and asains come from?alot of questions ,,,the theory of evolution is just as much a "leap of faith" as religion is..why didnt the ancient egyptians worship apes?
@coquitoabkk Type in human family tree and your questions will be answered. A monkey is not black, just the fur. Everyone did have dark skin, but due to climate they migrated, some to Europe, Asian, etc and so they skin and hair changed due to the climate.
@coquitoabkk dna/proteins join to produce a different variations. Just like there's more than one color of rose. also look up cross breeding eg nectarine is a cross of peach and plum. therefore people with different dna , produce new types of variations. as time goes on each person has dna from every ancestor.
i got a serious idea people... lets grab every species of ape monkey w/e...and for the sake of science get someone or a few people to mate with them.. male female vise-versa,.... and see what happens..if it was possible then it would b possible now right??
@ImHereToTellYou1 ---- so then what does having common ancestors mean??? if my "100 times great grandfather was a monkey then i would be a monkey too lol...i donno ..its like theres an A and a C but theres no B ... u know
@coquitoabkk we and apes only share some dna makeup, a few million years ago we would have a type of homonoide that was neither man nor ape but had both of our traits,
@Mike89066 If you said (it's pretty much been proven) you'd be laughed at. How are you ever going to win a debate like that. Now if you're talking about things evolving to adapt to their surroundings yes but ANYTHING in nature changing from one thing to another has never been proven nor will it ever because it just doesn't happen, its to impossible.
@sr1215cl You show a complete lack of understanding on how evolution works. Noticeable changes occur over many, many generations. You admit small changes happen, but fail to realize that enough small changes over a long enough period make a large change from the original. There are many examples of transitional fossils, you just have to look for them and not expect the evidence to come to you.
@sr1215cl "There is a problem of which I, personally, am currently unable to understand or figure out at this very moment... therefore, the only plausible conclusion is that magic is the answer!!!"
Yes. Logical indeed...
You would have been a real hit at the Salem Witch Trials.
@torontobboy21 adam didnt exist in the capacity that is defined in the bible.... anyone who believes in that myth should go back and do high school science
We didn't come from stupid apes. We ARE stupid apes. Look at so many, many millions of us, denying evolution which is supported by overwhelming evidence and yet believing in ancient scribblings without a shred of support. Think about it.
They do still evolve. Heck we still evolve. Over merely the past 100 years we've even gotten taller. Evolution of this magnitude takes a very long time and goes step by step, millennium by millennium. You don't simply wake up and find your tail missing.
Extreme changes in weather over time have to do with it as well. A species' new generation wont need to evolve if they can live how they are. If you can't survive through evolution, you become extinct. Just as some of our ancestors did.
Not every species is going to develop into us through the course of evolution. Our ancestors didn't go through every species before finally landing where we are -just as we were never a dinosaur; that was a different string of beings.
A metaphorical ex would be to say our ancestors were one of the many fish in the water. We swam out & over time adapted to the change while the fish who stayed remained the same because of no change in their environment.
@TheGutterMonkey Saying you believe in this IS delusional and crazy! There is to much order in this world for it to JUST happen, but hey everybody is entitled to their own opinion. BTW have you ever studied the human eye, try and say this just happen by evolution, not even Darwin could find a way that evolution could of played a role in it. Just impossible to technical.
@TheGutterMonkey how long is a week to god though??????????? one day could repesent a thousand years or more or less who knows bible use alot of symoblism if it was really 7 days then god could of did it all in one day and been done with it
@TheGutterMonkey So why are apes and gorillas and monkeys still being born over and over again and dying like that, why don`t they evolve into humans, it would be a thing of the past they would be extinct if we evolved from them
@iLuvBarRefaeli Humans and other apes descended from a common ancestor whose population split to spawn us and those other "unchanging" apes you're referring to. The apes we evolved from weren't the same apes that there are today, and there's no evidence that those apes AREN'T evolving (it's not an over night process).
Concerning why monkeys are still around, I have a similar questions for you: If many Americans and Australians are descended from Europeans, why are there still Europeans around?
"The intevention Theory" really answers it all. To be what we are today is really impossible for nature to acheive. As unbelievable as it may seem, I think there was an intervention, a genetic reordering or transformation occured which made us to what we are today. Humans. Science really cannot go with the "we can from apes" theory without having solid fossil records to show the transformations. We have none. Darwins Evolution theory in a few years will be absolete.
It's not at all impossible for nature to achieve once you manage to wrap your mind around how long of a time it took.
All evidence of evolution points to the same outcome, and the evidence is extensive and consistent.
If you honestly think the theory (this is "theory" in scientific definition -like the theory of gravity- not the informal use of the word--such as a "guess") of evolution will become obsolete, then you simply haven't looked at the evidence clearly.
@TheGutterMonkey well its kinda simple the evolved that species that evolved wrongly are now extinct... what we have in the world to day you could say is like a masterpiece. obviously we will continue to evolve but you get what im sayin right? ppl think evolution is right first time and it isnt. neanderthol man is a type of evolved human that was wrong and its gone now :) we how ever are still here :)
@dragosst With all due respect; you're simply wrong. The argument of irreducible complexity is not taken seriously by the scientific community, and Michael Behe (IC's biggest proponent) isn't even taken seriously by his own biology department.
There has never been evidence against evolution ever to be published in any peer reviewed scientific journal. And, as previously stated, the evidence FOR evolution is abundant and it is all consistent with what evolution predicts and entails.
1.I'm aware of the fact that the scientific community is overwhelmingly evolutionist. Therefore it comes natural to refute the IC argument. I think however that it is a powerfull argument or that - at least - it deserves a counter-argument from an evolutionist - such as yourself - that's more than just "the scientfic priesthood refutes it, so move on!".
@dragosst IC has been shown to have no basis in reality. It's been written against several times in scientific journals (journals reviewed and designed by the scientific community as a whole, not just a sect devoted to the study of evolution) and has even been found as unscientific in court (by a conservative judge, no less). So no, it's not a powerful argument. There is no actual evidence for IC and no scientific alternative to evolution. Also, there's no priesthood in science—that's absurd.
The Pointless Internet Arguments Forum is open for debate! :)
1. Ok, so - in a few words - what's the argument against IC?
2. Would you say that there is - or there has been at times - such a thing as dogmatical approaches in science ( irrational clinging to obsolete theories etc.) ?
3. I was making an important point in my previous message - what are the numbers? For example - how many links do you need between A. afarensis and H. sapiens sapiens for that to be a data-based transitional sequence? 5? 50? 500? Evolution simply says : "However many we have found until now." That's not the way science should go. Science should say : hypothesis A will be confirmed it you find the facts x, y and z in the field ( or through lab experiments ).
@dragosst You miss the point that all species are transitional. There is no clear deliniation as to where one species ends and another begins. The changes are slow, gradual and subtile. They require many tens or hundreds of thousands of years accumulate enough for us to even recognize them as another species. Also, homonids of similar genetic make up interbreed. We know through DNA analysis that Homo sapiens interbreed with Homo neanderthalis, a much earlier homonid. There is also the
I understand that all species are transitional. However, they can be broken down into categories : h. sapiens, h. erectus etc. Using this general classification evolution theory should be able to say :" To go from A afarensis to H sapiens these things have to change : body hair, brains, bones etc. Let's compare this theoretical model to the fossils we found and we will find from now on."
@dragosst These catagories are human abstracts. They are denoted after the fact. There are far too many variables to assign predictive designations. We can only view the changes after they have occured. The complete ecosystem is thus far beyond our abilty to pull all these things together and predict the next step. We can't even predict tomorrow's weather. That doesn't mean we don't understand it's mechanisms. It just means that the complexity exceeds our models. Who can guess when
That's just my point. Evolution theory stands at about the same level as the weather forecast. It may be true. Not the same with developed science such as physics. Although incomplete, physics can say things like "Drop this ball from this tower and it will reach the earth at x sec." and other. All that evolution theory can say is "Maybe it happened like this."
@edwardschlosser1 There should be space there for a "Maybe it didn't". The hunger for an explanation should not overlook cartesian skepticism. There was never any skepticism since Darwin. Do remember - as I said - that not long ago a simple H. neand. was considered good enough to go from some unknown monkey to us. Now there are 4-5 links in between those. That should give us a few doubts about the method the guys researching this are using, shouldn't it?
@edwardschlosser1 And the thing is - there is no method. "However many we shall find, whit whatever characteristics, they are good. They prove the theory." is the method.
It doesn't say that. It just says "Whatever! However many we shall find, whit whatever characteristics, they are good. They prove the theory." Do remember that - as it is pointed out in the docum. above - H neandert. was considered good enough to fill the gap between an old-w. monkey and h. sap. for tens of years by the same "scientific comunity".
That's because as soon as the evolutionary paradigm was adopted critical thinking outside of it and skepticism were thrown to the wind. As it often happens in the history of science.
@dragosst There is also the issue of evolution proceeding in a non-linear fassion. Evolution is a response to a changing environment. The environment doesn't change at a steady, linear rate. Again we go back to punctuated equilibrium.
Yes, i agree, that is a better explanation and a powerfull argument. However, as I see it, it has a great problem in the fact that we don't know - and we'll never know - how complete the fossil record is compared to the total number of species that ever lived. There will always be unknown unknowns. So. it's just a hypothesis and it should remain so. If we are true to the rigor of modern scienc, that is.
@TheGutterMonkey I used the word "priesthood" as a metaphor for dogmatic, irrational approach. Speaking of dogmatism in science, you can even see it in the documentary you uploaded in the overwhelming and stubborn support for the Piltdown forgery against A. africanus, a fossil which they haven't even seen but refuted as a link. One could make the argument that the scientists of today are as likely to be human as those of that era. Or as anybody else.
I’ve not been arguing the details of IC because IC (and ID) has already been debunked by professionals who have studied it. Your disagreement isn't with me but with science itself and if you desire the appropriate counterarguments then look in any scientific journal or encyclopedia.
Science is unbiased and self-correcting—if there were a flaw to disprove the NUMEROUS evidences of Evolution it would be found by the scientists who you are arguing against.
1. Would you say that three links is enough to go from Australopithecus afarensis ( which is basically a sort of a chimpanzee in terms of brain size etc.) to H. sapiens sapiens?
(The three links being H. habilis, H. erectus, H. heidelbergensis.)
2. If it took nature 30 ml. years to go from arboreal monkeys ( such as Aegyptopithecus zeuxis which has a 20 cm3 brain) to A. afarensis, how come it took only 4 ml.y to go from Afarensis to modern humans?
@dragosst Because evolution is not linear. Punctuated equilibrium theory as described by Dr. Steven Jay Gould, Ph.D., Harvard University, explains this non-linear aspect of evolution.
3. Which other scientific theory ( besides evolutionism ) has no criteria to validate or invalidate itself? That is if theory A is right I should find - on the field or in the lab - the facts a,b,c. How many transitional fossils must we find between a fish and a reptile? Or between a old world monkey and a human? How many?
@dragosst Other scientific theories that have no critieria to validate or invalidate include gravity, the weak electromagnetic force, the strong magnetic force and quantum mechanics in atomic theory. All exist, and all are facts, but their operation consists of theories with great predictive value. Evolution actually stands on much firmer ground than any of these others. We have fossils, Modern DNA comparisons between humans including mitochondrial DNA, and DNA comparisons to other species...
@dragosst and to neanderthal man. Evolution can be studied in bacteria through artificial selection, and the evolution of "superbugs" like MRSA support evolutionary mechanisms. Evolution is a fact. The theory of evolution is currently a mix of Darwinian evolution and puctuated equilibrium. Theories that support facts are always undergoing revision as our understanding of the natural world increases. Our present theory of gravity is mass warping time space. It too will be refined over time.
Whenever people say "Evolution was never prooved in a lab" evolutionsits say "Sure it has! Just look at bacteria!". I think one has to have a great lack of common sense to think that going from bugs to superbugs is just the same as going from a fish to an elephant only a lot of time added to the process.
@dragosst Scientifically it is the same mechanism. So is the evolution of fruit flies via artifical selection, and the divergent evolution in sub-species of canines. These are basic changes in the DNA. A large accumulation of these changes is how one species gradually changes into another. That is why we can use DNA analysis to support heredity. The DNA of Homo sapiens is placed into a chamber with the DNA of modern chimps. When heated the double helix unwinds and the base pairs will
The change needed to go from a bug to a super-bug is minimal compared to that needed to go from a terrestrial mammal to an aquatic one for example. Saying that the first basically prooves the second is like saying "If John can run for 100 m, than he can run for another 100 km." I agree that the first sequence (bug-superbug) can be a model for the second.
However, the second remains to be proven if we are to be honest to scientific rigor and not to "It's all very simple, I'll explain it all in this one book" XIXth-century style theories ( marxism, freudims, Comte-ian positive sociology etc etc ).
@dragosst and the base pairs will allign with the base pair of a simlar species chimps in this case). Sequencing the alligned pairs allows us to actually count the similar pairs and dissimilar pairs. From this we know that the genetic structure of chimps is about 98% that of Homo sapiens. That means that we shared a common ancestor a few million years ago. The verification of the fossi record and the assumed relationships derived from comparitive anatomy shows a very good corelation.
2. Science has always moved forward in cycles of research - theory - rigidity and all breakthroughs have always been made against the rigidly established paradigm at the time. Contrary to what one R. Dawkins would have you believe - by telling the story of the old scientist hugging the young one who is contradicting the theory he embraced for a lifetime - scientists are human like all of us, and - being human - they can get quite stubborn, irrational and dogmatic at times.
3. The fact that should be established by a hypothesis after being put on paper should be - "what should i find in the real world - or through a lab experiment - for this theory to hold?". This has never been established by evolutionists. For example "reptiles come from amfibians". How many links should i find between those two for this to be true? 2? 4? 100? 1000? 1 mil? If one does not establish this than the hypothesis can't be prooved.
Evolutionists say : "Well, there were plenty of links but it's organic matter, it disintegrated into the soil, it's gone forever so we can't find it in order to prove evolution to certain standards. We'll take what we find, evolution is true, so ... move on."
IF WE REALLY COME FROM MONKEYS CAN SOMEBODY EXPLAIN TO ME WHY MONKEYS DON'T CHANGE TO HUMAN TODAY COME ON PEOPLE STOP LISTEN TO WHAT UR LEARNT AND THINK FOR YOURSELVES I DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.
booesha2 4 days ago
@booesha2 "I DOESN'T MAKE SENSE." Well at least you're right about one thing. Now I have a question for you using your logic, if Americans came from Europe why are there still Europeans? Why don't Europeans become Americans? The reason we have so many different species is because of group isolation over long periods of time not allowing all animals within a species to evolve to be the same.
rod31808 3 days ago
fuck gingos
BIGPOLLOTX 1 week ago
mans worst invention ever is religion, its what seperates man and stops mans accomplishments. imagine if religion never restricted us, we'd already being living on mars
juki0h 1 week ago
Comment removed
juki0h 1 week ago
What a bunch of homos.
mkf0528 2 weeks ago
Evolution is a fact. Deal with it creationist bitches
domisthebomb09 3 weeks ago
@domisthebomb09 im with you! if these religious nuts want a war, im all for it, lets go!
juki0h 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@domisthebomb09 IF WE REALLY COME FROM MONKEYS CAN SOMEBODY EXPLAIN TO ME WHY MONKEYS DON'T CHANGE TO HUMAN TODAY COME ON PEOPLE STOP LISTEN TO WHAT UR LEARNT AND THINK FOR YOURSELVES I DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.
booesha2 4 days ago
YEAH! I'm in the smart part of YouTube!!
domisthebomb09 3 weeks ago
Lol the best part about these videos is reading the debates on the comment section -_-
Ravenite1 1 month ago
A message to the film-makers:
I saw only the first to min of the video and stopped. Enough with the lies.Quit keeping the truth concealed! There is no longer point in doing it. We don't derive from the apes; we don't have the same number of chromosomes. Even if we do, part of our genes originates from outer space.
I believe we might be a genetic mix of local mammals (namely, apes) and higher intelligence beings coming from other planets. All the signs of ancient civilizations certify this!
0rioni 1 month ago
@0rioni Our chromosomes and chimps are almost identical. Our chromosome number 2 is a direct fusion of chimmps chromosomes 2A and 2B. And what is your evidence that we are descendants of extra-terrestrials? Faith? Or fuzzy feelings? Sorry, we need proof. The video accurately presents the evidence as we have it as of now. Sorry to burst your bubble. The evidence is that We are the outcome of over 4 billion years of evolution from a common we share with all other organisms.
ofosusam 1 month ago
There are NO gods ..... I am proud to be the decendant of an ape!
southaussie5108 2 months ago
YOU ALL WILLL GO TO HELL FOR TALKING RUBBISH !!!!!
HUMAN WAS CREATED BY THE GOD !!!!!! FULL STOP
Sandra58699 2 months ago
@Sandra58699 there are no gods. Grow up and educate yourself and stop parroting ancient mythologies. The concept of the gods was created by humans.
ofosusam 2 months ago
@ofosusam And the concept of science is also created by humans too, so what gives you the right to declare god to be just a concept when you believe in something that is also a concept? you need to educate yourself too.
Jake4595 2 months ago
@Jake4595 Did you actually sit in a science class and study and pass the exam? Science is a PROCEDURE for analyzing and testing claims. Through science methods you can sit at your computer and criticize science. Pathetic. The same process yields no evidence of gods, none, anywhere. So yes we can conclude that the concept is not supporterd by any proof. Nobody is to "believe" science, the evidence speaks for itself. Medicine, TV, cars, planes, electricity, fridge, etc etc
ofosusam 2 months ago
@ofosusam LOL your quite a rough talker,you need to calm down, and yes ofcourse they say everything about science is true, thats what they have been saying the past 100 of years and every year they bring in new ideas which alters what have been said by previous scientists. Tell me, do you base your thoughts on logic or reasons?
Jake4595 2 months ago
@Jake4595 Science never claims 100% on anything, there is always room for improvement, more accuracy and better theories as more evidence comes in. That is what science is. It is a self correcting, self improving process. We used to use typewritters, today we dont we use computers, an improvement. So yes we will always alter and improve on previous scientists if we have compelling evidence to do so. Please read up on the scientific method, I think that is where you are getting confused.
ofosusam 2 months ago
@ofosusam i dont reject science by the way
Jake4595 2 months ago
@Jake4595 Yes, logic reason and EVIDENCE. In science we call it data. And why are you questioning that? Because I reject gods, fairys, demons, goblins, elves, easter bunny and others? Again show me the evidence and I will join you in worshipping them. Untill then, they are not important because their existence has not been demonstrated.
ofosusam 2 months ago
@ofosusam I don't believe i ever said anything about wanting you to worship with me. And, if logics, reason and evidence is what made you believe in science then doesn't this have no difference from the concepts of religions? believing just because it is "true" ,other than the fact that science is the work of what already existed while religion is the pursue of the unknown?
Jake4595 2 months ago
@Jake4595 You keep saying belief. I atheists dont believe stuff. We accept stuff based on evidence. We dont faith in say gravity, germs, or evolution, we accept the claims because overwhelming evidence exists to support them. Atheists take the claims of gods as presented by the religious and we ask for the evidence to back it up. So I have not seen any, that is why I do not accept claims about gods. Religion is the opposite, it is based on faith not evidence
ofosusam 2 months ago
@Jake4595 The evidence shows that humans created religion and not vice versa. Therefore gods were invented by humans. That is why every god and follows the cultural pracises of the region where it was invented, and not vice versa. Science is not a belief, it is a methodology for studying the evidence from the natural world. Nobody needs a special right against gods. Just show us the evidnce, else we reject the claim. You got it now?
ofosusam 2 months ago
@Sandra58699 Then, Charles Darwin created me! =)
In Darwin's hell, you are forced to stay in a church and read the bible forever. In that case, i would not dare to sin!
SierkRian 2 months ago
@Sandra58699 Sorry, but it is humans who created gods, not the other way round.
ofosusam 1 month ago
@ofosusam oh so who created humans and animals nature please we would all think the same and not be this complex god created us I dont expect you to belive me but
why not think about it crhistianity is true just think about it
XgamerlogicX 1 month ago
@XgamerlogicX christianity is true because you say so? So Islam is true because my middle eastern friends say so? you have to back up your claim. we call it evidence. There is no evidence for any religions or gods, that is why you need faith to keep believing them. I quit believing them. I dont know how humans came about? well I do, but even if I did not, simply inserting gods to fill my knowledge deficit is does not make sense either.
ofosusam 1 month ago
@ofosusam hey man i got jessuse crhist the old testimate written in stone we got alot of things to back us up. but its your choice leave that void in your life dont fill it with any thing when you are down so deep thinking no one loves you and i am down there i know some one loves me god, jesus christ you will most likely drown in sarrow and fear to come back up
XgamerlogicX 1 month ago
@XgamerlogicX I know, you believe what you want to beleive and that gives you fuzzy feelings that some father figure in the sky loves you and you will drink beer with him in the after life if you do what he tells you now, I mean what the priest tells you. For me, its not about what I want. I will base my life on the evidence. And there is no evidence to support any religious claims. I would love that afterlife party too but there is no proof for it. Sorry. Religion is a crutch.
ofosusam 1 month ago
@ofosusam 1. i dont have a priest i read the bible.
2. i understand the need of proof but just because we have no proof doesnt mean its not there. I have proof only a crhistan can have its not big but its enough.
XgamerlogicX 1 month ago
@XgamerlogicX Keep defending the indefensible. Do you apply this logic to all gods or only your favorite god? Because in that case you cannot rule out Allah, or the hindi god Ganeesh. And the muslims will tell you only they have the faith in the only true god and nobody else. I say you all are bonkers and deluded, untill you show me the proof. Sorry, no ifs or buts. Untill then religion continues to be a stupid and hallucinogenic enterprise. I am glad I grew out of it.
ofosusam 1 month ago
@ofosusam you are technicly in an religion right now your an athist and like i said before READ THE BIBLE, can you get that through your thick skull their is alot of historic facts to back it up. besides if nature created us doesnt nature repeat its sealf where are the people from the bushes and stuff like that why would nature make us reproduce think about that
XgamerlogicX 1 month ago
@XgamerlogicX NO I am not in a religion. Is being a non-stamp collector also a hobby? Why the bible and not the Quran or Bhagavad Gita? They all have some historicity or at least claim so. Nature is indifferent. That is why gazelles keep getting eaten by lions no matter how hard they pray to the gazelle god. And viruses will keep making humans sick no matter how hard we pray to our favorite geography-based gods. There are no gods. Religion is bunk.
ofosusam 1 month ago
@ofosusam 1. you are in a group of people with belief 2. your god is nature in a way.
im not dening that those have facts. every thing has facts and if we continue this anyfarther you arent going to shake me just so you know before you keep going
XgamerlogicX 1 month ago
@XgamerlogicX No for the umpteenth time atheism is not a belief, just like not liking basket ball is also sports enthusiast. Nature is not a god, nature is what it is and atheists are interested to study it based on the evidence.
Never my intention to get into back and forth with you either. I quit believing in childish geography-based phantom beings a long time ago, like gods, demons etc. But if you inject falsehood into any debate some of of us may just call you out on it. Ciao
ofosusam 1 month ago
@ofosusam ciao really, you think il'l leave that easily look i dont care what you say it still dosnt sway me lets say you are right nture did create us where is nature with all these other people doesnt nature repeat it self like a cycle wich sience proved nature cant just stop making us because it isnt a living thinking anything also why are there monkeys or gorrillas here today didnt we grow and advance from them?? now Ciao
XgamerlogicX 3 weeks ago
@XgamerlogicX OK. So white Americans are the descendants of europeans, so why are there still europeans? black Americans are the descendants of Africans, so why are there still Africans? So yes, humans and chimpanzees share a common direct ancestor and yes there can, will and are chimpanzees still around. Please think for yourself and stop quoting these creationist arguments, those airheads could not even pass math test yet they claim they are experts, no wonder they beleive in talking snakes
ofosusam 3 weeks ago
@ofosusam ok thats it i cant handle all these comments to me asking me why this why that heres a solution read the bible what do you have to lose exactly?
XgamerlogicX 2 weeks ago
Those two hairy guys look familiar. I think I saw them open for Foghat back in '74.
tomthefunky 5 months ago
religion ... is an invention of human beings...its purpose was .. n is .. to control our behaviour .. to help us to right things ... nor wrong ones.. but some of us use it as a tool .. to satisfy their personal wants ,, that y there is war .. mostly ,, people ..extremists are blindfold by belief .. supposedly given by the "almighty"
nilesh4018 5 months ago
I always love coming here to witness the idiocy over whether we are created from evolution or if God created everyone... XD I'm sorry, but you people don't have proof that your God created you...only a book that was MANMADE in the first place says so. I'd rather believe scientific evidence/fossils than to believe everything that's preached from a book. Religion isn't the answer to everything...yet some of you think this idea of evolution is brainwashing. How about you open up your mind a little.
Crystasorrow 5 months ago
@Crystasorrow How dare you to utter those words. Bible was created by humans, but theby were guided by the holy spirit. And those theories, were proposed by scientists and the scientists were guided by?
itsmechisti 5 months ago
@itsmechisti What? Now we have to be guided by something in order for it to be right? I have a right to utter those words thank you very much. Just because you can't accept and believe in this, doesn't mean I need to believe that a holy being created everyone and everything in a matter of days. Seems impossible even for a God. If you ask me, God is depended on way too much.
Crystasorrow 5 months ago
@itsmechisti scientists like myself are guided by evidence. Nothing more nothing less. show me the evidence for gods and I will accept the claims.
ofosusam 2 months ago
@ofosusam Well good day to you, i keep to my philosophic ways and you keep to your scientific ways, we all be happy.
Jake4595 2 months ago
@Jake4595 No problem. I also hope you will stop indoctrinating innocent children and also stop trying to legislate religion or pushing it into our face through politics, intimidation and fearmongering. If not atheists will challenge you every step of the way.
ofosusam 2 months ago
@ofosusam LOL rest assure, i am not like that
Jake4595 2 months ago
@Jake4595 Good. We can have respectful dialogue. I apologize if I came across as brash. I will sub your channel. Thanks.
ofosusam 2 months ago
@ofosusam No harms done mate. I'll sub back in return, and a good day to you.
Jake4595 1 month ago
@ofosusam
Aren't the Stonehenge and the Pyramids of Egypt enough evidence for you? You call yourself a scientist; move your ass, do your research, explain to us ignorants why they exist, and how they were built. If an ignorant religious man sees an alien, he thinks he saw god; that's how I explain god. Don't just read and repeat theory -you don't contribute to science by doing that. Earth-is-Flat was e theory too, but we laugh at it now. Soon people may end up laughing at what you call science.
0rioni 1 month ago
@0rioni Pyramids? The evidence suggests they were built by humans. Some details remain to be worked out. What is the big deal that makes you defer it to gods? NO earth is flat was commanded by a god in his text. BUt today we know it is false, plus other untenable claims is what makes us laugh at and dismiss the idea of gods creating stuff. Science builds on prior knowledge. Religion claims it already has all the answers, but they keep coming up short. So we laugh at it.
ofosusam 1 month ago
@Crystasorrow i just have one question for you thoe. nature can make rocks but they are not alive though. so how can nature make humans with every single cell is alive our blood stream our skin our imune system our diffrent thoughts and yet why did nature stop making humans nature usually has a prosses cycles and stuff like that. why are we the ones making humans where is nature with more?
XgamerlogicX 1 month ago
Why arent a single one of the transitional phases alive to this day if they were more evolved than apes yet the apes and monkeys thrive o this day?
sbambic 6 months ago
@sbambic Apes and monkeys still exist but they are not the same apes and monkeys that were always around. And we were never the same kind of apes and monkeys that are living today. We are simply descended from a common ancestor.
Too put it simply: There was one group of ancestors; part of this group went west, part went east, part went north, part went south, and part stayed put. Each of these branches of the same common ancestor went on to evolve to fit into the environments they left to; etc.
TheGutterMonkey 6 months ago
God created animals on the 5th Day! God created man a man, not an ape or whatever! WAKE UP! Do not degrade yourselves. So you want to be compared to apes huh?
itsmechisti 6 months ago
@itsmechisti oh and learn about evolution before you start trying to refuting it. because you cant. i bet if you learned more about you learned about it. and im glad to be a great ape. better than being born a sinner and the only wait to go to heaven is to accept a jewish zombie to be my savior because some rib lady ate a magical fruit because some talking snake pressured her into
TheEricoCorleone 5 months ago
Genesis 1:27
"God created man in His own image. Man and woman, He created them."
God created MAN and WOMAN. Not apes evolving to man or woman. This is not true. Please don't be deceived. PLEASE DON'T! :( Why do some people like to be APES? You are degrading yourselves! Wake up! Charles Darwin, the one who proposed evolution became a Christian when he died! He disregarded ALL his research. SO WHY DO YOU BOTHER TO BELIEVE IN SOME PIECE OF CRAP THAT HAS BEEN DISREGARDED BY ITS PROPOSER? God Bless!
itsmechisti 6 months ago
@itsmechisti what, fossils aren't good enough for you?
TheEricoCorleone 6 months ago
@TheEricoCorleone Haven't you ever wondered, where do fossils come from? And if you know where it did, then where did that come from? Even if you say that everything come from a single cell, then where did that cell come from? There must be a supernatural being behind all that. And I am telling you, it is God. Genesis 1:1, "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth." That verse was written years before those things were proposed.
itsmechisti 5 months ago
@itsmechisti Your stupid we have seen in labs how cells could have been made by natural process
Luis568369 5 months ago
@itsmechisti well those fossils came from dead organism and a single single cell was made by chemicals and just because we don't know where the universe came from doesn't mean we have to say some magical sky daddy did it and there were other religions before christianity, judaism, or islam such as greek and roman polytheism and if you say everything had to be created then what created god and created who created god why cant we just stick with the more simple conclusion, the universe is eternal
TheEricoCorleone 5 months ago
@itsmechisti every body has their own views on evolution ...of life .. u god ..me it's via science ..
nilesh4018 5 months ago
@nilesh4018 The only evolution I know is the evolution of the believers.
itsmechisti 5 months ago
@itsmechisti We are all animals. We are the human species. We are "Homo Sapiens." Their where many different kinds of humans before us. But their all extinct, with only their fossils left to tell their story. And one day, we will become extinct, and our bones will be left for something else to find. What makes animals so much better than humans? Personally, i think we are no better then animals.
stefanoGFsiciliano 3 months ago
175 lbs MY ASS!!!!
lol more like 275lbs
Neanderthals were behemoths in size
KentuckyFriedCoons 7 months ago
ballshit u idiots came from apes not me
harryahmed420 7 months ago
People who believe bible theory don´t accept a facts like that man is from ape. i know few jehovas witnesses and i must say there aint bigger fools like them. Evolution theory explain more about human history than bible rubbish.
Hordak84 7 months ago
god creatd peeple 6000 yrs ago >:c
MaxxHark 8 months ago
Black people are gorillas not white people compare them they all match nose fingers body everything
ObamagotOsama100 8 months ago
White people are capuchin monkeys, blacks are gorillas...but you - are a 'moron'. New breed.
superhamzah85 8 months ago
the correct way to prenounce it is neandertal not neanderTHal
CARRETO5 8 months ago
You guys should watch the charles darwin documentary. Just magnificant.
sexybeast619619619 10 months ago
well we can all guess what religiuos folks would say "god put those bones there to test are faith" dont make me laugh god put nothing there to test us because there is no invisable man putting things on earth to test us
winddragon1022 11 months ago
i wish i can go back in time back to the dinosaur age and just watch evolution till today and the future, of course that would mean id have to be alive for ever. im gona do this actually, im gona figure out how to live forever, probably turn myself into a cyborg, then ill discover time travel.
JUKIO01 11 months ago
all you have to do is just look at niggers aborigines and see that we come from apes, plus you can't deny the DNA evidence as well, lol
zoso1234 11 months ago
@zoso1234 You ignorant, racist scumbag. You have the logical capacity of a retarded daffodil. Keep your ignorance to yourself.
adrianswinger69 11 months ago
@adrianswinger69 Truth hurts I know, ah mother nature is a cruel bitch, lol
zoso1234 11 months ago
@zoso1234 I agree with the DNA evidence, Darwinian theory of punctuated evolution et al. I was referring to your ignorant bigotism. lol
adrianswinger69 11 months ago
@adrianswinger69 Actually we are all part ape, but nig nogs are definetly proof, lol...shaved gorillas with big dicks, hahah
zoso1234 11 months ago
@zoso1234 Actually we are all part 'common ancestor', apes, men, gorillas, etc. etc. You may, however, be an exception, given your obviously low intellect and inability to form rational arguments
adrianswinger69 11 months ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@adrianswinger69 Thats because I am too tired to argue with an idiot like you douche bag, lol
zoso1234 11 months ago
I like the theory that we started walking upright to conserve energy.
TheBinary000 11 months ago
@TheBinary000 i thought it was to see better. but thats a good argunment to. also, walking upright would give us more freedom to move about, traveling further distances, etc
JUKIO01 11 months ago
This production was created by modified monkey brains (funny sarcasm)
jaredta1a 11 months ago
@8:15, Ew, they picked up dookie and smelled it.
ImHereToTellYou1 1 year ago
i got a million questions...ok heres an example now...you see how when u get a kitten and raise it as a house cat even tho it wasnt raised by other cats it still grows up and has that hunter instinct..were if it sees a fly or a mouse it gets low and the ears go up or w/e...how come we dont have that? we have to be taught survival... so how could have man lasted in those times of all those predators?when animals produce in way faster numbers than humans do...
coquitoabkk 1 year ago
@coquitoabkk how could we have lasted from 1 man or woman--- to 100,000 men and women and how did it starting at 1 turn into different races...u know how hard it would be to F a ape...the female ape would snap our penis off lmaooooo
coquitoabkk 1 year ago
oh btw.. see the skulll they found... y do they assume automatically that it was a white skinned male with a big nose????why couldnt he be black? And if we evolved from monkeys then wouldnt every1 have dark skin? where did white and asains come from?alot of questions ,,,the theory of evolution is just as much a "leap of faith" as religion is..why didnt the ancient egyptians worship apes?
coquitoabkk 1 year ago
@coquitoabkk Um.
Have you ever seen a shaved chimpanzee? They're pretty light-skinned.
And no we didn't evolve from monkeys, but monkey like creatures....
And they're white skinned because they're talking about neanderthals...who thrived in colder regions..which would of gave them a lighter skin tone.
AgrivatedKillah 1 year ago
@AgrivatedKillah doesnt explain blonde haired white males ... or green eyed red haired females with freckles
coquitoabkk 1 year ago
@AgrivatedKillah we evolved from primates
Godofrockl666 1 year ago
@coquitoabkk Type in human family tree and your questions will be answered. A monkey is not black, just the fur. Everyone did have dark skin, but due to climate they migrated, some to Europe, Asian, etc and so they skin and hair changed due to the climate.
ImHereToTellYou1 1 year ago
@coquitoabkk dna/proteins join to produce a different variations. Just like there's more than one color of rose. also look up cross breeding eg nectarine is a cross of peach and plum. therefore people with different dna , produce new types of variations. as time goes on each person has dna from every ancestor.
rmpbklyn 11 months ago
@coquitoabkk
no evolution is back by fact. religion is back by rubbish.
assym2006 9 months ago
i got a serious idea people... lets grab every species of ape monkey w/e...and for the sake of science get someone or a few people to mate with them.. male female vise-versa,.... and see what happens..if it was possible then it would b possible now right??
coquitoabkk 1 year ago
@coquitoabkk If they can't reproduce offspring then they are not the same species. Humans did not come from Apes they just have a common ancestor.
ImHereToTellYou1 1 year ago
@ImHereToTellYou1 ---- so then what does having common ancestors mean??? if my "100 times great grandfather was a monkey then i would be a monkey too lol...i donno ..its like theres an A and a C but theres no B ... u know
coquitoabkk 1 year ago
@coquitoabkk Common- Belonging equally to or shared equally by two or more.
We're not apes.
ImHereToTellYou1 1 year ago
@coquitoabkk we and apes only share some dna makeup, a few million years ago we would have a type of homonoide that was neither man nor ape but had both of our traits,
jester26uk 11 months ago
@coquitoabkk wow, what the hell would that prove? that man can fuck monkeys?
alexbeathaloreach 11 months ago
Ape come from human
Nizaris1 1 year ago
@Nizaris1 no human come from ape
Godofrockl666 1 year ago
Comment removed
Nizaris1 1 year ago
@Mike89066 If you said (it's pretty much been proven) you'd be laughed at. How are you ever going to win a debate like that. Now if you're talking about things evolving to adapt to their surroundings yes but ANYTHING in nature changing from one thing to another has never been proven nor will it ever because it just doesn't happen, its to impossible.
sr1215cl 1 year ago
@sr1215cl You show a complete lack of understanding on how evolution works. Noticeable changes occur over many, many generations. You admit small changes happen, but fail to realize that enough small changes over a long enough period make a large change from the original. There are many examples of transitional fossils, you just have to look for them and not expect the evidence to come to you.
rod31808 1 year ago
So great granddad was a ape...... RIGHT! Use some logic not stupidity.
sr1215cl 1 year ago
@sr1215cl "There is a problem of which I, personally, am currently unable to understand or figure out at this very moment... therefore, the only plausible conclusion is that magic is the answer!!!"
Yes. Logical indeed...
You would have been a real hit at the Salem Witch Trials.
S.C.W.
TheGutterMonkey 1 year ago 5
@sr1215cl Wrong! Your grandad wasn't an ape but a species that branched off the apes...Use some logic will you!!
jjoneil73 1 year ago
To be smashed upp? what cind of arceoligists is this???
saltfan2 1 year ago
this is all stupidity...
what happened to adam? do u think adam came from an ape?
all time/money wasted on this video
torontobboy21 1 year ago
@torontobboy21 adam didnt exist in the capacity that is defined in the bible.... anyone who believes in that myth should go back and do high school science
drunkenbozo1994 1 year ago
@torontobboy21 Go back to school as you may learn something about real life and not just a false belief!!
jjoneil73 1 year ago
@torontobboy21 "Adam" was (is) a delusion..a myth..... just like the talking serpents....
ammarios 1 year ago
from man to ape,20 beers!!thanks for uploding
vangerwen79 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
We didn't come from stupid apes. We ARE stupid apes. Look at so many, many millions of us, denying evolution which is supported by overwhelming evidence and yet believing in ancient scribblings without a shred of support. Think about it.
wonkothemagicelf 1 year ago
but one question
why apes still apes ??? today why they did not evolve ????
if Survival of the fittest ........and the time evolve the living-beings to higher class
then why the insects still insects and live in the same way for millions of years ?/?
i believe that the answer is bigger than "evolution theorem"!!
alsadeg111222 1 year ago
They do still evolve. Heck we still evolve. Over merely the past 100 years we've even gotten taller. Evolution of this magnitude takes a very long time and goes step by step, millennium by millennium. You don't simply wake up and find your tail missing.
Extreme changes in weather over time have to do with it as well. A species' new generation wont need to evolve if they can live how they are. If you can't survive through evolution, you become extinct. Just as some of our ancestors did.
S.C.W.
TheGutterMonkey 1 year ago
@TheGutterMonkey
i got what u mean .
what i mean is :- according to "evolution theorem "
the living-beings evolve in chain so we were insects and we evolved through all the known animals till now it takes us very long long time
then some of the insects didnt evolved and they still live now in the same way since they were created
they had enough time and every thing
WHY THEY STILL INSECTS
WHEREAS SOME OF THEM ENVOLVED TO US ?????
alsadeg111222 1 year ago
Not every species is going to develop into us through the course of evolution. Our ancestors didn't go through every species before finally landing where we are -just as we were never a dinosaur; that was a different string of beings.
A metaphorical ex would be to say our ancestors were one of the many fish in the water. We swam out & over time adapted to the change while the fish who stayed remained the same because of no change in their environment.
Trying thinking about it that way.
S.C.W.
TheGutterMonkey 1 year ago 3
in what year was this made?
WiseStrategist 1 year ago
It's pretty frightening how many people don't believe in evolution. lol
"An ape?! ME! Don't be absurd. This book clearly says an invisible dude made us one week 6,000 years ago".
Gotta love the delusional world!
S.C.W.
TheGutterMonkey 1 year ago 36
@TheGutterMonkey
Yea that's for sure..
A boy with long Hair running around Naked would look a hell of a lot like some sort of ape...
Humanity is extremely ignorant......
NinjaChampionKO 1 year ago
@TheGutterMonkey lol thats spot on!.........but there is a santa claus?.......right?
caraflatavan 1 year ago
@TheGutterMonkey - lol and don't forget Adam and Eve and the evil serpent with the forbidden fruit! lmao
KingsWorld2010 1 year ago
@TheGutterMonkey Saying you believe in this IS delusional and crazy! There is to much order in this world for it to JUST happen, but hey everybody is entitled to their own opinion. BTW have you ever studied the human eye, try and say this just happen by evolution, not even Darwin could find a way that evolution could of played a role in it. Just impossible to technical.
sr1215cl 1 year ago 2
@TheGutterMonkey how long is a week to god though??????????? one day could repesent a thousand years or more or less who knows bible use alot of symoblism if it was really 7 days then god could of did it all in one day and been done with it
whatis250 1 year ago
@whatis250
there is no god
assym2006 9 months ago
@TheGutterMonkey Thats Jehovah's witness
Godofrockl666 1 year ago
@TheGutterMonkey You got to be kidding me, the stork brought us
ChannelingusXIV 9 months ago
@ChannelingusXIV I actually have nothing against Stork Theory. I think it's just as likely as Birth Theory and should be taught along it in schools.
Teach both sides!
TheGutterMonkey 9 months ago
@TheGutterMonkey So why are apes and gorillas and monkeys still being born over and over again and dying like that, why don`t they evolve into humans, it would be a thing of the past they would be extinct if we evolved from them
iLuvBarRefaeli 8 months ago
@iLuvBarRefaeli Humans and other apes descended from a common ancestor whose population split to spawn us and those other "unchanging" apes you're referring to. The apes we evolved from weren't the same apes that there are today, and there's no evidence that those apes AREN'T evolving (it's not an over night process).
Concerning why monkeys are still around, I have a similar questions for you: If many Americans and Australians are descended from Europeans, why are there still Europeans around?
TheGutterMonkey 8 months ago
@TheGutterMonkey
i think that the hebrew bible actually backs up evolution
superlalabbz 6 months ago
"The intevention Theory" really answers it all. To be what we are today is really impossible for nature to acheive. As unbelievable as it may seem, I think there was an intervention, a genetic reordering or transformation occured which made us to what we are today. Humans. Science really cannot go with the "we can from apes" theory without having solid fossil records to show the transformations. We have none. Darwins Evolution theory in a few years will be absolete.
dreamcatcherr2002 1 year ago
It's not at all impossible for nature to achieve once you manage to wrap your mind around how long of a time it took.
All evidence of evolution points to the same outcome, and the evidence is extensive and consistent.
If you honestly think the theory (this is "theory" in scientific definition -like the theory of gravity- not the informal use of the word--such as a "guess") of evolution will become obsolete, then you simply haven't looked at the evidence clearly.
S.C.W.
TheGutterMonkey 1 year ago 7
@TheGutterMonkey well its kinda simple the evolved that species that evolved wrongly are now extinct... what we have in the world to day you could say is like a masterpiece. obviously we will continue to evolve but you get what im sayin right? ppl think evolution is right first time and it isnt. neanderthol man is a type of evolved human that was wrong and its gone now :) we how ever are still here :)
mm1k3y 5 months ago
@TheGutterMonkey
It's not impossible, it's ridiculous.
Nothing goes from simple to highly complex by sheer dumb luck. The time frame is irrelevant.
Just adding huge quantities of time doesn't do it.
Darwinism is as rigid and as simplistic as any all-explaining XIX century theory.
As is freudism in psychology, as is marxism in social history.
It's just that - in contrast to those two other theories - darwinism isn't dead yet.
dragosst 5 months ago
@dragosst With all due respect; you're simply wrong. The argument of irreducible complexity is not taken seriously by the scientific community, and Michael Behe (IC's biggest proponent) isn't even taken seriously by his own biology department.
There has never been evidence against evolution ever to be published in any peer reviewed scientific journal. And, as previously stated, the evidence FOR evolution is abundant and it is all consistent with what evolution predicts and entails.
Sorry.
TheGutterMonkey 5 months ago
@TheGutterMonkey
1.I'm aware of the fact that the scientific community is overwhelmingly evolutionist. Therefore it comes natural to refute the IC argument. I think however that it is a powerfull argument or that - at least - it deserves a counter-argument from an evolutionist - such as yourself - that's more than just "the scientfic priesthood refutes it, so move on!".
dragosst 5 months ago
@dragosst IC has been shown to have no basis in reality. It's been written against several times in scientific journals (journals reviewed and designed by the scientific community as a whole, not just a sect devoted to the study of evolution) and has even been found as unscientific in court (by a conservative judge, no less). So no, it's not a powerful argument. There is no actual evidence for IC and no scientific alternative to evolution. Also, there's no priesthood in science—that's absurd.
TheGutterMonkey 5 months ago
@TheGutterMonkey
The Pointless Internet Arguments Forum is open for debate! :)
1. Ok, so - in a few words - what's the argument against IC?
2. Would you say that there is - or there has been at times - such a thing as dogmatical approaches in science ( irrational clinging to obsolete theories etc.) ?
dragosst 5 months ago
@TheGutterMonkey
3. I was making an important point in my previous message - what are the numbers? For example - how many links do you need between A. afarensis and H. sapiens sapiens for that to be a data-based transitional sequence? 5? 50? 500? Evolution simply says : "However many we have found until now." That's not the way science should go. Science should say : hypothesis A will be confirmed it you find the facts x, y and z in the field ( or through lab experiments ).
dragosst 5 months ago
@dragosst You miss the point that all species are transitional. There is no clear deliniation as to where one species ends and another begins. The changes are slow, gradual and subtile. They require many tens or hundreds of thousands of years accumulate enough for us to even recognize them as another species. Also, homonids of similar genetic make up interbreed. We know through DNA analysis that Homo sapiens interbreed with Homo neanderthalis, a much earlier homonid. There is also the
edwardschlosser1 3 months ago
@edwardschlosser1
I understand that all species are transitional. However, they can be broken down into categories : h. sapiens, h. erectus etc. Using this general classification evolution theory should be able to say :" To go from A afarensis to H sapiens these things have to change : body hair, brains, bones etc. Let's compare this theoretical model to the fossils we found and we will find from now on."
dragosst 3 months ago
@dragosst These catagories are human abstracts. They are denoted after the fact. There are far too many variables to assign predictive designations. We can only view the changes after they have occured. The complete ecosystem is thus far beyond our abilty to pull all these things together and predict the next step. We can't even predict tomorrow's weather. That doesn't mean we don't understand it's mechanisms. It just means that the complexity exceeds our models. Who can guess when
edwardschlosser1 3 months ago
@edwardschlosser1
That's just my point. Evolution theory stands at about the same level as the weather forecast. It may be true. Not the same with developed science such as physics. Although incomplete, physics can say things like "Drop this ball from this tower and it will reach the earth at x sec." and other. All that evolution theory can say is "Maybe it happened like this."
dragosst 3 months ago
@edwardschlosser1 There should be space there for a "Maybe it didn't". The hunger for an explanation should not overlook cartesian skepticism. There was never any skepticism since Darwin. Do remember - as I said - that not long ago a simple H. neand. was considered good enough to go from some unknown monkey to us. Now there are 4-5 links in between those. That should give us a few doubts about the method the guys researching this are using, shouldn't it?
dragosst 3 months ago
@edwardschlosser1 And the thing is - there is no method. "However many we shall find, whit whatever characteristics, they are good. They prove the theory." is the method.
dragosst 3 months ago
@edwardschlosser1
It doesn't say that. It just says "Whatever! However many we shall find, whit whatever characteristics, they are good. They prove the theory." Do remember that - as it is pointed out in the docum. above - H neandert. was considered good enough to fill the gap between an old-w. monkey and h. sap. for tens of years by the same "scientific comunity".
dragosst 3 months ago
@edwardschlosser1
That's because as soon as the evolutionary paradigm was adopted critical thinking outside of it and skepticism were thrown to the wind. As it often happens in the history of science.
dragosst 3 months ago
@dragosst There is also the issue of evolution proceeding in a non-linear fassion. Evolution is a response to a changing environment. The environment doesn't change at a steady, linear rate. Again we go back to punctuated equilibrium.
edwardschlosser1 3 months ago
@edwardschlosser1
Yes, i agree, that is a better explanation and a powerfull argument. However, as I see it, it has a great problem in the fact that we don't know - and we'll never know - how complete the fossil record is compared to the total number of species that ever lived. There will always be unknown unknowns. So. it's just a hypothesis and it should remain so. If we are true to the rigor of modern scienc, that is.
dragosst 3 months ago
@TheGutterMonkey I used the word "priesthood" as a metaphor for dogmatic, irrational approach. Speaking of dogmatism in science, you can even see it in the documentary you uploaded in the overwhelming and stubborn support for the Piltdown forgery against A. africanus, a fossil which they haven't even seen but refuted as a link. One could make the argument that the scientists of today are as likely to be human as those of that era. Or as anybody else.
dragosst 5 months ago
I’ve not been arguing the details of IC because IC (and ID) has already been debunked by professionals who have studied it. Your disagreement isn't with me but with science itself and if you desire the appropriate counterarguments then look in any scientific journal or encyclopedia.
Science is unbiased and self-correcting—if there were a flaw to disprove the NUMEROUS evidences of Evolution it would be found by the scientists who you are arguing against.
Also, I didn't upload this documentary.
TheGutterMonkey 4 months ago
@TheGutterMonkey
1. Would you say that three links is enough to go from Australopithecus afarensis ( which is basically a sort of a chimpanzee in terms of brain size etc.) to H. sapiens sapiens?
(The three links being H. habilis, H. erectus, H. heidelbergensis.)
2. If it took nature 30 ml. years to go from arboreal monkeys ( such as Aegyptopithecus zeuxis which has a 20 cm3 brain) to A. afarensis, how come it took only 4 ml.y to go from Afarensis to modern humans?
dragosst 4 months ago
@dragosst Because evolution is not linear. Punctuated equilibrium theory as described by Dr. Steven Jay Gould, Ph.D., Harvard University, explains this non-linear aspect of evolution.
edwardschlosser1 3 months ago
@TheGutterMonkey
3. Which other scientific theory ( besides evolutionism ) has no criteria to validate or invalidate itself? That is if theory A is right I should find - on the field or in the lab - the facts a,b,c. How many transitional fossils must we find between a fish and a reptile? Or between a old world monkey and a human? How many?
dragosst 4 months ago
@dragosst Other scientific theories that have no critieria to validate or invalidate include gravity, the weak electromagnetic force, the strong magnetic force and quantum mechanics in atomic theory. All exist, and all are facts, but their operation consists of theories with great predictive value. Evolution actually stands on much firmer ground than any of these others. We have fossils, Modern DNA comparisons between humans including mitochondrial DNA, and DNA comparisons to other species...
edwardschlosser1 3 months ago
@dragosst and to neanderthal man. Evolution can be studied in bacteria through artificial selection, and the evolution of "superbugs" like MRSA support evolutionary mechanisms. Evolution is a fact. The theory of evolution is currently a mix of Darwinian evolution and puctuated equilibrium. Theories that support facts are always undergoing revision as our understanding of the natural world increases. Our present theory of gravity is mass warping time space. It too will be refined over time.
edwardschlosser1 3 months ago
@edwardschlosser1
Whenever people say "Evolution was never prooved in a lab" evolutionsits say "Sure it has! Just look at bacteria!". I think one has to have a great lack of common sense to think that going from bugs to superbugs is just the same as going from a fish to an elephant only a lot of time added to the process.
dragosst 3 months ago
@dragosst Scientifically it is the same mechanism. So is the evolution of fruit flies via artifical selection, and the divergent evolution in sub-species of canines. These are basic changes in the DNA. A large accumulation of these changes is how one species gradually changes into another. That is why we can use DNA analysis to support heredity. The DNA of Homo sapiens is placed into a chamber with the DNA of modern chimps. When heated the double helix unwinds and the base pairs will
edwardschlosser1 3 months ago
@edwardschlosser1
The change needed to go from a bug to a super-bug is minimal compared to that needed to go from a terrestrial mammal to an aquatic one for example. Saying that the first basically prooves the second is like saying "If John can run for 100 m, than he can run for another 100 km." I agree that the first sequence (bug-superbug) can be a model for the second.
dragosst 3 months ago
@edwardschlosser1
However, the second remains to be proven if we are to be honest to scientific rigor and not to "It's all very simple, I'll explain it all in this one book" XIXth-century style theories ( marxism, freudims, Comte-ian positive sociology etc etc ).
dragosst 3 months ago
@dragosst and the base pairs will allign with the base pair of a simlar species chimps in this case). Sequencing the alligned pairs allows us to actually count the similar pairs and dissimilar pairs. From this we know that the genetic structure of chimps is about 98% that of Homo sapiens. That means that we shared a common ancestor a few million years ago. The verification of the fossi record and the assumed relationships derived from comparitive anatomy shows a very good corelation.
edwardschlosser1 3 months ago
@TheGutterMonkey
2. Science has always moved forward in cycles of research - theory - rigidity and all breakthroughs have always been made against the rigidly established paradigm at the time. Contrary to what one R. Dawkins would have you believe - by telling the story of the old scientist hugging the young one who is contradicting the theory he embraced for a lifetime - scientists are human like all of us, and - being human - they can get quite stubborn, irrational and dogmatic at times.
dragosst 5 months ago
@TheGutterMonkey
3. The fact that should be established by a hypothesis after being put on paper should be - "what should i find in the real world - or through a lab experiment - for this theory to hold?". This has never been established by evolutionists. For example "reptiles come from amfibians". How many links should i find between those two for this to be true? 2? 4? 100? 1000? 1 mil? If one does not establish this than the hypothesis can't be prooved.
dragosst 5 months ago
@TheGutterMonkey
Evolutionists say : "Well, there were plenty of links but it's organic matter, it disintegrated into the soil, it's gone forever so we can't find it in order to prove evolution to certain standards. We'll take what we find, evolution is true, so ... move on."
dragosst 5 months ago
We share over 95% of our dna with chimps....
blackatheistgirl 2 years ago