Australian Politics Forum - Evidence of Evolution being a hoax

Kytro

Gold Member

Offline

Blasphemy: a victimless
crime

Posts: 3409
Adelaide
Gender: male

Re: Evidence of Evolution being a hoax
Reply #165 - Nov 4^th, 2012 at 11:32am

Soren wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 9:54pm:

If we evolved in parallel with apes, how come we are so incredibly different from them, even as we share most our our DNA?

It is thought the divergence happened around 4-6 million years ago. That's a long time.

As for the differences, I'm not a geneticist however there seems to be a fair amount of similarity to me.

Back to top

IP Logged

rabbitoh07

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2783
Gender: male

Re: Evidence of Evolution being a hoax
Reply #166 - Nov 4^th, 2012 at 11:53am

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Nov 4^th, 2012 at 10:07am:

rabbitoh07 wrote on Nov 4^th, 2012 at 7:58am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Nov 4^th, 2012 at 6:58am:

Emma wrote on Nov 4^th, 2012 at 4:55am:

But
I do have to say SOB - your attempt .. at explaining why humans and apes are so diff, despite very close DNA, was not a good comparison.

Dogs are not an example of this sort of divergence. Funnily enough, it has been HUMAN intervention which has produced the range of form dogs now display, in all their variety,. and it has more to do with selective breeding , not evolution.

I guess you are right since dogs are the same species and we arnt same species as apes. I was just trying to make it overly simple for him.

SOB

"Apes" are not a species. "Ape" is the general term referring to the family Hominoidea, which we are a member of along with gibbons, orang-utan, gorillas and chimpanzees

Homo sapiens
Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Chordata
Class: Synapsida
Class: Mammalia
Order: Primates
Family: Hominidae
Tribe: Hominini
Genus: Homo
Species: H. sapiens

As apes though - we resemble chimpanzees more than anything, and should really be considered a species of chimpanzee. Creating the genus Homo to describe ourselves doesn't really make much sense. Our species should really be Pan sapiens.

I am not interested in your semantics. You knew what i meant and you are just trying to pick a fight going on about the semantic stuff. Beats me why since we should be on the same side on this issue.

SOB

It is not semantics. You were wrong and I corrected you. Humans are a species of ape. Not a different species to apes.

Stop being such an over-sensitive pussy.

Back to top

IP Logged

Sir Spot of Borg

Gold Member

Offline

WE ARE BORG

Posts: 26510
Australia

Re: Evidence of Evolution being a hoax
Reply #167 - Nov 4^th, 2012 at 11:55am

rabbitoh07 wrote on Nov 4^th, 2012 at 11:53am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Nov 4^th, 2012 at 10:07am:

rabbitoh07 wrote on Nov 4^th, 2012 at 7:58am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Nov 4^th, 2012 at 6:58am:

Emma wrote on Nov 4^th, 2012 at 4:55am:

But
I do have to say SOB - your attempt .. at explaining why humans and apes are so diff, despite very close DNA, was not a good comparison.

Dogs are not an example of this sort of divergence. Funnily enough, it has been HUMAN intervention which has produced the range of form dogs now display, in all their variety,. and it has more to do with selective breeding , not evolution.

I guess you are right since dogs are the same species and we arnt same species as apes. I was just trying to make it overly simple for him.

SOB

"Apes" are not a species. "Ape" is the general term referring to the family Hominoidea, which we are a member of along with gibbons, orang-utan, gorillas and chimpanzees

Homo sapiens
Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Chordata
Class: Synapsida
Class: Mammalia
Order: Primates
Family: Hominidae
Tribe: Hominini
Genus: Homo
Species: H. sapiens

As apes though - we resemble chimpanzees more than anything, and should really be considered a species of chimpanzee. Creating the genus Homo to describe ourselves doesn't really make much sense. Our species should really be Pan sapiens.

I am not interested in your semantics. You knew what i meant and you are just trying to pick a fight going on about the semantic stuff. Beats me why since we should be on the same side on this issue.

SOB

It is not semantics. You were wrong and I corrected you. Humans are a species of ape. Not a different species to apes.

Stop being such an over-sensitive pussy.

Yeah but you are being a dick by doing it after someone else already did and i agreed.

SOB

Back to top

Whaaaaaah!
I'm a
Moron!

- edited by some unethical admin - you think its funny? - its a slippery slope

IP Logged

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: Evidence of Evolution being a hoax
Reply #168 - Nov 4^th, 2012 at 12:03pm

Kytro wrote on Nov 4^th, 2012 at 11:32am:

Soren wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 9:54pm:

If we evolved in parallel with apes, how come we are so incredibly different from them, even as we share most our our DNA?

It is thought the divergence happened around 4-6 million years ago. That's a long time.

As for the differences, I'm not a geneticist however there seems to be a fair amount of similarity to me.

Yes, that's a very long time - yet apes have changed very little, compared to the enormous change in humans.

Why was it advantageous for us to shed our fur, develop speech, dexterity and to think in abstract terms, invent theories about the world - but not for apes?

Back to top

IP Logged

Sir Spot of Borg

Gold Member

Offline

WE ARE BORG

Posts: 26510
Australia

Re: Evidence of Evolution being a hoax
Reply #169 - Nov 4^th, 2012 at 12:12pm

Soren wrote on Nov 4^th, 2012 at 12:03pm:

Kytro wrote on Nov 4^th, 2012 at 11:32am:

Soren wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 9:54pm:

If we evolved in parallel with apes, how come we are so incredibly different from them, even as we share most our our DNA?

It is thought the divergence happened around 4-6 million years ago. That's a long time.

As for the differences, I'm not a geneticist however there seems to be a fair amount of similarity to me.

Yes, that's a very long time - yet apes have changed very little, compared to the enormous change in humans.

Why was it advantageous for us to shed our fur, develop speech, dexterity and to think in abstract terms, invent theories about the world - but not for apes?

Not every change is advantageous. It doesnt work like that. We may have shed the fur around the time we developed tools so the ones that had no fur but had tools would survive despite not having fur. Just an example. I dont claim to know when we developed tools or lost our fur.

SOB

Back to top

Whaaaaaah!
I'm a
Moron!

- edited by some unethical admin - you think its funny? - its a slippery slope

IP Logged

rabbitoh07

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2783
Gender: male

Re: Evidence of Evolution being a hoax
Reply #170 - Nov 4^th, 2012 at 12:15pm

Soren wrote on Nov 4^th, 2012 at 12:03pm:

Kytro wrote on Nov 4^th, 2012 at 11:32am:

Soren wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 9:54pm:

If we evolved in parallel with apes, how come we are so incredibly different from them, even as we share most our our DNA?

It is thought the divergence happened around 4-6 million years ago. That's a long time.

As for the differences, I'm not a geneticist however there seems to be a fair amount of similarity to me.

Yes, that's a very long time - yet apes have changed very little, compared to the enormous change in humans.

Why was it advantageous for us to shed our fur, develop speech, dexterity and to think in abstract terms, invent theories about the world - but not for apes?

Your post makes no sense. Human are apes.

Apes have developed speech, dexterity and to think in abstract terms, invent theories about the world. Specifically - the species of ape known as Homo sapiens.

Other apes have evolved in different directions.

Back to top

IP Logged

Yadda

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 21819
A cat with a view

Re: Evidence of Evolution being a hoax
Reply #171 - Nov 4^th, 2012 at 12:28pm

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Nov 4^th, 2012 at 10:10am:

Im not following 20 links

- you want to make a point you make your point then use the links to back yourself up not use them instead of an argument.

SOB

SPOT,

So you failed English grammar, AND, Math.

Quote:

.....Read this thread and you will see it is not just the people who disagree with you who think that you're a spastic, but even those on 'the same side" who wish to distance themselves from you. Your very presence lowers the intelligence of this thread.

Your very presence lowers the intelligence of this thread this whole forum.

Back to top

"....And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."
Luke 16:31

IP Logged

Sir Spot of Borg

Gold Member

Offline

WE ARE BORG

Posts: 26510
Australia

Re: Evidence of Evolution being a hoax
Reply #172 - Nov 4^th, 2012 at 12:29pm

Yadda wrote on Nov 4^th, 2012 at 12:28pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Nov 4^th, 2012 at 10:10am:

Im not following 20 links

- you want to make a point you make your point then use the links to back yourself up not use them instead of an argument.

SOB

SPOT,

So you failed English grammar, AND, Math.

Quote:

.....Read this thread and you will see it is not just the people who disagree with you who think that you're a spastic, but even those on 'the same side" who wish to distance themselves from you. Your very presence lowers the intelligence of this thread.

Your very presence lowers the intelligence of this thread this whole forum.

Awww poor yadda doesnt ant to answer the question.

SOB

Back to top

Whaaaaaah!
I'm a
Moron!

- edited by some unethical admin - you think its funny? - its a slippery slope

IP Logged

Yadda

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 21819
A cat with a view

Re: Evidence of Evolution being a hoax
Reply #173 - Nov 4^th, 2012 at 12:36pm

rabbitoh07 wrote on Nov 4^th, 2012 at 12:15pm:

Soren wrote on Nov 4^th, 2012 at 12:03pm:

Kytro wrote on Nov 4^th, 2012 at 11:32am:

Soren wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 9:54pm:

If we evolved in parallel with apes, how come we are so incredibly different from them, even as we share most our our DNA?

It is thought the divergence happened around 4-6 million years ago. That's a long time.

As for the differences, I'm not a geneticist however there seems to be a fair amount of similarity to me.

Yes, that's a very long time - yet apes have changed very little, compared to the enormous change in humans.

Why was it advantageous for us to shed our fur, develop speech, dexterity and to think in abstract terms, invent theories about the world - but not for apes?

Your post makes no sense. Human are apes.

Apes have developed speech, dexterity and to think in abstract terms, invent theories about the world. Specifically - the species of ape known as Homo sapiens.

Other apes have evolved in different directions.

rabbitoh07,

Yes but [if the theory of evolution is correct] at one time in the past those apes were our direct contemporary cousins, so why did 'we' [apes] evolve into something other than what we were, when those around us, those who were our contemporaries, did not ?

Why didn't the 'evolutionary imperative' act upon chimpanzees and gorillas [who supposedly were, at one time, our contemporaries] ?

Back to top

"....And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."
Luke 16:31

IP Logged

Yadda Gold Member Offline Posts: 21819 A cat with a view	Re: Evidence of Evolution being a hoax Reply #174 - Nov 4^th, 2012 at 12:43pm Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Nov 4^th, 2012 at 12:29pm: Awww poor yadda doesnt ant to answer the question. SOB I have answered.i So, you failed in English Comprehension too ? Did you get a Pass in any subject at school ?
Back to top	"....And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead." Luke 16:31 IP Logged

Sir Spot of Borg

Gold Member

Offline

WE ARE BORG

Posts: 26510
Australia

Re: Evidence of Evolution being a hoax
Reply #175 - Nov 4^th, 2012 at 1:00pm

Yadda wrote on Nov 4^th, 2012 at 12:43pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Nov 4^th, 2012 at 12:29pm:

Awww poor yadda doesnt ant to answer the question.

SOB

I have answered.i
So, you failed in English Comprehension too ?

Did you get a Pass in any subject at school ?

No you only answered the question: "what can i say about spot that is unlikely to piss him off but look like im trying anyway?"

The question i wanted answered was what you think happened. the rib and snake story or evolution.

SOB

Back to top

Whaaaaaah!
I'm a
Moron!

- edited by some unethical admin - you think its funny? - its a slippery slope

IP Logged

Kytro

Gold Member

Offline

Blasphemy: a victimless
crime

Posts: 3409
Adelaide
Gender: male

Re: Evidence of Evolution being a hoax
Reply #176 - Nov 4^th, 2012 at 1:02pm

Soren wrote on Nov 4^th, 2012 at 12:03pm:

[quote author=41737E78650A0 link=1350356132/166#166 date=1351992733]

Yes, that's a very long time - yet apes have changed very little, compared to the enormous change in humans.

Why was it advantageous for us to shed our fur, develop speech, dexterity and to think in abstract terms, invent theories about the world - but not for apes?

I wouldn't say very little, after all they were common ancestors so we all branched off the same thing. It may have been advantageous, but evolution is what works well enough to reproduce and compete.

Humans have done very well for themselves, so what you mentioned is clearly an advantage.

Back to top

IP Logged

rabbitoh07

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2783
Gender: male

Re: Evidence of Evolution being a hoax
Reply #177 - Nov 4^th, 2012 at 2:56pm

Yadda wrote on Nov 4^th, 2012 at 12:36pm:

rabbitoh07 wrote on Nov 4^th, 2012 at 12:15pm:

Soren wrote on Nov 4^th, 2012 at 12:03pm:

Kytro wrote on Nov 4^th, 2012 at 11:32am:

Soren wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 9:54pm:

If we evolved in parallel with apes, how come we are so incredibly different from them, even as we share most our our DNA?

It is thought the divergence happened around 4-6 million years ago. That's a long time.

As for the differences, I'm not a geneticist however there seems to be a fair amount of similarity to me.

Yes, that's a very long time - yet apes have changed very little, compared to the enormous change in humans.

Why was it advantageous for us to shed our fur, develop speech, dexterity and to think in abstract terms, invent theories about the world - but not for apes?

Your post makes no sense. Human are apes.

Apes have developed speech, dexterity and to think in abstract terms, invent theories about the world. Specifically - the species of ape known as Homo sapiens.

Other apes have evolved in different directions.

rabbitoh07,

Yes but [if the theory of evolution is correct] at one time in the past those apes were our direct contemporary cousins, so why did 'we' [apes] evolve into something other than what we were, when those around us, those who were our contemporaries, did not ?

Why didn't the 'evolutionary imperative' act upon chimpanzees and gorillas [who supposedly were, at one time, our contemporaries] ?

Your question still does not make any sense.

All of us apes (gibbons, gorillas, orang-utan, chimpanzees, humans) shared a common ancestor. Variation in a species comes from mutations in genetic material. At some stage , starting some 20 million years ago, genetic mutations led to natural selection favouring some various different physical features. There was obviously some evolutionary advantage in those individiduals which favoured brachiation as a mode of locomotion - these eventually became separate species of gibbons and orang-utans etc. Some 4 millon years ago, variations in the common ancestor of the Great Apes led to natural selection favouring physically powerful and highly socially organised individuals who became what we know as the various gorilla species. ANd the less physically endowed of our common ancestors, gained evolutonary advantage not by developing physical features or specific diets - but but adopting varied diets and using inter-species communication and advanced tool-making skills to survive. Some of these creatures also evolved to use vocalisations as a means of communication. These became the ancestors of the various Homo species.

The Homo genus is probably the least successful of the apes. Most of the Homo species are now extinct. Only one survives - Homo sapiens - although it does survive in plague proportions.

Back to top

IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: Evidence of Evolution being a hoax
Reply #178 - Nov 4^th, 2012 at 5:21pm

Soren wrote on Oct 31^st, 2012 at 8:21pm:

muso wrote on Oct 28^th, 2012 at 7:02pm:

- because as human beings, we have a sense of morality and altruism, which is entirely separate from evolutionary processes.

You are saying (without probably even realising it) that humans have certain attributes (morality, altruism) that are independent from and not subject to evolution.

I was responding to Yadda who was claiming that Evolution was some kind of moral code. It isn't. It's just a biological process.

I'd be wasting my time explaining the Price Equation and the "evolution" of a predisposition to altruism, but it's a consequence of synoecism - life in a complex society. As soon as humans started the process of living in extended settlements, they were faced with a different set of fitness criteria. There are some fairly heavy mathematics involved, but essentially the sense of altruism is a consequence of city (large village) life. All societies have had to come to terms with the mismatch between what is good for the individual and what is good for society. Organised religions sprung up as a result of the need to change the rules of living in order to survive in a complex society.

http://www.gnxp.com/new/2011/04/10/george-price-group-selection-and-altruism/

So yes, it is independent of biological evolution, because the homo sapiens of say 15,000 years ago are pretty close to those of today.

You can apply the term evolution to societies, but it's totally separate to allelomorphic evolution. Some call it (loosely) the evolution of memes, but the widespread use of Facebook for example is hardly a result of any kind of genetic (or allelomorphic) evolutionary process. The same thing applies to altruistic behaviour.

Look, in simple terms, nobody is saying that the use of Facebook was a consequence of non Facebook users dying or being less fit.

Go on - surprise me.....

If anybody wants a more rigorous explanation, I managed to find this Wikipedia article . It's not too heavy for the mathematically challenged, but it has links to the mathematics involved:

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

I should say that Price was probably the first to study what has since developed into the field of social evolution. He was often an enigmatic character.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Nov 4^th, 2012 at 6:29pm by muso »

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: Evidence of Evolution being a hoax
Reply #179 - Nov 4^th, 2012 at 6:11pm

Another aspect of what I'm trying to say is that individual cognitive development is also separate from evolution. Evolutionary processes are what put homo sapiens on the map, but the detailed structure of the individual human brain is not determined by allelomorphic genetics alone.

Those who are most successful in society recognise that the human brain is largely self programmable. The human genome has been sequenced and it contains somewhat less than 25,000 genes. There is no way known that 25,000 genes can be responsible for predetermining the interconnection of around 100 billion neurons, each with up to 10,000 branches. As far as that is concerned, it's up to the individual. Each time we think, we construct new neuron pathways or reinforce existing ones. That is basically up to us as individuals.

100 billion is about the same number of stars that exist in the galaxy. It's a huge number, and an enormous number of connections and permutations.

We are largely the product of our own self programming (learning). If you want a controversial consequence of the fact that we are more nurture than nature, it means that we can reprogram any of our preferences or predispositions. (including sexuality) You can read that any way you like, but it's true. A taste can also be acquired for just about any food that you currently dislike. The brain is incredibly plastic.

I should make a distinction between allelomorphic evolution and other forms of "social evolution". These include behavioural inheritance, epigenetic inheritance, parental effects etc.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Nov 4^th, 2012 at 6:42pm by muso »

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged