TheAlphaWolf said:
well, of course I can't possibly list them all. From nested higherarchies to geographical distribution, fossils (includes transitional fossils), homologous structures, analogous structures, and vestigial structures, to the fact natural selection has been observed, and that even SPECIATION (macroevolution... a population of one species turning into another) has been observed.
I must say I'm not very familiar with human evolution, but I do know some things. the process of getting intelligence to uste fire and tools to hunt happened in gradual steps. There's no single time when hominids started using both tools, tools to hunt, fire, etc. First it started out with simple tools, like using a stone to shatter bone so the bone marrow could be eaten. Then it went to sharpening those stones to make them more efficient, then to using them to kill, then adding a stick to the end (like an ax type of thing), etc. So in short, there's no way to say. Humans aren't the only ones to use tools either. There are ravens, chimps, finches, etc. that also use simple tools.
well, all hominids (including modern humans) are apes, NOT monkeys, and there have been quite a few lines of hominids (homo erectus, neandarthals, the hobbit, etc). All but one survived, and that's because of various reasons... I think neandarthals were outcompeted by modern humans right?
no. can you elaborate? I don't understand...
yeah, don't give them ideas. Then we have to reply to their stupid arguments.
I'm colorblind to blue so it's difficult to make it out?kmguru said:So is the intelligent design...here I am being the devil's advocate...the fact that religion evolved and practiced by ~80% of the world's population that tend to believe in intelligent design...can itself be considered as the observational facts.
The ID people feel that while there is a relation between the primates and humans in DNA, and brain mechanics...the conclusion can not be drawn that one fine morning the primate became a human. People have been searching for that missing link for a long time and there has been no such thing...even between specis. To turn on or off a single gene in a human body takes a lot of knowledge and laboratory equipment. Now changing say 1000 genes so that a female primate will give birth to a human type, without rejecting the fetus, is really out of this world. If that is true, we should find the enzyme that is responsible for such process and use it in transplanting biological organs. And I am sure scientists have artificially inseminated human sperm in primates with no results...unless you consider a whole cross specis are in Timbuktu running their empire....
According to latest science, humans have been on the Earth scene for only 100,000 years. That is too small a time for nature to experiment turning on and off the gene sequences and make it compatible with the mother primate to create a viable off spring. Turning a 1000 genes just right in such a small period is not possible. Now if you say we have been here for the last 200 million years and therefore the first 50 million years, nature tinkered with the genes and that we can find the half breeds which lasted 100,000 years each...then I can understand the progression...
I am trying to give you an alternate scenario between classical Adam and Eve story and the primate giving birth to a human.
Notice, you could not pin down, exactly what the time frame is for a human to be present on this planet. It is faily established that plant life arrived about 750 million years ago. It takes a long time like a million years or so, for a specis to establish themselves. It takes 60 million years for the dinosaur to become a crocodile...specifically when there is a stress in the environment.
There has been practically no changes in the human brain in the last 4000 years - so, if we can establish exactly when the primates got their higher functions of the brain and invented fire...that will go a long way in establishing your claim.
There is no such thing as people invented fire gradually...either you did one day or you did not...it is like saying, she got pregnant gradually over 5 years...
valich said:
Do you believe in fairy tales? If so, then of course you are not more intelligent. But the fact is that most of us today don't, because today we are more intelligent.kmguru said:With a question mark, are you asking if they are, or making a statement? No, people are not more intelligent than they were 4000 years ago, otherwise, we would not be believing in fairy tales and that too divided between groups...
Everything transforms...the universe transformed from pure hydrogen to many elements, stars and planets. Does that mean, they all evolved...if you use that word, then that is fine. But then if you say the aeroplane evolved from motor cycle...some may say yes (because, man evolved from hydrogen...man made motor cycle...then the progression of technology created the aeroplane) or ...some may say...it was the intelligent design...
Take your pick...I think it is how you define the term under what environment....with what time and space integration.
If you do not get it...do not worry...it is one of those....a priori...or a posteroi issues...
kmguru said:
will_ebert said:
"Sciforum: the intellectual community" pole resuls:kmguru said: