Evolution of Man (page 2)

whyamihere

Well I am not going to say I come from Monkey's even if it is true....Shut Up Kls!(flash forward to what she might say)

Brooke

drwtsn32

How long would it take for the earthers and the mars-ers to become unable to breed with each other?

I have wondered the exact same thing! It'd probably take thousands of years...and maybe require complete isolation. If several people from Earth moved to Mars each year (and vice versa), I imagine that would help prevent speciation.

Gollum

It's also possible that the article you came across was referring to the idea that it looks like we are about to reach the point where we can understand, control and alter our genetic structure at will. If this becomes commonplace, then human genetic evolution starts to look like a non-factor. That is, as long as we possess and use this ability. Richard Dawkins recently made some comments about this lately in some interviews, so perhaps that's what you saw.

Qcmbr

There is no evidence for the evolution of man that I can see - no transitional men. What evidence is there that Lucy or any of the other little people were proto humans? I see as much fossil evidence for human evolution as I see for coelencath evolution, bee evoltuion, fern evolution, alligator evolution, spider evolution. There are several isolatated cases of potential footprints adjacent to dino footprints but then that can't be right can it - man around at the same time as dinos perish the thought.

Give me your transitional species (and prove it), give me reasons why fossils suddenly appear in an explosion of different types and then don't change throughout the fossil record until they disappear (do they ever reappear millions of years later?). Homo Sapiens are surrounded by chimps, apes and other bipedal creatures but they aren't each others ancestors.

Aztec

There is no evidence for the evolution of man that I can see - no transitional men.

Try http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/

There are several isolatated cases of potential footprints adjacent to dino footprints but then that can't be right can it - man around at the same time as dinos perish the thought.

That's been proven a hoax. Perhaps you didn't get the memo.

I'm not going to go into a long point by point discussion with you on evolution. Partially because I think it's best for people to do their own research and partially because I can't. I understand most of the basic concepts of evolution but not the minutae. I'm still studying it myself. One of the most simple examples of modern evolution, observable in our time, is insects abilities to become resistent to pesticides in a matter of years. Or viruses abilty to do the same with antibiotics. Fascinating stuff eh?

Bav, did you realize you joined up here almost one year ago? You've come a long way. Congrats!

AlanF

Qcmbr said:

: There is no evidence for the evolution of man that I can see - no transitional men.

I think it's more like that there's no evidence you will accept. But then, flat-earthers refuse to accept the evidence for a spherical earth.

I don't think you can clearly define "transitional man". If you think you can, then state clearly what you think its characteristics would be. Also discuss what sort of characteristics it would need to be truly "transitional".

There's plenty of evidence for "transitional men" in the usual meaning of the term. There have existed a number of clearly different species of humans and humanoids over 4-5 million years. The earliest examples have characteristics of earlier apes and of modern humans -- small brains, large teeth and canine teeth, big chewing muscles; upright walking, pelvis more like modern humans' than apes, feet more like modern humans' than apes; fingers intermediate in structure between apes and humans. We have various species like homo africanus, homo australopithecus (Lucy), homo habilis, homo ergaster, homo erectus, homo giganticus, archaic homo sapiens, modern homo sapiens, homo neanderthalensis -- all forming a big tree of species that gets more toward the apelike condition the further back in time you go. Recently there was found what was apparently a dwarf species of homo erectus on an Indonesian island that died out only about 14,000 years ago. More species are found every few years.

What more do you want? A videotaped confession? "I evolved from ape to human."

: What evidence is there that Lucy or any of the other little people were proto humans?

An evolution of structure over time. An appearing and dying out of various species that get more and more like modern humans over time.

If that's not evolution, what's your explanation for the fossil evidence.

: I see as much fossil evidence for human evolution as I see for coelencath evolution, bee evoltuion, fern evolution, alligator evolution, spider evolution.

Coelocanths, bees, ferns, alligators and spiders have changed little over long periods of time -- according to the fossil evidence. Humans and humanoids have changed drastically. What don't you see?

: There are several isolatated cases of potential footprints adjacent to dino footprints but then that can't be right can it - man around at the same time as dinos perish the thought.

Ah, the Paluxy River manprints. LOL! Aren't you aware that even most young-earth creationists admit that that was a combination of hoax and too-hopeful misinterpretation? They gave up on that nearly 15 years ago.

: Give me your transitional species (and prove it),

First state what kind of proof you'd accept. Don't ask for a videotape. Then we'll talk about supplying it.

: give me reasons why fossils suddenly appear in an explosion of different types and then don't change throughout the fossil record until they disappear

This is an active area of research by evolutionary biologists, and the answer is not yet in. However, the notion of punctuated equilibrium has much going for it. What this means is that small, isolated populations evolve apart from the parent species, and then some geological or environmental shift takes place that allows the new population to spill out over the entire former range. Since fossilization is an extremely rare event, the chances of finding a specimen of a rapidly evolving population is remote, but the chances of finding a specimen of the new and much more populous species that has rapidly expanded in size is much better. So the apparent explosions are really just artifacts of the extremely small sample size we have. For example, the so-called Cambrian explosion actually took place over about a 20 million year time period. During that long period of time, many new species appeared.

Conversely, if "God did it", then why does God suddenly kill off massive numbers of species during great extinction events? In the great Permian extinction of some 230 million years ago, 90% of the earth's species died off. In the great Cretaceous extiinction of 65 million years ago, about 70% of the species died off, including the dinosaurs.

: (do they ever reappear millions of years later?).

No.

: Homo Sapiens are surrounded by chimps, apes and other bipedal creatures but they aren't each others ancestors.

Who says? No one knows for sure what the specific ancestral relationships were. So you can't make such a blanket statement -- as if you know.

AlanF

Midget-Sasquatch

Q,

AlanF gave you a thorough list of discovered fossils.

Just contrasting Australopithecus Afarensis to humans and other apes will definitely show it to be a decent transitional form. I also suggest reading up on and trying to find photos of Homo Habilis and Homo Erectus and comparing them with archaic humans. A nice trend in increasing cranial capacity and other skull changes can be seen. If you can find one, take a look at a close up picture of the skull of Turkana Boy (a young H. Erectus). The skull is a nice blend of human and simian.

There are even some skulls found that are debated as to whether they are H. Erectus or H Heidelbergensis and are good candidates for transitional forms between those two. Some examples of these that I know of are Tautavel Man and Petralona (some even classify this one as neanderthal).

zen nudist

lets not leave out how sexual selections pressures have been greatly eased by the invention of beer and other spirits (^_^)

AlmostAtheist

Q,

I saw a church sign the other day that said, "If we evolved from chimps, why are there still chimps?!?"

The problem with that line of reasoning is it assumes that there is one "best" form for a being to take, forever. It is making the assumption that evolution says humans are "better" than chimps, and therefore the chimps should be gone. Truth is, humans aren't better or even "more evolved", they are evolved differently. The chimp is best for living in his environment, the human is best for living in his.

I was amazed when I realized that this exact same pressure drives other things. For instance, if 100 years ago you built a mousetrap that catches but doesn't kill the mouse, no one would have bought it. People liked to kill mice. So even if you built it, you couldn't sell it. Such a device would not survive, economically speaking. However, the environment in which mouse traps survive has changed. Some consumers today will only buy no-kill traps. So today your trap will survive. But it won't compete directly with the old-fashioned killing devices, since they have a different environment, a different target market. They both will continue to exist. What if the market changes again, and now nobody wants to kill mice? The old fashioned one will die out entirely.

That's what I like about evolution, it is so natural. Just like water flowing downhill, heat rising, and economy. There's no magic, no trigger, no "design". It just happens because that's what it does.

In my opinion. And in my opinion, it's a beautiful, awesome thing.

Dave

AlmostAtheist

On the subject of "what would an ID curriculum look like" the answer is apparently "not much". Here's a debate of sorts between ID and evolution folks. The ID'ers don't vary from the simple "life is too complex to have come about without design" argument. That's it, there's just no more to it than that.

http://www.actionbioscience.org/evolution/nhmag.html

Evolution of Man

Share this