Science/Environment Explaining evolution and natural selection.

[Total Power]

I'm guessing you missed the gist of my post, but having re-read it, I can see my point wasn't framed so well.

Given Neanderthal man, Homo Erectus & Homo Sapiens are distinct species; much as Orangutans, Gorillas & Spider Monkeys are!...Then how can one species mate with the other to produce a 3rd species?

I am not sure i understand your point. Neanderthals were not a different specie, they are our cousins. Humans carry upto 20% of Neanderthal DNA. Homo Erectus didnt mate with a different specie to produce H.S if thats what your argument is. Humans in the present day are still evolving, in a million years from now, we will look different.

You also seem to be claiming here, that a bigger brain & higher intelligence doesn't guarantee survival success, on the one hand....While claiming that humans somehow superseded Neanderthals & Homo Erectus BECAUSE of our superior intelligence.

95% of all species ever to have walked on earth are extinct. Does it mean those who survived are more intelligent than those extinct? this is not the case, there are thousands of evidences of more intelligent species becoming extinct thanlesser intelligent species. Hominids were smarter than present day humans are extinct.

Now, even assuming we did 'evolve' from these 2 entirely different species....If we came from them, then where did our extra intelligence come from?

We did not, homo erectus EVOLVED into H.S They didnt mate with different species.

You can see my confusion surely?....More than this....Given their relatively high intelligence, you'd of thought at least a small pocket of Neanderthals or Homo Erectus would still be extant somewhere....After all, the world has only just become fully explored quite recently.

Where are all these other 'species' of Homonids?....After all, there are plenty of different monkey species?

I have addressed t his in the earlier posts, our DNA carries Neanderthal DNA. Which means they definitely have mated with the humans as we know. Crows are way smarter than pigeons but there are more pigeons than crows, intelligence is not the only factor in deciding survival, thats the key point

 

[Procrastinator35]

I am not sure i understand your point. Neanderthals were not a different specie, they are our cousins. Humans carry upto 20% of Neanderthal DNA. Homo Erectus didnt mate with a different specie to produce H.S if thats what your argument is. Humans in the present day are still evolving, in a million years from now, we will look different.

95% of all species ever to have walked on earth are extinct. Does it mean those who survived are more intelligent than those extinct? this is not the case, there are thousands of evidences of more intelligent species becoming extinct thanlesser intelligent species. Hominids were smarter than present day humans are extinct.


We did not, homo erectus EVOLVED into H.S They didnt mate with different species.


I have addressed t his in the earlier posts, our DNA carries Neanderthal DNA. Which means they definitely have mated with the humans as we know.

20% won't get the job done, so far as fertile off-spring is concerned.

Erectus 'evolved' into Sapien?.....You do realize that explains absolutely nothing at all?....Do you somehow imagine the word 'evolve' contains magical properties?....That word, in Evolutionary theory, contains the exact same 'logos' & teleology that inheres in the concept of God in the Christian mind-set.

It's time all you Natural Selection proponents woke up to that fact:

 

[bad setanta]

in a million years from now, we will look different.

I reckon we'll all look like the Cantina band from Star Wars

 

[bad setanta]

And even then P35 still won't admit to being a Christian.

 

[Total Power]

20% won't get the job done, so far as fertile off-spring is concerned.

I am talking about modern day humans. And they are a sub-species of humans with DNA similar to 99.5% of present day humans. Who knows how much the early H.S had as a percentage of the DNA? many human races do not have Neanderthal DNA, like caucasians have upto 15% of neanderthal dna but sub-saharan africans dont have any.

Erectus 'evolved' into Sapien?.....You do realize that explains absolutely nothing at all?....Do you somehow imagine the word 'evolve' contains magical properties?....That word, in Evolutionary theory, contains the exact same 'logos' & teleology that inheres in the concept of God in the Christian mind-set.

why the **** not? we can see divergence happening due to "human activities". Environmental and habitats can easily give rise to divergence. We do not know what the factor is, but it happens. How is that magical? are you telling ,there are no evidence of divergence happening due to geographical/human interference in todays world that we can measure and see? are you telling me we are no longer evolving? are you telling me we have never seen a new specie rise without having to resort to fossil records? are you telling me all this is similar to a christian god who performed miracles? If you do that then its not even worth debating, cause you are desperate trying to disprove something which is proven. Natural selection has gaps but not those you mentioned. Find out what are the potential falsification of the ToE and disprove then. Nobel will be waiting for you.

Btw just out of interest, what do you believe in, if not evolution? believing in magic/creation is possible but not evolution which is rock solid.

It's time all you Natural Selection proponents woke up to that fact:

wake up to what? your claim humans were unique has been debunked, many other species which are extinct showed human like traits. Every single research article out there points to that. Ofcourse there are many things we dont understand as well, but evolution is still rock solid

 

[Chief]

LOL....Careful mate, Chief will be all over you.

Yes - I did just run out of viagra and he seems to have access.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Total Power]

20% won't get the job done, so far as fertile off-spring is concerned.

I will address this again. This is a strawman. Some of them can. Surely you've heard of a mule? It i s the offspring of a male donkey and female horse - two different species. In order for different species to be able to breed, they must be closely related - usually within the same genus, and at least within the same family. Donkey's and horses both belong to the family Equidae and genus Equus. Neanderthals and humans could easily interbreed.

Groundbreaking analysis of the Neanderthal genome (nuclear DNA and genes) published in 2010 supports the less extreme 'Out of Africa' model. Results show that modern humans and Neanderthals did interbreed, although on a very limited scale. Researchers compared the genomes of five modern humans with the Neanderthal, discovering that Europeans and Asians share about 1-4% of their DNA with Neanderthals and Africans none. This suggests that modern humans bred with Neanderthals after moderns left Africa but before they spread to Asia and Europe. The most likely location is the Levant, where both species co-existed for thousands of years at various times between 50-90,000 years ago. Interestingly, the data doesn't support wide-scale interbreeding between the species in Europe, where it would have been most likely given their close proximity. Researchers are now questioning why interbreeding occurred on such a low scale, given that it was biologically possible. The answer may lie in cultural differences.

Another probable example of interbreeding between modern humans and other human species was also published in 2010. DNA from a tooth and finger bone excavated from Denisova cave in Russia, showed these remains belonged to a genetically distinct group of humans distantly related to Neanderthals and even more distantly related to Homo sapiens. The study also revealed that these 'Denisovans' interbred with the ancestors of modern Melanesians and Aboriginal Australians as the DNA of both groups today contains 4% to 6% Denisovan DNA (it has not been found in other Eurasian groups sampled). This may be due to rare encounters between modern humans and Denisovans as moderns migrated through South-East Asia and on to Melanesia. What species the Denisovans belonged to is unknown, but it is suggested they may be Homo heidelbergensis, whose remains have been found in the correct timespans and locations but whose DNA has yet to be extracted (and may never be due to the age of the remains).

http://australianmuseum.net.au/when-and-where-did-our-species-originate


The proof is right out there mate, about time you accept it

 

[Procrastinator35]

And even then P35 still won't admit to being a Christian.

LOL....Let it go Setanta.

Can't you see I'm critiquing Evolutionary theory, on the same grounds as that whole 'perfectibility of man'' nonsense that inheres in Christianity?

Things 'evolving' into new, improved & better things; Emanates from that exact same generic brand of thinking.

Why do you think Creationists & Evolutionists are so antagonistic towards each other?....It's a battle-ground over the ownership of the same ideological narrative.

The concept of Evolve, no more explains what there is, than providence does....Natural Selection over God's will....It's one gigantic croc.

 

[Procrastinator35]

I reckon we'll all look like the Cantina band from Star Wars

Okay....You can have Pons-head & I'll opt for Wall-nut head....Rub my brow-line & see what happens....But don't rub me the wrong-way.

 

[bad setanta]

Why do you think Creationists & Evolutionists are so antagonistic towards each other?....It's a battle-ground over the ownership of the same ideological narrative.

Because people want to be able to believe stupid things on faith, nothing mysterious about it.

 

[Procrastinator35]

Because people want to be able to believe stupid things on faith, nothing mysterious about it.

But it's funny how the term 'evolve' now magically explains everything.

 

[Total Power]

But it's funny how the term 'evolve' now magically explains everything.

It doesnt , but somehow "magic"(aka creationism)explains everything. But we are getting there and its the best we got, unless you are coming up with someone new. Dont you find it funny that when darwin wrote this book he made some predictions about his gaps and how it will be filled, everything we have discovered since that seems to confirm what he predicted all along. Hang in there grasshopper, your god is dying, day by day

 

[Total Power]

The concept of Evolve, no more explains what there is, than providence does....Natural Selection over God's will....It's one gigantic croc.

So if you dont believe in natural selection state your case, so far i havent seen a single argument from you that hasnt been debunked. I also showed you 2 different species can interbreed under certain conditions, if you are going to ignore my points and go off on a tangent then why are you in this thread? why cant homo erectus breed with a specie under the same genus and produce a fertile specie?

 

[Total Power]

20% won't get the job done, so far as fertile off-spring is concerned.

Offsprings dont have to fertile initially, but that doesnt stop them from sexual reproduction. Many many examples of parthenogenesis are present in nature (in invertibrates and plants). Amazon molly fish for example is a variety of fish where there are no males, but that doesnt stop them from sexual reproduction. I find it funny why you keep sticking to the same point that i have addressed before?

 

[M Malice]

you have done a brilliant job the last few pages explaining the process to P35 Total Power , if he can't grasp the concept now i think you may be wasting your breath. i admire your perseverance and patience, and your belief in your faith Procrastinator35 even though i think it lacks evidence.

great respectful banter the last few pages and enjoyable reading.

 

[Procrastinator35]

It doesnt , but somehow "magic"(aka creationism)explains everything. But we are getting there and its the best we got, unless you are coming up with someone new. Dont you find it funny that when darwin wrote this book he made some predictions about his gaps and how it will be filled, everything we have discovered since that seems to confirm what he predicted all along. Hang in there grasshopper, your god is dying, day by day

But you see, this is my point.....At least Creationism is honest enough not to deny a 'magical' component.

Now, so far as I'm aware, your magical evolution machine seems to work like this: You toss in a homo Erectus or 3, into a tumble-dryer, set it on warp 2 setting for say, 5 million years....And bam, Bob's your uncle, Homo Sapien pops out.

So if you don't believe in natural selection state your case, so far i haven't seen a single argument from you that hasn't been debunked. I also showed you 2 different species can interbreed under certain conditions, if you are going to ignore my points and go off on a tangent then why are you in this thread? why cant homo erectus breed with a specie under the same genus and produce a fertile specie?

Read the thread topic young padawan....I have raised quite a number of concerns here over evolutionary theory, which you have been floundering around, to say the least.... In the interests of intellectual rigour, at least admit you haven't got a clue, for once in your life. And, I'd venture to suggest, neither has anyone else on this board.

You have not shown how 2 distinct species can give rise to a fertile, completely new species (which is a complete fantasy); & your arbitrary homo erectus/Neanderthal inter-coupling example, won't cut the mustard either.

Your attempts to turn the focus back upon creationism is a betrayal of that fact; and reeks of intellectual dishonesty.

 

[CM86]

But you see, this is my point.....At least Creationism is honest enough not to deny a 'magical' component.

Now, so far as I'm aware, your magical evolution machine seems to work like this: You toss in a homo Erectus or 3, into a tumble-dryer, set it on warp 2 setting for say, 5 million years....And bam, Bob's your uncle, Homo Sapien pops out.



Read the thread topic young padawan....I have raised quite a number of concerns here over evolutionary theory, which you have been floundering around, to say the least.... In the interests of intellectual rigour, at least admit you haven't got a clue, for once in your life. And, I'd venture to suggest, neither has anyone else on this board.

You have not shown how 2 distinct species can give rise to a fertile, completely new species (which is a complete fantasy); & your arbitrary homo erectus/Neanderthal inter-coupling example, won't cut the mustard either.

Your attempts to turn the focus back upon creationism is a betrayal of that fact; and reeks of intellectual dishonesty.

Thread has been going really well up to this post.

But you seem to do this every time you feel out of your depth.

"Now, so far as I'm aware, your magical evolution machine seems to work like this: You toss in a homo Erectus or 3, into a tumble-dryer, set it on warp 2 setting for say, 5 million years....And bam, Bob's your uncle, Homo Sapien pops out."​

That quote from your post is what "reeks of intellectual dishonesty". And I know it's been explained to you several times in this thread. So there is absolutely no reason for you to try to phrase it that way, other than to try and make it easier to try and discredit.

 

[chelseacarlton]

you have done a brilliant job the last few pages explaining the process to P35 Total Power , if he can't grasp the concept now i think you may be wasting your breath. i admire your perseverance and patience, and your belief in your faith Procrastinator35 even though i think it lacks evidence.

great respectful banter the last few pages and enjoyable reading.

Agreed
Love it.
Two of my faves on this site

 

[Pie eyed]

Stooping to parody is no substitute for an argument.

It's also symbolic of a confession, that you've got nothing boys.

Nihilism dressed up as higher learning....Pie Eyed to a tee.

You have provide nothing even remotely like an argument since you first joined the discussion, in fact the argument was over years ago.
You simply post rote dogma, irrational memes, childish questions, irrelevant philosophical meanderings and the odd attempt to drag others into your vacuous pit.

I'm not sure anyone has to have anything but "Nothing" when in a discussion about something with no substance.

 

[Total Power]

But you see, this is my point.....At least Creationism is honest enough not to deny a 'magical' component.

Now, so far as I'm aware, your magical evolution machine seems to work like this: You toss in a homo Erectus or 3, into a tumble-dryer, set it on warp 2 setting for say, 5 million years....And bam, Bob's your uncle, Homo Sapien pops out.

Are you ****ing kidding me mate? you dont go in the tumble dryer and come out as a homo sapien. Your understanding of evolution is messed up. Sexual habits, environment/geography, survival instincts played a huge part in that, this is proven beyond anything from genetics, fossils and geography that changes occur cause of that. The reason why Homo Neanderthalis had bigger eyes and bigger bodies was that was necessarily for survival then.But that also meant more food and more hunting and more social organisation. By all research it points to the fact that they were bad at that.Homo Sapiens didnt have that, cause that was a distinct disadvantage at that time. That appearance may have caused H.N to be extinct.Divergence is occurring in flies, mozzies,, fruit bats as we speak (we can observe that cause of their smaller lifespan), its impossible to observe the process in humans or animals cause they live way longer (not just a few days or hours like those mentioned above). The process takes hundreds of years to complete (even for those with a lifespan of 2 hours).

Here wasps "going into the tumble-dryer" and coming out as new species as you mentioned.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/scientists-observe-wasps-evolving-into-new-species-1446229404

Here mozzies turning into new species cause of human intervention

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-could-be-just-as-bad-as-causing-extinctions/

Sigh.

Read the thread topic young padawan....I have raised quite a number of concerns here over evolutionary theory, which you have been floundering around, to say the least.... In the interests of intellectual rigour, at least admit you haven't got a clue, for once in your life. And, I'd venture to suggest, neither has anyone else on this board.

You have not shown how 2 distinct species can give rise to a fertile, completely new species (which is a complete fantasy); & your arbitrary homo erectus/Neanderthal inter-coupling example, won't cut the mustard either.

Your attempts to turn the focus back upon creationism is a betrayal of that fact; and reeks of intellectual dishonesty.

How many times do i need to give the example of mule above? you CAN interbreed if you are under the same genus. H.N and H.S are under the same genus (tiger and lion, horse and donkey, wolves and dogs, they. they can interbreed and produce fertile offspring. . Look up on any resources online and tell me if i am wrong, every single biologist out there agree, i will be happy to address your concerns if you make a valid point but you are not making a valid point that hasnt been refuted. I am telling you what biologists out there "agree upon". To you thats not having a "clue" cause you desperately wants to invoke "magic" in that. Maybe your creationism can explain why so many species are at a disadvantage? Stop reading your discovery institute and ICR websites. The only good thing to come out from this is you are exposed as an evolution denier like N37, take a ticket and stand in the line

 

[Total Power]

Thread has been going really well up to this post.

But you seem to do this every time you feel out of your depth.

"Now, so far as I'm aware, your magical evolution machine seems to work like this: You toss in a homo Erectus or 3, into a tumble-dryer, set it on warp 2 setting for say, 5 million years....And bam, Bob's your uncle, Homo Sapien pops out."​

That quote from your post is what "reeks of intellectual dishonesty". And I know it's been explained to you several times in this thread. So there is absolutely no reason for you to try to phrase it that way, other than to try and make it easier to try and discredit.

Yep evolution is going into the tumble dryer and come out as new species FMD. Hey p35 maybe you can explain why evolution put so many species at a disadvantage then?

 

[Total Power]

You have not shown how 2 distinct species can give rise to a fertile, completely new species (which is a complete fantasy); & your arbitrary homo erectus/Neanderthal inter-coupling example, won't cut the mustard either.

Your attempts to turn the focus back upon creationism is a betrayal of that fact; and reeks of intellectual dishonesty.

I request you to read this, it will be apparent who is intellectually dishonest here. If you are under the same "genus" you can interbreed and produce distinctly different fertile offsprings.

http://www.rafonda.com/interbreeding_between_species.html

Consider the example of wolves, coyotes and dogs: three distinct species that can interbreed. In fact, all species of the genus Canis can mate and produce fertile offspring (Wayne et al., 1997, re: A. P. Gray, Mammalian Hybrids).

Stop being dishonest atleast to yourself.

 

[Procrastinator35]

I request you to read this, it will be apparent who is intellectually dishonest here. If you are under the same "genus" you can interbreed and produce distinctly different fertile offsprings.

http://www.rafonda.com/interbreeding_between_species.html

Stop being dishonest atleast to yourself.

Same as sheep & Goats....Shared ancestry & all have 78 chromosomes and are Canine hybrids....So nothing new.

That's the same as arguing the Great Dane & the Chihuahua are 2 distinct species....Their not, merely different breeds.

 

[Total Power]

Same as sheep & Goats....Shared ancestry & all have 78 chromosomes and are Canine hybrids....So nothing new.

That's the same as arguing the Great Dane & the Chihuahua are 2 distinct species....Their not, merely different breeds.

You asked for different species, i gave you examples of that, here from wiki

"Wolves (canis lupus), coyotes (canis latrans), and domestic dogs (canis familiaris) are closely-related but different species"






That is what i am telling you, you can interbreed if you are under the same "genus" like Neanderthals and humans.

Next you will say lions and tigers are same species as well, a liger is a fully fertile hybrid offspring.

 

[Total Power]

The liger is a hybrid cross between a male lion (Panthera leo) and a female tiger(Panthera tigris). The liger has parents in the same genus but of different species.