primates with moral sence, empathy and fairness

Originally posted by galveston75
Uh, why aren't they human as we are now? Haven't they been around as long as our supposed ancestors? Why haven't they "evolved" as we have according to evolution? Did they just miss the boat or pick a wrong branch in the tree of evolution?

Because their ancestors did not move into the open grasslands of the African rift valley when our ancestors did, oh clueless one.

Originally posted by kevcvs57
Because their ancestors did not move into the open grasslands of the African rift valley when our ancestors did, oh clueless one.

And why didn't they? Does anyone have proof of what happened on this planet during those millions of years we supposedly evolved from the apes we supposedly came from and why one ancestor went one way and why one went the other? Why would a grass land produce a human as we know it and living around a forested area not?
It would seem to me if humans evolved in an open area with preditors much faster and stronger then we are, we would have evolved into something much different then we are today. Something as equally as fast if nothing else then the animals that would be hunting us. Just a thought.....
And the proof I'd like would not include words such as " we think, probably, under the right conditions, we assume, we hypothesize, it could have, etc, etc.
If it is a fact then one should be able to show a clueless one like myself that simple and clear fact. Dont you think?

Originally posted by galveston75
And why didn't they? Does anyone have proof of what happened on this planet during those millions of years we supposedly evolved from the apes we supposedly came from and why one ancestor went one way and why one went the other? Why would a grass land produce a human as we know it and living around a forested area not?
It would seem to me if humans ev should be able to show a clueless one like myself that simple and clear fact. Dont you think?

Well the theory goes that with a reduction in forests and the spread of grasslands our ancestors were either pushed, or jumped down from the trees in order to exploit this new habitat. Apparently if you are moving through grasslands it is better to stand up and thereby enable yourself to see over the grass and spot potential predators. This had the added advantage of freeing up the forelimbs which would eventually become really good at holding and manipulating things like tools and bibles n stuff.

You see the monkey shape is really good for swinging about in trees, but if you take it into open space it just rolls around and spills its tea.

Originally posted by galveston75
Uh, why aren't they human as we are now?

if they were human, we wouldn't be having this discussion. what makes you think they should have become human?

Haven't they been around as long as our supposed ancestors? Why haven't they "evolved" as we have according to evolution?

they did evolve. they evolved into what we see today. there is no rule in evolution that says everything has to evolve into human beings.

Did they just miss the boat or pick a wrong branch in the tree of evolution?

bacteria have been around longer than all of us, yet they are still around. by your line of questioning, it is clear you understand very little of evolution theory. pick up a good book or two on the subject and your questions will be answered in detail.

by a good book or two, i mean actual books on evolution by actual evolutionary scientists. volumes of useless pseudoscience collected by creationists in order to keep hapless christians ignorant by misrepresenting evolution theory do not count.

Originally posted by galveston75
And the proof I'd like would not include words such as " we think, probably, under the right conditions, we assume, we hypothesize, it could have, etc, etc.
If it is a fact then one should be able to show a clueless one like myself that simple and clear fact. Dont you think?

well you're out of luck. we have the fossil evidence and evidence of changing habitat. with these, we can track environmental changes and migration habits over a period of time and build theories of what happened based on interpretations of collected evidence.

if you can come up with better explanations for the fossil and environmental record, you're welcome to have a go at it, you might even get yourself published!

Originally posted by VoidSpirit
well you're out of luck. we have the fossil evidence and evidence of changing habitat. with these, we can track environmental changes and migration habits over a period of time and build theories of what happened based on interpretations of collected evidence.

if you can come up with better explanations for the fossil and environmental record, you're welcome to have a go at it, you might even get yourself published!

Well I've been shown the supposed evidence by many here and other places many times and as much as you all want it to be evidence, it ain't.
For all the ions of time these changes supposedly took place it would have taken hundreds of thousands if not into the hundreds of millions or more of individual beings to be in this evolving line to survive. So that would mean millions if not billions of fossils would have been deposited on the surface of the earth of these beings as they died over this time.
So where are they? Why is there only a handfull if that many of these link fossils from our supposed ancestors?

Originally posted by VoidSpirit
well you're out of luck. we have the fossil evidence and evidence of changing habitat. with these, we can track environmental changes and migration habits over a period of time and build theories of what happened based on interpretations of collected evidence.

if you can come up with better explanations for the fossil and environmental record, you're welcome to have a go at it, you might even get yourself published!

Oh so the theory issue still pops up it's ugly head. Sorry, I'm looking for facts. When you guys find them, I'll be glad to take a look.....

Originally posted by VoidSpirit
if they were human, we wouldn't be having this discussion. what makes you think they should have become human?

Haven't they been around as long as our supposed ancestors? Why haven't they "evolved" as we have according to evolution?

they did evolve. they evolved into what we see today. there is no rule in evolution that says every ...[text shortened]... order to keep hapless christians ignorant by misrepresenting evolution theory do not count.

"Bacteria".... intersting little life form. But why haven't they changed? Is there no need to? If they have done just fine and haven't evolved into something bigger and better, why haven't they improved?
Why did our supposed first life form that you say we came from not just stay as they were?

Originally posted by galveston75
"Bacteria".... intersting little life form. But why haven't they changed?

who told you they haven't?

Is there no need to?

evolution does not happen based on need.

If they have done just fine and haven't evolved into something bigger and better, why haven't they improved?

who told you bigger is better? who told you they haven't improved?

Why did our supposed first life form that you say we came from not just stay as they were?

why should they stay as they are?

Originally posted by VoidSpirit
who told you they haven't?

Is there no need to?

evolution does not happen based on need.

If they have done just fine and haven't evolved into something bigger and better, why haven't they improved?

who told you bigger is better? who told you they haven't improved?

Why did our supposed first lif ...[text shortened]... ou say we came from not just stay as they were?

why should they stay as they are?

Well they still seem to be bacteria today. Why have they not changed in the millions of years they've existed or if they have it has been very little?
And if evolution does not happen based on need, what is it based on, want or maybe curiosity?
And maybe bigger isn't always better but it sure helps if one is running for his life all the time.
So, the issue of somewhere in time some apelike ancestors of ours wondered out into the grasslands as was mentioned here, first why would they do that if they were more succesfull in a tree area where their longer arms and such worked just fine. All their food was there and obvious protection from being attacked?
It would seem they would have just stayed there to begin with and if they did wonder out to this new area they would have suffered greatly and no doubt would not have survived as it would have taken quite a long time to evolve into the appropriate being that would be able to survive out there. The needed changes would have to almost happen instantly to survive, don't you think?
I mean today we don't see the chimps moving out to the grasslands to check it out and see if they could survive out in the open and if they did I doubt many would make it back alive. So how could they have done it at anytime in the past and why would they even try?

Originally posted by galveston75
Well they still seem to be bacteria today. Why have they not changed in the millions of years they've existed or if they have it has been very little?
And if evolution does not happen based on need, what is it based on, want or maybe curiosity?
And maybe bigger isn't always better but it sure helps if one is running for his life all the time.
So, t ...[text shortened]... ck alive. So how could they have done it at anytime in the past and why would they even try?

Like I told you on the other thread, Richard Dawkins says these bacteria, apes, chimpanzees, and the like are not our ancestors, but just our cousins. Praise the Lord!

YouTube

Originally posted by galveston75
Well they still seem to be bacteria today. Why have they not changed in the millions of years they've existed or if they have it has been very little?
And if evolution does not happen based on need, what is it based on, want or maybe curiosity?
And maybe bigger isn't always better but it sure helps if one is running for his life all the time.
ed ju ck alive. So how could they have done it at anytime in the past and why would they even try?

Why do you fundamentalist constantly pretend not to understand the answers to the questions you ask in this infantile manner. I am sure you must know by now that we did not evolve from any monkey in existence today, but that we share a common ancestor with them.

Our ancestors did not all jump down from the trees and into the grasslands one sunday afternoon. Their habitat was shrinking due to climatic change which allowed grass to dominate huge areas of land that was once dense forest. As this new niche appeared they probably exploited it on an ad hoc basis, over time any mutations that gave an advantage to individuals in terms of exploiting this niche would generally speaking be passed on and permeate through successive generations.

I would imagine most larger life forms evolve and adapt along this niche exploitation model as it would seem to offer the time required for gradual adaptation. If there is evidence for relatively quick bursts of evolutionary change it seems to be tied up with dramatic environmental changes leading to mass extinctions and a much more severe survival of the best adapted scenario.

Bacteria on the other hand owe their success to their ability to adapt over much shorter periods due to their tendency to reproduce themselves really quickly and due to their much simpler structure, and mutate as required over much shorter periods. As for why do they not evolve; they do, they diversify at quite dramatic rates.

As Voidspirit suggested you would be better served reading the views of people who actually Know what they are talking about, but we both know you would not admit to understanding them even if you could, being obtuse to the point of sounding infantile is to good a strategy for pretending black is white, and creationism is true.

Btw life forms of any kind do not decide to actively evolve they simply follow a few basic rules of survival and Sh#####g.

Originally posted by kevcvs57
Why do you fundamentalist constantly pretend not to understand the answers to the questions you ask in this infantile manner. I am sure you must know by now that we did not evolve from any monkey in existence today, but that we share a common ancestor with them.

Our ancestors did not all jump down from the trees and into the grasslands one sunday aftern ...[text shortened]... do not decide to actively evolve they simply follow a few basic rules of survival and Sh#####g.

You said, "due to their much simpler design" I can't believe it. We are finally making progress. "Bacteria were DESIGNED." Now we are beginning to agree. Now, if we can come to an an agreement as to WHO is the designer, that would be wonderful. HalleluYah !!! Praise the Lord!

Originally posted by RJHinds
You said, "[b]due to their much simpler design" I can't believe it. We are finally making progress. "Bacteria were DESIGNED." Now we are beginning to agree. Now, if we can come to an an agreement as to WHO is the designer, that would be wonderful. HalleluYah !!! Praise the Lord![/b]

How very droll, well done.

Fixed it.

Originally posted by kevcvs57
How very droll, well done.

Fixed it.

You take it back? Then, I guess we don't agree? That darn Satan!