explaining common ancestry

what better way to describe the evolution of great apes other than a little trip through spidey's family tree, fuzzy bitch.

you know what i'm starting to wonder... have you tried it? cause i don't think anyone has.

---

“I asked for the vegetarian.""Ah, yes, the vegetarian, yes! There we go, Mr. Hitler. There we go... Like a bit of wine? Thank you very much...you Nazi shithead!"

he seems to be having a lot of trouble with chimps and humans.watch his head explode.
this is a tarsier. he's a primate.
two eyes. a nose with two nostrils. a mouth with different kinds of teeth including canines and incisors. ears on the sides of his head, not the top. opposable thumbs. a spine. elbows that bend in. knees that bend back. a tail bone (very scant tail though). hair. mammary glands. damn cute, too.
this is a ring-tailed lemur. ever watch zoobomafoo? he's a primate too.these are both primitive primates. they're most likely the type of critters larger primates developped from. how do we decide this? we look at similar characteristics and genes and decide that more similar things branched away from the common ancestor later than less similar things. ever see a phylogenetic tree? here's the one for primates This message has been edited by brennakimi, 12-14-2005 12:30 AMThis message has been edited by Admin, 12-14-2005 02:09 PM

---

“I asked for the vegetarian.""Ah, yes, the vegetarian, yes! There we go, Mr. Hitler. There we go... Like a bit of wine? Thank you very much...you Nazi shithead!"

no, all the previous generations are remarkably hairless, even balding.

---

אָרַח

this should be interesting.

unless carico just goes to another thread, repeats his claims along with the assertion that evos fail to deal with his issues ...as appears to be the case.but I can also guess what his response will be.

Do evolutionists truly not see the ludicrousness of claiming that one species can turn into another without mating and breeding with that species? Or do they already know that and are lying about it when they claim that apes can turn into humans on their own? I'd like to know. Thank you.

While you are right that Oliver was popularized as a "Humanzee", he was in fact a bonobo, not a chimp.While technically bonobos and chimps are both equally distant from us genetically, the B tendancies to walk on two legs and have sex at the drop of the hat make them much more human-like (or us more bonobo-like) if you ask me.

Tarsiers also have elongated middle fingers (so useful in traffic), and the females vocalize their sexual receptiveness.Clearly one of us.

---

Save lives! Click here!
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC!

Okay, this I gotta hear. Please explain how cats and dogs have more traits in common than, let's say humans and bonobos.I'll get you started.Cats and Dogs both have two eyes.
Humans and Bonobos both have two eyes.Oh, crap, I think I ran right off the rails at the start. You try.

Cats and dogs both have; 4 legs, 2 eyes, 2 ears, a nose, a mouth, whiskers, mammary glands, hair all over their bodies, cannot talk, form complex analyses, contemplate spirituality, or build bridges.The only things in common between apes and humans is that they both have 2 eyes, a nose, a mouth,2 ears, mammary glands and thumbs. Apes cannot walk on 2 legs for very long, think, talk, build bridges, etc. But the most important factor about apes and humans is that they cannot breed with each other. And that is what separates one species from another.So again, until you can answer my question above about whether or not evolutionists actually know that one species cannot turn into another species without breeding with that species, then conversing about cats and dogs will be a waste of time because it does not prove that one species can turn into another on its own with breeding with that species.This message has been edited by Carico, 12-22-2005 10:22 AM

that i did not know. see? they're closer to us than even i thought.

Answer: Evolutionists don't think what you claim--one species does not turn into another, and one animal does not turn into another.You're welcome.Comment: You seem to have an odd obsession with bestiality. You previously claimed to have studied evolution for "30 years." How is it you continue to make these ludicrous misstatements about what the theory of evolution claims? Are you that ignorant after 30 years of studious effort, or are you lying?Please answer.Consider a simpler version. Tell me how dog breeders developed St. Bernards without having St. Bernards for their non-St. Bernard dogs to breed with.Thank you.

---

Save lives! Click here!
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC!

You either clearly do not have a strong grasp of the theories involved, or you don't understand the word "contrary".

Then how did the ape species turn into human beings without mating with humans or changing on their own? There is no other way, my friend. And again, according to the Oxford Dictionary and Thesaurs American Edition, a species is; "A classification of living orgnaisms consisting of individuals with similar genes capable of exchanging genes and interbreeding." Therefore, apes and humans are not the same species because we cannot interbreed.So again, how did apes change into another species without breeding with that species or changing on their own? You have just proved the theory of evolution impossible because you are claiming that apes did not breed with humans nor did they change into humans on their own. So thank you for saying that apes did not turn into human beings. You have finally made a truthful statement.This message has been edited by Carico, 12-22-2005 10:33 AM