Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 63 (9072 total)
54 online now:
CosmicChimp, dwise1, jar, kjsimons, Tanypteryx (5 members, 49 visitors)
Newest Member: FossilDiscovery
Post Volume: Total: 893,169 Year: 4,281/6,534 Month: 495/900 Week: 19/182 Day: 7/12 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Common Ancestor?
Admin
Director
Posts: 12788
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.1


Message 241 of 341 (693536)
03-17-2013 11:55 AM


Topic Reminder
This topic is about the last common ancestor between man and ape. Diversions onto other topics such as intelligent design should be taken to other threads, or propose a new one over at Proposed New Topics.

--Percy
EvC Forum Director

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 8486
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 242 of 341 (693537)
03-17-2013 12:05 PM
Reply to: Message 239 by Just being real
03-17-2013 10:42 AM


JBR writes:

You have your opinion and I have mine. I guess we'll leave it at that

Except that it's not my opinion. It's science's explanation supported by the evidence versus your opinion.

Edited by Admin, : Fix quote.


Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

This message is a reply to:
 Message 239 by Just being real, posted 03-17-2013 10:42 AM Just being real has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 243 by Just being real, posted 03-17-2013 1:15 PM Tangle has replied

  
Just being real
Member (Idle past 3170 days)
Posts: 369
Joined: 08-26-2010


Message 243 of 341 (693540)
03-17-2013 1:15 PM
Reply to: Message 242 by Tangle
03-17-2013 12:05 PM


RE--Except that it's not my opinion. It's science's explanation supported by the evidence versus your opinion.--

Regarding the last common ancestor premise and creation, don't you agree that what you personally believe about what creationists predict or don't predict is only your opininon? Your claim is that creation doesn't predict that the "last common ancestor" premise, could also be the result of a common creator. That is your opinion isn't it? I have been involved in the debate for almost nine years now and all the creationists I have ever spoken with and most of the creationist websites I have veiwed do explain the similarities this way.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 242 by Tangle, posted 03-17-2013 12:05 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 244 by Tangle, posted 03-17-2013 1:47 PM Just being real has replied
 Message 245 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-17-2013 1:57 PM Just being real has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 8486
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 2.5


(2)
Message 244 of 341 (693541)
03-17-2013 1:47 PM
Reply to: Message 243 by Just being real
03-17-2013 1:15 PM


JBR writes:


Regarding the last common ancestor premise and creation, don't you agree that what you personally believe about what creationists predict or don't predict is only your opininon? Your claim is that creation doesn't predict that the "last common ancestor" premise, could also be the result of a common creator. That is your opinion isn't it? I have been involved in the debate for almost nine years now and all the creationists I have ever spoken with and most of the creationist websites I have veiwed do explain the similarities this way.

Creationists do not explain anything, they simply assert that god made things the way they are. That is not an explanation, it's a belief - or if you prefer - an opinion.

Science offers an explanation supported by evidence.

Handily, as well as providing evidence for its own position, it also disproves the creationist position by also pointing out the problems with it - dates, bad design, nested hierarchy, lack of floods, lack of genetic bottlenecks caused by floods and so on.

It's game over I'm afraid - all that's left are those that are not interested in facts.


Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

This message is a reply to:
 Message 243 by Just being real, posted 03-17-2013 1:15 PM Just being real has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 247 by Just being real, posted 03-17-2013 3:05 PM Tangle has taken no action
 Message 259 by kofh2u, posted 03-18-2013 11:35 AM Tangle has taken no action

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 286 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 245 of 341 (693542)
03-17-2013 1:57 PM
Reply to: Message 243 by Just being real
03-17-2013 1:15 PM


Regarding the last common ancestor premise and creation, don't you agree that what you personally believe about what creationists predict or don't predict is only your opininon? Your claim is that creation doesn't predict that the "last common ancestor" premise, could also be the result of a common creator. That is your opinion isn't it? I have been involved in the debate for almost nine years now and all the creationists I have ever spoken with and most of the creationist websites I have veiwed do explain the similarities this way.

But creationists do not predict the pattern of similarities. They "explain" them, as you say, by saying goddidit that way (and even then that's using the term "explain" rather loosely) --- but there is nothing whatsoever in creationism that would predict them.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 243 by Just being real, posted 03-17-2013 1:15 PM Just being real has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 248 by Just being real, posted 03-17-2013 3:05 PM Dr Adequate has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 246 of 341 (693543)
03-17-2013 2:11 PM
Reply to: Message 240 by Just being real
03-17-2013 10:42 AM


NoNukes writes:

... Genesis claims some things about what God actually did, and those things are not consistent with what we see.

JBR writes:

By all means feel free to give me an example please.

You don't need me come up with examples, but the entire fossil record, including for example, the lack of rabbits or lizards in the pre-Cambrian period is entirely inconsistent with the idea that all animals except humans were created in a one day period.

However a time-sequenced appearance and disappearance of life forms is entirely what we would expect if animal life evolved from a common ancestor or ancestors.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison.

If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass


This message is a reply to:
 Message 240 by Just being real, posted 03-17-2013 10:42 AM Just being real has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 249 by Just being real, posted 03-17-2013 3:05 PM NoNukes has replied

  
Just being real
Member (Idle past 3170 days)
Posts: 369
Joined: 08-26-2010


Message 247 of 341 (693545)
03-17-2013 3:05 PM
Reply to: Message 244 by Tangle
03-17-2013 1:47 PM


RE--Science offers an explanation supported by evidence. --

Yes, supported by the same similarity "evidence" that creationists say supports a common creator.

RE--Handily, as well as providing evidence for its own position, it also disproves the creationist position by also pointing out the problems with it - dates, bad design, nested hierarchy, lack of floods, lack of genetic bottlenecks caused by floods and so on.--

And I have seen all the arguments on the reverse side of the spectrum. Neither really propell this debate forward, but rather leave it spinning its wheels in the mud throwing. So here is where we can move forward. --->Provide an example of evidence for common ancestory that doesn't rely at all on the similarity arguments. Period!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 244 by Tangle, posted 03-17-2013 1:47 PM Tangle has taken no action

  
Just being real
Member (Idle past 3170 days)
Posts: 369
Joined: 08-26-2010


Message 248 of 341 (693546)
03-17-2013 3:05 PM
Reply to: Message 245 by Dr Adequate
03-17-2013 1:57 PM


RE--But creationists do not predict the pattern of similarities. They "explain" them, as you say, by saying goddidit that way (and even then that's using the term "explain" rather loosely) --- but there is nothing whatsoever in creationism that would predict them.--

Again Doc. you are welcome to believe what you want. That's not what I see though. I see creationists saying as you said "goddidit" and then predicting you could support that claim by the fact that many organisms appear to have a common creator as opposed to a common ancestor. But in the end its only a different interpretation of the exact same evidence. What I think is needed here to propell common ancestory out of this stale tie, and up into first place, is evidence to support it that doesn't rely at all on a similarity argument.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 245 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-17-2013 1:57 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 252 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-17-2013 6:26 PM Just being real has taken no action

  
Just being real
Member (Idle past 3170 days)
Posts: 369
Joined: 08-26-2010


Message 249 of 341 (693547)
03-17-2013 3:05 PM
Reply to: Message 246 by NoNukes
03-17-2013 2:11 PM


RE--You don't need me come up with examples, but the entire fossil record, including for example, the lack of rabbits or lizards in the pre-Cambrian period is entirely inconsistent with the idea that all animals except humans were created in a one day period.--

Oh real-hhill-ly? When the fossils don't support it why can't creationists just claim "imperfection of the fossil record," like so many evolutionists love to do? Seems like a good a case of "whats good for the goose"... to me.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 246 by NoNukes, posted 03-17-2013 2:11 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 253 by NoNukes, posted 03-18-2013 12:48 AM Just being real has taken no action

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12788
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.1


Message 250 of 341 (693548)
03-17-2013 3:32 PM


Topic Reminder
Again, this topic is about the last common ancestor between man and ape. Diversions onto other topics such as intelligent design should be taken to other threads, or propose a new one over at Proposed New Topics.

--Percy
EvC Forum Director

Replies to this message:
 Message 254 by Just being real, posted 03-18-2013 3:07 AM Admin has replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 1341 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 251 of 341 (693550)
03-17-2013 4:59 PM


Chimpanzee-human last common ancestor
At the risk of being on topic, I offer the following from Wiki:

The chimpanzee-human last common ancestor (CHLCA, CLCA, or C/H LCA) is the last species that humans, bonobos and chimpanzees share as a common ancestor.

In human genetic studies, the CHLCA is useful as an anchor point for calculating single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) rates in human populations where chimpanzees are used as an outgroup.[citation needed] The CHLCA is frequently cited as an anchor for molecular time to most recent common ancestor (TMRCA) determination because the two species of the genus Pan, the bonobos and the chimpanzee, are the species most genetically similar to Homo sapiens.
Time estimates

The age of the CHLCA is an estimate. The fossil find of Ardipithecus kadabba, Sahelanthropus tchadensis, and Orrorin tugenensis are closest in age and expected morphology to the CHLCA and suggest the LCA (last common ancestor) is older than 7 million years. The earliest studies of apes suggested the CHLCA may have been as old as 25 million years; however, protein studies in the 1970s suggested the CHLCA was less than 8 million years in age. Genetic methods based on Orangutan/Human and Gibbon/Human LCA times were then used to estimate a Chimpanzee/Human LCA of 6 million years, and LCA times between 5 and 7 million years ago are currently used in the literature.

http://en.wikipedia.org/...panzee-human_last_common_ancestor


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein

How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein

It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers


Replies to this message:
 Message 255 by Just being real, posted 03-18-2013 3:12 AM Coyote has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 286 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 252 of 341 (693555)
03-17-2013 6:26 PM
Reply to: Message 248 by Just being real
03-17-2013 3:05 PM


Alas, it appears that if you want to go on being wrong about this subject, you will have to do so in another thread. Or you could apply five seconds' thought to the matters on which you discourse so glibly; whichever you find less fatiguing.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 248 by Just being real, posted 03-17-2013 3:05 PM Just being real has taken no action

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 253 of 341 (693563)
03-18-2013 12:48 AM
Reply to: Message 249 by Just being real
03-17-2013 3:05 PM


When the fossils don't support it why can't creationists just claim "imperfection of the fossil record," like so many evolutionists love to do? Seems like a good a case of "whats good for the goose"... to me.

Well you can surely try to make that case. The problem with doing that with regards to the pre-Cambrian is that the 'imperfection' is not just gaps in establishing some fossil evidence of common descent; essentially all of the higher order mordern life forms are missing from the pre-Cambrian strata. Yet there are enough lower order forms and primitive forms present to let us know life did exist at the time. In short there is both too much and too little there for the creationist.

But yeah, you can equivocate and pretend that the 'imperfect fossil record' you need to explain the missing life forms in the pre-Cambrian is the same thing that evolution proponents point to.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison.

If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass


This message is a reply to:
 Message 249 by Just being real, posted 03-17-2013 3:05 PM Just being real has taken no action

  
Just being real
Member (Idle past 3170 days)
Posts: 369
Joined: 08-26-2010


Message 254 of 341 (693565)
03-18-2013 3:07 AM
Reply to: Message 250 by Admin
03-17-2013 3:32 PM


Re: Topic Reminder
RE--Again, this topic is about the last common ancestor between man and ape. Diversions onto other topics such as intelligent design should be taken to other threads--

Are you implying that my discussions are not on topic? Because if you are I am not understanding why not considering the context of how this thread was framed.

The comments by Tram Law (the author) were:"If there is a common ancestor to both humans and apes, has it been found? If not, doesn't that call into question the existence of common ancestors?"

He seems to be calling into doubt the existence of a common ancestor to me, which is to the point I have been making here. I'm questioning the evidence presented for a common ancestor. The usual evidence presented is based on the similarity argument which creationists claim could merely be the result of a common creator. Therefore to truly propel common ancestry premises to the forefront we would need to see evidence that does...not...rely on similarity arguments.

So I'm basically asking the same question as Tram Law but with the additional need for that evidence to be supported by something other than similarities. I'm not seeing how this is deviating from topic at all?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 250 by Admin, posted 03-17-2013 3:32 PM Admin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 257 by Admin, posted 03-18-2013 9:24 AM Just being real has replied

  
Just being real
Member (Idle past 3170 days)
Posts: 369
Joined: 08-26-2010


Message 255 of 341 (693566)
03-18-2013 3:12 AM
Reply to: Message 251 by Coyote
03-17-2013 4:59 PM


Re: Chimpanzee-human last common ancestor
RE--because the two species of the genus Pan, the bonobos and the chimpanzee, are the species most genetically similar to Homo sapiens.--

This is a similarity argument. Creationists claim that this is merely a result of a common creator.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 251 by Coyote, posted 03-17-2013 4:59 PM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 256 by Tangle, posted 03-18-2013 4:02 AM Just being real has taken no action
 Message 258 by Coyote, posted 03-18-2013 11:05 AM Just being real has taken no action

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022