Ancestry24 Careers24 Entertainment Fin24 Food24 Health24 Kalahari.net Mobile News24 Property24 Weather24 Wheels24 Women24 Sport24
Answerit

Open Question

Who here doesn't believe in Evolution?

Who thinks that the whole idea is stupid? Who believes that evolution is where we come from apes, and then wonder why apes don't evolve into humans? Recently I had to explain evolution to someone, and I did it in the following way, which I hope makes it much clearer to you guys that still have the wrong idea of what it really is. --- Imagine you have a pack of dogs, same species. The pack of dogs split up, with one pack moving to the mountains, while the other moves to marsh lands. Over time, the packs start adapting to their new environments, with the marsh dogs growing wider paws, stockier build, perhaps even with some webbing between the toes, while the mountain dogs grow longer legs and become lighter in build to suit the rocky terrain they live in. As time goes by, they adapt more and more, to such an extent that when you later on take 1 of each pack and compare them, they differ from each other immensely. (different species)

So what that boils down to is that the one species did NOT give birth to the other. On contrary - the one pack of dogs had no influence over the other pack at all, since they lived in different regions. They both adapted to their conditions separately, to better survive. Humans and apes are like these two packs of dogs. We started from the same point, but we adapted differently due to the conditions we lived in. Obviously, there's a few more steps between us and the original "pack", but this is a simplified explanation, which I hope you can understand to realize that evolution really isn't that far fetched and weird at all. So we don't come from monkeys, and monkeys did not 'stop evolving' and they will NOT become humans either.

Makes sense?

@Fredster - as cr1t explained - the further down the line you go, the more branches you have, the bigger the difference would be when comparing it with the starting point. You say it's all in the DNA, however I believe you're unaware of the fact that they HAVE found the evidence in our DNA to prove that we share a common ancestor. They CAN prove that most life, at some point, shared a common ancestor with each other. The evidence is there, and we have found it.

@greatgodpan - you misread the entire question. I simplified the explanation, but obviously there's not just one generation linking us and apes together. There's many, many generations. If you take a little bit of blue, and add yellow to it...it's not going to change color immediately. It's going to stay blue, and then after a couple of rounds, might start looking blue-green. Only after you added a lot of yellow, possibly as much as there was blue to begin with, will you end up with green.

@ Alicia - How did you come to this conclusion ? " In the absence of an evolutionary explanation, divine special creation remains as the only scientifically viable explanation for the origin of life and of all biological designs"? How can you justify something due not being able to justify something else? If your argument is that evolution can't be justified, and therefore it's not true, then the same can be said about your God, since he too can't be justified, and proven to be real. So can I then argue that the absence of proof of your God, is proof that evolution is real? You will argue that I can't, so why are you?

@ Moannet - Tipiese antwoord van iemand wat niks beter het om by te voeg nie.

@ Conveyancer - please use the following links as answers to your question. Evidence of a common ancestor to all life through Universal biochemical organisation and molecular variance patterns, DNA sequencing, Endogenous retroviruses, Proteins, Pseudogenes and other mechanisms - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_common_descent#DNA_sequencing ">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_common_descent#DNA_sequencing and The Three domain system - how it all began - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_common_descent#DNA_sequencing ">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_common_descent#DNA_sequencing I would also like to add that cr1t did make a lot of sense. Even though a fox comes from the dog-like family, they can not mate, just like a lion can't mate with a cat even though they are both felines. So the fact that they are the same, yet different enough to not be able to mate clearly indicates that evolution is pretty viable in the sense that they had the same 'grandparents' yet now they can't mate. So when thinking clearly, you realize that if they started the same, but are different now, evolution MUST have happened
17 mths ago - -7 min left to answer.

Answers -

You make perfect sense.

17 mths ago

If you explain it this way, it does make sense.

17 mths ago

Yep, it is said that humans evolved very quickly after they started to cook food, because it changed the protein structure and developed the brain and the body. The oldest signs of man cooking are in S.Africa at Swartkrans. http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhis/PlainTextHistories.asp?historyid=ab10

17 mths ago

Isn't God wonderful how He intelligently designs His Creation? Amazing. It's all already in the Bible you know. The hand of God is visible in everything. How can you not look at a puppies and children playing in a green, flowery field at sunset and not see God? You call it evolution, I call it evoJesuslution.

17 mths ago

I have learnt of lately that you can provide facts and what people do with these facts is their rights. We never going to get every one to agree about evolution. I think you have explained this very well.

17 mths ago

You always make sense.

17 mths ago

Kaksak- I think I should invite you for a braai bru! We think so alike.

17 mths ago

What you said does make sense. BUT...you have it wrong...see, they are still the same species (dogs). They did not evolve into another species. The DNA still is the same. Altough they look different, they are still dogs. Same as we get today. You first said that that dogs are from the same species, then when you get to the humans and the apes, you say we started on the same way..No we did not.. look at DNA, they are not the same and you can never change it, nor can you inbreed them. That is why cats and dogs cannot breed and so forth. I suggest you go back to the drawing board..the Bible and just accept that God made us all differently.

17 mths ago

@Fredster69 the further two branches of species move from each other the less likely they are able to create hybrids. That is why you can still breed a donkey with a horse. But you can't cross an Giraffe with another antelope species. I would say breeding a chiwawa and a husky is very unlikely. So are they are still dogs but different species.

17 mths ago

Fredster you are one hell of a joke. you cant prove god so how could you possibly tell others they're wrong? you need help.

17 mths ago

yes evolution within the species is proven fact......dog breeding,horse breeding,cattle,etc etc prove this....as do cerain hybrid plant species.....if the mountain and marsh dogs have sexual intercourse they would in all likelyhood be capable of naturally producing offspring similar to the original dog.....they are the same species and NOT diffrent species as your bracketed comment states ..........it is however not possible that if you or i had sex with a gorrilla that we would produce offspring at all...............so evolution from one species to another seems unfeasible to me............so the theory that one celled omeabas evolved into apes who evolved into humans would appear to be nonsense..........not one experiment of trying to breed diffrent species of mammals together to create a hybrid specuies has ever succeeded.

17 mths ago

Yes, it makes sense, Poopbag. The apes and modern man branched off millennia ago in any case. We are not even from Neanderthals, apparently, they were different from modern man and died out as a species. The bible punchers just get offended thinking that their Granny slept with a chimp. It's just ignorance.

17 mths ago

Thanks Darwin....as with the dogs, change didn't take over night right? No one ever said that Gods 7 days, equalled our 7 days as in 24 hours, as such God's 1 day could have been 100 years for all we know, as such evolution is quite possible and quite religiously plausible......watch this get shot down like the helderburg..

17 mths ago

Lol @ BFH......

17 mths ago

nope i dont believe we evolved from apes. not one little bit.

17 mths ago

You make perfect sense. Everything you say makes Sense, but I know God made it all possible. He is the Creator of all what we are, were and what is to come. The advocates of evolution are unable to adduce fossil intermediate forms which show an actual historical process of evolution of new kinds of organisms. They have failed to devise scientific theories which really explain evolution, and they cannot demonstrate the evolution of anything new by any known genetic mechanism or process. Furthermore, there is no evidence which proves that the alleged evolution of all life really occurred. Throughout the history of the world no new complex design has been observed to originate except from an intelligent mind. In the absence of an evolutionary explanation, divine special creation remains as the only scientifically viable explanation for the origin of life and of all biological designs. Conclusion You and I are not being unscientific in the least because we believe that in the beginning God created the kinds of plants and animals, each to reproduce after its own kind. As Christian citizens we should openly avow our faith in the biblical record of creation. And we should work to stop the dogmatic teaching of evolution and the persecution of Christians in the tax-funded public schools and universities. Amen. I got 16 TD the other day. Bet you can do better than that. I want to add this: It is very clear that the Bible is not joking when it says “In the beginning GOD created the heavens and the earth”. It is so much more rational to believe that the Almighty Creator made the earth and the life in it than to believe that a random explosion made everything perfectly. Especially when there is so much evidence for creation and even evolutionist’s experiments and tests prove this. I think one of the main reasons so many people believe in evolution is because they are ignorant and mislead, but if they would take the time to closely examine the evidence and facts, they would quickly see that Creation is the only logical explanation for the creation of the awesome universe we live in. Although many evolutionist scientists claim that their experiments have supported and backed up evolution, they have really only helped to disprove it. For example, Stanley Miller did an experiment in 1953 to see if he could produce organic compounds out of gases, heat, and energy. The experiment had a chamber containing the gases assumed to be present in the young eart

17 mths ago

Eish.

17 mths ago

Yes, you are right. Though the theory as a whole has not been proven, just like creationism, it is very likely. There are species that are in the process of subdividing right now. Adaptation is the most important keyword. Mice (Mus musculus domesticus) that went to Marion island with ships have already evolved to have shorter tails (to mimimize heat loss) and darker fur (to absorb sunlight) in order to survive. Our own species are much taller than only a few centuries ago. Only the shortest of the present population will fit onto beds as recent as the 19th century. This may be due to better nutrition and also due to the natural selection trait of women selecting taller men to procreate with.

17 mths ago

It actually does not matter to anyone else what someone else believes, nor does it affect the truth.

17 mths ago

Kak storie.

17 mths ago

Alf, stop embarrassing yourself. You are clearly a certain female on here's multiple profile. I think you've made that pretty clear.

17 mths ago

I have to agree with Fredster. Your "explanation" fails to address how the DNA changed into different species. The only thing your explanation explains is a change in certain physical attributes of a specific species. CR1t also loses the argument a bit. How do you get to compare the Giraffe with Antelope from this perspective? They are two separately created species with no common ancestor. So, obviously they will not be able to procreate. Just like birds cannot procreate with fish. No common ancestor. No shared DNA - separate species, separate DNA, all created not evolved from the same source.

17 mths ago

@Conveyancer The giraffe is one of only two living species of the family Giraffidae, along with the okapi. The family was once much more extensive, with over 10 fossil genera described. An early ancestor of the giraffids was a 3 m (10 ft) tall antelope-like mammal that roamed Europe and Asia some 30–50 million years ago (mya) during the Eocene epoch.[9] You could not cross a okapi and a giraffe to be more exact than what I was, but the point is still correct.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giraffe#Taxonomy_and_evolution

17 mths ago

ek dink jys van kak gemaak.....

17 mths ago

There is evolution of consciousness meaning the soul passes into different species and they differ in consciousness untill it reaches the human body where consciousness is most developed because a human can enquire about God and the meaning of life. So there is evolution of the soul and not of the body. Adaptation is there and that means that a species may change its body to some degree in order to get food in a new way for example but one species will never actually become another species, like a monkey becoming a man for example. Its a flawed theory.

17 mths ago

Too much to read... Who cares, sure it's evolution, but what drives dna to change depending on the surroundings perceived by the senses? Just combine the two and we can all be happy.

17 mths ago

Answer more Questions in General - Sciences & Maths

Browse more Questions in General - Sciences & Maths

Vote for more Answers in General - Sciences & Maths