Are We Still Evolving?

Posted in the Evolution Debate Forum

Comments

Showing posts 1 - 20 of79
< prev page
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Tampa, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Nov 29, 2012
 
The question comes up from time to time. A recent study published in Nature suggests we are - faster than ever:

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2012/11/rec...

“I started out with nothing”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Nov 30, 2012
 
Some of us are

“In God we trust”

Level 7

Since: Dec 12

The truth will set you free

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Mar 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

We are going to wait a thousand years and not change a bit.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Mar 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

Carchar king wrote:
We are going to wait a thousand years and not change a bit.
Actually you already have. If you are a normal human being like the rest of us then it means you were naturally born with around 125 to 175 mutations which are not shared by your parents.

Of course instead you could be a clone:

http://andrewparker.net/homer_clones_slide_sh...

“In God we trust”

Level 7

Since: Dec 12

The truth will set you free

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Mar 11, 2013
 

Judged:

1

I haven't evolved. I know I didn't.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Mar 11, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Carchar king wrote:
I haven't evolved. I know I didn't.
YOU didn't evolve.

Individuals do not evolve, POPULATIONS evolve.

Unless you are a clone of both of your parents -- which is impossible -- you are VERY SLIGHTLY different from each.

Assuming you have children, they are diffent from you and your spouse as well.

These 'differences' build up and are referred to as "Evolution".
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Mar 11, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Carchar king wrote:
I haven't evolved. I know I didn't.
But you are certainly the product of common ancestry. You just don't know it.

“In God we trust”

Level 7

Since: Dec 12

The truth will set you free

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Mar 16, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
YOU didn't evolve.
Individuals do not evolve, POPULATIONS evolve.
Unless you are a clone of both of your parents -- which is impossible -- you are VERY SLIGHTLY different from each.
Assuming you have children, they are diffent from you and your spouse as well.
These 'differences' build up and are referred to as "Evolution".
Nope. Let me tell you what evolution really is.

We people have lived on earth for 10,000 years. Through out those 10,000 we became smarter. We started building wagons for transport. We started building rural to Urban areas.

Life becomes more technological. Life changes not us.

“In God we trust”

Level 7

Since: Dec 12

The truth will set you free

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Mar 16, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
But you are certainly the product of common ancestry. You just don't know it.
you'll regret you're words.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Mar 16, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Carchar king wrote:
Nope. Let me tell you what evolution really is.

We people have lived on earth for 10,000 years. Through out those 10,000 we became smarter. We started building wagons for transport. We started building rural to Urban areas.

Life becomes more technological. Life changes not us.
Your last sentence is a contradiction. Life changes, period. And not just due to technology.

Besides, since we still have creationists it's quite obvious that we haven't always got smarter.
Carchar king wrote:
<quoted text>
you'll regret you're words.
Setting your poor English aside, why would I regret that?

“talk to the kitteh”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Mar 17, 2013
 
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually you already have. If you are a normal human being like the rest of us then it means you were naturally born with around 125 to 175 mutations which are not shared by your parents.
Of course instead you could be a clone:
http://andrewparker.net/homer_clones_slide_sh...
What would you say to somebody who claims a human fetus is less human that a grown pig? "It" being a combination of two peoples' genetic information seems to make it fully human as far as I can tell.

“talk to the kitteh”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Mar 17, 2013
 
Carchar king wrote:
<quoted text>
you'll regret you're words.
Do you believe in the bible?
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Mar 18, 2013
 
nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>What would you say to somebody who claims a human fetus is less human that a grown pig?
I'd tell 'em they messed up their DNA tests.
nanoanomaly wrote:
"It" being a combination of two peoples' genetic information seems to make it fully human as far as I can tell.
Fully human in origin, not fully human in development.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
Mar 18, 2013
 
Carchar king wrote:
<quoted text>
you'll regret you're words.
Uh-huh.

Sure.

<hand-wanking motion>
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
Mar 18, 2013
 
Carchar king wrote:
<quoted text>
you'll regret you're words.
Really relish that sweet Christian revenge fantasy where Jesus slowly and painfully tortures all the rest of us, endlessly, for all eternity -- this "loving" God of yours?(((shakes head))))

“talk to the kitteh”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
Mar 18, 2013
 
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
I'd tell 'em they messed up their DNA tests.
<quoted text>
Fully human in origin, not fully human in development.
So, if I was born premature without fully developed lungs you would call me "not fully human"? That's bullshyt and you know it. The DNA says that a human fetus is full on human at every stage of development. It will, at no time, have the capacity to develop into anything except what it is; human.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
Mar 18, 2013
 
nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>So, if I was born premature without fully developed lungs you would call me "not fully human"? That's bullshyt and you know it. The DNA says that a human fetus is full on human at every stage of development. It will, at no time, have the capacity to develop into anything except what it is; human.
I understand that. It depends on the context.

1 - It has the DNA of a human and is part of the normal human reproductive cycle.

2 - A fetus is not fully grown.

In context one it is "fully human". In context two it is not "fully human".

“talk to the kitteh”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#18
Mar 18, 2013
 
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
I understand that. It depends on the context.
1 - It has the DNA of a human and is part of the normal human reproductive cycle.
2 - A fetus is not fully grown.
In context one it is "fully human". In context two it is not "fully human".
At exactly what point in its development do you think it becomes "fully" human?
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#19
Mar 19, 2013
 

Judged:

1

nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>At exactly what point in its development do you think it becomes "fully" human?
Whenever we (arbitrarily) decide it is.

“Maccullochella macquariensis”

Since: May 08

Melbourne, Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20
Mar 19, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>At exactly what point in its development do you think it becomes "fully" human?
At an indeterminate point, somewhere between birth and about age 7*. However, this is too messy for any practical purpose, so it simpler to consider it to be human from birth.
.
.
.
.
.
.
* Of course this depends on what you mean by fully human. What I mean is by considering what it is that separates us from other animals and IMO that is a question of degree rather than kind, for there is nothing that we have that other animals don't also have, except some things are more developed in humans. To me the defining quality for "human-ness" is the ability to use language and to think rationally and abstractly far better than any other animal that we know of. This develops in humans some time after birth and there is no bright line that we can draw to say exactly when it occurs, thus by choosing birth as a demarcation point we can be sure that we include all those that have developed the quality that makes them fully human, by this definition.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 1 - 20 of79
< prev page
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

19 Users are viewing the Evolution Debate Forum right now

Search the Evolution Debate Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 13 min Biggie 111,611
It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 23 min DanFromSmithville 132,920
When Will Evolutionists Confess Their Atheistic... 23 min polymath257 1,180
Should evolution be taught in high school? (Feb '08) 2 hr MikeF 171,198
Ann Coulter: Idiot (Sep '11) 12 hr Discord 355
Science News (Sep '13) Jul 7 positronium 2,820
Plan your Relocation needs with Packers and Mov... Jul 7 shashi12 1
•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••