New Theory of Evolution: Apes devolve...
SkyHausmann

Madison, WI

#204 Feb 27, 2008
Ok Sporto,

Check out the last three years worth of mitochondrial DNA research, that does seem to indicate that while we did not evolve from apes, humans and chimps share a common ancestor.

Try Googling "mitochondrial eve".
supersport wrote:
I'm saying science has no idea which animal evolved from which -- or even if evolution happened at all. Science has been telling us for decades that the fossil evidence shows that humans evolved from apes -- now it's come out that the fossil record shows the opposite -- that apes evolved from humans.....the fossil evidence, according to this guys shows that human bones, or bones indistinguishable from humans, are found in certain layers of the earth that would indicate an age of over 20 million years. This fact lead the author to conclude that knucklewalkers must have evolved from humans or human-like creatures with our same body-style as ours.
He is forceful in his conclusion that there is no fossil evidence for ape-to-human evolution.
This is evidence that science has no clue.
personally I think it's all a complete farce.
SkyHausmann

Madison, WI

#205 Feb 27, 2008
Heh. That is pretty funny.

Cupla corrections:

1. I'm not really an evolutionist (the supposed antithesis of creationists). I am a person that believes in the power of the scientific method and approach to understanding the world I live in.

2. I dont believe in things. Belief is your area of expertise. I understand other people's SCIENTIFICALLY generated hypotheses and research in the context of previously generated hypotheses and research. All good science is reproducible, and therefore does not rely on belief.

3. I dont know if h. sapiens sapiens and chimps common ancestor was a knuckle walker. It may have been a tree dweller. Or, the beginning of the upright, bipedal hominid.
supersport wrote:
so are you evolutionists embarrased that you ever believed something so dumb that you came from kunckle-walkers?
Carmine Fragione

Edgewater, FL

#206 May 10, 2013
It makes the most sense, an explosion of complex creatures including the human being came in a cluster and hardened to be the human genome as the parent for all else. Then in time the aging of the Genome produced sexually transmitted diseases, radiation damage and retro viruses to degenerate the information of the parent genome, falling into the branches of the apes having the worst disaster and the humans being the best surviving of the original genome. Then instead of fusing telomeres to connect apes to humans, you start with the human genome and fragment or break chromosomes due to trisomy reinforced by inbreeding and devolve to the apes, with some recovery of compensations to avoid extinction. The Evolution model of Telomere fusion is simply telling a story in reverse of what is known medically to be able to actually happen in a declining worsening outcome of medical disasters and plateauing some recovery, just before reaching extinction events.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#207 May 10, 2013
Why do you hate kittens?
LowellGuy

United States

#208 May 11, 2013
Carmine Fragione wrote:
It makes the most sense, an explosion of complex creatures including the human being came in a cluster and hardened to be the human genome as the parent for all else. Then in time the aging of the Genome produced sexually transmitted diseases, radiation damage and retro viruses to degenerate the information of the parent genome, falling into the branches of the apes having the worst disaster and the humans being the best surviving of the original genome. Then instead of fusing telomeres to connect apes to humans, you start with the human genome and fragment or break chromosomes due to trisomy reinforced by inbreeding and devolve to the apes, with some recovery of compensations to avoid extinction. The Evolution model of Telomere fusion is simply telling a story in reverse of what is known medically to be able to actually happen in a declining worsening outcome of medical disasters and plateauing some recovery, just before reaching extinction events.
Oh, I get it. Magic. That makes sense.
Level 6

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#209 May 11, 2013
supersport wrote:
I would just like to call everyone's attention to a new book out called "The Upright Ape" by Aaron Filler.
Thank you. http://www.amazon.com/Upright-Ape-New-Origin-...

All I can say is that this new thesis is consistent with the axioms of devolution theory.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#210 May 12, 2013
Shubee wrote:
All I can say is that this new thesis is consistent with the axioms of devolution theory.
A theory which of course, does not exist.
Level 6

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#211 May 12, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
A theory which of course, does not exist.
Let me check. OK, there it is: everythingimportant.org/devolution

“Help religion science wander”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

into the night.

#212 May 12, 2013
Shubee wrote:
<quoted text>Let me check. OK, there it is: everythingimportant.org/devolution
No, it doesn't exist. There is nothing there that isn't the product of a wannabe moron with no grasp of science. Substituting your refutted bunk into the theory of evolution does not constitute an acceptable theory and make you a theorist.

You are just screaming for attention. Even the negative attention you get here.
Level 6

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#213 May 12, 2013
Mathematically speaking, if Darwin's four postulates (D4) constitute a scientific theory, then so is the more specialized theory of those four postulates adjoined to the common descent (CD) postulate. And by definition, if the common descent postulate and its converse is unprovable from the first four postulates, then CD is logically independent of D4. Consequently, D4 adjoined to the negation of CD is also a scientific theory. More specifically, D4 adjoined to the devolution hypothesis must also be classified as a scientific theory.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#214 May 13, 2013
Shubee wrote:
<quoted text>Let me check. OK, there it is
Oh wait - no it isn't. That's just the fantasy ramblings of a deluded fundie. Common ancestry has not been negated since no fundie has been able to provide a valid falsification or better explanation for the evidence. You have Goddidit with magic. Which has zero evidence. Cue shoob whining.
HTS

Englewood, CO

#215 May 14, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh wait - no it isn't. That's just the fantasy ramblings of a deluded fundie. Common ancestry has not been negated since no fundie has been able to provide a valid falsification or better explanation for the evidence. You have Goddidit with magic. Which has zero evidence. Cue shoob whining.
Dude, evolutiondidit with pixie dust isn't science. Your "common ancestry" dogma is not science, but a philosophical interpretation of the facts founded on atheism.
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#216 May 14, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>Dude, evolutiondidit with pixie dust isn't science. Your "common ancestry" dogma is not science, but a philosophical interpretation of the facts founded on atheism.
Prove your a__hole God EXISTS.

Then science won't NEED to follow methodological naturalism as part of the scientific method.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#217 May 14, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>Dude, evolutiondidit with pixie dust isn't science. Your "common ancestry" dogma is not science, but a philosophical interpretation of the facts founded on atheism.
O hai, HTS. You have never been able to address evolution's actual mechanisms hence your childish caricatures. You've never been able to demonstrate common ancestry is based upon atheism while we on the other hand have demonstrated otherwise. You've never been able to falsify evolution in any scientific manner while we have on the other hand demonstrated how it passes the scientific method. You have never been able to demonstrate a better alternative explanation that does a better job of explaining the evidence, due to the fact your only alternative involves invisible magic wizardry. You have also embraced the quite absurd dogma that is YECism, which as well as assuming the Flinstones is a science documentary also requires the complete and total denial of every single scientific field ever. Your knowledge of science does not even rise above absolute zero, there are many YEC's who have demonstrated far more scientific knowledge and understanding than you have and they're as dumb as a box of rocks. Even Markie. Plus your ability to debate or even actually discuss any subject ranks FAR below your scientific knowledge. In short you are an impotent liar for Jesus capable only of shooting blanks in the vain hope it makes your Jewish sky daddy happy.

Still waiting for you to deal with stuff from over a year ago, so you've certainly made Cowboy your idol. Not the most flattering of compliments I know.
Level 6

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#218 May 14, 2013
HTS wrote:
Dude, evolutiondidit with pixie dust isn't science. Your "common ancestry" dogma is not science, but a philosophical interpretation of the facts founded on atheism.
Finally, someone that understands the difference between just-so-stories and real science.

“Help religion science wander”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

into the night.

#219 May 14, 2013
Shubee wrote:
Mathematically speaking, if Darwin's four postulates (D4) constitute a scientific theory, then so is the more specialized theory of those four postulates adjoined to the common descent (CD) postulate. And by definition, if the common descent postulate and its converse is unprovable from the first four postulates, then CD is logically independent of D4. Consequently, D4 adjoined to the negation of CD is also a scientific theory. More specifically, D4 adjoined to the devolution hypothesis must also be classified as a scientific theory.
So that is how you sound intelligent while still being a flaming moron. You just put some garbage together and use the words postulate or axiom.

I think if you stopped eating so much cheese you wouldn't be postulate and the burning in your axiom would go away.

Tagging a refuted concept onto the theory of evolution hasn't happened so it doesn't consitute a theory. The only place I have seen this ludicrous idea attempted was on this morons website. And the only thing this idiot was really doing was screaming for attention because he wants to seem relevant.

“Help religion science wander”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

into the night.

#220 May 14, 2013
Shubee wrote:
<quoted text>Finally, someone that understands the difference between just-so-stories and real science.
Just relax a bit before you get out the viagra and poppers. This moron knows even less about science than you do. If that is possible.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#221 May 15, 2013
Shubee wrote:
<quoted text>Finally, someone that understands the difference between just-so-stories and real science.
Apparently not.
Level 6

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#222 May 16, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
You just put some garbage together and use the words postulate or axiom.
I never expected anyone here to understand the highest and purest form of science ever conceptualized by the human mind.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#223 May 16, 2013
Shubee wrote:
<quoted text> I never expected anyone here to understand the highest and purest form of science ever conceptualized by the human mind.
Which is why you don't.(shrug)

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form 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.

Evolution Debate Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 2 min Chimney1 43,321
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 1 hr replaytime 205,206
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 3 hr Eagle 12 18,592
can anyone explain to me why humans are the onl... (Mar '08) 9 hr ChristineM 917
Questions about first life 12 hr Upright Scientist 18
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 12 hr Dogen 151,492
Carbon and isotopic dating are a lie Sat One way or another 16
More from around the web