New Theory of Evolution: Apes devolve...
Carmine Fragione

Edgewater, FL

#224 Sep 18, 2013
It is rational to think that the earlier parent species would tend to have less and less number of overall chromosomes and more DNA genetic sequences in those fewer but longer chromosome strips. As the species descend and are impaired by sexually transmitted diseases, radiation damages and retro viruses the number of chromosomes suffer X fragmentations , trisomy episodes and tend to lose DNA sequences while breaking longer chromosomes into pairs of shorter broken ones healed with additional telomeres.
So the apes must have fallen away from a higher species, as the human and the human may have fallen away from a common ancestor even a greater creature than the modern humans. Devolution seems to follow design erosion predictions but vertical evolution has never been seen, in any event.
kaddleman

West Mifflin, PA

#225 Sep 19, 2013
youtube.com/watch... …………… Disordinance africans
are monkeys

Level 7

Since: Sep 07

Los Angeles, CA

#226 Sep 20, 2013
Carmine Fragione wrote:
Devolution seems to follow design erosion predictions but vertical evolution has never been seen, in any event.
With the sole exception of every living thing on the planet.
LMT

Akron, OH

#227 Sep 21, 2013
supersport wrote:
I would just like to call everyone's attention to a new book out called "The Upright Ape" by Aaron Filler. I just received it in the mail a couple days ago and have not had a chance to read every page, but I've been able to read enough to get the gist his new theory as to where and what humans came from.
You evolutionists know how you've been telling everyone for all these years how we humans came from tree-swinging, knuckle-walking chimpanzee-type apes? You can throw that nonsense out the window. According to this guy, it's the other way around. See, according to the fossil evidence, bones that are either human, or indistinguishable from human, have been unearthed from places that no such bones should be unearthed. There are many such examples in the book, but I'll quote from the preface:
"In part, this book details what I have discovered since the day in 1981 when David Pilbeam placed in my hands the problem of explaining a seemingly inexplicable 21-million-year-old fossil. This bone had the totally unique features found in humans, but it was from a creature that lived 15 million years too soon. There should not have been anything that looked like this until the human-chimp split 6 million years ago. I believe this conundrum can be explained, but Darwinian Evolutionary Theory as it now stands cannot provide everything that is required to explain it." Pg. 9
So, in other words, human bones were found in the same strata as other supposedly 21 million year old creatures. Any normal person would take from this that maybe -- just maybe -- that "strata" was not layed down slowly, over a course of millions of years, but maybe in one catastrophic event -- say, oh I don't know -- like A FLOOD, or something weird like that.
But no. Instead of assuming catastrophic geology, this guy just transforms the theory to make it fit...and in the meantime dumps out 50 years of paleontology and anthropology in the waste basket.
And this guy doesn't mince words. Here are his conclusions:
"It is a widely held position among anthropologists who study Australopithecus and Homo that upright bipedalism must have arisen from a quadrupedal common ancestor with the chimpanzee. However, there is no definitive fossil evidence at all for this position. All the evidence, which is reviewed in detail in the following chapter, actually appears to point the other way when it is fully and fairly considered. Certainly, some theoretical models and historical views exist that predate our fossil discoveries and thus support a quadrupedal ancestor for the so-called hominine lineage of human ancestors......However, the evidence form the fossil record and the evidence from our understanding of lineage relationships has failed to support these positions in any definitive way. The time has come fro the specialists involved to sagely put aside four decades of hypotheses based solely on the quadrupedal ancestor."
(next paragraph)...."there is clearly absolutely no basis for insisting that a primarily upright bipedal last common ancestor could not have been present a virtually every branch point that leads away from our own hominiform lineage. The fact is that a quadrupedal ancestor for the hominines remains to be proven."
(next paragraph) "There is just no way to deny the mounting evidence from anatomy, genetics, embryology, and paleontology. Almost certainly, the ancestor shared by the quadrupedal apes and the bipedal humans was itself an upright biped." pg. 222
to be continued...
Science is not changed by a single non-peer-reviewed book from a creationist-friendly publisher. If this author has the guts to put his findings and conclusions up for peer review, he should go for it. If he were correct (highly unlikely) he could be awarded the Nobel prize. But the trend among creationists is to just sneak into the party, drop a turd in the punchbowl, and leave.
beers

Plano, IL

#228 Sep 22, 2013
LMT wrote:
<quoted text>Science is not changed by a single non-peer-reviewed book from a creationist-friendly publisher. If this author has the guts to put his findings and conclusions up for peer review, he should go for it. If he were correct (highly unlikely) he could be awarded the Nobel prize. But the trend among creationists is to just sneak into the party, drop a turd in the punchbowl, and leave.
Yeah because they are very open minded. Oh wait

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Evolution is true.....

#229 Oct 18, 2013
I have a new theory of evolution.

Creationists evolved from Chimpanzee's and Atheists evolved from pre-humans

Level 9

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#230 Oct 20, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
I have a new theory of evolution.
Creationists evolved from Chimpanzee's and Atheists evolved from pre-humans
But what about the fleas?

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Evolution is true.....

#231 Oct 21, 2013
_Susan_ wrote:
<quoted text>
But what about the fleas?
They evolved from dogs.:-)

Level 9

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#232 Oct 26, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
They evolved from dogs.:-)
I thought it was from cats!

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#233 Oct 26, 2013
_Susan_ wrote:
<quoted text>
I thought it was from cats!
let's see...(picking up my ukelele)*my... cat... has... fleas..*

nope, just doesn't work....

Level 9

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#234 Oct 26, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>let's see...(picking up my ukelele)*my... cat... has... fleas..*
nope, just doesn't work....
lol
Travis

Grafton, NH

#235 Dec 6, 2017
Katydid wrote:
<quoted text>

If this were the case then chimps, gorillas and orangutans would have 23 pairs of chromosomes and humans would have 24.

That is not the case though. Humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes; the chimp has 24 (gorillas and orangutans also have 24 pairs like the chimp). The difference in the number appears to be the consequence of two ancestral chromosomes fusing together to form chromosome number 2 in humans.

To review, chromosomes are made up of two parts called arms. They are joined by something called a centromere, which is the pinched or narrow area between the arms. The short arm of the chromosome is called p (petite or small); the long arm is called q because q follows p. The p arm is always on top and the arms are what contain the genes.

At the end of the Human Genome Project they were able to pinpoint the exact location where the fusion occurred. Special sequences occur at the tips of all primate chromosomes and those sequences do not occur elsewhere. Now where we have chromosome number 2, primates have one extra chromosome (for clarity’s sake we will call them chromosome 2a and 2b). They have proof that 2a and 2b fused together to make chromosome 2 in humans because that special primate sequence (remember, it occurs at the tips of the primate chromosomes) is found along the long arm (q) of chromosome number 2 in humans (which is right in the middle of chromosome number 2, remember the short arm p, is on top, comes first, then it is joined by the q arm at the centromere).

So, this special sequence, which is only found on the tips of primate chromosomes, is found right in the middle of our fused second chromosome!!!!

Again, irrefutable proof that we both shared a common ancestor in the distant past, and that apes did not "Devolve from humans".
Correct me if I’m wrong, but aren’t the implications of the argument that we did in fact evolve from the apes in some way, but that since we did it must be that the fossil dating method of layers is wrong?
MrWong

North Augusta, SC

#236 Dec 7, 2017
Travis wrote:
<quoted text>

Correct me if I’m wrong, but aren’t the implications of the argument that we did in fact evolve from the apes in some way, but that since we did it must be that the fossil dating method of layers is wrong?
You're wrong.
swatchinganimals

Audubon, NJ

#237 Tuesday Jun 12
i think that humans will evolve into gods and then animals will evolve into humanoid animals.. and the humans will watch over the animals as the animals form advanced civilizations..

for example.. swat cats.
swatchinganimals

Audubon, NJ

#238 Tuesday Jun 12
or lazlo..

rocks modern life.. way ahead of the time because ti's the after this time period.. because we will leave the planets and become gods.. as animals become humanoid..
swatchinganimals

Audubon, NJ

#239 Tuesday Jun 12
i think apes that we see turn into a different type of human that has not yet been formed..

and that once all the other apes were evolved.. the leftover apes are not apes

of the same races...

so that all the apes all the true apes that humans evolve from actually died off because

they already evolve..

so that those other apes we see today.. don't evolve into humans..

they are preparation for other evolutions..

perhaps as we die out.. those apes will become the new humans and have
other features we didn't have..
swatchinganimals

Audubon, NJ

#240 Tuesday Jun 12
i don't feel like the apes are the direct on the evolution pattern with humans
i think all the humans apes evolved already..

those are side evolution creatures...

they are evolving into a different kind of human we haven't seen yet..
and won't get to see because this type of human we are might get killed off by aliens..
swatchinganimals

Audubon, NJ

#241 Tuesday Jun 12
i feel like the apes we see and put in our zoos are actually more evolved than us and when they finish evolving will be an advanced form of human..
swatchinganimals

Audubon, NJ

#242 Tuesday Jun 12
when we were apes we were dumber than those apes..
chondira

Audubon, NJ

#243 Tuesday Jun 12
it would be cool if you could track your ancestry and find the BACTERIA. your related to or the mitochondria or something..

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) 3 min Dogen 95,420
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 22 min 15th Dalai Lama 170,121
Are Asians/whites more evolved? (Sep '07) 54 min 15th Dalai Lama 1,880
Beauty is the Lord's Golden Section 4 hr 15th Dalai Lama 27
Souls have weight .. 21 grams Experiment 7 hr Simon 20
Can the universe be God's brain? (Jun '07) 22 hr Dogen 116
SEX did not EVOLVE (Nov '17) 22 hr Dogen 268