Chimps Stronger Than Humans?

Off Topic
61

[quote]PGJ wrote:
If you believe man evolved from something else, then where are we going?[/quote]

Wherever genetic market forces dictate. If market forces say we’re fine the way we are, we don’t change.

[quote]
Why aren’t there creatures somewhere in between monkey and man?[/quote]

Well there are bonobo chimpanzees. As for anything in between, we must have out-eaten, out-settled, and out-bred them.

Everything? I think humans in the developed world have stopped evolving because we have pretty much eliminated natural selection with medical technology.

If anything we are “evolving” into a genetically diseased and pathetic version of our former selves – which is why I support development of genetic engineering technology. Why pass on your nearsightedness to your children when you can give them 20/15 vision?

– ElbowStrike

62

[quote]Digital Chainsaw wrote:
PGJ wrote:
Grimnuruk wrote:
Digital Chainsaw wrote:
PGJ wrote:

Why did apes and monkeys never evolve?

If this is turning into an evolution discussion, why aren’t there any half-evolved cavemen today. I mean if we all started out as apes or monkeys, and we evolved to where we are today, surely there should be some species right in the middle.

Please tell me you are joking.

I don’t think he is.

I suspect this thread is going to “evolve” into another group ignorance display. I am constantly amazed at the number of people who can’t do a little reading and thinking with a clear critical mind to understand a few basic concepts that are uncontroversial to anyone with an understanding of them. It’s like the newbs who come on the site asking about “gaining weight” or something, without reading any of the articles first.

They did evolve. Evolution moves differently for different organisms in different environments. Some forms are static or nearly so for extremely long periods of time because they fit their environment so well that natural selection acts on them very little.

Their is no such thing as “half-evolved.” That suggests that there is an end “goal” of evolution. It is a survival response to environmental pressure. Evolution is simply change. one definition is change in gene frequency in a population through time. It is happening all the time. That’s why we need new vaccines and drugs to combat diseases, because the disease organisms are changing/being changed in response to their environment. Antibiotic resistance is becoming a problem due to an over saturation of the environment with antibiotic soaps and the like.

Cavemen? People just as modern as those of us on this forum lived in caves for 10’s of thousands of years. Our cultures have evolved and become more advanced through time to where we don’t have to do that anymore. Erase all but a few 10 thousands of people on the globe, all memory and evidence of our current technology and cultures from their minds and environment and people wouldn’t just be slapping up houses and driving hummers.

I’m not looking to get into a huge scientific/religious argument. I don’t agree with the THEORY of evolution. That doesn’t make me stupid. I see a lot of scientists making the evidence meet the theory, like your “well it doesn’t work for everything” argument. Evolutionists like to call people names. To me, evolution means changing from one thing into another (ie, monkey to man). Evolution is not lizards who learn to swim, or a bird that grows an unusually large beak. That is adaptation. Evolution would be a dog changing into lion.

If you believe man evolved from something else, then where are we going? Surely we are still evolving. Why aren’t there creatures somewhere in between monkey and man? Or do you believe everything has stopped evolving because we are so well adapted to this environment?

Wow.

The questions you pose show your complete and utter ignorance of this subject.

Please, take unearth’s advice.

[/quote]

Lighten up dude. You guys tell me to “open my mind” then criticize me for not believing exactly like you do. That’s very open minded of you. Science rewrites itself all the time. Isn’t it remotely possible that YOU are wrong?

I don’t believe in evolution. You guys are doing a great job of making the evidence fit your theory.

The fact that you don’t have an answer to my questions shows that you are not as smart as you think. When did evolution become fact? It is inconceivable that we are the only creature on the planet to have evolved. Every other creature on the planet is about on the same “evolutionary” scale, except humans (fish still swim, monkeys still swing from trees, dogs still walk on four legs, humans are building spaceships and performing brain surgery and writing poetry). Why is that? Why are humans so far advanced compared to all other creatures?

63

[quote]PGJ wrote:
You guys tell me to “open my mind” then criticize me for not believing exactly like you do. That’s very open minded of you.
[/quote]

I never told you to be open minded. I suggested you read up on a theory you seem to know little about.

Yes.

You know little to nothing about the theory, you have no intention of educating yourself on the subject, but you KNOW it’s not true.

You are indeed a very wise man!

I never claimed to be smart.

Experts in the field DO have answers to your question, but you’re too lazy to research the subject.

The theory of evolution does not make this claim. Of course you would know this if you knew anything about it. But you don’t and I’m guessing you probably never will.

64

[quote]PGJ wrote:

Lighten up dude. You guys tell me to “open my mind” then criticize me for not believing exactly like you do. That’s very open minded of you. Science rewrites itself all the time. Isn’t it remotely possible that YOU are wrong? [/quote]

Please show me the post where I said “open your mind”. You are addressing me right?

…?

I have plenty of answers, it’s just that your warped view of what you seem to think evolution is is so distorted, the questions are valueless, and quite frankly, it is much more time than I am willing to spend clapping it out for you.

[quote]When did evolution become fact? It is inconceivable that we are the only creature on the planet to have evolved. Every other creature on the planet is about on the same “evolutionary” scale, except humans (fish still swim, monkeys still swing from trees, dogs still walk on four legs, humans are building spaceships and performing brain surgery and writing poetry). Why is that? Why are humans so far advanced compared to all other creatures?

[/quote]

unearth addressed this nonsense more concisely than I could.

65

Do you really need more proof of evolution than the Galapagos islands.

I believe evolution is happening today, in front of all our eyes. The thing is, evolution is not fast enough to notice it. At least without severe changes in environment, and or many other possible areas.

Here is a bit of evolution for you: the age at which teenage girls enter puberty is dropping. I cannot find exact figures, but I recall something like 2-6 years earlier in the past 70 years (don’t quote me on that).

Do a search, tons of articles out there on it.

http://archives.cnn.com/2000/HEALTH/children/03/31/early.puberty.wmd/

http://www.etr.org/recapp/research/journal200209girls.htm

http://fact.on.ca/news/news0012/nt001224.htm

Here is another concept? Why do women have breasts? All other mammals lose breasts after they stop breast feeding. Human women do not. Ever see a bitch have pups? Her breast swell with milk, after the pups stop feeding, she loses those breasts (within reason).

Is it possible it is because when humans evolved into upright “monkeys,” and moved into the plains, we evolved to have a frontal attraction similar to the all too popular ass attraction? I don’t know, but I love female breasts, and asses.

66

[quote]PGJ wrote:
The fact that you don’t have an answer to my questions shows that you are not as smart as you think. When did evolution become fact? It is inconceivable that we are the only creature on the planet to have evolved. Every other creature on the planet is about on the same “evolutionary” scale, except humans (fish still swim, monkeys still swing from trees, dogs still walk on four legs, humans are building spaceships and performing brain surgery and writing poetry). Why is that? Why are humans so far advanced compared to all other creatures?
[/quote]

I beg you to please pick up a book on the theory of evolution. What you are calling evolution is not what the actual theory of evolution is talking about. I am not going to venture a guess as to why you don’t know, but its painfully obvious by the questions that you ask that you’re not getting it. Once you’ve completed, I hope you can come back and we can have a discussion. Until then, its much like trying to teach calculus to someone who hasn’t had arithmetic.

67

Lots of great posts, fellas. Especially from Elbow Strike. Thanks for sharing the idea that both a large cranium and a large jaw structure could not fit through the birth canal. Setting up an evolutionary battle between brain and brawn. It’s a beautiful theory.

68

[quote]Petedacook wrote:
Do you really need more proof of evolution than the Galapagos islands.

I believe evolution is happening today, in front of all our eyes. The thing is, evolution is not fast enough to notice it. At least without severe changes in environment, and or many other possible areas.

Here is a bit of evolution for you: the age at which teenage girls enter puberty is dropping. I cannot find exact figures, but I recall something like 2-6 years earlier in the past 70 years (don’t quote me on that).

Do a search, tons of articles out there on it.

http://archives.cnn.com/2000/HEALTH/children/03/31/early.puberty.wmd/

http://www.etr.org/recapp/research/journal200209girls.htm

http://fact.on.ca/news/news0012/nt001224.htm

Here is another concept? Why do women have breasts? All other mammals lose breasts after they stop breast feeding. Human women do not. Ever see a bitch have pups? Her breast swell with milk, after the pups stop feeding, she loses those breasts (within reason).

Is it possible it is because when humans evolved into upright “monkeys,” and moved into the plains, we evolved to have a frontal attraction similar to the all too popular ass attraction? I don’t know, but I love female breasts, and asses.

[/quote]

Teenage girls entering puberty and breats size IS NOT evolution. Evolution is women slowly changing into someting else.

69

Listen guys, perhaps my definition of “evolution” is different than yours. In my opinion, evolution (as in the theory of evolution), means that men came from apes or that some creatures today USED to be something else. Swimming lizards is adaptation, not evolution. Is that a wrong definition?

70

[quote]PGJ wrote:

Teenage girls entering puberty and breats size IS NOT evolution. Evolution is women slowly changing into someting else.

[/quote]

you are missing it brother. Evolutionary change as you speak of takes centuries. You cannot identify it around you except to note differences as I have pointed out to you. For the most part, humans have developed a solid grasp of things to minimize elements that force change.

How do you explain the duck billed Platypus? Where the hell did he come from?

Evolution takes a great deal of time. I can also tell you, the average height of people has been getting higher. The average height of people during the Revolutionary war was significantly shorter than today.

You see, if the pattern continues, over the next few thousand years, what will become of height?

Why is height increasing? I would speculate height is desirable, more to women than to men, but nonetheless, desirable by both sides. Man wants tall woman, woman wants a tall man, they have tall kids. And after one generation, what 70 years have gone by?

And yet you wonder why people are not evolving into something different? Like growing gills or something?

I tell you what brother, stick around for the next million - 2 million years and tell me what differences you see.

You think we will look the same as we do today? To think for as second the changes I have pointed out, or the Galapagos islands are not evidence of evolution boggles my mind.

What if dark clouds consume the planet, and only people that have a gene allowing them to live in that environment survive? And suppose with that one gene, also comes a hunch back trait that gets worse with that gene pool? All modern marvels aside.

71

[quote]PGJ wrote:

Teenage girls entering puberty and breats size IS NOT evolution. Evolution is women slowly changing into someting else.

[/quote]

And if you think what I have outlined is not a slow evolution into something else, your dead wrong:

ev?o?lu?tion Pronunciation[ev-uh-loo-shuhn] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA

?noun

  1. any process of formation or growth;
72

[quote]Petedacook wrote:
PGJ wrote:

Teenage girls entering puberty and breats size IS NOT evolution. Evolution is women slowly changing into someting else.

you are missing it brother. Evolutionary change as you speak of takes centuries. You cannot identify it around you except to note differences as I have pointed out to you. For the most part, humans have developed a solid grasp of things to minimize elements that force change.

How do you explain the duck billed Platypus? Where the hell did he come from?

Evolution takes a great deal of time. I can also tell you, the average height of people has been getting higher. The average height of people during the Revolutionary war was significantly shorter than today.

You see, if the pattern continues, over the next few thousand years, what will become of height?

Why is height increasing? I would speculate height is desirable, more to women than to men, but nonetheless, desirable by both sides. Man wants tall woman, woman wants a tall man, they have tall kids. And after one generation, what 70 years have gone by?

…

[/quote]

Height is based on nutrition. The changes in countries like China have happened in one generation because now they are not starving.

73

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Petedacook wrote:
PGJ wrote:

Teenage girls entering puberty and breats size IS NOT evolution. Evolution is women slowly changing into someting else.

you are missing it brother. Evolutionary change as you speak of takes centuries. You cannot identify it around you except to note differences as I have pointed out to you. For the most part, humans have developed a solid grasp of things to minimize elements that force change.

How do you explain the duck billed Platypus? Where the hell did he come from?

Evolution takes a great deal of time. I can also tell you, the average height of people has been getting higher. The average height of people during the Revolutionary war was significantly shorter than today.

You see, if the pattern continues, over the next few thousand years, what will become of height?

Why is height increasing? I would speculate height is desirable, more to women than to men, but nonetheless, desirable by both sides. Man wants tall woman, woman wants a tall man, they have tall kids. And after one generation, what 70 years have gone by?

…

Height is based on nutrition. The changes in countries like China have happened in one generation because now they are not starving.[/quote]

Yep. We are healthier, bigger and taller today thanks to modern medicine, NOT because of evolution. Our food is filled with all sorts of growth hormones, maybe that’s part of it.

Growing tall is not evolution. Viatmins, more emphasis on pre-natal care, smoke-free environments (yes, smoking can stunt growth).

74

[quote]bushidobadboy wrote:
Don’t forget that from the moment they are born, to the moment they die, all primates are active, using all their limbs for movement, balance, gripping, etc. This must have a great effect on conditioning those super-strong muscle fibres. Also, they live a ‘pure’ life, without the artificial shit that we have in our lives. I don’t know how much this helps, but I’m sure it does.[/quote]Actually I saw a program where they rescued a gorilla from a private owner. The gorilla had never been allowed outside a small cage (maybe 5ft x 5ft), was under-fed on scraps & very malnourished, had barely any body-hair left and was living in generally putrid conditions (wasn’t even allowed out to crap). Anyway, one thing I noticed as they carried him out of the cage was that he had thighs that would’ve taken the Mr.O.

75

[quote]Petedacook wrote:
PGJ wrote:

Teenage girls entering puberty and breats size IS NOT evolution. Evolution is women slowly changing into someting else.

you are missing it brother. Evolutionary change as you speak of takes centuries. You cannot identify it around you except to note differences as I have pointed out to you. For the most part, humans have developed a solid grasp of things to minimize elements that force change.

How do you explain the duck billed Platypus? Where the hell did he come from?

Evolution takes a great deal of time. I can also tell you, the average height of people has been getting higher. The average height of people during the Revolutionary war was significantly shorter than today.

You see, if the pattern continues, over the next few thousand years, what will become of height?

Why is height increasing? I would speculate height is desirable, more to women than to men, but nonetheless, desirable by both sides. Man wants tall woman, woman wants a tall man, they have tall kids. And after one generation, what 70 years have gone by?

And yet you wonder why people are not evolving into something different? Like growing gills or something?

I tell you what brother, stick around for the next million - 2 million years and tell me what differences you see.

You think we will look the same as we do today? To think for as second the changes I have pointed out, or the Galapagos islands are not evidence of evolution boggles my mind.

What if dark clouds consume the planet, and only people that have a gene allowing them to live in that environment survive? And suppose with that one gene, also comes a hunch back trait that gets worse with that gene pool? All modern marvels aside.

[/quote]

How does a platypus prove anything? If anything it proves creation. Why would anything evolve into that?

People were shorter 200 years ago because they were a lot less healthy. Their life expectancy was about half of what it is today. People died of colds and tooth decay. They had all sorts of weird diseases that do not exist today.

You are talking about adaptation, not evolution. Evolution is changing genetically from one thing to another. Has science been able to show that one creature today has been altered genetically from what it used to be?

Galapagos Islands? A bunch of birds and lizards learned to do unusual things out of necessity. A bird growing a long beak is not evolution. A lizzard that swims is not evolution.

76

[quote]PGJ wrote:

You are talking about adaptation, not evolution. Evolution is changing genetically from one thing to another. Has science been able to show that one creature today has been altered genetically from what it used to be?

[/quote]

What’s the difference between adaptation and evolution ?

77

[quote]PGJ wrote:
Petedacook wrote:
PGJ wrote:

Teenage girls entering puberty and breats size IS NOT evolution. Evolution is women slowly changing into someting else.

you are missing it brother. Evolutionary change as you speak of takes centuries. You cannot identify it around you except to note differences as I have pointed out to you. For the most part, humans have developed a solid grasp of things to minimize elements that force change.

How do you explain the duck billed Platypus? Where the hell did he come from?

Evolution takes a great deal of time. I can also tell you, the average height of people has been getting higher. The average height of people during the Revolutionary war was significantly shorter than today.

You see, if the pattern continues, over the next few thousand years, what will become of height?

Why is height increasing? I would speculate height is desirable, more to women than to men, but nonetheless, desirable by both sides. Man wants tall woman, woman wants a tall man, they have tall kids. And after one generation, what 70 years have gone by?

And yet you wonder why people are not evolving into something different? Like growing gills or something?

I tell you what brother, stick around for the next million - 2 million years and tell me what differences you see.

You think we will look the same as we do today? To think for as second the changes I have pointed out, or the Galapagos islands are not evidence of evolution boggles my mind.

What if dark clouds consume the planet, and only people that have a gene allowing them to live in that environment survive? And suppose with that one gene, also comes a hunch back trait that gets worse with that gene pool? All modern marvels aside.

How does a platypus prove anything? If anything it proves creation. Why would anything evolve into that?

People were shorter 200 years ago because they were a lot less healthy. Their life expectancy was about half of what it is today. People died of colds and tooth decay. They had all sorts of weird diseases that do not exist today.

You are talking about adaptation, not evolution. Evolution is changing genetically from one thing to another. Has science been able to show that one creature today has been altered genetically from what it used to be?

Galapagos Islands? A bunch of birds and lizards learned to do unusual things out of necessity. A bird growing a long beak is not evolution. A lizzard that swims is not evolution.

[/quote]

Firstly, I do commend your intention to learn. What you’re calling adaptation is actually a necessary part of evolution. You’re shortcoming is that you are not extending it on the correct timescale. Evolution is the many many adaptations over biological history.

For example, lets take a hypothetical population and call it “Species A.” For some reason (lets say continental drift), the populations of Species A is separated into two geographically different regions.

Each set will now undergo a number of adaptations best suited for that particular region. When so many of these adaptations have occurred, millions of generations later, Species A in one region is vastly distinct from species A in the other (and also vastly different from the original species A). We then relabel them species B and species C, and show there nearest common ancestor as A.

Evolution does NOT say that, for instance, monkeys were having babies then all the sudden one gave birth to a human. We both agree that is not what happened, however, that is probably one of the biggest misconceptions about evolution. Evolution works in a gradual process over millions and millions of years. If the literature which you have read states otherwise, I would surely love to see it.

Also, keep in mind that while apes and humans may appear very outwardly different, our genes are actually 98.5% identical. Let that sink in a moment. If you’re accepting the principles of adaptation by natural selection, it doesn’t seem that ‘odd’ how we arose.

78

[quote]PGJ wrote:
How does a platypus prove anything? If anything it proves creation. Why would anything evolve into that?
[/quote]

I wanted to address this specifically, as this baffled scientists during the 19th century. However, we have now discovered fossil records of the platypus’s ancestors showing that it did evolve. The answer to your question “why would anything evolve into that” is a simple one: because it was adaptive to.

(Platypus - Wikipedia if you’d like to check for yourself)

79

[quote]k.elkouhen wrote:
PGJ wrote:

You are talking about adaptation, not evolution. Evolution is changing genetically from one thing to another. Has science been able to show that one creature today has been altered genetically from what it used to be?

What’s the difference between adaptation and evolution ?
[/quote]

Adaptation is a lizzard that learns how to swim. Evolution would be one species of animal changing genetically into another (ie: ape to man). A finch who’s beak changes is still a finch.

Also, the fact that there are 13 different types if finch in the Galapagos just proves that there are many types of finch. Perhaps all 13 types were at one point living on all the islands. Due to differing available vegitation on specific islands, those types that were ill suited to the environment died away leaving only those that were equiped to eat that specific vegitation.

80

[quote]Bane wrote:
PGJ wrote:
Petedacook wrote:
PGJ wrote:

Teenage girls entering puberty and breats size IS NOT evolution. Evolution is women slowly changing into someting else.

you are missing it brother. Evolutionary change as you speak of takes centuries. You cannot identify it around you except to note differences as I have pointed out to you. For the most part, humans have developed a solid grasp of things to minimize elements that force change.

How do you explain the duck billed Platypus? Where the hell did he come from?

Evolution takes a great deal of time. I can also tell you, the average height of people has been getting higher. The average height of people during the Revolutionary war was significantly shorter than today.

You see, if the pattern continues, over the next few thousand years, what will become of height?

Why is height increasing? I would speculate height is desirable, more to women than to men, but nonetheless, desirable by both sides. Man wants tall woman, woman wants a tall man, they have tall kids. And after one generation, what 70 years have gone by?

And yet you wonder why people are not evolving into something different? Like growing gills or something?

I tell you what brother, stick around for the next million - 2 million years and tell me what differences you see.

You think we will look the same as we do today? To think for as second the changes I have pointed out, or the Galapagos islands are not evidence of evolution boggles my mind.

What if dark clouds consume the planet, and only people that have a gene allowing them to live in that environment survive? And suppose with that one gene, also comes a hunch back trait that gets worse with that gene pool? All modern marvels aside.

How does a platypus prove anything? If anything it proves creation. Why would anything evolve into that?

People were shorter 200 years ago because they were a lot less healthy. Their life expectancy was about half of what it is today. People died of colds and tooth decay. They had all sorts of weird diseases that do not exist today.

You are talking about adaptation, not evolution. Evolution is changing genetically from one thing to another. Has science been able to show that one creature today has been altered genetically from what it used to be?

Galapagos Islands? A bunch of birds and lizards learned to do unusual things out of necessity. A bird growing a long beak is not evolution. A lizzard that swims is not evolution.

Firstly, I do commend your intention to learn. What you’re calling adaptation is actually a necessary part of evolution. You’re shortcoming is that you are not extending it on the correct timescale. Evolution is the many many adaptations over biological history.

For example, lets take a hypothetical population and call it “Species A.” For some reason (lets say continental drift), the populations of Species A is separated into two geographically different regions.

Each set will now undergo a number of adaptations best suited for that particular region. When so many of these adaptations have occurred, millions of generations later, Species A in one region is vastly distinct from species A in the other (and also vastly different from the original species A). We then relabel them species B and species C, and show there nearest common ancestor as A.

Evolution does NOT say that, for instance, monkeys were having babies then all the sudden one gave birth to a human. We both agree that is not what happened, however, that is probably one of the biggest misconceptions about evolution. Evolution works in a gradual process over millions and millions of years. If the literature which you have read states otherwise, I would surely love to see it.

Also, keep in mind that while apes and humans may appear very outwardly different, our genes are actually 98.5% identical. Let that sink in a moment. If you’re accepting the principles of adaptation by natural selection, it doesn’t seem that ‘odd’ how we arose.[/quote]
\

Humans are also 85% genetically similar to mice. The sea urchin s also very similar genetically to humans.

Evolution says that millions and millions of years ago, our ancestors were apes. It says that before then all things lived in the water as baceria and other strange organisims, and over time they evolved into complex life-forms and eventually crawled out of the water and lived on land mysteriously becoming dogs, cows, birds, elephants, monkeys and humans.

I wonder how genetically similar mice and apes are. I bet it’s really close, but nobody would argue that apes evolved from mice or vice versa.