A Question about Evolution

I'm just interested to see what your answers are.

If we evolved from Apes, then we should be able to track the evolutionary process back to a single celled organism.

What did apes evolve from. What was the next ancestor, and so on. If evolution is a reality we should be able to back track these various stages, right?

Evolutionary Tree models - images

Assembling the Tree of Life

Human Evolution

Do the research. This science has been firmly in place for a few decades, and the DNA research is supporting the evolutionary model.

You can track your ancestors, all the way back to viruses and waxy oil bubbles in the deep sea, if you want to.

ATS is not a substitute for a college education. If you want to know the secrets of the world, get educated! Deny Ignorance!

O-315


[edit on 18-3-2009 by organism315]

[edit on 18-3-2009 by organism315]

this guys stuff is very interesting.

AronRa - Foundational Falsehoods of Creationism

I don't know anything about the guy but the vids were interesting.

When you boil it all down, evolution is a theory. A theory is a 'proven' hypothesis (which is an educated guess). Theory is an educated guess that has some 'proof' behind it. Not "end all be all" proof, but some kind of evidence that backs the claim.

As organism315 says, if you are truly interested in the subject, go get educated about it and form an opinion. Opinion is all that we REALLY have, isn't it? Just remember, those who teach you are only human too.

No one knows it all, otherwise things would be so much more simple. Actually I'm kind of happy that there isn't anyone who knows it all. Life would be so boring otherwise.

These days, the ancestry of organisms if often traced through "mitochondrial dna."

The proposition that a scientific theory is just an "educated guess" is difficult to defend unless you take a strong skeptical view, such as: it is just an "educated guess" that the outside world persists even when it isn't actively observed. The word "theory" has a technical meaning in science. Just like different sports use different ways of keeping score (a low score is good in golf but bad in baseball) different areas of study sometimes use words in specialized ways. Scientific theories demonstrate their value based on their ability to explain phenomena, predict the future, and maintain falsifiability (a tautology, such as "a bachelor is an unmarried man" does not qualify as a theory because it is not falsifiable).

A hypothesis is a proposed explanation: "The moon is made of green cheese" qualifies as a hypothesis.

A law describes a theory's observations.

Evolution is a theory used to explain observations, while natural selection is a law which provides a mechanism to describe the observable results of evolution.

Funny how many people oppose biological Darwinism, but are all gung-ho about social Darwinism...





[edit on 18-3-2009 by incoherent_television]

Originally posted by incoherent_television

Funny how many people oppose biological Darwinism, but are all gung-ho about social Darwinism...

[edit on 18-3-2009 by incoherent_television]

Oh be glad you edited out your explanation on what a Theory is...

reply to post by dragonking76


That's funny, I put description and explanation in the wrong place on the tail end of my post... but you posted your comment before I posted my edit...

Turning over Newton's Law of Gravitation...

[edit on 18-3-2009 by incoherent_television]

Make sure to look up some information on Chromosome #2, Retroviruses, and human/ape blood types. There are some excellent videos on You Tube dealing with these subjects.

Try Phoenixshade3 and BonoboBill.

Originally posted by dragonking76

Originally posted by incoherent_television

Funny how many people oppose biological Darwinism, but are all gung-ho about social Darwinism...

[edit on 18-3-2009 by incoherent_television]

Oh be glad you edited out your explanation on what a Theory is...

Is it safe to assume that since you noticed my error before I noticed my own error, that you are deliberately spreading disinformation about a theory being merely an "educated guess" and what such an assertion implies for the creationist crowd?

reply to post by incoherent_television


Well, thats easy

Creationists do not deal with educated guesses, they know what happened (and why), all the facts are in the Holly Book, and they are facts because the book said so, or those who read it feel that it is so (which basically means that it must be so)...

It can be confusing with the Holly Book in the beginning, but you have to read it over and over and over and over again and believe that you will get your free gift of eternal life and only then, it will finally make sense. If it does not, then (see the pattern here?) read it again or consult somebody who read it more times then you did.

Anyways, Creationists are "merely" trying (and succeeding, according to them) to fit this reality into what Bible is saying.

One lil' problem though...those pesky evil scientist, them lil' buggers who just seem not to care at all

Hopefully we will be able to get rid of them all, the sooner the better, so we can all finally, happily ever after, live as one nation under God, forever and ever, till the end of time

Amen

Richard Dawkins has written a wonderful book that does just what the OP is asking for. The Ancestor's Tale begins with us and traces our ancestry all the way back down the Tree of Life to the very first (speculative, of course) organism.

I know Prof. Dawkins's writing very well and it seems to me he has aimed this book at young, inquiring minds. The material in it is fascinating, and easy to grasp for almost anyone.

Of course, it is widely acknowledged that Prof. Dawkins is, if not the Devil himself, his chaplain at least.

Originally posted by Oolon
this guys stuff is very interesting.

AronRa - Foundational Falsehoods of Creationism

I don't know anything about the guy but the vids were interesting.

It sure was. Best i have seen in a long time. But science should show changes in species in a different way then they do. By showing that a species just change shape is wrong. The transformation gives people wrong image of the proses.

Originally posted by anonymous56
I'm just interested to see what your answers are.

If we evolved from Apes, then we should be able to track the evolutionary process back to a single celled organism.

What did apes evolve from. What was the next ancestor, and so on. If evolution is a reality we should be able to back track these various stages, right?

If we evolved from apes, why would there still be any apes?
We evolved WITH apes.

Originally posted by CaptainCaveMan

Originally posted by anonymous56
I'm just interested to see what your answers are.

If we evolved from Apes, then we should be able to track the evolutionary process back to a single celled organism.

What did apes evolve from. What was the next ancestor, and so on. If evolution is a reality we should be able to back track these various stages, right?

If we evolved from apes, why would there still be any apes?
We evolved WITH apes.

We are apes but we have given ourselves a different definition. We are just another kind of ape.

Originally posted by Astyanax
Richard Dawkins has written a wonderful book that does just what the OP is asking for. The Ancestor's Tale begins with us and traces our ancestry all the way back down the Tree of Life to the very first (speculative, of course) organism.

And one I would highly recommend also.

Of course, it is widely acknowledged that Prof. Dawkins is, if not the Devil himself, his chaplain at least.

Apparently he also gives creationists couties.

[edit on 19-3-2009 by melatonin]