[Discussion] Do you accept the theory of evolution?

[BLAZE]

Monkeys to humans ? I'm good thank you.

Nah dude Apes
and humans are Apes too aka tailess Primates

 

[Your Creepy Stalker]

U wanna know of evolution is real?

U have a dog?

They didn't always exist. We forcibly created them. There are here through something called artificial selection.

That's evolution for u

I have a cat. Your argument is invalid.

(Hey, everyone voting yes on the poll, why aren't you voting the third option? We know Natural Selection isn't the only thing guiding it, because Dogs exist)

 

[BLAZE]

So I'm a tailless ape ??? K.

Apes (Hominoidea) are a branch of Old World tailless anthropoid catarrhine primates native to Africa and Southeast Asia. They are distinguished from other primates by a wider degree of freedom of motion at the shoulder joint as evolved by the influence of brachiation. There are two extant branches of the superfamily Hominoidea: the gibbons, or lesser apes; and the hominids, or great apes.
The family Hylobatidae, the lesser apes, include four genera and a total of sixteen species of gibbon, including the lar gibbon and the siamang, all native to Asia. They are highly arboreal and bipedal on the ground. They have lighter bodies and smaller social groups than great apes.
The family Hominidae, known collectively as the great apes, include orangutans, gorillas, chimpanzees, bonobos and humans;[1][2][3][4] alternatively, this family clade is also known as the hominids. There are seven extant species of great apes: two in the orangutans (genus Pongo), two in the gorillas (genus Gorilla), two in the chimpanzees (genus Pan), and a single extant species, Homo sapiens, of modern humans (genus Homo).[5][6]

You must be registered for see links

 

[Punk Hazard]

1. Don't quote me

1. Make me.

2. Shut the **** up

Won't make you less wrong

3. Refer to the what I said above and always remember it when you think of qouting my post and trying to be a smartass at the same time.

That's why I quoted you.

So I'm a tailless ape ??? K.

Apes (Hominoidea) are a branch of Old World tailless anthropoid catarrhine primates native to Africa and Southeast Asia. They are distinguished from other primates by a wider degree of freedom of motion at the shoulder joint as evolved by the influence of brachiation. There are two extant branches of the superfamily Hominoidea: the gibbons, or lesser apes; and the hominids, or great apes.

The family Hylobatidae, the lesser apes, include four genera and a total of sixteen species of gibbon, including the lar gibbon and the siamang, all native to Asia. They are highly arboreal and bipedal on the ground. They have lighter bodies and smaller social groups than great apes.
The family Hominidae, known collectively as the great apes, include orangutans, gorillas, chimpanzees, bonobos and humans;[1][2][3][4] alternatively, this family clade is also known as the hominids. There are seven extant species of great apes: two in the orangutans (genus Pongo), two in the gorillas (genus Gorilla), two in the chimpanzees (genus Pan), and a single extant species, Homo sapiens, of modern humans (genus Homo).[5][6]

You must be registered for see links

You must be registered for see links

You must be registered for see links

 

[Power Bottom]

I don't believe in it.

 

[DominiqueX]

So I'm a tailless ape ??? K.

Kinda, yes. o.o

Have you ever seen a species among the Hominidae, "great apes"?
Maybe someone should place you infront of a shaved chimpanzee and a shaved human. Not only their appearance is almost identical to ours, their behavior is as well. They have social structures like we do and groups of them even wage wars against each other for resources. If you are still not convinced, look at the DNA xD

 

[Narushima]

Let me tell you kids a secret that sadly, not even your average Biology PhD is likely to know much about and certainly not understand: evolution by natural selection is, in fact, a very profoundly mathematical thing.

And this means that it makes about as much sense to talk about whether or not one 'accepts' evolution as it does to talk about whether or not you want to 'accept' e.g. classical mechanics but well get to that later.

Now I am personally a mathematician-physicist by education - I study biology as a hobby now but I was largely indifferent /apathetic to biology and evolution for most of my life. That changed when, in the final year of university, almost by mere chance, I opted to study a course called "mathematical population genetics".

This course was a mere introduction to one of the most rigorous and magnificent branches in all of biology - "population genetics". Now unfortunately, population genetics is a very mathematical discipline - so mathematical that your best chance of being able to study it in any significant detail at a university/college is during the final years of a pure math degree. As it turns out, the word 'population genetics' is a very misleading one because the discipline would more accurately be described as 'mathematics of evolution'.

Anyways, the population-genetic or mathematical definition of evolution is the following: evolution is simply the change in gene frequencies that occurs in a population, over time.

There is, in fact, an even deeper mathematical structure to this definition and most generally, we can define a mathematical process (algorithm) that I have seen called by various authors as a "Darwin machine": a Darwin machine is any open-ended process that works through:

1) variation of something
2) selective retention of those things

For example, the human immune system's most important aspect is such a process: when you are infected by some pathogen, your body will start to produce antibodies. But the antibodies are initially produced randomly - your immune system will make thousands and thousands of different antibodies in an attempt to fight the specific pathogen. Most of these antibodies will not work. But some of those antibodies will be effective. Those antibodies are selected - your body starts producing those ones en masse.

The human immune system has the same general mathematical structure as natural selection: where natural selection is the change in gene frequencies in a population over time, successfully fighting disease works through the change in antibody frequencies within an organism, over time. Both the immune system and natural selection are mathematical "Darwin machines."

The recent advances in genomics offers and will continue to offer ever more case studies of natural selection within humans. To give you a very interesting recent example: some of the metabolic adaptations of cold-adapted human groups have been found at the genetic level. Note particularly the differences in the expression of the relevant gene frequencies between the three different populations analyzed (Europeans, Chinese and Inuit)

" Those genetic mutations, found in nearly 100 percent of the Inuit, are found in a mere 2 percent of Europeans and 15 percent of Han Chinese, which means that these groups would synthesize omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids differently from the Inuit."

You must be registered for see links

.
berkeley.edu/2015/09/17/what-the-inuit-can-tell-us-about-omega-3-fats-and-paleo-diets/

 

[NarutoKage2]

I have a cat. Your argument is invalid.

(Hey, everyone voting yes on the poll, why aren't you voting the third option? We know Natural Selection isn't the only thing guiding it, because Dogs exist)

Dang it! !!
Nah but natural selection is the most well explained non artificial mechanism, though there is compelling evidence for sexual selection etc(under certain circumstances).

 

[Venomous Cobra]

I do believe in evolution in a sense, a species evolving into another however seems kinda far fetched. People might name species that go through extreme changes as the time goes different names and classify them differently, but I personally believe that it is still the same species, I mean on what what makes a species a species?

Oh well, though, most people consider it a theory and a fact at the same time.

 

[Angelic.]

mega evolution gg

 

[SumnNarutoRelated]

so much fail in this thread holy sh!t

 

[NarutoKage2]

I do believe in evolution in a sense, a species evolving into another however seems kinda far fetched. People might name species that go through extreme changes as the time goes different names and classify them differently, but I personally believe that it is still the same species, I mean on what what makes a species a species?

Oh well, though, most people consider it a theory and a fact at the same time.

If it can mate and have kids= same species.

 

[Ryu Kishi]

Yes I do

 

[Multiply]

Re: el

No because if humans evolved from monkeys why are there still monkeys?

You must be registered for see images

Don't take the bait. It's too late.

I... I never thought of it that way...

You must be registered for see images

 

[SumnNarutoRelated]

Re: el

No because if humans evolved from monkeys why are there still monkeys?

You must be registered for see images

Don't take the bait. It's too late.

because we didnt



because we didnt




because we didnt





because we didnt




evolve from MONKEYS.




We. share. a. common. ancestor. with. monkeys.

 

[Venomous Cobra]

If it can mate and have kids= same species.

closely related species can mate though, there are hybrids. Some experiments show that you can actually attach two parts of two different species together and the animal would still live(or at least for a short time) what would you really call such a being?

sure you can't force two unrelated animals to breed, such as say a fox and and hayena , but that is scientifically only because they parted from each other way too much that it is very hard, though surely they should have had an ancestor million years ago(not an accurate number)

 

[Aimee Sky]

I do definitely!

 

[Tobi98]

Re: el

because we didnt



because we didnt




because we didnt





because we didnt




evolve from MONKEYS.




We. share. a. common. ancestor. with. monkeys.

Pretty sure he was being sarcastic amigo

 

[Bacillus]

the only thing that i find appalling in this thread is that creationists seem to have a common misconception about evolution, and in turn, refuse to actually do their research. i'm scratching my head at this one

anyway
there is no definite truth or validity to creationism and, honestly, even science can be wrong (phrenology, anyone?). all i see in this thread is the simple fact that what's rational to those who accept evolution may not be rational to creationists

arguing is moot and teaching creationists or vice-versa is moot because no one is actually proving anything other than how they showcase their own arrogance. really, this discussion is still based on theories constructed by humans to begin with. even the RNA theory comes with its own problems, panspermia uses endless and pointless circular logic, the list goes on. there is, again, i say: no definite truth and there likely never will be. science is proven wrong all the time, religion isn't logical or illogical and merely exists (used as a system of faith by, you guessed it, humans)
it comes down to perspective, really
the more minutes this thread wastes actually believing the arguments are worth a damn and will get through to the opposing side the more minutes i spend grimacing

basically, this thread is doing it wrong

 

[Pumpkin Ninja]

Why object to what you don't understand? That doesn't make sense, its like saying I don't understand black holes, so for religious purposes I don't believe in it
And for the record there are MANY religious scientists who believe in evolution.
. Natural selection is very simple. An animal of any given species, is able to survive(not die, for w.e reasons) and live long enough to pass on its genes to the next generation(have babies) while some animals of the same species aren't (again, for w.e reasons). The traits(characteristics of the animal) that allowed it to survive and pass on its genes, are transferred to the next generation and thus those specific traits are 'selected' since they survived , obviously, while less favourable traits in any given environment for survival don't.

Why?

I never objected to it because I don't understand it, I simply said I don't know how it works. I know already that there are theories about how it works like natural selection.