Skip to comments.There is no proof that we evolved from apes. Period
Posted on 12/15/2005 9:10:41 AM PST by flevit
Simon Schama appears to have little understanding of biology (Opinion, September 4). With an ostrich mindset that tries to ignore reality, pseudo-scientists continue in the vain hope that if they shout loud and long enough they can perpetuate the fairy story and bad science that is evolution.
You don't have to be a religious fundamentalist to question evolution theory - you just have to have an open and enquiring mind and not be afraid of challenging dogma. But you must be able to discern and dodge the effusion of evolutionary landmines that are bluster and non sequiturs.
No one denies the reality of variation and natural selection. For example, chihuahuas and Great Danes can be derived from a wolf by selective breeding. Therefore, a chihuahua is a wolf, in the same way that people of short stature and small brain capacity are fully human beings.
However, there is no evidence (fossil, anatomical, biochemical or genetic) that any creature did give rise, or could have given rise, to a different creature. In addition, by their absence in the fossil record for (supposed) millions of years along with the fact of their existence during the same time period, many animals such as the coelacanth demonstrate the principle that all creatures could have lived contemporaneously in the past.
No evidence supports the notion that birds evolved from dinosaurs, nor that whales evolved from terrestrial quadrupeds, nor that the human knee joint evolved from a fish pelvic fin. And the critically-positioned amino acids at the active sites within enzymes and structural proteins show that the origination of complex proteins by step-wise modifications of supposed ancestral peptides is impossible. In other words, birds have always been birds, whales have always been whales, apes did not evolve into humans, and humans have always been humans.
But you might protest that it has been proved that we evolved from apes. In fact, the answer is a categorical No. Australopithecines, for example, were simply extinct apes that in a few anatomical areas differed from living apes. If some of them walked bipedally to a greater degree than living apes, this does not constitute evidence that apes evolved into humans - it just means that some ancient apes were different from living apes.
Oh yes there is -- the liberal Democrats!
He's right - he has not evolved.
Someone should have checked out talkorigins before writing this. I believe just about every point is soundly refuted there.
I'm no biologist, but I don't think evolutionists claim that humans evolved from apes.
Evidence (if you want proof, try mathematics, photography, or a fine Scotch):
Figure 1.4.4. Fossil hominid skulls. Some of the figures have been modified for ease of comparison (only left-right mirroring or removal of a jawbone). (Images © 2000 Smithsonian Institution.)
Only a matter of time before a ping and a wave of defenders of the evolution dogma.
Defensive tackles, gorillas. You do the math. ;)
I present al franken, as proof that you are in error...
That's how this article should have begun.
Its impossible to explian the obvious to someone with a closed mind.
Evolution does NOT state we descended from Apes. It states that Apes and men had a common ancestor.
People who refuse to recognize evolution have a Quranic mindset which shuts out the vast amount of evidence which clearly indicates that life DID evolve, that the early fossil record shows very primitive simple life forms, that successive geological deposits have revealed increasingly more complex life forms which bear obvious anatomical resemblence to existing or later forms.
EVEN IF YOU COULD PRODUCE A LIVE ACTION FILM showing evolution occuring over the time span of millions of years, these people would still refute what was unfolding before their eyes.
This is because their objections are rooted in their version of faith, and not in any scientific or logical analysis. They have managed to conviince themselves that:
1) The Bible is in disagreement with evolution
2) Obvioulsy the Bible is correct.
3) Therefore evolution didn't occur.
The holes in this chain of logic have been hashed, re-hashed and re-re-hashed in numerous arguments. There is NOTHING which which change their minds.
I gotta have a banana and think about that one...
Good argument. I know it convinced me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.