There is no proof that we evolved from apes. Period

the Sunday Telegraph ^ | 9/11/05 | Vij Sodera

[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.

[flevit]

second time, (first one hopefully deleted)

[EagleUSA]

Oh yes there is -- the liberal Democrats!

[GSlob]

He's right - he has not evolved.

[antiRepublicrat]

Someone should have checked out talkorigins before writing this. I believe just about every point is soundly refuted there.

[BikerNYC]

I'm no biologist, but I don't think evolutionists claim that humans evolved from apes.

[flevit]

about the author:

http://www.onesmallspeck.com

http://www.onesmallspeck.com/author.html

[Coyoteman]

There is no proof that we evolved from apes. Period

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.)

(A) Pan troglodytes, chimpanzee, modern
(B) Australopithecus africanus, STS 5, 2.6 My
(C) Australopithecus africanus, STS 71, 2.5 My
(D) Homo habilis, KNM-ER 1813, 1.9 My
(E) Homo habilis, OH24, 1.8 My
(F) Homo rudolfensis, KNM-ER 1470, 1.8 My
(G) Homo erectus, Dmanisi cranium D2700, 1.75 My
(H) Homo ergaster (early H. erectus), KNM-ER 3733, 1.75 My
(I) Homo heidelbergensis, "Rhodesia man," 300,000 - 125,000 y
(J) Homo sapiens neanderthalensis, La Ferrassie 1, 70,000 y
(K) Homo sapiens neanderthalensis, La Chappelle-aux-Saints, 60,000 y
(L) Homo sapiens neanderthalensis, Le Moustier, 45,000 y
(M) Homo sapiens sapiens, Cro-Magnon I, 30,000 y
(N) Homo sapiens sapiens, modern

[highlander_UW]

Only a matter of time before a ping and a wave of defenders of the evolution dogma.

[TXBSAFH]

Defensive tackles, gorillas. You do the math. ;)

[InsureAmerica]

I present al franken, as proof that you are in error...

[rattrap]

I'm no biologist, but ...

That's how this article should have begun.

[Diddle E. Squat]

[Kelly_2000]

"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. "

rubbish

[flevit]

http://www.onesmallspeck.com/author.html

[BikerNYC]

LOL. Indeed.

[svcw]

My dad used to say we had many relatives that swung by their necks but none that swung by their tails. Silly, I know.

[ZULU]

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.

[shield]

At times I've found/felt the 'two legged beast' among us/standing right next to me. LOL

http://www.reasons.org

[LearsKent]

I gotta have a banana and think about that one...

[ShadowAce]

rubbish

Good argument. I know it convinced me.

[Paradox]

Actually, the theory is that both man and apes evolved from a common ancestor.

[The_Republican]

Of course not - This is how it all began as everyone knows: The "Block" insipired the apes!

[flevit]

yes a bacterium like organism...even less likely

[phil1750]

If apes evoloved into man, why is there still apes?

[flevit]

nope, bacteria like organism, the common ancestor to all...or
as chemical evolution, an inorganic molecule.

[Kelly_2000]

*sigh*

I am just tired of these kinds of debates posting the real facts to anyone who is not a scientist is problematic

[Gefreiter]

Lloyd Pye explained it all on Coast to Coast AM the other night:

http://www.coasttocoastam.com/shows/2005/12/13.html

Humans are actually bio-engineered and not native to planet Earth.

[Paradox]

My statement is correct. I was merely correcting your initial mistatement.

[theFIRMbss]

>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

Simon Schama is
a smart, entertaining guy.
But his specialty

is art history.
If he's talking science then
he's like you and me.

[HereInTheHeartland]

No Helen Thomas photos?

[flevit]

Vij Sodera was born in India and has lived in England since the age of 4 years. He attended St Clement Danes Grammar School in London, gaining major school prizes for academic achievement and art, and graduated from Sheffield University Medical School in 1975 with distinction in chemistry. He became a Fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh in 1981.

mmmmm.

[steve-b]

Trying to explain biological science to this clown is like trying to explain economics to a DUmmie socialist.

[manwiththehands]

"People who refuse to recognize evolution have a Quranic mindset ... "

The weaker the postition, the stronger the attacks and accusations.

I learned that from Libs/'Rats.

And I'm offended, 'Zulu'.

Go throw spears.

[flevit]

http://www.onesmallspeck.com/author.html

I take it you didn't look at the link

[ZULU]

"Go throw spears."

"The weaker the postition, the stronger the attacks and accusations."

I ain't no liberal, and I'm offended by your equating me with one.

If you want to believe that God intended the Bible to be a scientific text for a tribe of neolithic shepherds, instead of a guide to life and promise of eternal salvation through a Saviour, be my guest.

As I stated, their is absolutely nothing I can say or demonstrate to change your mind.

[ZULU]

???????????

[oldleft]

To treat this as a serious question, because volcanic activity took place in Africa a long time ago and split the continent into a dry eastern half and a wet western half. When the east half of Africa dried up because moisture was blocked by the mountains and became the Savannah we know today, swinging from trees was no longer practical. Only animals which could travel long distances at a relatively fast pace could survive. That's why people are bipedal and have incredible endurance compared to other primates. The apes on the western side of Africa survived just fine as it was still wet and covered with trees.

That's why.

[null and void]

Much better.

[Popping popcorn]...

[flevit]

a bacteria (like thing) is THE common ancestor to every living thing (supposedly) it is your grandfather given (supposedly) enough generation...ape/humans is just up the chain of grandfathers.

[RexBeach]

George Carlin used to say "If we're descended from apes, how come there are still apes?"

Hey, what do I know? I was history major!

Now, if you want to talk about the Fredrick Jackson Turner Thesis, well OK!

[Hildy]

You've never met my ex-boyfriend!

[HairOfTheDog]

There is no proof that we evolved from apes. Period

Correct... there's never even been a theory that we evolved from ~apes~ exactly. ;~D

[Coyoteman]

"If we're descended from apes, how come there are still apes?"

The answer is in PatrickHenry's List-O-Links.

[cgk]

BTTT

[untrained skeptic]

It is simply not possible to PROVE evolution with fossils.

There are too many counter explainations, and the fossil records don't usually contain a lot of complete skeletons.

The fossils are too old to extract DNA.

There is lots of evidence that can be used to support the theory of evolution. None that proves it.

You can put up pictures of skulls, but those scientific names gave are based on the idea that if it look like a human but different, it must be part of the fossil record showing evolution.

At most they might be able to provide evidence that there was a different species of that more closely resembled humans than apes in the past. They can't prove evolution.

We do not yet have the means to prove evolution, and almost impossible if not impossible to disprove as well. Maybe that will change as we learn more.

[fish hawk]

Take the Bible completely out of the equation and you still have nothing. You don't need the Bible for an argument. I guess somewhere in the basement of the Smithsonian there is tons of proof of evolution but they don't want to show it to us just yet.

[RexBeach]

Hey, remember, I was a history major! Thanks for the link(s).

[flevit]

http://www.onesmallspeck.com/chapter%2010%20human%20fossils.html

I would certainly, like to read the who chapter.

the evidence you show are skulls of various forms...

the explination of which shows a timeline of change/relative-ness...above is an alternative explination.

[MindBender26]

"There is no proof that we evolved from apes."

Ever been up close with Teddy Kennedy?

[ZULU]

That is probably correct.