How long before the next set of humans evolve from (anything)?
Options
Rock_Well
Members Posts: 2,185 ✭✭✭✭✭
Who created you?
Oh, your mother and father?
Who created them?
Oh, their mother and father?
And them?
And them?
And them?
What about the first man?
Oh, evolution?
What about the woman?
Did she evolve simultaneously along with the first man?
From what?
So, it took evolution to bring about the first TWO human beings, that could procreate on their own for countless generations down the line?
How much longer before a('nother) verifiable example of two human beings evolving into existence, independent of any outside intelligence, comes along?
Hasn't enough time passed by now?
Oh, your mother and father?
Who created them?
Oh, their mother and father?
And them?
And them?
And them?
What about the first man?
Oh, evolution?
What about the woman?
Did she evolve simultaneously along with the first man?
From what?
So, it took evolution to bring about the first TWO human beings, that could procreate on their own for countless generations down the line?
How much longer before a('nother) verifiable example of two human beings evolving into existence, independent of any outside intelligence, comes along?
Hasn't enough time passed by now?
Comments
-
this aint pokemon that evolution ? aint real ?
-
but, but, but.....it happens in Pokemon ALL the time. see? that's how we KNOW it's real
-
I'm not sure what comes after developing a conscience. What would the next mental stage be?
-
Humans evolve every time genetic variation occurs.
Otherwise, humans would look exactly the same as their same-sexed parent; with no genetic/phenotypic differences.
The genetic variation that speciated ? sapiens is not necessarily something that could only happen to two organisms either.
? sapiens came about 2 million years after the ? genus; and the ? sapiens sapiens subspecies (modern humans)--which is 200,000 years old--came about 300,000 years later.
Check back in a million years or so. -
threadstarter, maybe you should read a book other than the Bible to get a clearer understanding of human origins
-
He kinda has a point about the two evolving simultaneously. However if this is an attempt to cast adam and eve as individuals born into a world made 6000 yrs ago that ain't what it says in the book
-
He kinda has a point about the two evolving simultaneously.
His point doesn't make any sense. Why only two? Evolution and natural selection works with gradual mutations within a whole species. From what I'm getting, he's thinking humans just came from simpler organisms in a matter of a day.
-
How much longer before a('nother) verifiable example of two human beings evolving into existence, independent of any outside intelligence, comes along?
NEVER!
-
fiat_money wrote: »Humans evolve every time genetic variation occurs.
Otherwise, humans would look exactly the same as their same-sexed parent; with no genetic/phenotypic differences.
The genetic variation that speciated ? sapiens is not necessarily something that could only happen to two organisms either.
? sapiens came about 2 million years after the ? genus; and the ? sapiens sapiens subspecies (modern humans)--which is 200,000 years old--came about 300,000 years later.
Check back in a million years or so.
This still does not address the origin of mankind...
-
As with other animals, humans were merely one of many species to diverge under their genus after millions of years.solid analysis wrote: »fiat_money wrote: »Humans evolve every time genetic variation occurs.
Otherwise, humans would look exactly the same as their same-sexed parent; with no genetic/phenotypic differences.
The genetic variation that speciated ? sapiens is not necessarily something that could only happen to two organisms either.
? sapiens came about 2 million years after the ? genus; and the ? sapiens sapiens subspecies (modern humans)--which is 200,000 years old--came about 300,000 years later.
Check back in a million years or so.
This still does not address the origin of mankind...
-
Because that just so happen to be the number that the question allows.Jaded Righteousness wrote: »He kinda has a point about the two evolving simultaneously.
His point doesn't make any sense. Why only two? Evolution and natural selection works with gradual mutations within a whole species. From what I'm getting, he's thinking humans just came from simpler organisms in a matter of a day.
take however many a number you need.
Then proceed to the next question: "How much longer before a('nother) verifiable example of (x number) of human beings evolving into existence, independent of any outside intelligence, comes along?"
another point: we have countless examples of human-kind and and animal-kind being begat by like kinds of it's own.
ie. cows begetting cows, cats begetting cats, birds begetting birds, etc.
we have no examples of ANY-KIND evolving, coming to existence, from a KIND other than it's own. ie: no frogs, that grew up to be little boys later.
Also, we have no examples of ANY-KIND evolving, coming to existence, independent of any outside intelligence, than that which occurs doing say the natural mating process.
yea...i won't make a thesis for the age of the world because i wasn't there when it started..and neither does The Book give an age; it's moreso people use The Book and the genealogies therein as way of measuring. so it depends on what one use to measure. Still, none of us were there when it began so we'll never know...but i do hold the age of the world to be way younger than millions and billions of years.He kinda has a point about the two evolving simultaneously. However if this is an attempt to cast adam and eve as individuals born into a world made 6000 yrs ago that ain't what it says in the bookBiblicalAtheist wrote: »I'm not sure what comes after developing a conscience. What would the next mental stage be?
Human had a conscience since day one, no matter how much they were, or were not, aware of it. -
One would need to define what a 'KIND' is before we could answer the question you are posing Solid Analysis. Looking at a statement like 'cows beget cows, cats beget cats, and birds beget birds' you have a massive range for KIND. Birds are defined as the class Aves so birds beget birds is the same as mammals beget mammals which means a dog can give birth to a dolphin. Cats beget cats would allow my calico house cat to give birth to a lion. Cows beget cows is actually pretty accurate. The point is KINDs is a meaningless category while species is a very specific and practical category. Species beget the same species.
But this leads to a paradox. If species beget species where do new species come from? Well to resolve this we must look at life as a continuum. There is never a point were *? * an ape-man/woman couple gives birth to a human. Instead there is an unbroken line of generations moving back through time that connects any human being with simpler creatures from the past.
If you looked at only the people that made up your ancestors about 3,000 years ago they would look identical to modern humans, maybe slightly shorter. Move back 30,000 and you would begin to notice slight changes in the jawline and head but nothing you would considered weird. 150,000 years ago you would still call your ancestors human but now they do appear pretty different from modern humans. If you went back 300,000 you would probably look at your ancestors (those that would contribute DNA to your existence) and say wait they are not human any more. If you stepped generation by generation through your ancestors from 150,000 through 300,000 years ago you would never see some hard line that you stated that generation is human and the previous one is not.
Species are like a blending of colors. Imagine a bright yellow blending into a vibrant orange. While it is simple to see the difference between the ends of that color spectrum trying to draw a line in the middle and say everything on this side is yellow and everything on the other is orange might be impossible. -
No they didn't, not until they ate of the tree of. Until man ate of the fruit, they were animals, knowing neither good nor evil, afterwards beast became like gods, knowing good and evil. We know knowledge without wisdom and understanding is pretty much useless(lying ass snake) so I figure after gathering so much understanding and wisdom humans will experience another 'mental leap in evolution'.solid analysis wrote: »Human had a conscience since day one, no matter how much they were, or were not, aware of it.
-
No, humans are constantly evolving.Humans are done evolving for the most part. Immune systems and the likes are still evolving, but in regards to significant physical features it seems to be done as there is nothing else for us to really overcome on this planet at the moment - we are the dominant species.
Recorded human history only goes back a few thousand years, a mere 2.5% of the time since they speciated.
We haven't been around long enough to conclude that we've stopped evolving. -
fiat_money wrote: »
As with other animals, humans were merely one of many species to diverge under their genus after millions of years.solid analysis wrote: »fiat_money wrote: »Humans evolve every time genetic variation occurs.
Otherwise, humans would look exactly the same as their same-sexed parent; with no genetic/phenotypic differences.
The genetic variation that speciated ? sapiens is not necessarily something that could only happen to two organisms either.
? sapiens came about 2 million years after the ? genus; and the ? sapiens sapiens subspecies (modern humans)--which is 200,000 years old--came about 300,000 years later.
Check back in a million years or so.
This still does not address the origin of mankind...
of course we see variation within a given species and this is expected in a complex and well designed system to help with adapting to various circumstance. i know this is often used as 'evidence' to support evolutionary theories.
But again, what we don't see is complete transformation between kinds of species. Most people accept that this isn't something that we would be able to observe on the day to day; mainly because if these type of transformation were possible, the development would take ginormous amounts of time. -
solid analysis wrote: »Because that just so happen to be the number that the question allows.
take however many a number you need.
Then proceed to the next question: "How much longer before a('nother) verifiable example of (x number) of human beings evolving into existence, independent of any outside intelligence, comes along?"
another point: we have countless examples of human-kind and and animal-kind being begat by like kinds of it's own.
ie. cows begetting cows, cats begetting cats, birds begetting birds, etc.
we have no examples of ANY-KIND evolving, coming to existence, from a KIND other than it's own. ie: no frogs, that grew up to be little boys later.
Also, we have no examples of ANY-KIND evolving, coming to existence, independent of any outside intelligence, than that which occurs doing say the natural mating process.
Well first of all, your question doesn't make any sense by supposing that only two humans would pop up out of some kind of simple form unrelated to the species that humans evolved from, unable to mate with like animals, natural selection steering the path of evolution towards larger brains and other qualities that make humans beings human. Honestly, I think you should study the topic a little more before you attempt to debate it.
You can look back and see fossil evidence of the evolutionary path of animals; elephants and horses in example. Evolution takes years and years, more than the span of your lifetime to actually see it take place in front of your eyes.
I have a question for you though: In what way can we observe any outside intelligence playing any part in the evolutionary process? Other than the Bible telling you so, where do you get this idea?
Obviously, evolution and natural selection are better theories than the intelligent design theory. Unlike the ? theory, we can actually observe evolution taking place. Unlike the ? theory, natural selection is completely logical -
Another way we can observe evolution taking place is in pests that become immune to poisons. Natural selection favors the animals that have the ability to withstand the chemicals used to ? them
-
solid analysis wrote: »
yea...i won't make a thesis for the age of the world because i wasn't there when it started..and neither does The Book give an age; it's moreso people use The Book and the genealogies therein as way of measuring. so it depends on what one use to measure. Still, none of us were there when it began so we'll never know...but i do hold the age of the world to be way younger than millions and billions of years.
lol... smh..
-
One would need to define what a 'KIND' is before we could answer the question you are posing Solid Analysis. Looking at a statement like 'cows beget cows, cats beget cats, and birds beget birds' you have a massive range for KIND. Birds are defined as the class Aves so birds beget birds is the same as mammals beget mammals which means a dog can give birth to a dolphin. Cats beget cats would allow my calico house cat to give birth to a lion. Cows beget cows is actually pretty accurate. The point is KINDs is a meaningless category while species is a very specific and practical category. Species beget the same species.
pardon my use of such broad term, but by 'KIND' i mean, the 'family' - 'the umbrella' for the given family the animal fall under. Lions, panthers, tigers, cheetahs, for example belonging to the cat family.But this leads to a paradox. If species beget species where do new species come from? Well to resolve this we must look at life as a continuum. There is never a point were *? * an ape-man/woman couple gives birth to a human. Instead there is an unbroken line of generations moving back through time that connects any human being with simpler creatures from the past.
ie. humans and chimpanzees i take? the problem with this view is the biased focus on similarities and the ignoring of the differences.
-
We don't usually see it because it takes too long, recorded human history is only a few thousand years old. Speciation usually takes hundreds of thousands of years, millions in fact; humans have not been recording history for millions of years. This is why--in most cases--we only have fossils of these earlier species.solid analysis wrote: »fiat_money wrote: »
As with other animals, humans were merely one of many species to diverge under their genus after millions of years.solid analysis wrote: »fiat_money wrote: »Humans evolve every time genetic variation occurs.
Otherwise, humans would look exactly the same as their same-sexed parent; with no genetic/phenotypic differences.
The genetic variation that speciated ? sapiens is not necessarily something that could only happen to two organisms either.
? sapiens came about 2 million years after the ? genus; and the ? sapiens sapiens subspecies (modern humans)--which is 200,000 years old--came about 300,000 years later.
Check back in a million years or so.
This still does not address the origin of mankind...
of course we see variation within a given species and this is expected in a complex and well designed system to help with adapting to various circumstance. i know this is often used as 'evidence' to support evolutionary theories.
But again, what we don't see is complete transformation between kinds of species. Most people accept that this isn't something that we would be able to observe on the day to day; mainly because if these type of transformation were possible, the development would take ginormous amounts of time.
However, sub-speciation and speciation has been observed by humans to an extent:fiat_money wrote: »Evolution may be a slow process, but that does't mean no biological evolution has been observed by humans. A simple example is that all modern domesticated dogs are descendants of the gray wolf; because of various mutations and breeding, the species is now extremely diverse. On a much shorter timescale, the evolution of bacteria can be observed well within a human's lifespan.
Additionally, speciation has been observed in plenty of plants and insects, the Croatian lizard, the Central European blackcap, the Galapagos finches, land snails, and in species of penguin and African cichlid to a lesser extent.
Insect speciation experiment:
All it takes for speciation to occur is for animals to breed/reproduce within a certain niche of the species long enough for enough variation to occur so that it they can't breed with the rest of the species.
So yes, humans have observed speciation; which is only one form of biological evolution. -
Changing environment/habits, selective breeding, natural genetic variation.fiat_money wrote: »
No, humans are constantly evolving.Humans are done evolving for the most part. Immune systems and the likes are still evolving, but in regards to significant physical features it seems to be done as there is nothing else for us to really overcome on this planet at the moment - we are the dominant species.
Recorded human history only goes back a few thousand years, a mere 2.5% of the time since they speciated.
We haven't been around long enough to conclude that we've stopped evolving.
How else would we evolve physically at this present moment with no predators or harsh geography to overcome?
You know, the usual ways in which biological evolution occurs. -
solid analysis wrote: »
the problem with this view is the biased focus on similarities and the ignoring of the differences.
Of course there are differences to expect. Explain the problem you have with that. And don't forget to answer my question about observing i.d. I want to know about that one -
Houses and cars are examples of the changing environment.fiat_money wrote: »
Changing environment/habits, selective breeding, natural genetic variation.fiat_money wrote: »
No, humans are constantly evolving.Humans are done evolving for the most part. Immune systems and the likes are still evolving, but in regards to significant physical features it seems to be done as there is nothing else for us to really overcome on this planet at the moment - we are the dominant species.
Recorded human history only goes back a few thousand years, a mere 2.5% of the time since they speciated.
We haven't been around long enough to conclude that we've stopped evolving.
How else would we evolve physically at this present moment with no predators or harsh geography to overcome?
You know, the usual ways in which biological evolution occurs.
We spend very little time adapting to those things due to houses, cars and the like. We're not changing much physically.
-
Modern houses better protect humans from the climate, and cars reduce the amount of foot travel for humans.fiat_money wrote: »
Houses and cars are examples of the changing environment.fiat_money wrote: »
Changing environment/habits, selective breeding, natural genetic variation.fiat_money wrote: »
No, humans are constantly evolving.Humans are done evolving for the most part. Immune systems and the likes are still evolving, but in regards to significant physical features it seems to be done as there is nothing else for us to really overcome on this planet at the moment - we are the dominant species.
Recorded human history only goes back a few thousand years, a mere 2.5% of the time since they speciated.
We haven't been around long enough to conclude that we've stopped evolving.
How else would we evolve physically at this present moment with no predators or harsh geography to overcome?
You know, the usual ways in which biological evolution occurs.
We spend very little time adapting to those things due to houses, cars and the like. We're not changing much physically.
You saying we're going to adapt to the controlled environments of those things? What possible changes could be evoked?
A likely environmental example is modern obesity.
Another example--that's likely to be a product of selective breeding--is how humans have been getting taller. -
Subjective.fiat_money wrote: »
Modern houses better protect humans from the climate, and cars reduce the amount of foot travel for humans.fiat_money wrote: »
Houses and cars are examples of the changing environment.fiat_money wrote: »
Changing environment/habits, selective breeding, natural genetic variation.fiat_money wrote: »
No, humans are constantly evolving.Humans are done evolving for the most part. Immune systems and the likes are still evolving, but in regards to significant physical features it seems to be done as there is nothing else for us to really overcome on this planet at the moment - we are the dominant species.
Recorded human history only goes back a few thousand years, a mere 2.5% of the time since they speciated.
We haven't been around long enough to conclude that we've stopped evolving.
How else would we evolve physically at this present moment with no predators or harsh geography to overcome?
You know, the usual ways in which biological evolution occurs.
We spend very little time adapting to those things due to houses, cars and the like. We're not changing much physically.
You saying we're going to adapt to the controlled environments of those things? What possible changes could be evoked?
A likely environmental example is modern obesity.
Another example--that's likely to be a product of selective breeding--is how humans have been getting taller.
Height isn't very significant
