Did humans descend from monkeys? Where is your evidence?

[joshua 1 9]

Biology makes absurd claims, I want to see their evidence.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Well, you certainly won't get any evidence for the claim you've made since nowhere in biology is it said that humans evolved from monkeys.

 

[jayem]

The answer to your question is no. Monkeys, humans, great apes, lemurs, and all the primates descended from a common ancestor. If you don't know this exceedingly elementary concept, then you lack even a rudimentary understanding of the topic. You need to begin with the very basics of evolutionary biology. The TalkOrigins site is a good start. And it discusses evidence for how species evolve.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Well, you certainly won't get any evidence for the claim you've made since nowhere in biology is it said that humans evolved from monkeys.

So evolution is not science then. Just a myth that Darwin made up because he had to much time on his hands.

 

[46AND2]

So evolution is not science then. Just a myth that Darwin made up because he had to much time on his hands.

No, he's not saying there is no evidence for evolution...just not for monkeys evolving into man, because that isn't what evolution claims.

Would you prefer, instead, the evidence that man and monkeys evolved, separately, from a common ancestor?

 

[joshua 1 9]

Would you prefer, instead, the evidence that man and monkeys evolved, separately, from a common ancestor?

That seems to be your understanding. So go ahead and show me what you have got.
Not one atheist on this board believe in the theory of common ancestor.

 

[46AND2]

Not one atheist on this board believe in the theory of common ancestor.

Whatever do you mean by this?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

So evolution is not science then. Just a myth that Darwin made up because he had to much time on his hands.

What? No. Your claim has zero basis since the claim that humans descended from monkeys is not a claim that evolutionary science makes.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Whatever do you mean by this?

Not one person accepts the theory of common ancestor on this board. Adam, Noah, Abraham were all common ancestor. If you reject that then that means you reject the theory of common ancestor.

 

[46AND2]

Not one person accepts the theory of common ancestor on this board. Adam, Noah, Abraham were all common ancestor. If you reject that then that means you reject the theory of common ancestor.

Wow. Just....wow.

 

[joshua 1 9]

What? No. Your claim has zero basis since the claim that humans descended from monkeys is not a claim that evolutionary science makes.

So you admit then that the theory of common descend is a defunct theory and never was nor ever well be true?

 

[Loudmouth]

So you admit then that the theory of common descend is a defunct theory and never was nor ever well be true?

Can you prove that Jesus was the son of Zeus, or do you think the Bible is false?

 

[Cute Tink]

Not one person accepts the theory of common ancestor on this board. Adam, Noah, Abraham were all common ancestor. If you reject that then that means you reject the theory of common ancestor.

"Not one person" - does that mean that you don't even accept this?

Or are you not a person?

Try this blatant misstatement:

Jesus was the common ancestor. If you reject that then that means you reject the Bible.

 

[joshua 1 9]

"Not one person"

Sorry the reference was to the atheists. Because if they accepted theism then they would no longer be atheists. That does happen on this board in both directions. Some atheists convert and become theists and some theists convert and become atheists.

 

[joshua 1 9]

The theory of evolution says that humans came from a common ancestor

Sorry common ancestor is not allowed on this board.
That is the rules established by the atheists.
Your going to produce evidence some other way.

 

[46AND2]

This is a standard bait and switch which is another term for logical fallacy. Further proof that atheists have no real integrity when it comes to logic.

No, it was a parody of your stance

 

[quatona]

Gee that is funny. How many times have people come on this board that do not even have a third grade level of understanding of the Bible. If we play by your rules then people have to demonstrate at least a elementary understanding of the Bible before they are qualified to comment and offer their opinions. That way we can all play by the same rules. It would be a little absurd that you expect me to have at least a third grade level of understanding of science. Yet all the time people offer opinions about the Bible when they do not even have a third grade level of Bible school.

Your OP made it look like you wanted to learn something.
When you make a faulty claim about evolution theory´s statements, this needs to be pointed out.
Your tu quoque fallacy is completely irrelevant here.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Biology makes absurd claims, I want to see their evidence.

What happened?
Do you no longer support what your hero, Francis Collins, supports?

Didn't you like always maintaint that you believe whatever Collins believes, concerning biology?

If you want a reminder about what he believes on the subject of evolution, read my signature once more. That doesn't sound like Collins thinks that biology makes "absurd claim", wouldn't you agree?

 

[46AND2]

Gee that is funny. How many times have people come on this board that do not even have a third grade level of understanding of the Bible. If we play by your rules then people have to demonstrate at least a elementary understanding of the Bible before they are qualified to comment and offer their opinions. That way we can all play by the same rules. It would be a little absurd that you expect me to have at least a third grade level of understanding of science. Yet all the time people offer opinions about the Bible when they do not even have a third grade level of Bible school.

Just because people don't interpret the Bible by taking things out of context like you do, does not mean that we don't have an understanding of the Bible. You remember when you claimed that the running water verse was pertaining to general skin infections, and then I clearly showed you how you were mistaken using nothing more than simple contextual reading?

Remember, many of us were Christians well into adulthood, and have done a great deal of Bible study.

Another example of Christians taking the Bible out of context: calling the slavery that god condoned in the OT as nothing more than indentured servitude. If you read it in context, this is clearly not the case.

 

[Armoured]

Sorry common ancestor is not allowed on this board.
That is the rules established by the atheists.

what the ever living tapdancing fire truck are you talking about?

Your going to produce evidence some other way.

So let me, guess, every evidence you're presented with, you'll claim doesn't count, and then, after being presented with hundreds of pieces of evidence, you'll claim no one showed you any evidence?