• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The biogeographic evidence for evolution

nPeace

Veteran Member
LOL, I love this thread. It is a perfect example of how creationists, when confronted with evidence for evolution, just dodge it and pretend it doesn't exist, and instead decide to talk about other stuff, like how to make English words mean something other than what they are defined to mean.
All that long talk get's us nowhere . Your thread is broken. Can you fix it?
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
I really hope none of you are lawyers, or magistrates.
Sad when people stick out they know the truth of a matter even when they don't know.
Worst yet, imagine if you were all part of a jury. I would feel sorry for the poor guy who has to spend his life in prison, all because of people who think they are so brilliant. It's only a thought.

A proper judge would throw this case out, as well as all you out his sight. I would shake his hand for being the only reasonable person in the room... besides me. :)

By the way, I'm laughing at all the lawyers. Like I said, this thread has turned into a circus.
Perhaps you have nothing better to do.

If the OP has any worth, why not discuss that?
Do you think trying to discredit a person you hate, is going to earn you points?
The OP was already weak to begin with, so don't blame me. I only showed it to be useless. A cockroach would have run across it, and it would have toppled.

So what's it going to be - discuss the OP, or stand around complaining like someone just stole all your lottery tickets? :smirk:

I need to remind you once again that since you do not understand the nature of evidence you are in no position to state what a judge would do.

Why are you afraid to even discuss the topic of evidence?
 

Jose Fly

Fisker of men
If the OP has any worth, why not discuss that?
Sure.

Basically, the concept of biogeography dictates that if two organisms share a common ancestor, this should be reflected in their historical geographic ranges. We can test and confirm this through the fossil record.

An example: Let’s say species B and species C both originated from species A millions of years ago. In the time since the split, species B has migrated to another continent. The prediction of past biogeography states that as we go back in time through the fossil record, the geographic ranges of species B and C should become closer and closer until the two overlap around the time of the evolutionary split.

So, is this what we see in humans and primates?

Absolutely! Morphological analysis first suggested that our closest relatives are the great apes. This has been confirmed to an astounding degree by genetic analysis. Well, great apes are found only on the continent of Africa; so given the prediction described above, where would we go to find our oldest fossil links to other great apes? Charles Darwin predicted this over 100 years ago….

We are naturally led to enquire, where was the birthplace of man at that stage of descent when our progenitors diverged from the Catarrhine stock? The fact that they belonged to this stock clearly shews that they inhabited the Old World; but not Australia nor any oceanic island, as we may infer from the laws of geographical distribution. In each great region of the world the living mammals are closely related to the extinct species of the same region. It is therefore probable that Africa was formerly inhabited by extinct apes closely allied to the gorilla and chimpanzee; and as these two species are now man's nearest allies, it is somewhat more probable that our early progenitors lived on the African continent than elsewhere." (Darwin 1871, p. 161)​

Was Mr. Darwin correct in his prediction? Of course! Later species of hominids (H. erectus, H. heidelbergensis, H. neandertalensis, and H. sapiens) are found outside of Africa. But the farther we move back in time, we find that the older species (early Homo species, the australopithecines, and earlier specimens) are found exclusively within Africa, where we also find the great apes. This is exactly as we would predict under human/ape shared ancestry.
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
Well it seem clear no one has anything useful to say, except this guy, who gave them a chance.
So enjoy your babbling. I'm out of here. Peace out.
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
Oh, by the way. Just some friendly advice. Join the Christians and get rid of some of that anger and hatred. Gee.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Thank God for Christianity. We behave ourselves rather than say what's on our minds.
Are you still wasting time?
Please, if you "behaved yourself" we would not have all of this trouble.

When I make an error, and I have made more than my share, I do acknowledge it and then guess what? The conversation moves on.
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
Oh, by the way. Just some friendly advice. Join the Christians and get rid of some of that anger and hatred. Gee.

No anger or hatred. Mostly amusement that there is no acknowledgement of a clear mistake. You could simply say that you misspoke in your post and everything would have blown over. But, by being unwilling or unable to admit to an error, you compound the problem.

Different skin color does not make different species.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
And then one day you too can refer to people with different skin colors as different species, and then when you're called on it you can act like it's everyone else's issue. :rolleyes:

This reminded me of a phone call to the Atheist Experience, which unfortunately I could not dig up, where the caller asked "Does evolution say that black people evolved from a different monkey". Unfortunately for him his ignorance of the theory of evolution was indicative of his own racism.
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
Discussing your post. But if you want to discuss the OP a knowledge of the concept of evidence would be extremely helpful.
Sorry. Your offer has become overly monotonous, and I already discussed what evidence is with you.
We got no where. No need to repeat those dramas.
That doesn't make sense to you, does it?
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
No anger or hatred. Mostly amusement that there is no acknowledgement of a clear mistake. You could simply say that you misspoke in your post and everything would have blown over. But, by being unwilling or unable to admit to an error, you compound the problem.

Different skin color does not make different species.
I don't think you display anger and hatred. I find you are quite decent. A bit stubborn, but I can live with that. :)

I already explained to you, my example was not referring to species. When we use examples, they are to show something, not necessarily the same as talking about the particular.

I can use cars as an example about birds. I did not say the car is a bird.
It would be stupid to argue that I said that. Agreed?
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
Please, if you "behaved yourself" we would not have all of this trouble.

When I make an error, and I have made more than my share, I do acknowledge it and then guess what? The conversation moves on.
Good. I made no error, and I am not in court. I'm really tolerating this.
 
Top