Evidence for Human Evolution

[Curious George]

No one thought modern humans descended from neanderthals.

No one recently... Pretty sure that once upon a time, people did.

 

[dust1n]

No one recently... Pretty sure that once upon a time, people did.

Fair point. It was probably a reasonable possibility before further technologies, etc.

 

[Unification]

Human evolution is backed up by this and by countless other forms of verifiable evidence. So, I believe that evolution is true. Why wouldn't you expect the DNA from neanderthals to be distinct? Human Evolution demands that the DNA would not be the same.

At best, evolution of the "physical body" of a human is backed up by evidence. The "being" or "mind," not so much.

 

[leibowde84]

At best, evolution of the "physical body" of a human is backed up by evidence. The "being" or "mind," not so much.

It doesn't claim to. It's not the be all end all of understanding.

 

[Sapiens]

At best, evolution of the "physical body" of a human is backed up by evidence. The "being" or "mind," not so much.

Prove its existence before you start worrying about its evolution, horse goes first, then cart.

 

[outhouse]

Actually there's a greater proportion of Neanderthal d.n.a. in Asian populations with the genome studies, and I believe they figure the average is around 6% of all genetic material, if my memory is correct.

I was thinking Mongolian but I think that was just a test subject on a show I watched

 

[outhouse]

At best, evolution of the "physical body" of a human is backed up by evidence. The "being" or "mind," not so much.

Your factually in error . Just because you refuse what is known and taught does not mean your personal faith has any credibility.

 

[Unification]

Your factually in error . Just because you refuse what is known and taught does not mean your personal faith has any credibility.

Thank you for your opinion, without supplying any facts or where error is made. I know that I have a mind.

 

[Unification]

Your factually in error . Just because you refuse what is known and taught does not mean your personal faith has any credibility.

Feel free to provide facts at any time that the nonphysical mind evolved from the physical, and that you've solved the mind-body problem. To me, that's all personal faith based.

I am in no denial that my physical body evolved.

 

[Altfish]

No one recently... Pretty sure that once upon a time, people did.

Yes, but at one time people used to think that "God did it"

 

[Unification]

Prove its existence before you start worrying about its evolution, horse goes first, then cart.

We've been over this awhile back, how the mind can think of things that don't exist physically. By the way, how've you been?

Santa Claus is abstract but doesn't exist physically. It's common sense.

There is abstract and there is physical.
One is mind. One is body.

Under any scientific physical law, the capability to even think of something that doesn't exist physically defies all physical laws. The all physical body wouldn't be able to do such things. It's easy proof that Santa Claus exists abstractly yet not physically.

Scientists are well aware of this "problem."

 

[leibowde84]

Hello everyone. I would like to share something I found about human evolution. We have found many Neanderthal fossils and have been able to sequence their DNA and compared it to human DNA. The result is that their DNA is shown to be distinct.

View attachment 11261
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v464/n7290/full/nature08976.html#f2

View attachment 11262
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/mtDNA.html

So what do you think about human evolution? Is there strong evidence we evolved from apes or is it all nonsense?

With the available evidence, it is indisputable that we, in fact, evolved from a common ancestor with modern day apes.

 

[Sapiens]

We've been over this awhile back, how the mind can think of things that don't exist physically. By the way, how've you been?

Santa Claus is abstract but doesn't exist physically. It's common sense.

There is abstract and there is physical.
One is mind. One is body.

Under any scientific physical law, the capability to even think of something that doesn't exist physically defies all physical laws. The all physical body wouldn't be able to do such things. It's easy proof that Santa Claus exists abstractly yet not physically.

Scientists are well aware of this "problem."

I know of no law that prevents imagination. I know of no argument that succeeds by using the existence of imagination as proof of a brain/mind duality.

You "know" that you have a mind ... can you actually support this claim with something that is somewhat more concrete than, "I know therefore it is?"

 

[leibowde84]

We've been over this awhile back, how the mind can think of things that don't exist physically. By the way, how've you been?

Santa Claus is abstract but doesn't exist physically. It's common sense.

There is abstract and there is physical.
One is mind. One is body.

Under any scientific physical law, the capability to even think of something that doesn't exist physically defies all physical laws. The all physical body wouldn't be able to do such things. It's easy proof that Santa Claus exists abstractly yet not physically.

Scientists are well aware of this "problem."

This is so obviously untrue, it's disturbing. Everything that you are referring to are mixtures or variations of things that are known. Human beings have the ability to create out of the known and available. Even animals have this ability. Everything that was first, be it the bird's nest, the beaver's dam, or the human's spear, life has shown time and time again that it can create that which did not exist before it from that which does.

Further, humans have been able to create tools, languages, belief systems, art, music, forms of givernment, curency and even tangible representations of pure non-physical concepts like love, beauty, power and thought. To deny this is to deny what makes life so wonderful and awe inspiring, which, in turn, makes the existence of God that much more unlikely.

 

[Unification]

This is so obviously untrue, it's disturbing. Everything that you are referring to are mixtures or variations of things that are known. Human beings have the ability to create out of the known and available. Even animals have this ability. Everything that was first, be it the bird's nest, the beaver's dam, or the human's spear, life has shown time and time again that it can create that which did not exist before it from that which does.

Further, humans have been able to create tools, languages, belief systems, art, music, forms of givernment, curency and even tangible representations of pure non-physical concepts like love, beauty, power and thought. To deny this is to deny what makes life so wonderful and awe inspiring, which, in turn, makes the existence of God that much more unlikely.

I think we are talking about separate things and you're confused that they are the same.

What was Santa Claus and God created from?

I am simply saying that the mind exists to think of such things. Are you saying that the mind doesn't exist?

 

[Unification]

I know of no law that prevents imagination. I know of no argument that succeeds by using the existence of imagination as proof of a brain/mind duality.

You "know" that you have a mind ... can you actually support this claim with something that is somewhat more concrete than, "I know therefore it is?"

Do you realize how ridiculous it sounds asking me to show you that the mind exists? What kind of physical evidence would you like for the non-physical? Why don't you rip a spec of knowledge or a spec of thought or a spec of memory out of your brain and show it's physical existence.

Is the abstract physical?

You seem to centralize on the brain, forgetting the rest of the body, there are also millions of brain cells in the stomach, and tons of neurons in the heart.

You can study biophotons if you would like. Photon's have no mass, and are not physical or matter. It's common sense we are not all physical and matter.

http://www.biontology.com/research/what-is-biophoton-science/

 

[Unification]

This is so obviously untrue, it's disturbing. Everything that you are referring to are mixtures or variations of things that are known. Human beings have the ability to create out of the known and available. Even animals have this ability. Everything that was first, be it the bird's nest, the beaver's dam, or the human's spear, life has shown time and time again that it can create that which did not exist before it from that which does.

Further, humans have been able to create tools, languages, belief systems, art, music, forms of givernment, curency and even tangible representations of pure non-physical concepts like love, beauty, power and thought. To deny this is to deny what makes life so wonderful and awe inspiring, which, in turn, makes the existence of God that much more unlikely.

Please substantiate what you think "God" is and why your thoughts of that "God" are unlikely.

 

[Sapiens]

Do you realize how ridiculous it sounds asking me to show you that the mind exists? What kind of physical evidence would you like for the non-physical? Why don't you rip a spec of knowledge or a spec of thought or a spec of memory out of your brain and show it's physical existence.

Is the abstract physical?

You seem to centralize on the brain, forgetting the rest of the body, there are also millions of brain cells in the stomach, and tons of neurons in the heart.

You can study biophotons if you would like. Photon's have no mass, and are not physical or matter. It's common sense we are not all physical and matter.

http://www.biontology.com/research/what-is-biophoton-science/

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, that what can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.

Dismissed.

Allow me to introduce you to: ScienceBlogs - "Your Friday Dose of Woo: A bio-photon here, a bio-photon there…whatever a bio-photon is"

Please do enjoy.

Is there such a thing as the enteric nervous system? Sure. Is there a cardiac nervous system and a cardiac nerve plexus? Sure.

So what? This is not evidence for your case, it is just more evidence for human evolution from a fish like form.

 

[Unification]

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, that what can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.

Dismissed.

Allow me to introduce you to: ScienceBlogs - "Your Friday Dose of Woo: A bio-photon here, a bio-photon there…whatever a bio-photon is"

Please do enjoy.

Is there such a thing as the enteric nervous system? Sure. Is there a cardiac nervous system and a cardiac nerve plexus? Sure.

So what? This is not evidence for your case, it is just more evidence for human evolution from a fish like form.

You must have missed all of the peer reviewed research of biophotons.

But, that's rather savvy.... provide a "blogger's" opinion from 2009 as if that settles everything.

 

[Unification]

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, that what can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.

Dismissed.

Allow me to introduce you to: ScienceBlogs - "Your Friday Dose of Woo: A bio-photon here, a bio-photon there…whatever a bio-photon is"

Please do enjoy.

Is there such a thing as the enteric nervous system? Sure. Is there a cardiac nervous system and a cardiac nerve plexus? Sure.

So what? This is not evidence for your case, it is just more evidence for human evolution from a fish like form.

Thanks for the evidence that someone can use their mind to transform something scientifc into their own opinionated "woo" about it on a blog from 09.