4 ms·

> if we don't know all the details about our evolution, then we should just say that we know nothing and ignore all the things we actually do know are very very

> if we don't know all the details about our evolution, then we should just say that we know nothing and ignore all the things we actually do know are very very likely? Nothing wrong with studying and figuring out how things work, you should not look at it with an all or nothing attitude. But assuming from the very start that all human species ancestors are some kind of ape is just so ridiculous that it can only sink in when you are properly conditioned(at school) or properly brainwashed. And teaching it to the kids on school is almost criminal IMHO. You want proof, me too, but we don't have it yet. But I promise you it will not be apes, just as we don't fall of the end of the earth. > In my post I'm assuming acceptance of what is commonly accepted in the theory of evolution. If you don't accept that, there is absolutely no point in continuing this discussion. Many things that are commonly accepted are wrong, not? I do have a point and there is a general discussion about this you cannot stop fortunately.

mkl 7y ago
> assuming from the very start that all human species ancestors are some kind of ape No one makes that assumption. We know from copious hard evidence that humans and modern apes are closely related, and from more limited hard evidence that there were other animals with features similar to both humans and apes long ago. More recent human ancestors were not apes (they were more human-like), and way distant past ancestors were not apes (they were before even prehistoric apes existed), and none of our ancestors were modern apes (which have evolved into their modern forms since our last common ancestors with them, and those common ancestors were not apes as we know them today). Some human ancestors were prehistoric ape-like animals. Teaching well-established scientific knowledge in schools is essential, and about as far from criminal as it's possible to get. Your "all human species ancestors are some kind of ape" is not well-established scientific knowledge, but your faulty assumption of how you imagine others' knowledge to work. You seem to be starting with the assumption that evolution isn't real (based on a primary school reaction?!), rather than deriving the knowledge that it is real from the evidence. (Yes, I have actually done this. I had a summer job deriving evolutionary relationships directly from genetic data. It's not difficult, and the connections between species just pop out of the DNA sequences with a bit of maths.) Evolution wasn't just made up, it was figured out from the evidence, just like gravity, electricity, chemistry, etc. Like all scientific fields, our knowledge of it is not complete (and never will be).
- siempreb 7y ago
  > Teaching well-established scientific knowledge in schools is essential Well established? It's simply not proven, period. You should only teach kids what you are 100% sure about, and when you're not than you have to honestly say that it's an assumption. Otherwise it is not teaching but conditioning. > Evolution wasn't just made up, it was figured out from the evidence, just like gravity, electricity, chemistry, etc. Gravity, electricity, etc.. are things you can prove, not the evolution of an ape into a human. I have no clue why so many people desire to believe that our ancestors were apes, I think it's rather pathetic, and most likely due to conditioning.
  - the_af 7y ago
    > Well established? It's simply not proven, period. You should only teach kids what you are 100% sure about Forget teaching science at all, then. That's not how scientific knowledge works. Evolution is not "proven". No empirical science theories are ever "proven". But evolution as a theory is pretty much as good as it gets. Yes, some details get reworked from time to time, but the fundamentals are our best bet. > Gravity, electricity, etc.. are things you can prove No. How do you "prove" gravity or electricity? > not the evolution of an ape into a human Other people have told you multiple times no-one believes apes evolved into humans, so please stop arguing against this strawman. Modern apes and humans share a common ancestor which was neither ape nor human, and the evidence for this is pretty strong.
    - siempreb 7y ago
      > Other people have told you multiple times no-one believes apes evolved into humans You're kidding me? That's what I see with most ape -> human believers, they are 100% sure about things they assume or cannot know. Typical example, thx for that.
      - the_af 7y ago
        Me: > Other people have told you multiple times no-one believes apes evolved into humans, so please stop arguing against this strawman You: > That's what I see with most ape -> human believers Do you see the problem in this exchange?
polymatter 7y ago
But then you would also need to explain things like vestigal elements in humans, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_vestigiality https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_vestigiality. This is all neatly explained by evolution. For eample, why do humans have a tail bone? Why have muscles attached to the ear that can not move it? Why have wisdom teeth? And there is about a dozen of these things in humans that have no discernable purpose in humans but have a similarity with things in other animals that do serve a purpose. Evolution gives a model to explain this. Humans evolved from ape-like creatures that had a tail, humans have evolved not to grow the tail but have not quite lost the tail bone. Humans evolved from ape-like creatures that could move their ears. Humans didn't need that and so ears have become fixed without detriment, but have not yet lost the muscles. etc.
michaelmrose 7y ago
There is no notable and credible alternative theory that doesn't involve rearranging a graph of apelike creatures. How about you come clean and admit you aren't advocating for a different theory about the shape of life's family tree but the abdication of the need to make one to a "higher power", an unscientific theory that literally possess the most notable flaw you are ascribing to biology. That one must indoctrinate kids at a young age in order to convince anyone.

mkl 7y ago

> assuming from the very start that all human species ancestors are some kind of ape No one makes that assumption. We know from copious hard evidence that humans and modern apes are closely related, and from more limited hard evidence that there were other animals with features similar to both humans and apes long ago. More recent human ancestors were not apes (they were more human-like), and way distant past ancestors were not apes (they were before even prehistoric apes existed), and none of our ancestors were modern apes (which have evolved into their modern forms since our last common ancestors with them, and those common ancestors were not apes as we know them today). Some human ancestors were prehistoric ape-like animals. Teaching well-established scientific knowledge in schools is essential, and about as far from criminal as it's possible to get. Your "all human species ancestors are some kind of ape" is not well-established scientific knowledge, but your faulty assumption of how you imagine others' knowledge to work. You seem to be starting with the assumption that evolution isn't real (based on a primary school reaction?!), rather than deriving the knowledge that it is real from the evidence. (Yes, I have actually done this. I had a summer job deriving evolutionary relationships directly from genetic data. It's not difficult, and the connections between species just pop out of the DNA sequences with a bit of maths.) Evolution wasn't just made up, it was figured out from the evidence, just like gravity, electricity, chemistry, etc. Like all scientific fields, our knowledge of it is not complete (and never will be).

siempreb 7y ago
> Teaching well-established scientific knowledge in schools is essential Well established? It's simply not proven, period. You should only teach kids what you are 100% sure about, and when you're not than you have to honestly say that it's an assumption. Otherwise it is not teaching but conditioning. > Evolution wasn't just made up, it was figured out from the evidence, just like gravity, electricity, chemistry, etc. Gravity, electricity, etc.. are things you can prove, not the evolution of an ape into a human. I have no clue why so many people desire to believe that our ancestors were apes, I think it's rather pathetic, and most likely due to conditioning.
- the_af 7y ago
  > Well established? It's simply not proven, period. You should only teach kids what you are 100% sure about Forget teaching science at all, then. That's not how scientific knowledge works. Evolution is not "proven". No empirical science theories are ever "proven". But evolution as a theory is pretty much as good as it gets. Yes, some details get reworked from time to time, but the fundamentals are our best bet. > Gravity, electricity, etc.. are things you can prove No. How do you "prove" gravity or electricity? > not the evolution of an ape into a human Other people have told you multiple times no-one believes apes evolved into humans, so please stop arguing against this strawman. Modern apes and humans share a common ancestor which was neither ape nor human, and the evidence for this is pretty strong.
  - siempreb 7y ago
    > Other people have told you multiple times no-one believes apes evolved into humans You're kidding me? That's what I see with most ape -> human believers, they are 100% sure about things they assume or cannot know. Typical example, thx for that.
    - the_af 7y ago
      Me: > Other people have told you multiple times no-one believes apes evolved into humans, so please stop arguing against this strawman You: > That's what I see with most ape -> human believers Do you see the problem in this exchange?

polymatter 7y ago

But then you would also need to explain things like vestigal elements in humans, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_vestigiality https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_vestigiality. This is all neatly explained by evolution. For eample, why do humans have a tail bone? Why have muscles attached to the ear that can not move it? Why have wisdom teeth? And there is about a dozen of these things in humans that have no discernable purpose in humans but have a similarity with things in other animals that do serve a purpose. Evolution gives a model to explain this. Humans evolved from ape-like creatures that had a tail, humans have evolved not to grow the tail but have not quite lost the tail bone. Humans evolved from ape-like creatures that could move their ears. Humans didn't need that and so ears have become fixed without detriment, but have not yet lost the muscles. etc.

michaelmrose 7y ago

There is no notable and credible alternative theory that doesn't involve rearranging a graph of apelike creatures. How about you come clean and admit you aren't advocating for a different theory about the shape of life's family tree but the abdication of the need to make one to a "higher power", an unscientific theory that literally possess the most notable flaw you are ascribing to biology. That one must indoctrinate kids at a young age in order to convince anyone.