Perhaps, lim00b but I had enough. Put in CleaverDick's words, I will not try to stop the world from going round.

you dont need to believe it, you just need to accept it as scientific fact, all DNA test on mapping the genome have supported this theory of common ancestor.

I shall leave you with this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster

The flying spaghetti monster has EQUAL claim to creationist theory. No evidence at all.

Circumstantial evidence > no evidence.

Being blunt, FSM has equal claim as christianity/islam/etc. when it comes to origins.

This post has been edited by befitozi: May 3 2010, 06:49 PM

they can dismiss an evidence by simply calling it circumstantial,but when the evidence come in bulk and that each and everyone of them equally points to a sole direction and no other better possible explanations are available,they would then make up a rigid supportive sets of evidence which corroborate the truth of the conjecture previously held,that said,the conjecture must be shown falsifiable in advance...

This post has been edited by CleverDick: May 4 2010, 12:56 AM

if humans evolved from monkeys, why haven't we found a cross-species of human-monkey ?

here,read it
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reproductive_isolation

A monkey aint strong, it thinks it is strong only when cruising with their homies. Very evident in the streets in KL right up to the parliamentary cabinet of Malaysia.
But again, no matter how strong they are, still they're dumb as fark.

This post has been edited by babyrabies: May 3 2010, 08:00 PM

That's indeed very informative. Thanks

But somehow I still don't get it. 2 different species cannot cross-breed but what about evolution of ONE species?

Lets put it this way, my ancestors had tails. But over time it gets shorter and shorter until the way we all are now. Where did all the intermediate species go? e.g. 12cm tail, 6cm tail..etc?

the earliest known human direct ancestor homo habilis was tail-less.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_habilis
the lost of tail happened way earlier before the common ancestor of apes and humans split off,this is why human fossils with tails will never be found...

This post has been edited by CleverDick: May 4 2010, 06:58 PM

you do realize none of the apes (baboon, chimpanzee, orang utan, gorilla, etc - the closest to humans evolution-wise) have tails right? the disappearance of tail doesnt happen during the evolution of homo sapiens, but long time before than when apes split from other monkeys

how can we know that human and monkey or orang utan can be inter-species mix?/

like a horse and donkey....

any 1 have try to mate with a monkey b4??

read previous post or we will more or less go round and round in circles, explaining things that has been explained

here,read it
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reproductive_isolation

Probably that stuff sound circumstantial to you because you're either misinformed or you do not understand it. There is no circumstantial evidence in evolution. Granted, Darwin's original body of work was quite straightforward, but the theory of evolution itself has evolved and refined with every new discovery. We now know that epigenetics is also a strong factor. For example, if you have not had a history of diabetes in your family tree, but in your lifetime you consume so much Pepsi that you became a diabetic, your offspring would then have a predisposition towards diabetes. Also, if your family tree were all weaklings, and you took up bodybuilding and you became a muscular hunk. Your offspring will have a predisposition towards becoming muscular as well. This is roughly what epigenetics have shown us.

Another new discovery is that lateral gene transfer is easier than we thought. Retroviruses, parasites and bacteria can insert their genes into ours easily. Some of these end up eventually as junk DNA. Some of these are successfully silenced by our own biological mechanisms. Scientists are still able to resurrect these extinct viruses based on our genetic code from the "junk DNA" segments, because the laterally inserted genes stand out from the rest of the genome and can be isolated. Sometimes, lateral gene transfer provides us with surprising benefits, like beneficial mutations. Sometimes, they give us genetic defects. Across the various genomes of the entire human race, we're now able to see which race endured what sort of pandemic or epidemic how many generations ago, and what sort of immune adaptation our immune systems came up with.

Heard of the CCR5-delta32 deletion mutation? It's theorized to be a remnant of the Black Death, and it allowed the descendants of the Black Death survivors to resist HIV infection.

That's how evolution takes place.. through small changes.. some which are accidental (such as exogenous LTG) and some which are due to adaptation to surroundings or new lifestyles, like what epigenetics have shown. At present, evolution is recognized as a fact, and it's not exactly the same as the gradual Darwinian model that we used to know. There's a bit of Lamarckian "sudden jumps" here and there.


Hahahaaa!!! Damn right!!!!

A Theory becomes a Law if its many times proved with facts.
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/national/...250973&srvc=rss

Coming back to the topic of why monkeys are so strong.. Humans have only 3 types of muscle fibers, but cats have 7. Their fast-twitch fibers can fire with a much higher intensity and frequency than a human's, while being able to handle higher mechanical loads. Hence, cats are easily more explosive than humans. They can jump so high, and they can sprint much faster than humans despite their short legs.

Perhaps monkeys have such difference compared to humans. Their muscular make up may be different, either in the physiology/structure/type of their muscles or in the nerve network that innervates the fibers.

Holy cow o.o Those hairy thingy are quite strong huh? LOL

no, a scientific theory will not become scientific law. scientific method dont work that way.