Apes descended from Humans – NOT the other way around.

[ptif219]

Seems evolution is wrong. But then we all know science is always wrong when the new theory comes.

Apes descended from Humans

Man didn’t descend from apes. What is closer to the truth is that our knuckle-dragging cousins descended from us.

That’s one of the shocking new theories being drawn from a series of anthropology papers published Friday in a special edition of the journal Science.

Scientists say a 4.4-million-year-old fossil called Ardi – short for ardipithecus ramidus – is descended from the “missing link,” or the last common ancestor between humans and apes.

The 4-foot, 110-pound female’s skeleton and physiological characteristics bear a closer resemblance to modern-day humans than to contemporary apes, meaning they evolved from human-like creatures – not the other way around.

 

[soccerboy22]

That article doesn't disprove evolution. All it means is that the apes seem to have evolutionary progressed farther than humans did to adapt with their living environments.

 

[Cardinal]

Neat, but I'm not sure how this disproves evolution either.

 

[Wiseone]

Seems evolution is wrong. But then we all know science is always wrong when the new theory comes.

Apes descended from Humans

Man didn’t descend from apes. What is closer to the truth is that our knuckle-dragging cousins descended from us.

That’s one of the shocking new theories being drawn from a series of anthropology papers published Friday in a special edition of the journal Science.

Scientists say a 4.4-million-year-old fossil called Ardi – short for ardipithecus ramidus – is descended from the “missing link,” or the last common ancestor between humans and apes.

The 4-foot, 110-pound female’s skeleton and physiological characteristics bear a closer resemblance to modern-day humans than to contemporary apes, meaning they evolved from human-like creatures – not the other way around.

So you're evidence that evolution is wrong is that.... evolution didn't occur in the order we orginally thought? At no point in time while you were writing this did you pause and think "Hey wait I'm arguing evolution is wrong and my evidence is evolution itself?"

 

[ptif219]

That article doesn't disprove evolution. All it means is that the apes seem to have evolutionary progressed farther than humans did to adapt with their living environments.

If this theory is correct Apes evolved from humans which means evolution saying we came from apes is wrong

 

[ptif219]

So you're evidence that evolution is wrong is that.... evolution didn't occur in the order we orginally thought? At no point in time while you were writing this did you pause and think "Hey wait I'm arguing evolution is wrong and my evidence is evolution itself?"

No I am saying evolution happens. It is probably going on today. The point is we did not come from apes. So this means the whole progression of evolution is wrong. We now do not know where man came from.

 

[roughdraft274]

Seems evolution is wrong. But then we all know science is always wrong when the new theory comes.

Apes descended from Humans

Man didn’t descend from apes. What is closer to the truth is that our knuckle-dragging cousins descended from us.

That’s one of the shocking new theories being drawn from a series of anthropology papers published Friday in a special edition of the journal Science.

Scientists say a 4.4-million-year-old fossil called Ardi – short for ardipithecus ramidus – is descended from the “missing link,” or the last common ancestor between humans and apes.

The 4-foot, 110-pound female’s skeleton and physiological characteristics bear a closer resemblance to modern-day humans than to contemporary apes, meaning they evolved from human-like creatures – not the other way around.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/envir...617-no-sea-level-increase-last-100-years.html

Judging by your last thread regarding scientific literature I'm thinking it's safe to assume that this paper is saying anything other than what you're saying it is saying.

 

[ptif219]

http://www.debatepolitics.com/envir...617-no-sea-level-increase-last-100-years.html

Judging by your last thread regarding scientific literature I'm thinking it's safe to assume that this paper is saying anything other than what you're saying it is saying.

Read it,it is from the journal of science

 

[Slartibartfast]

Seems evolution is wrong. But then we all know science is always wrong when the new theory comes.

Apes descended from Humans

Man didn’t descend from apes. What is closer to the truth is that our knuckle-dragging cousins descended from us.

That’s one of the shocking new theories being drawn from a series of anthropology papers published Friday in a special edition of the journal Science.

Scientists say a 4.4-million-year-old fossil called Ardi – short for ardipithecus ramidus – is descended from the “missing link,” or the last common ancestor between humans and apes.

The 4-foot, 110-pound female’s skeleton and physiological characteristics bear a closer resemblance to modern-day humans than to contemporary apes, meaning they evolved from human-like creatures – not the other way around.

rof The argument is not that humans descended from apes (as we know apes today) but from an earlier species. What you have posted, supports this hypothesis.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

Seeing some of the apes around here, you may be on to something. :ssst:

 

[roughdraft274]

Read it,it is from the journal of science

Yes, lol. have you read it? Do you understand that it in no way is going against evolution? It's merely shedding light in a few areas. We previously thought that our common ancestor with the apes walked hunched over as many apes do now. This new fossil leads us to believe that our common ancestor walked mostly upright like humans and then apes branched off and began walking hunched over on their knuckles as you would see them today. Evolution still is correct in saying that share a common ancestor with the apes. It's only saying that the common ancestor was more human than it was ape in many ways.

 

[Slartibartfast]

Seeing some of the apes around here, you may be on to something. :ssst:

Did Harry Guerilla evolve from himself or did he evolve from himself?

 

[Manc Skipper]

Nobody ever claimed that humans descended from apes in the first place.

 

[Dittohead not!]

Nobody ever claimed that humans descended from apes in the first place.

Humans did not descend from apes, but from astralopithecas.

 

[ptif219]

rof The argument is not that humans descended from apes (as we know apes today) but from an earlier species. What you have posted, supports this hypothesis.

Does it? Or does it show apes evolved from man and man was before Apes?

 

[ptif219]

Yes, lol. have you read it? Do you understand that it in no way is going against evolution? It's merely shedding light in a few areas. We previously thought that our common ancestor with the apes walked hunched over as many apes do now. This new fossil leads us to believe that our common ancestor walked mostly upright like humans and then apes branched off and began walking hunched over on their knuckles as you would see them today. Evolution still is correct in saying that share a common ancestor with the apes. It's only saying that the common ancestor was more human than it was ape in many ways.

So then the teaching man evolved from apes may be a total misstatement.

 

[ptif219]

Nobody ever claimed that humans descended from apes in the first place.

I believe Darwin did.

Evolution Of Man

 

[Cameron]

Does it? Or does it show apes evolved from man and man was before Apes?

From the article you posted:

Scientists say a 4.4-million-year-old fossil called Ardi – short for ardipithecus ramidus – is descended from the “missing link,” or the last common ancestor between humans and apes.

The 4-foot, 110-pound female’s skeleton and physiological characteristics bear a closer resemblance to modern-day humans than to contemporary apes, meaning they evolved from human-like creatures – not the other way around.

Thus, both man and apes evolved from a common ancestor...which I believe has been the basic theory for decades. The only difference is that the original ancestor (at least 4.4 million years ago) is now believed to have been slightly more human-like than ape-like.

 

[Redress]

I believe Darwin did.

Evolution Of Man

This thread proves why you should read source material beyond titles. From this source:

The modern theory concerning the evolution of man proposes that humans and apes derive from an apelike ancestor that lived on earth a few million years ago. The theory states that man, through a combination of environmental and genetic factors, emerged as a species to produce the variety of ethnicities seen today, while modern apes evolved on a separate evolutionary pathway. Perhaps the most famous proponent of evolutionary theory is Charles Darwin (1809-82) who authored The Origin of Species (1859) to describe his theory of evolution. It was based largely on observations which he made during his 5-year voyage around the world aboard the HMS Beagle (1831-36). Since then, mankind's origin has generally been explained from an evolutionary perspective. Moreover, the theory of man's evolution has been and continues to be modified as new findings are discovered, revisions to the theory are adopted, and earlier concepts proven incorrect are discarded.

So no, according to your absolutely horrible source, he did not say it. By the way, I would never, ever use that source for a source for anything. It ain't good.

 

[Whovian]

 

[StillBallin75]

Seems evolution is wrong. But then we all know science is always wrong when the new theory comes.

Apes descended from Humans

Man didn’t descend from apes. What is closer to the truth is that our knuckle-dragging cousins descended from us.

That’s one of the shocking new theories being drawn from a series of anthropology papers published Friday in a special edition of the journal Science.

Scientists say a 4.4-million-year-old fossil called Ardi – short for ardipithecus ramidus – is descended from the “missing link,” or the last common ancestor between humans and apes.

The 4-foot, 110-pound female’s skeleton and physiological characteristics bear a closer resemblance to modern-day humans than to contemporary apes, meaning they evolved from human-like creatures – not the other way around.

I don't see how this disproves evolution.

 

[ptif219]

From the article you posted:

Thus, both man and apes evolved from a common ancestor...which I believe has been the basic theory for decades. The only difference is that the original ancestor (at least 4.4 million years ago) is now believed to have been slightly more human-like than ape-like.

Wrong since the was the period of astralopithecas.

Australopithecus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It is widely held by archaeologists and palaeontologists that the australopiths played a significant part in human evolution, and it was one of the australopith species that eventually evolved into the Homo genus in Africa around 2 million years ago, which contained within it species like Homo habilis, H. ergaster and eventually the modern human species, H. sapiens sapiens.[1]

 

[ptif219]

I don't see how this disproves evolution.

Evolution is on going. It just seems their several theories now and we do not know who evolved from whom or when. Then again it could be man was created and species evolved from man.

 

[roughdraft274]

So then the teaching man evolved from apes may be a total misstatement.

If you actually go to a biology class no one says man evolved from apes. We share a common ancestor. This article only shows that the common ancestor was a little more human like that we thought. It in no way gives credence to the idea that man was created and species evolved from him.

 

[Tucker Case]

Humans are apes.