Dog lovers are annoying

Also if you present studies and experiments of scientists making material out of nothing just remember that it is the scientists that are giving creative force to conduct such experimentation. If you can present me an experiment of a vacuum left alone and matter spontaneously forming than ill be all there with an open mind.

 

I believe, roundabout in most of the theory of evolution, but there is that whole strange gap missing. We found what we thought was before it, what we thought was after it, but nothing in between. I have read more than the usual amount of articles, for whatever reason about Pangaea and the origins of the early humans, I.E. we are all from Africa. It is interesting to see the mixes of the different mammal species and how the interbreeding of crossing stages of "evolution" created what we have today. It is even more interesting to hear some of the theories about why individuals who are still native to the African continent still have much different characteristics.

All evolution was, was a bunch of different groups of humans, that were separated, and over hundreds and thousands of years, began to "evolve" in their own ways, based on weather, sunlight, food, travel etc.... And eventually, these different groups encountered each other, cross breeding and continuing the process.

I DO, still have a hard time with the whole "We came from Gorillas" theory. That is where the missing link comes in and the logical questions cannot be answered. I.E. Why Gorillas have continued to breed and live for thousands of years, yet their genetics never "evolve" any closer to what we are as humans... Meaning, why would certain gorillas just start to evolve, in the same region, while certain ones did not....

I think we all evolved "as it were" but it ain't what the folks really portray. Giraffes developed longer necks. Certain animals developed ways to hold their breath underwater for 10 minutes out of necessity. Every species on the planet "evolves"...

But I also believe that you can believe in BASIC evolution, as well as creationism. What "God" is, is not some specific human form. If you follow western religion, you have to remember that no one really identified "what" god was. He simply sent a being, "his son" in human form as a prophet etc to speak to the humans. The only form that Jesus would have taken to communicate would be humans. I think the bible or the fable of Adam and Eve if taken to literally. Adam and Eve could have look like Neanderthals. But it wasn't until about 2000 years ago that a form of "god" appeared. It took us that long to REALLY start messing up earth, so if you believe in the "BOOK" and all that, you don't necessarily have to disagree with all the scientific evidence of human development. With that being said, you don't have to believe that we came from Gorillas to believe in basic evolution. Evolution is apparent in almost every species on earth. Plants, animals, insects.

 

I believe that god farted and the universe was born.
[video=youtube;RmD9ZWDUsNY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RmD9ZWDUsNY[/video]

 

Some say that the missing link is psilocybin's effect on the primate brain.

 

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16095-its-confirmed-matter-is-merely-vacuum-fluctuations.html

 

"It is scientifically proven that all major non communicable disease deaths are a result of eating to much animal based foods" - the archmaster

Hey everyone look archy went full retard. I don't feel as though I have to take this too seriously because this is clearly a troll or the guys mentally ill and either way I'd be in the wrong to respond but just so that everyone knows, sugar is the scourge of our generation and it is is ironically derived from plants which vegetarians love so much. Also inuits. I'm just going to leave that at that!

 

Oh snap well he posted youtube videos debunking evolution? Damn my whole world just turned upside down yall

 

Andof course we didn't evolve from chimps. THa'ts so dumb it's hilarious archy. You're a funny guy so I'm guessing you did that on purpose to ruffle my feathers.

No chimps are our brothers in evolution. We have a common ancestor. That ancestor was neither chimp or man, it was the primordial chimp-man.

 

Again it took scientists and computers to create these results. So in essence there is an intelligent creative force behind it. I'm not advocating creationism just point out this fault.

 

Obviously you know nothing on how the body works. Your body is fuel by glucose (sugar). When there is no readably available glucose in the blood the body then converts fat stores into glucose.

And go to your local hospital and find me a vegan with heart disease or cancer. I'll bet you $10,000 (yes I'm holding) that over 90% if not moreof those inflicted with either are meat eaters.

 

Where's this primordial chimp man you speak of?

 

Oh snap! I guess you didn't read that the video was in correlation to the 50 page article and I posted those for lazy bums that don't read more than a headline. Like you who think sugar is poison. Grow up punk.

 

Yes, and this was all explained in the articles I posted, but they don't want to read it. There is no missing link, and evolution is not a chain. It is a tree with many many branches.

 

kind of a silly bet to take as the number of american adults who consider themselves vegan is 1 million
(Source: Vegetarian Research Group, Vegetarian Times, Harris Interactive Service Bureau
Research Date: 6.18.2013), and the us population is 317 million.

if you take that into consideration finding 1 out of ten people with cancer to be vegan doesn't make being a vegan worth it. meatball subs are just too good, rack of lamb is just too good, venison back straps are just too good. thanksgiving turkey too good, bacon and eggs on a bagel with a slice of tomato is just too good. crabs out of your own back yard too good, clams you raked your self.... too good.

you know what's annoying....eating in a restuarant with any vegan. they're even annoying in vegan restuarants.

 

Now you are stepping away from rational logical conversation, and into the realm of made up statistics.

http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/70/3/516s.full
"Further categorization of diets showed that, in comparison with regular meat eaters, mortality from ischemic heart disease was 20% lower in occasional meat eaters, 34% lower in people who ate fish but not meat, 34% lower in lactoovovegetarians, and 26% lower in vegans."

Ardi predates man, yet already very separated from chimp.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/02/science/02fossil.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

This could be from the divergence point: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sahelanthropus_tchadensis
However, more research is needed to verify that. That is the fun part of evolution theory. We get to learn more and more about it as new discoveries are made. Aside from fossil evidence (which is substantial), there is a ton of microbiological and genetic evidence to support the modern theory. Comparing evolutionary scientists to creationists and their belief structure is pretty insulting, given the amount of time and energy that goes into the mounds of research.

 

what is this thread about...? seriously?

Also, metard...don't you have meme or something that could synthesize this discussion visually...hook a brother up...

 

Studies show just eating fish as your "meat" is just as healthy to the heart as vegetarianism anyways. I consider myself an occasional meat eater. I would say my diet is 30% fruit/vegetable, 30% animal protein, 20% fish, and 20% everything else. I think most humans would be in a lot better shape if they had similar diets. What we don't see in the statistics, is how much of the meat eater population regularly overindulges. We also don't see what meats they commonly eat. I bet you will find that occasional meat eaters and vegetarians are generally more health conscious overall, which makes up the biggest difference.

 

Jesus. It's all about Jesus. Don't you know that? Shark-hunter needs jesus. It could help his anger and hate issues.

 

Thanks...i couldn't remember when sifting through the pages of surf-related crap on this particular thread...HOw can I help with the cause? How about John 3:16...or Genesis 1:1...those proof texts should work for the topics on this thread! Wait...I like wolves...there done!

 

I read that whole link you posted, which had me thinking about it. I got the thing, about a tree or a bush. I get that, I just don't like the comparison. We all started from ONE thing. Period. And while I understand the ORIGINAL humans to be the tree trunk and the branches start to move out, but where this comparison stops working for me is the fact that these branches came back together and reconnected. It is more like a twisted vine if you want to think of it that way. But it all came from ONE thing, and from migration etc, and then reintroduction to each other, things cross bred, so it's not like one branch goes out and continues growing leaves and growing outward...

There were numerous occasions where neanderthals had been re-introduced to new-guinea people, who were supposedly more developed as well as the re-introduction of neanderthals to groups they encountered that still had traits left over from their past...

So this doesn't work for me.

If you read articles about where everyone went from "Africa" and how humans migrates, use Wiki or whatever other of the hundred sources that have the same info and cite the times when they explain the re-intigration of almost separate species that all evolved from an original "human" as it were. As certain more developed groups of humans encountered basically living groups that were of their ancestry basically, they start breeding and that is where all this evolution stuff gets grey. As time has gone on, over thousands of years, we are ALL more similar than every as far as different races and ethnicity, but all of our ancestors came from the same original HUMAN and they developed in many different ways, and as the world got small and populations grew, the re-integration and cross breeding of almost separate species at that point created a lot of the stranger looking fossils of earlier humans.

I agree with a lot of the article you posted, but the "tree" thing doesn't quite add up to me. There are too many missing pieces of that structure.

If the tree trunk is supposed to represent "matter" and display how EVERYTHING came from matter, okay, but that leaves out the entire history of human evolution and just puts us at the top of developed life... Which, I agree with, but that theory really has nothing to do with human development.