Why aren't monkeys evolving now?

[Toddsterpatriot]

If man evolved from the monkey, then why are monkeys not still evolving?

Where's the monkey who is smarter than the other monkeys, who's trying to evolve into a man?

Why don't we see monkeys doing anything intelligent, like discovering fire, or inventing the wheel, or burying their dead with ceremonial ritual?

Has the evolutionary process stopped cold?

If man evolved from the monkey, then why are monkeys not still evolving?

Why do you feel monkeys are not evolving?

 

[MaryL]

Evolution takes longer than it took to write the bible. My best guess.

 

[Blackrook]

If man evolved from the monkey, then why are monkeys not still evolving?

Where's the monkey who is smarter than the other monkeys, who's trying to evolve into a man?

Why don't we see monkeys doing anything intelligent, like discovering fire, or inventing the wheel, or burying their dead with ceremonial ritual?

Has the evolutionary process stopped cold?

If man evolved from the monkey, then why are monkeys not still evolving?

Why do you feel monkeys are not evolving?

Are they? If that is what you think, please provide some evidence.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

If man evolved from the monkey, then why are monkeys not still evolving?

Where's the monkey who is smarter than the other monkeys, who's trying to evolve into a man?

Why don't we see monkeys doing anything intelligent, like discovering fire, or inventing the wheel, or burying their dead with ceremonial ritual?

Has the evolutionary process stopped cold?

If man evolved from the monkey, then why are monkeys not still evolving?

Why do you feel monkeys are not evolving?

Are they? If that is what you think, please provide some evidence.

What makes you think they are evolving fast enough that we can show you evidence?
Now if you have evidence that they aren't evolving, that would be something.

 

[Hollie]

I claim, I know for a fact, that if you go outside right now and do three jumping jacks and holler "glory be", you will live forever, you will become better looking and wealthy, and all your descendants will live disease free forever.

If I'm correct (which I am), you gain everything.

If I'm wrong, you have nothing to lose.

Are you going to do the jumping jacks? If no, why not?

I have more evidence backing me up than you do. The evidence I have is:

1) Everything in the Bible, which can't be discounted entirely as a source of information even if not all of it is literally true;

2) 2000 years of saints and miracles, many of them witnessed by thousands and well documented.

The story of Joan of Arc is just one example. Her story would not be possible were it not for the direct intervention of God. I invite you to read about her, keeping an open mind and realize you are reading historical fact, not myth.

This is known as Argument from Authority, which means it's BS. On the bright side though, it's a very good example of faulty reasoning.

How is this argument from authority. If there is eye-witness testimony that certain events occurred, and this is recorded in historical (not religious) documents, then what other evidence is required?

Under the auspices of Metz and Poulengy, she gained a second meeting, where she made an announcement about a military reversal near Orléans several days before messengers arrived to report it.[31] Given the distance of the battle's location, Baudricourt felt Joan could only have known about the French defeat by Divine revelation, and this convinced him to take her seriously.

Joan of Arc - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Joan's knowledge of a battle hundreds of miles away is historical fact, not a story told in the Bible or in a myth or legend. It is recorded in Wikipedia and hundreds of other secular sources.

I can cite many other examples.

Well, as long as you read it on Wiki, it must be true.

Go to the library and you will find dozens of biographies of Joan of Arc which relate the same story. This is undisputed historical fact. If you reject it, you reject reason and logic and fact.

You have made no connection with Joan of Ark and any gawds.

 

[Blackrook]

If man evolved from the monkey, then why are monkeys not still evolving?

Where's the monkey who is smarter than the other monkeys, who's trying to evolve into a man?

Why don't we see monkeys doing anything intelligent, like discovering fire, or inventing the wheel, or burying their dead with ceremonial ritual?

Has the evolutionary process stopped cold?

If man evolved from the monkey, then why are monkeys not still evolving?

Why do you feel monkeys are not evolving?

Are they? If that is what you think, please provide some evidence.

What makes you think they are evolving fast enough that we can show you evidence?
Now if you have evidence that they aren't evolving, that would be something.

The burden of proof is on the person making the positive assertion that something is true. As an atheist, you should know that.

 

[Blackrook]

I have more evidence backing me up than you do. The evidence I have is:

1) Everything in the Bible, which can't be discounted entirely as a source of information even if not all of it is literally true;

2) 2000 years of saints and miracles, many of them witnessed by thousands and well documented.

The story of Joan of Arc is just one example. Her story would not be possible were it not for the direct intervention of God. I invite you to read about her, keeping an open mind and realize you are reading historical fact, not myth.

This is known as Argument from Authority, which means it's BS. On the bright side though, it's a very good example of faulty reasoning.

How is this argument from authority. If there is eye-witness testimony that certain events occurred, and this is recorded in historical (not religious) documents, then what other evidence is required?

Under the auspices of Metz and Poulengy, she gained a second meeting, where she made an announcement about a military reversal near Orléans several days before messengers arrived to report it.[31] Given the distance of the battle's location, Baudricourt felt Joan could only have known about the French defeat by Divine revelation, and this convinced him to take her seriously.

Joan of Arc - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Joan's knowledge of a battle hundreds of miles away is historical fact, not a story told in the Bible or in a myth or legend. It is recorded in Wikipedia and hundreds of other secular sources.

I can cite many other examples.

Well, as long as you read it on Wiki, it must be true.

Go to the library and you will find dozens of biographies of Joan of Arc which relate the same story. This is undisputed historical fact. If you reject it, you reject reason and logic and fact.

You have made no connection with Joan of Ark and any gawds.

I did, but you haven't bothered to read the article I linked to.

And that's what always happens when I provide atheists the proof of God they demand.

They refuse to look at.

Please don't pretend you are using science, logic and reason when you refuse to read articles I have shown you.

 

[Hollie]

This is known as Argument from Authority, which means it's BS. On the bright side though, it's a very good example of faulty reasoning.

How is this argument from authority. If there is eye-witness testimony that certain events occurred, and this is recorded in historical (not religious) documents, then what other evidence is required?

Under the auspices of Metz and Poulengy, she gained a second meeting, where she made an announcement about a military reversal near Orléans several days before messengers arrived to report it.[31] Given the distance of the battle's location, Baudricourt felt Joan could only have known about the French defeat by Divine revelation, and this convinced him to take her seriously.

Joan of Arc - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Joan's knowledge of a battle hundreds of miles away is historical fact, not a story told in the Bible or in a myth or legend. It is recorded in Wikipedia and hundreds of other secular sources.

I can cite many other examples.

Well, as long as you read it on Wiki, it must be true.

Go to the library and you will find dozens of biographies of Joan of Arc which relate the same story. This is undisputed historical fact. If you reject it, you reject reason and logic and fact.

You have made no connection with Joan of Ark and any gawds.

I did, but you haven't bothered to read the article I linked to.

And that's what always happens when I provide atheists the proof of God they demand.

They refuse to look at.

Please don't pretend you are using science, logic and reason when you refuse to read articles I have shown you.

I did read the article. I just don't find articles on Wiki to be convincing evidence of any gawds.

Is Wiki the best your gawds can do?

 

[HUGGY]

What with the NFL playoffs looming close thee Gawds have a lot on their plate. No time to prove they really exist. I'm thinking they could do the late night TV rounds. That would be a big help for us poor mortals. Maybe take out some ads during the Super Bowl. Imagine the great production to show America and the world what we have been missing for over 2,000 years. They could tap into the Catholic's and the Mega Church's bank rolls and do it up big. A campaign FOR THE AGES.. Biblical proportions !!!!

 

[MaryL]

I barely posted, has it been two billion years yet?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

If man evolved from the monkey, then why are monkeys not still evolving?

Where's the monkey who is smarter than the other monkeys, who's trying to evolve into a man?

Why don't we see monkeys doing anything intelligent, like discovering fire, or inventing the wheel, or burying their dead with ceremonial ritual?

Has the evolutionary process stopped cold?

If man evolved from the monkey, then why are monkeys not still evolving?

Why do you feel monkeys are not evolving?

Are they? If that is what you think, please provide some evidence.

What makes you think they are evolving fast enough that we can show you evidence?
Now if you have evidence that they aren't evolving, that would be something.

The burden of proof is on the person making the positive assertion that something is true. As an atheist, you should know that.

The burden of proof is on the person making the positive assertion that something is true.

Excellent point!

If man evolved from the monkey, then why are monkeys not still evolving?

The burden of proof is on the person claiming monkeys are not evolving.

 

[Tuckwolf]

At some point in time, you and I will both find out who is right and who is wrong about the existence of the human soul.

If I am wrong, I lose nothing.

If I am right, I gain everything.

You, on the other hand, gain nothing if you are right, and lose everything if you are wrong.

You can't win this wager because the best you can hope for is a tie.

I know this is not an original idea, but most ideas aren't original.

I claim, I know for a fact, that if you go outside right now and do three jumping jacks and holler "glory be", you will live forever, you will become better looking and wealthy, and all your descendants will live disease free forever.

If I'm correct (which I am), you gain everything.

If I'm wrong, you have nothing to lose.

Are you going to do the jumping jacks? If no, why not?

I have more evidence backing me up than you do. The evidence I have is:

1) Everything in the Bible, which can't be discounted entirely as a source of information even if not all of it is literally true;

2) 2000 years of saints and miracles, many of them witnessed by thousands and well documented.

The story of Joan of Arc is just one example. Her story would not be possible were it not for the direct intervention of God. I invite you to read about her, keeping an open mind and realize you are reading historical fact, not myth.

This is known as Argument from Authority, which means it's BS. On the bright side though, it's a very good example of faulty reasoning.

How is this argument from authority. If there is eye-witness testimony that certain events occurred, and this is recorded in historical (not religious) documents, then what other evidence is required?

Under the auspices of Metz and Poulengy, she gained a second meeting, where she made an announcement about a military reversal near Orléans several days before messengers arrived to report it.[31] Given the distance of the battle's location, Baudricourt felt Joan could only have known about the French defeat by Divine revelation, and this convinced him to take her seriously.

Joan of Arc - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Joan's knowledge of a battle hundreds of miles away is historical fact, not a story told in the Bible or in a myth or legend. It is recorded in Wikipedia and hundreds of other secular sources.

I can cite many other examples.

You have no idea just how much supposed "historical fact" is actually myth. For one thing she was never burned at the stake but was imprisoned for a short time. This was a myth perpetrated by the French Catholic Church as was a lot of religious nonsense associated with Jeanne D'arc. After the war with England she married Count Robert des Armoise and lived a long and happy life. She was also not the woman to lead the French troops into battle, there were several.
So much for Wiki.

 

[Blackrook]

What with the NFL playoffs looming close thee Gawds have a lot on their plate. No time to prove they really exist. I'm thinking they could do the late night TV rounds. That would be a big help for us poor mortals. Maybe take out some ads during the Super Bowl. Imagine the great production to show America and the world what we have been missing for over 2,000 years. They could tap into the Catholic's and the Mega Church's bank rolls and do it up big. A campaign FOR THE AGES.. Biblical proportions !!!!

At some point in time, you and I will both find out who is right and who is wrong about the existence of the human soul.

If I am wrong, I lose nothing.

If I am right, I gain everything.

You, on the other hand, gain nothing if you are right, and lose everything if you are wrong.

You can't win this wager because the best you can hope for is a tie.

I know this is not an original idea, but most ideas aren't original.

I claim, I know for a fact, that if you go outside right now and do three jumping jacks and holler "glory be", you will live forever, you will become better looking and wealthy, and all your descendants will live disease free forever.

If I'm correct (which I am), you gain everything.

If I'm wrong, you have nothing to lose.

Are you going to do the jumping jacks? If no, why not?

I have more evidence backing me up than you do. The evidence I have is:

1) Everything in the Bible, which can't be discounted entirely as a source of information even if not all of it is literally true;

2) 2000 years of saints and miracles, many of them witnessed by thousands and well documented.

The story of Joan of Arc is just one example. Her story would not be possible were it not for the direct intervention of God. I invite you to read about her, keeping an open mind and realize you are reading historical fact, not myth.

This is known as Argument from Authority, which means it's BS. On the bright side though, it's a very good example of faulty reasoning.

How is this argument from authority. If there is eye-witness testimony that certain events occurred, and this is recorded in historical (not religious) documents, then what other evidence is required?

Under the auspices of Metz and Poulengy, she gained a second meeting, where she made an announcement about a military reversal near Orléans several days before messengers arrived to report it.[31] Given the distance of the battle's location, Baudricourt felt Joan could only have known about the French defeat by Divine revelation, and this convinced him to take her seriously.

Joan of Arc - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Joan's knowledge of a battle hundreds of miles away is historical fact, not a story told in the Bible or in a myth or legend. It is recorded in Wikipedia and hundreds of other secular sources.

I can cite many other examples.

You have no idea just how much supposed "historical fact" is actually myth. For one thing she was never burned at the stake but was imprisoned for a short time. This was a myth perpetrated by the French Catholic Church as was a lot of religious nonsense associated with Jeanne D'arc. After the war with England she married Count Robert des Armoise and lived a long and happy life. She was also not the woman to lead the French troops into battle, there were several.
So much for Wiki.

 

[Muslim75]

Should not be considered as such by who? Mohammed? The saints and miracles are well documented, I could provide hundreds of links if I was inclined to do so. I mentioned Joan of Arc because her miracles are well documented. You cannot discount Joan of Arc as myth or legend, she is a historical figure.

Joan of Arc - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

How are these considered miracles ? Not only Joan of Arc but I say the same about all Christian saints. How do you Christians consider these miracles ? Christianity obviously does not know about miracles. Look to the 124 000 saints of Islam who lived after Muhammad (peace be upon him and his family), from the 7th century up to this day in 2014. With them you will find miracles. Here are two examples, out of a very great number:

1/ Graves of some saints of Islam have been re-opened for the purpose of moving them to other places and other cities. When they opened those graves, years and decades after their deaths, it seemed they died just now.

2/ Imam Busayri was known for his deep love in his heart for Muhammad (peace be upon him and his family). He was found one day standing in a river, and the river was boiling.

These are miracles.

 

[Muslim75]

When Pope John Paul II was canonized, it was said that it was because of one miracle of a woman who woke up from a coma after hearing his name. I say that it makes more sense if this so-called miracle is attributed to the woman, not to the pope.

 

[amrchaos]

You know something

I don't think "boiling rivers" is a good sign,IMHO.

 

[Tuckwolf]

Should not be considered as such by who? Mohammed? The saints and miracles are well documented, I could provide hundreds of links if I was inclined to do so. I mentioned Joan of Arc because her miracles are well documented. You cannot discount Joan of Arc as myth or legend, she is a historical figure.

Joan of Arc - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

How are these considered miracles ? Not only Joan of Arc but I say the same about all Christian saints. How do you Christians consider these miracles ? Christianity obviously does not know about miracles. Look to the 124 000 saints of Islam who lived after Muhammad (peace be upon him and his family), from the 7th century up to this day in 2014. With them you will find miracles. Here are two examples, out of a very great number:

1/ Graves of some saints of Islam have been re-opened for the purpose of moving them to other places and other cities. When they opened those graves, years and decades after their deaths, it seemed they died just now.

2/ Imam Busayri was known for his deep love in his heart for Muhammad (peace be upon him and his family). He was found one day standing in a river, and the river was boiling.

These are miracles.

The river wasn't boiling... he just farted!
Al told me

 

[Yarddog]

If man evolved from the monkey, then why are monkeys not still evolving?

Where's the monkey who is smarter than the other monkeys, who's trying to evolve into a man?

Why don't we see monkeys doing anything intelligent, like discovering fire, or inventing the wheel, or burying their dead with ceremonial ritual?

Has the evolutionary process stopped cold?[/QUOT

Baboons can learn to spot real words - Technology science - Science NBC News


Ive heard about a troup of Babboons adopting dogs to be used as sentrys and one group of Baboons when studied over a long period of time
would appear to meet each morning andhave some sort of assembly function. Who knows mayeb it was a safety meeting?

 

[Yarddog]

No scientist says we evolved from monkeys, but that we had a common ancestor.
Dolphins and whales evolved from land mammals.

Where are these common ancestors now? All buried and in the ground. Why did none of these half-monkey, half-men survive to the modern age? It seems awful convenient that none of them are around.

Well, see, its because they never have to be elected to office..... they are appointees. then they never have to leave, which is why you never see them!
mystery solved BTW this also explains why it takes them so long to get anything done, its that ..... small frontal lobe.

 

[hjmick]

If man evolved from the monkey, then why are monkeys not still evolving?

Where's the monkey who is smarter than the other monkeys, who's trying to evolve into a man?

Why don't we see monkeys doing anything intelligent, like discovering fire, or inventing the wheel, or burying their dead with ceremonial ritual?

Has the evolutionary process stopped cold?

Because man did not evolve from monkeys... Or apes. Or gorillas.

Good Christ doesn't anyone pat attention in class?