Monkeys become people?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
D

dharma-bum

Guest
Do you really think this is evidence that monkeys become men? You have to want to believe that as a matter of faith...not provable science.
No, I do not believe this is evidence that monkeys become, became, or evolved into men. And outside of the realm of pure mathematics, science is generally not provable. Scientifically, no one can prove anything with 100% certainty (note: i'm making this assertion with less than 100% certainty :) ).

I do believe that this is evidence for evolution, and evidence that evolution possibly created humanity after the process was repeated for billions of years.

I do not believe evolution is the one and only possible explanation for this evidence. As you pointed out, "evolutionists" change their positions frequently. Perhaps if new discoveries are made sometime in the future, evolution will be exposed as pseudo-science. If that happened, I would abandon the theory, but for now I believe it is the best theory to fit our observations. This is why science is not faith based. I have no faith (i.e. "belief without evidence") in evolution.

You did mention a very important concept though, different from but related to evolution. The "something from nothing" concept of the big bang. Similarly, PeterJens asked "What makes the first living organism based on DNA?" These are huge questions that evolution does not address or answer, and I do believe God somehow catalyzed these events.
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
61,624
30,654
113
I have no faith (i.e. "belief without evidence") in evolution.
Isolating this part of your post just to make the point that faith is not without evidence. People do seem to accept Hebrews 11:1 as a definition when it could be better accepted as a partial descriptor, such as saying, for instance, a banana is yellow and tasty is a partial descriptor of a banana but not a definition in and of itself :)
 
S

Sirk

Guest
They have yet to cook up life in a lab under pristine conditions to kick start even a simple single celled organism. God created life and he created it the way it is.The fall and subsequent flood is what changed things and why there aren't any more dinosaurs or 800lb beavers. Evolution is, always has been, and always will be a theory that falls flat on its face. Modern science is nothing more than a profit driven endeavor based on half truths and manipulation. Just like big pharma...big govt...the us dept of education and on and on and on..... It is about the control of information and ultimately control of us.
 
M

Mitspa

Guest
No, I do not believe this is evidence that monkeys become, became, or evolved into men. And outside of the realm of pure mathematics, science is generally not provable. Scientifically, no one can prove anything with 100% certainty (note: i'm making this assertion with less than 100% certainty :) ).

I do believe that this is evidence for evolution, and evidence that evolution possibly created humanity after the process was repeated for billions of years.

I do not believe evolution is the one and only possible explanation for this evidence. As you pointed out, "evolutionists" change their positions frequently. Perhaps if new discoveries are made sometime in the future, evolution will be exposed as pseudo-science. If that happened, I would abandon the theory, but for now I believe it is the best theory to fit our observations. This is why science is not faith based. I have no faith (i.e. "belief without evidence") in evolution.

You did mention a very important concept though, different from but related to evolution. The "something from nothing" concept of the big bang. Similarly, PeterJens asked "What makes the first living organism based on DNA?" These are huge questions that evolution does not address or answer, and I do believe God somehow catalyzed these events.
First lots of things are testable and provable ...we have many know and testable facts and laws of physics .. That's what real science is ... and its a leap of logic beyond reason to assume that mutations prove monkeys turn in to men...its like saying because someone grows a mole that that mole is proof that they will grow another eye...in billions of years only adds the value of taking something out of the realm of logic into the realm of fantasy ... you could say in a billion years monkeys will grow wings...but that not science ..that's a fairy tale. just making up things is not science..proving what is true is.


Look I don't mean to be unkind..and im glad you have at least some concept of God...but this theory has destroyed the faith of millions and leaves millions in bondage to ignorance and a religion of nothing.
 
Dec 18, 2013
6,733
45
0
you could say in a billion years monkeys will grow wings....
Sorry can't resist the opportunity this presents for a pop culture allusion. Does make me think of something funny though. Consider that all of known history fits into about 4,000 years (not including the Flood.) So if it were that there was even billion of years of existence then theoretically it is entirely scientifically plausible by that paradigm for Oz to have existed and vanished without leaving a trace.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SESI19h4wDo

[video=youtube;SESI19h4wDo]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SESI19h4wDo[/video]
 
B

Babylonisfalling

Guest
I don't think there are either. Evolution is at it's very best a theory and whether or not it's even a CREDIBLE theory is seriously questionable.
 
B

Brother_J_BELGIUM

Guest
If monkeys become people ...why do we still have monkeys and we don't have monkeys in the process of becoming people?

I mean if you believe millions of years ago monkeys became men...why did the evolution process stop with certain monkeys? Why do we now have monkeys..why did those monkeys not change as the other monkeys did... and if evolution is real science, why did process change some monkeys and leave other monkeys as monkeys? Why don't we see some monkeys changing to men now? Same monkeys they claim was around millions of years ago? Why does evolution only work in the imagination of some people who deny God as Creator?
Well... I think in the evolutionist's mind, sometimes evolution works and sometimes it doesn't. Sometimes 1 + 1 = 2 and sometimes it isn't... It's just a fairy tale. Another question can be brought forth. Why do almost all monkeys of the same species look identically like his or her brother and why does every human being look so different from each other. Think about it. Your brother can have black or dark brown hair and you could have blonde hair. We don't see that kind of information (DNA) in monkeys, do we?

The problem evolution faces, is this: they say by adding billions and billions of years, someday some small bacteria will turn into a monkey and then man by ADDING information (DNA) out of NOWHERE. However, the Bible tells us that He created 'kinds' of animals from which other species (there are millions of species that live today and couldn't all go on an Ark replica today). There are some 7,000 'kinds' (family or genus) of animals (fish and bugs excluded) from which all these millions SPECIES have developed. There's a huge difference between kinds and species.
 
Last edited:

Budman

Senior Member
Mar 9, 2014
4,153
1,999
113
Any duplication of genetic material can be imperfect and introduce new genetic codes. This is one way mutations occur: from mistakes made while copying DNA or RNA. Therefore, any increase in the genetic code (even if it originates as a duplication) allows for the possibility of new genes to mutate within the increased genetic code.

For example, people with down syndrome have extra genetic material, a duplicate chromosome 21. This is not generally considered a beneficial mutation (most aren't), but it is an increase in genetic information that can itself mutate. There are almost certainly people with DS who have mutated or partial copies of C21, so, to answer your question: that would be an example of a mutation that generated an increase in new genetic information.
Duplication is not an increase in genetic information. Copying mistakes result in a loss of genetic information.

You are misunderstanding the question, apparently.

I asked you to give an example of an increase in genetic information, not a reconfiguration of existing information, or an activation of the dormant - that results in a new function. An increase in new information from scratch - which is a requirement for Darwinian evolution to occur.
 
M

Mitspa

Guest
Cool someone that has studied how they use these terms ...I just don't have time to chase down every new lie evolutionist makes up or figure out every term... what I do know is this, God made Adam and Eve and evolution is just a silly lie. That any honest person can study out what they are trying to affirm and the lies they have already been caught telling and defeat this fairytale.
 
D

dharma-bum

Guest
*sigh* I apologize for bringing this inane thread to the top of the list again, but I feel compelled to clarify myself so people understand my position and stop misrepresenting it.

Duplication is not an increase in genetic information.
So where do we disagree?

1) DNA replication does not always create perfect copies of the original DNA molecule. There are frequent mistakes and errors in this process that result in mutations.

2) Gene duplication creates new genetic material and lengthens a DNA molecule.

3) A lengthened (duplicated) DNA molecule can replicate erroneously, and change its genetic code (mutate).

This would be an increase in genetic information.

Even if one increase is a detrimental, nonsensical sequence of gibberish nucleotides, it is happening repeatedly, in almost every cell, in almost every living organism. And like sands on the beach, stars in the sky, or monkeys at typewriters: some of them will eventually get it right and find a new beneficial mutation (see post #94 for an example).

Copying mistakes result in a loss of genetic information.
There are frequently errors and mistakes during DNA replication which cause changes in, not perfect copies of, a genetic sequence (and if the mistake occurs while replicating the termination sequence of the DNA molecule, you end up with even more genetic material!). Every diploid cell in your body is not making perfect copies of all 6,000,000,000 base-pairs of nucleotides it contains. They make mistakes.

These mistakes, or changes in the nucleotide sequence are not a "loss of genetic information." Although they could be perceived that way because they do irreversibly change the genetic sequence, and the original is lost.

The original sequence is lost, and a new one is there to replace it. This is the mechanism that causes evolution. These changes are mutations. They can be beneficial, harmful, or (most likely) benign (and not manifest in any noticeable way). Allow me to refer back to my "stars in the sky, monkeys at typewriters" analogy. At some point, in some cell, in some organism: a mutation will be beneficial and spread through the population. See post #94 for an example.

You are misunderstanding the question, apparently.
I think you misunderstood my response. I stated it much more simply in my post #95: "people with down syndrome have extra genetic material, and this extra material could mutate. They have 47 chromosomes, but usually people have 46."

This is a completely valid answer to your question. It is a mutation that can result in the increase of genetic information.

I asked you to give an example of an increase in genetic information, not a reconfiguration of existing information
I provided examples of how a genotype could be lengthened (through duplication, termination-sequence-errors, and additional chromosomes), and examples of mutations caused by faulty replication. Taken together, this is a recipe for new genetic information.

A "reconfiguration of existing information" on a lengthened DNA molecule is indistinguishable from "an increase in genetic information." If this is not apparent, you may have some fundamental flaws in your understanding of current evolutionary theory.

An increase in new information from scratch ... is a requirement for Darwinian evolution to occur.
No it isn't. Darwin wrote "On the Origin of Species" 100 years before Watson discovered DNA, and Darwin made no such claims.

"An increase in new genetic information from scratch" (inanimate matter?) is abiogenesis, and not the topic of discussion.

An increase in new genetic information from existing genetic information is evolution, and I have given a few examples of this.
 
M

Miri

Guest
Hi dharma,

You are not alone in thinking the world came about due to a mixture of creation and
evolution, many people including Christians muse over this possibility at some point.
Then they have to decide themselves which they will believe in. It sounds as if
you have not made up your mind yet.

I think that is why any inclination towards evolution undermines the concept that God
even exists. Dabble in evolution on any level and it's not possible to believe any of the bible.
I don't know how much of the bible you have read but it is multi faceted in that it all
links together. It is a joy to trace through these links try it for yourself, try
doing a word or concept study and you will quickly see what I mean.

The other problem with the theory of evolution/creation mix is that is assumes
God set things going and now everything it ticking over automatically and no
longer under his control.

Its not! It is all in God's hands, here is just some of what the bible says:-


Genesis 8:20-22 NKJV
[20] Then Noah built an altar to the LORD, and took of every clean animal and of every
clean bird, and offered burnt offerings on the altar. [21] And the LORD smelled a soothing
aroma. Then the LORD said in His heart, "I will never again curse the ground for man's
sake, although the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth; nor will I again
destroy every living thing as I have done. [22] "While the earth remains, Seedtime
and harvest, Cold and heat, Winter and summer, And day and night Shall not cease."



This shows God could make the world as we know it cease at any time! But He made a
covenant with Noah, Noah needed to be able to get on with his life without the worry of
another global disaster.

Then there is God's reply to Job below which clearly shows everything is in God's hands.
I think your concept of God and his ability is too small at the moment, praying for you
that one day you will realise just how awsome God is. We are ants on an ant hill
created by God.


Job 38:1,3-41 NKJV
[1] Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said: [3] Now prepare yourself
like a man; I will question you, and you shall answer Me. [4] "Where were you when
I laid the foundations of the earth? Tell Me, if you have understanding. [5] Who determined
its measurements? Surely you know! Or who stretched the line upon it?

[6] To what were its foundations fastened? Or who laid its cornerstone, [7] When the
morning stars sang together, And all the sons of God shouted for joy? [8] "Or who shut
in the sea with doors, When it burst forth and issued from the womb; [9] When I made
the clouds its garment, And thick darkness its swaddling band; [10] When I fixed
My limit for it, And set bars and doors; [11] When I said, 'This far you may come,
but no farther, And here your proud waves must stop!'

[12] "Have you commanded the morning since your days began, And caused the dawn
to know its place, [13] That it might take hold of the ends of the earth, And the wicked
be shaken out of it? [14] It takes on form like clay under a seal, And stands out like a
garment. [15] From the wicked their light is withheld, And the upraised arm is broken.

[16] "Have you entered the springs of the sea? Or have you walked in search of the depths?
[17] Have the gates of death been revealed to you? Or have you seen the doors of the
shadow of death? [18] Have you comprehended the breadth of the earth? Tell Me, if you
know all this. [19] "Where is the way to the dwelling of light? And darkness, where is its
place, [20] That you may take it to its territory, That you may know the paths to its home?

[21] Do you know it, because you were born then, Or because the number of your days
is great? [22] "Have you entered the treasury of snow, Or have you seen the treasury of
hail, [23] Which I have reserved for the time of trouble, For the day of battle and war?
[24] By what way is light diffused, Or the east wind scattered over the earth? [25] "Who has
divided a channel for the overflowing water, Or a path for the thunderbolt, [26] To cause
it to rain on a land where there is no one, A wilderness in which there is no man;

[27] To satisfy the desolate waste, And cause to spring forth the growth of tender grass?
[28] Has the rain a father? Or who has begotten the drops of dew? [29] From whose
womb comes the ice? And the frost of heaven, who gives it birth? [30] The waters harden
like stone, And the surface of the deep is frozen. [31] "Can you bind the cluster of the
Pleiades, Or loose the belt of Orion? [32] Can you bring out Mazzaroth in its season?
Or can you guide the Great Bear with its cubs? [33] Do you know the ordinances of
the heavens? Can you set their dominion over the earth? [34] "Can you lift up your
voice to the clouds, That an abundance of water may cover you?

[35] Can you send out lightnings, that they may go, And say to you, 'Here we are!'?
[36] Who has put wisdom in the mind? Or who has given understanding to the heart?
[37] Who can number the clouds by wisdom? Or who can pour out the bottles of heaven,
[38] When the dust hardens in clumps, And the clods cling together? [39] "Can you
hunt the prey for the lion, Or satisfy the appetite of the young lions, [40] When they
crouch in their dens, Or lurk in their lairs to lie in wait? [41] Who provides food for
the raven, When its young ones cry to God, And wander about for lack of food?



Job 39:1-30 NKJV
[1] "Do you know the time when the wild mountain goats bear young? Or can you mark
when the deer gives birth? [2] Can you number the months that they fulfill? Or do you
know the time when they bear young? [3] They bow down, They bring forth their
young, They deliver their offspring. [4] Their young ones are healthy, They grow
strong with grain; They depart and do not return to them. [5] "Who set the wild donkey
free? Who loosed the bonds of the onager, [6] Whose home I have made the wilderness,
And the barren land his dwelling? [7] He scorns the tumult of the city; He does not heed
the shouts of the driver. [8] The range of the mountains is his pasture, And he searches
after every green thing.

[9] "Will the wild ox be willing to serve you? Will he bed by your manger? [10] Can you
bind the wild ox in the furrow with ropes? Or will he plow the valleys behind you?
[11] Will you trust him because his strength is great? Or will you leave your labor
to him? [12] Will you trust him to bring home your grain, And gather it to your
threshing floor? [13] "The wings of the ostrich wave proudly, But are her wings and
pinions like the kindly stork's? [14] For she leaves her eggs on the ground, And warms
them in the dust; [15] She forgets that a foot may crush them, Or that a wild beast
may break them. [16] She treats her young harshly, as though they were not hers;
Her labor is in vain, without concern, [17] Because God deprived her of wisdom,
And did not endow her with understanding. [18] When she lifts herself on high, She
scorns the horse and its rider.

[19] "Have you given the horse strength? Have you clothed his neck with thunder?
[20] Can you frighten him like a locust? His majestic snorting strikes terror
. [21] He paws in the valley, and rejoices in his strength; He gallops into the clash
of arms. [22] He mocks at fear, and is not frightened; Nor does he turn back from
the sword. [23] The quiver rattles against him, The glittering spear and javelin.

[24] He devours the distance with fierceness and rage; Nor does he come to a
halt because the trumpet has sounded. [25] At the blast of the trumpet he says,
'Aha!' He smells the battle from afar, The thunder of captains and shouting.

[26] "Does the hawk fly by your wisdom, And spread its wings toward the south?
[27] Does the eagle mount up at your command, And make its nest on high?
[28] On the rock it dwells and resides, On the crag of the rock and the stronghold.
[29] From there it spies out the prey; Its eyes observe from afar. [30] Its young
ones suck up blood; And where the slain are, there it is."




See also the last few chapters of Job following the above.
 
M

Miri

Guest
Incidentally we worship an orderly God not a chaotic God and we see many
of the laws He set in place, gravity for example or the rotation of the galaxies.
But don't confuse God's laws with evolution.

God created these laws but he can also break them, again there are many
examples in the bible but the following will do:


2 Kings 20:9-11 NKJV
[9] Then Isaiah said, "This is the sign to you from the LORD, that the LORD
will do the thing which He has spoken: shall the shadow go forward ten degrees
or go backward ten degrees?" [10] And Hezekiah answered, "It is an easy
thing for the shadow to go down ten degrees; no, but let the shadow go
backward ten degrees." [11] So Isaiah the prophet cried out to the LORD,
and He brought the shadow ten degrees backward, by which it had gone
down on the sundial of Ahaz.
 
M

Mitspa

Guest
*sigh* I apologize for bringing this inane thread to the top of the list again, but I feel compelled to clarify myself so people understand my position and stop misrepresenting it.



So where do we disagree?

1) DNA replication does not always create perfect copies of the original DNA molecule. There are frequent mistakes and errors in this process that result in mutations.

2) Gene duplication creates new genetic material and lengthens a DNA molecule.

3) A lengthened (duplicated) DNA molecule can replicate erroneously, and change its genetic code (mutate).

This would be an increase in genetic information.

Even if one increase is a detrimental, nonsensical sequence of gibberish nucleotides, it is happening repeatedly, in almost every cell, in almost every living organism. And like sands on the beach, stars in the sky, or monkeys at typewriters: some of them will eventually get it right and find a new beneficial mutation (see post #94 for an example).



There are frequently errors and mistakes during DNA replication which cause changes in, not perfect copies of, a genetic sequence (and if the mistake occurs while replicating the termination sequence of the DNA molecule, you end up with even more genetic material!). Every diploid cell in your body is not making perfect copies of all 6,000,000,000 base-pairs of nucleotides it contains. They make mistakes.

These mistakes, or changes in the nucleotide sequence are not a "loss of genetic information." Although they could be perceived that way because they do irreversibly change the genetic sequence, and the original is lost.

The original sequence is lost, and a new one is there to replace it. This is the mechanism that causes evolution. These changes are mutations. They can be beneficial, harmful, or (most likely) benign (and not manifest in any noticeable way). Allow me to refer back to my "stars in the sky, monkeys at typewriters" analogy. At some point, in some cell, in some organism: a mutation will be beneficial and spread through the population. See post #94 for an example.



I think you misunderstood my response. I stated it much more simply in my post #95: "people with down syndrome have extra genetic material, and this extra material could mutate. They have 47 chromosomes, but usually people have 46."

This is a completely valid answer to your question. It is a mutation that can result in the increase of genetic information.



I provided examples of how a genotype could be lengthened (through duplication, termination-sequence-errors, and additional chromosomes), and examples of mutations caused by faulty replication. Taken together, this is a recipe for new genetic information.

A "reconfiguration of existing information" on a lengthened DNA molecule is indistinguishable from "an increase in genetic information." If this is not apparent, you may have some fundamental flaws in your understanding of current evolutionary theory.



No it isn't. Darwin wrote "On the Origin of Species" 100 years before Watson discovered DNA, and Darwin made no such claims.

"An increase in new genetic information from scratch" (inanimate matter?) is abiogenesis, and not the topic of discussion.

An increase in new genetic information from existing genetic information is evolution, and I have given a few examples of this.
Basically any corruption of the DNA is proof of evolution... when you take that logic outside of what is testable and provable by real science and add the element of vast periods of time where anyone can claim anything. Anyone can say in a billion years this or that will happen and have absolutely no proof ...all this evolution after all these billions of years and millions of fossils found and never one bit of proof that any created thing has been found to evolve into anything else but what is was? That's amazing that no evidence has ever been found...and that evolutionist have been caught time and time again trying to make up some evidence in the fossil record.
 
P

popeye

Guest
Do you really think this is evidence that monkeys become men? You have to want to believe that as a matter of faith...not provable science.
In a million year bracket we would need at least 2suns ,(who knows), to accommodate that time span.

Does the sun evolve into new suns every so often?
 

breno785au

Senior Member
Jul 23, 2013
6,002
767
113
39
Australia
They have yet to cook up life in a lab under pristine conditions to kick start even a simple single celled organism. God created life and he created it the way it is.The fall and subsequent flood is what changed things and why there aren't any more dinosaurs or 800lb beavers. Evolution is, always has been, and always will be a theory that falls flat on its face. Modern science is nothing more than a profit driven endeavor based on half truths and manipulation. Just like big pharma...big govt...the us dept of education and on and on and on..... It is about the control of information and ultimately control of us.
Even if they did, there is an external entity initializing that life. In other words, everything didn't come from nothing.
 
O

oldthennew

Guest
whatever we decide in our minds, we will eventually come to realize, that no matter what
we come-up with, we will ultimately come to know that we simply cannot know the
mind of Christ or the WHY He does what He does, because He is SPIRIT and we
are flesh....
but this does not eliminate our gifts or individual gifted knowledge, which can only
come from Him - take your gifts and cherish them in your hearts, for this is our own
personal proof of the One who loves us beyond our understanding.....
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
61,624
30,654
113
Even if they did, there is an external entity initializing that life. In other words, everything didn't come from nothing.
I would rather say an eternal Entity, as opposed to external, for He lives within us :)
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
61,624
30,654
113
Yeah I speaking within the context of a lab experiment :)
I see :) It is an interesting conjecture, one indubitably doomed to failure, this experiment... even cloning is rife with problems for the poor animals so formed.:(