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.

prove-all

Senior Member
May 16, 2014
5,977
400
83
63
A look at The dodo bird

In 1681, the last dodo bird on the planet breathed its last. But that did not end the bird’s story.

Some 300 years later, botanists on Mauritius—the island where the dodo had lived—noticed that a certain species of tree was rapidly dying off. Tambalacoque trees had historically grown in abundance on Mauritius, but by the 1970s some botanists said only 13 remained—and they were all thought to be around 300 years old. Each year, they were producing fruit containing seeds, but none of the seeds were sprouting into saplings. This meant that no new tambalacoque trees had sprouted since the late 1600s.

The tambalacoque’s average lifespan is roughly 300 years, so the last trees of the species were very near the end of their lives. Once those 13 died, the tambalacoque would be just like the dodo: extinct.

American ecologist Stanley Temple wondered if the dodo’s extinction 300 years earlier was connected to the tambalacoque’s inability to reproduce, which had also set in about 300 years earlier.

In Mauritius, Temple made a fascinating discovery: When the dodos were still alive, they ate tambalacoque’s fruit. And only after the seeds had journeyed through their digestive tract could they successfully germinate.

Researcher and writer Robert Doolan explained the discovery: “The tree’s seeds are encased in a thick-walled protective coat, but the dodo’s stone-filled gizzard was able to exert a powerful crushing pressure on them. The bird’s gizzard (a second stomach for grinding food) would pound away at the seed’s coat, weakening it and cracking it a little, but not enough to damage the seed inside. When eventually deposited by the dodo, the seed was able to germinate.”

After making this discovery, Temple found a solution: He imported some American turkeys to Mauritius. Their digestive process was similar enough to that of the dodos to be able to activate the tambalacoque seeds. Thanks to Temple and the turkeys, the tambalacoque lives on to this day.

The Message

The dodo went extinct back in 1681, but 300 years later, it delivered a posthumous message: For the tambalacoque tree to survive, it likely had to have come into existence at the same time as the dodo bird.

This supports the biblical account of creation. Genesis 1 records that when God renewed the Earth, He made plants and trees on the third day, and on the fifth day, He made animals, including birds (Genesis 1:11-23). The Bible’s account of creation matches the existence of a tree that relies on—and has always relied on—a bird for its survival.

Many species heavily depend on others for their survival. Many more organisms are mutually dependent: e.g., the calimyrna fig and the blastophaga wasp, the catalpa worm and the braconid, the yucca plant and the pronuba moth, and many more.

In each of these cases, the brilliance of the Creator is on display. The intricacy of His physical creation is clear. And the account of how He created Earth’s sophisticated ecosystems is confirmed.

from The Dodo’s Lesson in Evolution Theory, By Jeremiah Jacques
 

prove-all

Senior Member
May 16, 2014
5,977
400
83
63
A Multimillion-Dollar Monkey Fraud


The “missing link” is the holy grail of evolutionists. If scientists can find the remains of a “transition” species, they will definitively prove evolution, the thinking goes. Now, that missing link has been found!
That is, if we are to believe recent reports.

At the end of May, mass media started hyperventilating over the discovery of Ida, a fossilized monkey skeleton hailed as the “missing link” in human evolution. Fox News said the fossil “made waves” among scientists and non-scientists alike. The Guardian called it “one of the most significant primate fossil finds ever made.” Google made the fossil image a part of its homepage logo.

The Wall Street Journal dubbed Ida a possible “landmark discovery”—
potentially a common ancestor of all later monkeys, apes—and humans.

Yes, the media went bananas over the fossilized remains that scientists claim closely resemble a lemur (a small, tree-dwelling primate found in Madagascar) in some respects but an ape in others. Some experts called the skeleton the “eighth wonder of the world.” Others said the impact upon paleontology would be comparable to an “asteroid falling down to Earth.” At one point, the euphoria was so intense that the discovery was compared to the moon landing and the Kennedy assassination.

Even New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg got carried away at the star-studded unveiling,
calling the preserved specimen an “astonishing breakthrough.”

We haven’t seen science hype like this since the Mars rock.

But before you take the scientists’ and the media’s word for it and hang portraits of apes
over the family fireplace, you might want to look a little closer.

Sorry evolutionists: For all the big headlines and grand proclamations, this “missing link” is another
—if beautifully preserved—fraud, another in a long line of distinguished frauds.

The fanfare surrounding Ida is reminiscent of another famous fossil: the Piltdown man. Perhaps you have heard of it? The Piltdown fossil was a series of skull fragments discovered in the early 1900s that encompassed a human-like skull, orangutan-like jaw, and chimpanzee-like teeth.
Scientists gave it the name Eoanthropus dawsoni.

A familiar degree of great excitement accompanied the discovery of this fossil, as it purported to demonstrate a transition species between man and “lower primates.” The great majority of the scientific community jumped on this discovery as proof of evolution and the fossilized missing links that even Charles Darwin was admittedly at a loss to explain. Over 500 essays and scientific papers were written on the subject. Graduate students produced their doctoral theses from studying the fragments.

There was only one problem: The fantastic find was a fake.

The perpetrator combined a 700-year-old human skull, a 500-year-old lower jaw of
a Sarawak orangutan and fossilized chimpanzee teeth. He then used chemicals to dye the bones to give the appearance of age.

But here is the point. It took approximately 40 years for the scientific community to discover
the difference between a supposed multimillion-year-old fossil and a modern chimpanzee.

finish reading article at
https://www.thetrumpet.com/article/6223.3.0.0/society/media/a-multimillion-dollar-monkey-fraud
 
Last edited:

prove-all

Senior Member
May 16, 2014
5,977
400
83
63
For that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them:
as the one dieth, so dieth the other; yea, they have all one breath;
so that a man hath no preeminence above a beast: for all is vanity.
 

breno785au

Senior Member
Jul 23, 2013
6,002
766
113
39
Australia
A Multimillion-Dollar Monkey Fraud


The “missing link” is the holy grail of evolutionists. If scientists can find the remains of a “transition” species, they will definitively prove evolution, the thinking goes. Now, that missing link has been found!
That is, if we are to believe recent reports.

At the end of May, mass media started hyperventilating over the discovery of Ida, a fossilized monkey skeleton hailed as the “missing link” in human evolution. Fox News said the fossil “made waves” among scientists and non-scientists alike. The Guardian called it “one of the most significant primate fossil finds ever made.” Google made the fossil image a part of its homepage logo.

The Wall Street Journal dubbed Ida a possible “landmark discovery”—
potentially a common ancestor of all later monkeys, apes—and humans.

Yes, the media went bananas over the fossilized remains that scientists claim closely resemble a lemur (a small, tree-dwelling primate found in Madagascar) in some respects but an ape in others. Some experts called the skeleton the “eighth wonder of the world.” Others said the impact upon paleontology would be comparable to an “asteroid falling down to Earth.” At one point, the euphoria was so intense that the discovery was compared to the moon landing and the Kennedy assassination.

Even New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg got carried away at the star-studded unveiling,
calling the preserved specimen an “astonishing breakthrough.”

We haven’t seen science hype like this since the Mars rock.

But before you take the scientists’ and the media’s word for it and hang portraits of apes
over the family fireplace, you might want to look a little closer.

Sorry evolutionists: For all the big headlines and grand proclamations, this “missing link” is another
—if beautifully preserved—fraud, another in a long line of distinguished frauds.

The fanfare surrounding Ida is reminiscent of another famous fossil: the Piltdown man. Perhaps you have heard of it? The Piltdown fossil was a series of skull fragments discovered in the early 1900s that encompassed a human-like skull, orangutan-like jaw, and chimpanzee-like teeth.
Scientists gave it the name Eoanthropus dawsoni.

A familiar degree of great excitement accompanied the discovery of this fossil, as it purported to demonstrate a transition species between man and “lower primates.” The great majority of the scientific community jumped on this discovery as proof of evolution and the fossilized missing links that even Charles Darwin was admittedly at a loss to explain. Over 500 essays and scientific papers were written on the subject. Graduate students produced their doctoral theses from studying the fragments.

There was only one problem: The fantastic find was a fake.

The perpetrator combined a 700-year-old human skull, a 500-year-old lower jaw of
a Sarawak orangutan and fossilized chimpanzee teeth. He then used chemicals to dye the bones to give the appearance of age.

But here is the point. It took approximately 40 years for the scientific community to discover
the difference between a supposed multimillion-year-old fossil and a modern chimpanzee.

finish reading article at
https://www.thetrumpet.com/article/6223.3.0.0/society/media/a-multimillion-dollar-monkey-fraud
Should be finding these tranistional fossils before finding '300 million' year old fossils.
 
S

Sirk

Guest
Should be finding these tranistional fossils before finding '300 million' year old fossils.
Haha....exactly. I mean I'm no expert, but you'd think that they'd be in a shallower layer of strata than the older ones. Nevertheless...they keep teaching the nonsense of evolution to our kids.
 
P

pottersclay

Guest
. You know it's funny that Adam naming all the animals before his deep sleep found himself more in common with eve, who's anatomy was a bit different than he did with the animal he named ape.
 

robbomango

Junior Member
Feb 11, 2014
29
2
3
Why evolutionists get hung on the term monkey I 'm not sure because at the end of the day we're talking about going from a single cell to a human or a fish to a human which is an even bigger stretch. "It's not a monkey it's a common ancestor" Oh okay you mean like a tadpole lol...
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
57,031
26,758
113
Why evolutionists get hung on the term monkey I 'm not sure because at the end of the day we're talking about going from a single cell to a human or a fish to a human which is an even bigger stretch. "It's not a monkey it's a common ancestor" Oh okay you mean like a tadpole lol...
..
. .
human-embryos-and-their-development.jpg
 
M

Marian29

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?
Evolutionists don't even have answers for their own questions....
 
M

Mitspa

Guest
A Multimillion-Dollar Monkey Fraud


The “missing link” is the holy grail of evolutionists. If scientists can find the remains of a “transition” species, they will definitively prove evolution, the thinking goes. Now, that missing link has been found!
That is, if we are to believe recent reports.

At the end of May, mass media started hyperventilating over the discovery of Ida, a fossilized monkey skeleton hailed as the “missing link” in human evolution. Fox News said the fossil “made waves” among scientists and non-scientists alike. The Guardian called it “one of the most significant primate fossil finds ever made.” Google made the fossil image a part of its homepage logo.

The Wall Street Journal dubbed Ida a possible “landmark discovery”—
potentially a common ancestor of all later monkeys, apes—and humans.

Yes, the media went bananas over the fossilized remains that scientists claim closely resemble a lemur (a small, tree-dwelling primate found in Madagascar) in some respects but an ape in others. Some experts called the skeleton the “eighth wonder of the world.” Others said the impact upon paleontology would be comparable to an “asteroid falling down to Earth.” At one point, the euphoria was so intense that the discovery was compared to the moon landing and the Kennedy assassination.

Even New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg got carried away at the star-studded unveiling,
calling the preserved specimen an “astonishing breakthrough.”

We haven’t seen science hype like this since the Mars rock.

But before you take the scientists’ and the media’s word for it and hang portraits of apes
over the family fireplace, you might want to look a little closer.

Sorry evolutionists: For all the big headlines and grand proclamations, this “missing link” is another
—if beautifully preserved—fraud, another in a long line of distinguished frauds.

The fanfare surrounding Ida is reminiscent of another famous fossil: the Piltdown man. Perhaps you have heard of it? The Piltdown fossil was a series of skull fragments discovered in the early 1900s that encompassed a human-like skull, orangutan-like jaw, and chimpanzee-like teeth.
Scientists gave it the name Eoanthropus dawsoni.

A familiar degree of great excitement accompanied the discovery of this fossil, as it purported to demonstrate a transition species between man and “lower primates.” The great majority of the scientific community jumped on this discovery as proof of evolution and the fossilized missing links that even Charles Darwin was admittedly at a loss to explain. Over 500 essays and scientific papers were written on the subject. Graduate students produced their doctoral theses from studying the fragments.

There was only one problem: The fantastic find was a fake.

The perpetrator combined a 700-year-old human skull, a 500-year-old lower jaw of
a Sarawak orangutan and fossilized chimpanzee teeth. He then used chemicals to dye the bones to give the appearance of age.

But here is the point. It took approximately 40 years for the scientific community to discover
the difference between a supposed multimillion-year-old fossil and a modern chimpanzee.

finish reading article at
https://www.thetrumpet.com/article/6223.3.0.0/society/media/a-multimillion-dollar-monkey-fraud
This is one of the best examples that the folks who believe evolution will tell any lie to make this fairy tale plausible..when every time real science by honest scientist is applied, the fairytale falls apart.

They remind me of the conspiracy folks that take any thing they can find or make up to believe what they already want to believe.
 
C

christianperson91

Guest
Before making an argument against the theory of evolution, I believe one must educate oneself about the side they are attacking, instead of pulling out a strawman to argue against.

Understanding Evolution Resource Library

So it would make more sense to argue why you disagree with the ToE saying that chimps and humans share a common ancestor and chimps are our "cousins", then arguing against the ridiculous idea that "monkeys becoming people", because even those that accept the ToE disagree with that.
 
S

Sirk

Guest
Before making an argument against the theory of evolution, I believe one must educate oneself about the side they are attacking, instead of pulling out a strawman to argue against.

Understanding Evolution Resource Library

So it would make more sense to argue why you disagree with the ToE saying that chimps and humans share a common ancestor and chimps are our "cousins", then arguing against the ridiculous idea that "monkeys becoming people", because even those that accept the ToE disagree with that.

Really? ...explain this then. Because this is the evolution that I was taught in school. ascent_wide-cb4e63ee79c1188d7d2fe93246ac673b2bee18a0.jpg
 
C

christianperson91

Guest
Really? ...explain this then. Because this is the evolution that I was taught in school. View attachment 139907
That picture is a misconception. The picture makes it seem like we are from modern monkeys, in which we are not according to the ToE. That image also implies that neanderthals are our direct ancestors which is not the case. In fact when it comes to the topic of evolution, neanderthals and modern humans did share time period(s) existing together.

In fact in my anthropology class I had a few years back, this misconception was brought up, and we talked about the problems that picture you showed presents.

I am sure if you google misconceptions about evolution, you would come up with more problems that picture above shows, that doesn't line up with the actual ToE.
 
C

christianperson91

Guest
That picture is a misconception. The picture makes it seem like we are from modern monkeys, in which we are not according to the ToE. That image also implies that neanderthals are our direct ancestors which is not the case. In fact when it comes to the topic of evolution, neanderthals and modern humans did share time period(s) existing together.

In fact in my anthropology class I had a few years back, this misconception was brought up, and we talked about the problems that picture you showed presents.

I am sure if you google misconceptions about evolution, you would come up with more problems that picture above shows, that doesn't line up with the actual ToE.
And since I wasn't able to edit this in....

From an evolutionary perspective, this person talks about the misconception of "monkey to man", and your picture is brought up.

Misconception Monday: Let's Stop Monkeying About, Shall We? | NCSE
 
Dec 18, 2013
6,733
45
0
Old earth mythologists just try to say the monkey-to-man thing is a misconception to try to make Darwinism sound less ridiculous. If humans and apes shared a common ancestor though then it stands to reason that common ancestor would be fairly monkeyish. Which explains why so many hoaxes are fabricated using a combination of human and monkey bones.

Also fun fact, Neanderthal is actually 100% homo sapiens and has had to be relabeled as such though most darwinists conveniently leave that fact out.
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
57,031
26,758
113
[video=youtube;9W4e4MwogLo]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9W4e4MwogLo[/video]
 
C

christianperson91

Guest
Well since you brought up the idea that neanderthal are really just homo sapiens "GodIsSalvation", there is this which presents various differences. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal_anatomy Of course you could say its all just bogus. Still if you are ever interested in why people disagree with you on this matter, take time to check the link out. I still think its a good idea to know what your opposing side accepts before arguing against their points.
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
57,031
26,758
113
[video=youtube;6JJoPZp5pB0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JJoPZp5pB0[/video]

Not a very important question, whether or not Jesus existed? OMG!

Ernest Renan, French historian, religious scholar and linguist, said:
“All history is incomprehensible without Christ.”
 
T

Tintin

Guest
Evolution and the Christian faith do not mix. If you want to compromise, be inconsistent in your beliefs and be unreasonable in your understanding of God's Word (as it's written), fine, go ahead. But I won't take any part in the foolishness. Nor will I pat you on the back when both evolutionists and Christians don't want anything to do with your beliefs.
 
Dec 18, 2013
6,733
45
0
Well since you brought up the idea that neanderthal are really just homo sapiens "GodIsSalvation", there is this which presents various differences. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal_anatomy Of course you could say its all just bogus. Still if you are ever interested in why people disagree with you on this matter, take time to check the link out. I still think its a good idea to know what your opposing side accepts before arguing against their points.
I would indeed be inclined to think it bogus seeing as most the so-called Neanderthal skeletons are vastly incomplete (see overall Wikipedia neanderthal page for a start on that investigation). It is well known the atheistic community takes great creative license in rendering the incomplete skeleton to make it appear more primitive. This is something they have also done with other fossils, more famously the dinosaurs.

Also I do know the opposing side, I was a Darwinist for a while myself to my shame. Most darwinist points are made almost entirely from pure theory or straight up hoaxes. The reason they will disagree is they have been brainwashed since childhood into this paradigm by both the "education" system and, in my opinion, moreso by popular entertainment media.