• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Evolution and "the Missing Link"

Elektrix

Critical Thinker
E
Joined
Aug 13, 2001
Messages
295
Hi,

Hoping someone can help me out. I was in the middle of a debate with a creationist about evolution. That debate ended up being fruitless, as they weren't interested in actually reading anything about evolution, just posing typical creationist questions like:

"Well, scientists weren't there to observe all those species... just because the bones look similar, that doesn't mean they evolved from each other or are related species"

Anyway, someone else jumped in and basically also defended the theory of evolution, and this was fine.

But then this new person made a distinction and said that the theory that humans evolved from apes was still "just a theory" that they had trouble swallowing. I asked them about this, and provided various bits like the ape-human fossils from the talkorigins site on the 29+ Evidences for Macroevolution, and the other page on that site devoted to hominid evolution

I also brought up the stuff about the similarity in DNA, but didn't have too much more to say on that topic.

They said though that they have trouble believing humans evolved from apes, and again said it was "just a theory". Their main sticking point seemed to be from an anthropology class they took a couple of years ago, and they seemed to say that there was no definitive "missing link" found that conclusively links humans to apes, and thus he doesn't believe humans evolved from apes.

I am not sure where else to go with this. I haven't been able to find as much about this issue or typical responses to it.

Could anyone help me out?

-Elektrix
 
Very short answer:

There are no missing links, there are dozens of existing links.

Review the hominid FAQ page at Talk.Origins and see if you can explain to them that while no one fossil find is a perfect missing link, there are dozens of beings that are obvious representatives of human evolution.

The other suggestion is that you find a copy of the image that shows the spectrum of hominid skulls from a Chimpanzee to an anotomically modern human and ask them to:

A. Tell you where the missing link should be.
B. Seperate the spectrum into "fully ape" and "fully human."

I'll see if I can it for you... (edit) found it!

Need to add the image below though.
 
Sorry, I thought I said in my original post that I did go through talk.origins extensively, and especially went through the thing with the fossils, and also showed them directly the article there specific on hominid species, which I thought was excellent.

It might be that the person just isn't willing to consider it though?

This is their latest response to me:

Like I said, the theory of us evolving from apes is just that, a theory. You lost me somewhere and I lost you somewhere.

Im not even sure if we came from another species so I cant say what other ancestors we might of came from. If I could tell you then I would be a rich man. You tell people that they came from ancestors of monkies and see if most people will argee with you. Sure there are similarties but its not proven. Just because theres some "evidence" that supports it doesnt mean its true. Oh my bad, I was off a percent or so on the chimpanzee thing.

blah im getting lost to what we even arguing about so im out.
Click to expand...

Honestly I'm not sure how to even respond to this, especially after this revelation that this person isn't even sure if humans evolved from any other species.

I am stuck in how to respond to it further, really.

-Freakzilla
 
Thanks UnrepentantSinner, I ended up giving them the direct link to it at the talkorigins site......

But I get the feeling that this person just can't be debated with. If they feel that this isn't "evidence", or that even if it is evidence it doesn't mean there is any proof that humans evolved from monkees or apes doesn't mean it is true....

I don't know how to respond to that kind of response.... it's just odd because this person seems to have no problem with evolution otherwise, but seems to adamently not want to deal with the link between humans and apes (and even told me to see how many people believe it if i tell them we evolved from apes, as if the fact that a lot of people don't accept this makes it false).

-Elektrix
 
Well, evolution may be just a theory, but gravity is just a theory also. I suppose they don't believe in that either.:rolleyes:
 
BobK said:
Well, evolution may be just a theory, but gravity is just a theory also. I suppose they don't believe in that either.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Well, that kind of person I'm used to. This one is just frustrating because they fully accept the full scientific definition of evolution as a theory. They seem to accept just about everything about it.

But they seem to be very adament that they aren't even convinced humans evolved from any previous species, and he seems convinced that there is no evidence linking (even after presenting him with it) it conclusively. At best he acknowledges the evidence but says just because there is some evidence supporting the theory that humans evolved from apes, or that humans and apes share a common ancestor, it doesn't mean it's true.

It's just really odd.

I am probably just going to drop it, but it's just very odd.

-Elektrix
 
Elektrix said:

I am probably just going to drop it, but it's just very odd.

-Elektrix
Click to expand...

From what you've posted here, that seems like the course of action you're going to have to take. If there's enough wiggle room in his definition of theory for him to pull out the old, "well, it's not 100% proven totally and completely without a doubt" then I doubt you're going to make much of a dent.

Aslo, if he continues to claims there's "no evidence for desent" after reading "29 Evidences" then there's no way he's going to be convinced. The Phylogenetic Tree, the Cytochrome C and the Fossil Evidences should be more than enough to do the job at making the case for connectivity and continuity.

Even if you give up, it does sound as if you've planted a seed. Hopefully he'll continue to check out the evidences and at some point come around. :)
 
Humans and other primates like Apes did not evolve from Apes but a common anscestor. Chimpanzees and the like had their own evolutionary path, it may have been merged at one point but it branched off.

So, first thing I would do, is ask a name of one evolutionary scientist that believes that man evolved from Apes.
 
from the post quoted by Elektrix

You tell people that they came from ancestors of monkies and see if most people will argee with you.
Click to expand...

This is a blatant use of the logical fallacy argumentum ad populum.

Maybe they'd agree, maybe not. So what? If you'd had told someone 700 years ago that the Earth orbits the Sun then they'd probably had laughed at you. Doesn't mean it's wrong, though.

Sure there are similarties but its not proven. Just because theres some "evidence" that supports it doesnt mean its true.
Click to expand...

This sounds a bit funny. It reminds me of a quote from that great philosopher and scholar Homer Simpson:

Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true.
Click to expand...

How else are you going to "prove" something, except through the use of evidence? (And remember that nothing can be 100% proven in Science). I guess what he probably means is that there's some evidence, but not enough to convince him. In that case, if you've shown the fossil sequence that links humans to the ancestors of apes, and you've discussed the genetic and physical similarities between apes and humans, then I'm not sure what else you can say that would sway him. Perhaps he has unrealistically high standards for evidence. Perhaps he doesn't want to be swayed by the evidence. Who knows?

I agree with you. It's probably not worth arguing with him further.
 
Actually, I would ask him how he think humans came about and what evidence he has for that and why that evidence is enough to sway him and then compare the evidence through archeological evidence to his. Sorry for the run on.
 
Denise said:
Actually, I would ask him how he think humans came about....
Click to expand...
I am willing to bet that he considers Humans a special creation by God.
In other words, he believes in Evolution but only if God did it and that He did it specially for us.
 
"Missing Link" argument.

It is not too easy to debate such a person.

It is hard for me to say what they ever meant by missing links but there sure are transitional fossils and only way to avoid this fact is deny them as they do.

It is easy to understand that animal-human continuum may often be the biggest blow under the belt from a creationist point of view.This kind of a view can be found offending towards our dominant religion which is quick to distinguish between "man"-and-"animal" (the latter is there "for us" and without "soul")

I remember one "creationist" telling a small audience of other theists how he "does not believe humans descend from monkeys,even though some of us look like that".
But as pointed out,this is a fundamental misunderstanding of the basics of the theory (just like the argument of "just a theory" which can turn out to be an intellectual suicide)
 
Thanks for all your help. This person definitely won't budge:

nope still dont believe. I know pretty much the arguments for that since I took anthropology. So im just going to drop it because this is confusing me.
Click to expand...

I replied to this to again ask what he finds so lacking about the existing evidence, and then what he thinks the origins of modern humans are.... but I don't expect any further response.

I really don't get the feeling they actually took the time to read the things I linked to though.

But anyway, thanks for your help. It's at least been helpful to me.... and hopefully anyone else reading this thread might learn something.

-Freakzilla
 
Elektrix said:
Thanks for all your help. This person definitely won't budge:



I replied to this to again ask what he finds so lacking about the existing evidence, and then what he thinks the origins of modern humans are.... but I don't expect any further response.

I really don't get the feeling they actually took the time to read the things I linked to though.

But anyway, thanks for your help. It's at least been helpful to me.... and hopefully anyone else reading this thread might learn something.

-Freakzilla
Click to expand...

Zeno addressed this issue a long long time ago. No matter how many "intermediaries" you present the true believer, they will point to the gaps, no matter how miniscule and ask "but what about there?" There's really no dealing with those people. As with some of the stuff I pointed out from "29 Evidences" if the skull graphic doesn't convince them, then nothing will.

Willful ignorance can be such a hindrence to productive debate. :(
 
Another point you could bring up is "how could evolution of humans NOT happen?" We've got genes that mutate to provide variation - add geographic/climate variability in the mix, and it doesn't make sense how humans could stay the same over tens of thousands of years.

We've got quite a detailed history of how humans populated most of the planet, changing in physical form as they went, and that's just the last 10,000 to 15,000 years. People in sunny climates have darker skin have more melanin to protect them from the sun. People who moved to less sunny areas evolved lighter skin to make vitamin D from less sunlight. People in really cold areas evolved shorter arms and a thicker trunk to conserve body heat. And this is recent history, relative to the big picture. How could you have genes stay the same for millions of years? It's just not plausible.
 
It is a theory.

There are no logical counet theories at this point.

We are descneded from homonids.

The proff of evolution is in the fossil record and all around us every day.

Ask your friend :
Why can bacteria adapt to antibiotic?
Why can breeders change dogs?

Peace
 
Thanks all....:) But again, this person seems very stuck in not wanting to accept that humans were even subject to evolution (which seems confusing to me). They don't want to answer me about what they do think actually happened, just keep repeating the same line that there isn't enough definitive evidence (although I don't think they actually looked at it). I'm not going to keep trying to press the point, as he'll respond to anything else the same way - "still don't believe".

-Elektrix
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom