Lets try and bring the Gathering of Minds back to the way it was before, and discuss this in a civil manner.
Fuck off. J/P
Geologists have found a great deal of dinosaur fossils, in fact they are still finding them. We're talking about living creatures that are over 50 million years old, mind you. My question to you is, not whether skeletal structures of evolving monkeys have been found, but how many of them. I do not believe it is logical that we can uncover thousands of dinosaur fossils, yet find it difficult to locate these animals/humans. For evolution to be fact, there must be fossils to prove it. I have more questions, but I am going to base my arguement on this one, so if you would, please.
Where are they?
I wish I had time to join this topic earlier today…a couple people have already stated exactly what I was thinking.
First off, I dislike how you said “evolving monkeys.” This is not how you explain evolution and hints that you have very little knowledge on the topic.
Second, we must remember that Biological Evolution explains changes in ALL life forms over time: from the simplest life such as bacteria, to the captivating creatures in the deep sea, to the complex human.
It is also incredibly important to make sure everyone understands what exactly we are talking about. Evolution, in its basic form, is a process that results in heritable changes in a population spread over many generations.
The evolution of Human Species follows different stages beginning with the Australopethicus and continuing with homo habilis, homo erectus and homo sapiens. The last stages include those people who lived thousands of years ago in the Palaeolithic and Neolithic Age and are the immediate ancestors of modern man.
Moving on.
I guess I’m a little confused on your question. Is it simply the amount of skeletal remains that is the issue? If so, I’m having a hard time understanding why this is such an issue. Common sense can easily explain this. Shep answered reasonably well with the following:
1. most dinosaur fossils are quite large
2. Dinosaur fossils are found all throughout the world where as human ancestors tend to be centralized in africa and the middle east in places where it is a lot harder to go in and start digging
These two points are exactly some of the original thoughts traveling through my brain when I first read your post. I will add a little to his response.
1). We must also consider the wide range of variety amongst dinosaurs. They lived in the ocean, on land, some flew, and some were big others small. You cannot group all dinosaurs as the same. Related, but not the same. It’s similar in saying Neanderthals were humans. Not true at all. Formaldehyde mentioned also that dinosaurs were on earth for hundreds of millions of years. Humans and our ancestors only make up a tiny fraction of that time period.
Also, the dinosaur population must have been in the tens of billions! Span that over hundreds of millions of years, and then compare that to only the tens of thousands of early human ancestors. There is no comparison.
2) This is a great point. Humans have only recently begun to migrate outside of northern Africa/Mid-East. Homo erectus only left Africa 2 million years ago, and early humans only left Africa to Western Asia around 60-80 thousand years ago.
Moving on.
We are humans. There is a great deal of transformation from a monkey to a human, and there must be a great deal of evidence proving this in the ground. I understand the process of fossilization, but I believe it is much more difficult for a dinosaur to be burried before erosion than a monkey.
Again, I dislike this monkey to human scenario you bring up. Humans did not evolve from monkeys; we are simply related.
Then I would think that, given the specific location, it would be easier to dig up these fossils. For such a meaningful issue, I would think evolutionists would be lining up in Africa trying to dig up bones. The reality of superposition says they would not have to dig as deep as they would looking for dinosaurs. Besides, now a days, digging is not exactly required to find bones in the ground, is it?
There are plenty of people digging all over the areas of early man. Where do you think we find our evidence? I don’t think it’s necessarily true that these bones would be easy to find. Just because they are not as old as dinosaur fossils, does not make it less harder to locate.
The rest of the thread got a little boring.
____________
Nitro, I hate to answer questions with a question, but what other theory is there then Evolution, Adam & Eve? I think you’re a reasonable man. I know you stated you’re not a firm believer in either, but what does the evidence suggest?
Remember, evolution is not just isolated to humans; it is ALL LIFE. We can observe the changes in everything. Look at bacteria, viruses, plant life etc. It’s all around us. Change, mutation, adaptation. And yes, we can observe evolution. A great example is mentioned by talkorigins.com. “One example is insects developing a resistance to pesticides over the period of a few years.”
The evidence is so overwhelming for evolution its amusing that this is still even a topic. As far as I can tell, the only people who do not believe in evolution are the religious and people who do not honestly understand evolution. I think you would fall into the latter. I am not trying to insult you either, Nitro. I think you have a great deal of knowledge on a variety of subjects; it’s just that evolution isn’t one of them.
If you’re looking for solid proof for evolution, DNA is what you are looking for. If you really want to understand life and how we evolve, understand DNA. The discovery of DNA was considered to be the nail in the coffin for evolution, as far as the scientific community was concerned. Before DNA, evolution was just a theory. Now we can see it, touch it, and play with it. DNA occurs within the cells of all living things: plants, animals and microscopic organisms. It is exactly and precisely the proof of evolution.
