Are scientific evidences/proofs like fossils and other specimen enough to prove that man descended from apes?

Answer 1

Contrary to popular belief, instead of the chimpanzee, the human DNA and human genome structure is much closer to the “coach roach”. What does this say? It says that the Darwinian Theory of Evolution is entirely and completely wrong, and is severe misinterpretation of the data, indicating that it simply never occurred. We have been deceived for 140 years by a bogus hypothesis that has catapulted all of Humankind into a Scientific Dark Age. The Evolution/Uniformitarian Model is equal to the ridiculous and ludicrous Flat Earth Theory.

The truth is that there is a rudimentary genetic formula for life having the same identical ingredients that are varied in degree to generate the diversity of the species. So instead of incremental evolution, there was a "polybiological explosion" of all life in unison, using these common DNA and RNA ingredients, just as the Egyptian Book of the Dead states, "Then came forth the brood of living creatures," in unison with all their variety in contemporaneous harmony. Hence, dinosaurs, modern man, and all the anthropoids existed simultaneously in a "Pool of Life" that was periodically whittled away via cosmo-cataclysms that entombed percentages of the life into fossilization and stratification of the Geological Column, suddenly. Thus, the Geological Column has been radically misinterpreted by Evolution Scientists.

Clay artifacts of ancient sculpted dinosaurs with flesh and cave drawings of humans interacting with dinosaurs, even riding them as domesticated animals, were discovered years ago in the Peruvian Andes, yet because these finds do not fit in the current antiquated and primitive Scientific Paradigm of Evolutionists, then these discoveries are purposely and completely ignored with scientific dishonesty.

Answer 2

The word prove can be assigned a wide range of implication. The fossil record and shared characteristics between humans and simians are quite sufficient for you to bet your reputation and your scientific career. For the religious people who do not feel threatened by the thought of saying that the Bible may not be literally factual, and who have taken a look at the physical evidence and have tried to draw te most obvious conclusions from the physical evidence, most are comfortable betting their mortal souls on it. For those who cannot find away to sustain their faith if the Bible is not a literal, factual history book, the physical evidence does not matter.

Answer 3

human beings did no longer descend from apes. Apes AND human beings descended from a user-friendly ancestor that apparently lived someplace in Africa. Oldest got here upon bones of possible hominid / pre-hominid are referred to as Lucy. they only got here upon sufficient to recognize the bones belonged to a woman. additionally, via following strains of mitochondrial DNA biologists have been in a position to song present day human beings back to a place someplace on the western fringe of the African Continent i think of. The fossils are there. extra are being got here upon. it rather is purely very annoying, once you have no longer something yet bones to assert "yeah, this criter is the bridge between the animal hominid and the human." the place do you're saying being human is predicated, besides? employing approaches? Chimps try this each and all the time whilst they like a delectable termite. Even some birds do it. (use approaches) employing language? there is not any longer plenty left in fossils which could point out using that. a minimum of no longer in fossils as previous as Lucy. they're nonetheless engaged on it. check out the nationwide Geograhic magazine and the Smithsonian magazine. i think of in addition they have internet sits.

Answer 4

Please, please, please note the first girl's reponse, because that is a very common, and aggravating misconception people have towards human evolution.

As for your question; look, it's up to you. As this being science if you want to you can find all the holes, cracks, and mess ups in the evidence towards human evolution and use that to completely dismiss the theory. If it makes you feel pretty. Or you can take in science as a growing and changing field and go with it, knowing new findings, mistakes, and aswers to mistakes are going to occur. There aren't really *right* answers here persay, just ones that seem more logical than others. But I can't tell you where your logic is.

Answer 5

Here are some of our ancestors.

Australopithecus ramidus - 5 to 4 million years BCE
Australopithecus afarensis - 4 to 2.7 million years BCE
Australopithecus africanus - 3.0 to 2.0 million years BCE
Australopithecus robustus - 2.2 to 1.0 million years BCE
Homo habilis - 2.2 to 1.6 million years BCE
Homo erectus - 2 to 0.4 million years BCE
Homo sapiens - 400,000 to 200,000 years BCE
Homo sapiens neandertalensis - 200,000 to 30,000 years BCE
Homo sapiens sapiens - 130,000 years BCE to present


The Ape-like ancestor that we share with modern apes is between 5 and 10 million years old and has not yet been found, but he or she is out there somewhere. Deep within some rock lie the fossilised bones that will remove any doubts.

Hiding.....laughing at us....horrible missing link he is.......

Sorry... what was the question again?
.

Answer 6

For some... YES.

For others... NO

Personally, I generally don't put much thought into who, or what, my ancestors were.

I'm more concerned with creating a desirable future for myself, and those who come after me.

Though knowledge of the past can be used to build a better future, I don't think it matters much if our ancestors were apes, or dust.

Either way, we are now... human.

Answer 7

we didn't descend from apes. We share a common ancestor with apes. Big difference.

Answer 8

I believe so. These aren't someones opinions, these are documented facts. Didn't you hear or read in the news that they now have DNA to prove such truths?