Who is stupid enough to believe we evolved from monkeys?

Question

An old retarded atheist came up with a silly theory and now millions are consistently finding ways to keep this theory alive. Is there a motive? We keep finding species that were thought to be extinct and even with modern technology still no "missing link". I have read the origin of species and fully believe that if the retarded old guy was still alive he would concede he was wrong. The saddest is that Darwin's friends are still trying to keep the theory alive with silly subsequent theories such as punctuated equilibrium. Is it too hard to admit that we have no idea how we came to be. The hoaxes are so pathetic - Piltdown Man, Nebraska Man, Urey/Miller. This is not a religious question and I am not talking about evolutionary processes that are provable through scientific methods.

Once again. No religion please. Captain Bunkum, you answer too many questions and sound uptight; you need a girlfriend.

Answer 1

We're all free to believe in whatever we choose.

Answer 2

Who told you Darwin was an "old retarded atheist"? He actually had almost as much motive NOT to publish his ideas than he did to publish them--one of the reasons it took him nearly 20 years to publish the book. His ideas, which were counter to every popular scientific belief (based on religious ideology) of the time, caused him a great deal of worry and sickness, and he at first didn't even want his ideas publish until after his death.

Scientists are finding species that they thought were extinct...so?

"Missing link" is a term only thrown around by narrow minded creationists that want to start an argument or ignorant people who have never actually been taught the scientific priniciples.

If you would have actually read Origin of Species, you're first question wouldn't have been "Who is stupid enough to believe we evolved from monkeys?", because there's no discussion of human evolution in Origin of Species.

I believe that all of Darwin's friends are dead right now...I doubt they are pushing anything.

Scientists have known for a long time that Piltdown Man, Nebraska Man, etc. were either a hoax or reported by the popular media incorrectly...you're not breaking the back any scientific theory by spouting them off. (In fact, there are as many, if not more, instances of outright fraud by creationists--the Paluxy "footprints", Moab Man, Malachite Man, the Calaveras skull, I could go on.)

While the Urey-Miller experiments weren't exactly correct, the research that built off it has shown that many different scenarios can produce the same thing--amino acids.

Answer 3

Only religionists are stupid enough to still be spouting that propaganda.

Only religionists are stupid enough to not know the difference between apes and monkeys. Clue: apes are the ones without tails - if you have a tail then maybe you are descended from a monkey.

Only religionists are stupid enough not to understand the concept of "common ancestor shared with apes".

Only religionists believe there even should be a "missing link". If an animal the size of a mouse reproduced every 5 years and grew in size at each generation at such a slow rate that no human would notice a change in an entire lifetime, that animal would reach the size of an elephant in 60,000 years. 60,000 years in evolutionary terms is the blink of an eye and fossilisation is such a rare ocurrence that it would be extremely unlikely that any intermediate form (or "missing link") would also be preserved. From the fossil evidence it would simply seem like the mouse-like form vanished and an elephant-like form appeared. "Missing Link" is just another term used by pseudo-scientists with no real understanding of what they're talking about.

Only religionists still quote Piltdown Man which in no way detracts from the Theory of Evolution, which is a scientific theory. A scientific theory is defined as a model of a situation which FITS ALL KNOWN FACTS. Darwin's Theory of Evolution has stood for nearly 150 years and despite many discoveries such as genetics and DNA, has not only remained intact but has been reinforced by each new discovery, such as DNA, hereditary and mutation providing the mechanism for evolution.

Now... what have you got? Answer: a 2,000-year old book which features, amongst other things, a donkey that talks. Yeah right... sound basis for an alternative theory

UPDATE: yes I answer a lot of questions... is there a problem with that... this IS Yahoo Answers isn't it? Or is it actually a soapbox for the religiously deluded? Perhaps you don't like my answer because you haven't got a valid counter-argument.

And this IS a religious issue because the arguments against evolution are primarily based on religious belief.

Oh and I do have a girlfriend... and a wife

Answer 4

Fundamentalist Christians, apparently, since they're the only ones who keep bringing up this ridiculous and stupid question. And speaking of hoaxes, ever hear the one about the virgin birth, or the flood that killed everything not in the ark (even though all the sea and river creatures managed to live), or the one about how 2 people who had 2 sons, one of whom killed the other, leaving only mom, dad, and son, and yet no incest occurred to keep the species going? Sounds like some pretty pathetic fairy tales to me!

Answer 5

Hoo-hoo hee-hee SQWAAAK!!!
(Picking lice from my hairy chest
and eating them.)
"If the question is put to me, would I rather have an ape
for a grandfather on one hand, or on the other a man
endowed by nature with reason and rational thought,
who yet employs these faculties merely to introduce
ridicule into a grave scientific question, I should not
hesitate for a moment to prefer the ape."

-T.H. Huxley
P.S. You consider the Flintstones a documentary then?

Answer 6

you're simplifying it. Honestly, monkeys and humans probably have a common ancestor (another animal that we both evolved from) but humans and monkeys evolved differently

Also, have you ever noticed that the question of how something came to be is of no consequence unless you're human? The human race seems almost programmed to question where we came from.

If you're not talking about religion, why even bring it up? And if you're not talking about evolutionary processes provable by science, then what ARE you talking about?

Answer 7

in simple terms as there are none so blind as people who won't see, there are none so ignorant as people who in simple terms refuse the data present in a scientific and methodical way with the intention to illustrate the comparable are verifiable, good and quantifiable. There additionally are people who're in simple terms too lazy and/or inept to think of for themselves and that they gladly settle for that which somebody whom they deem to be an expert parent has advised them. You published this interior the U. S. and that is going to be remembered, if not found out, that the tutorial device interior the U. S. has a lengthy heritage of being controlled and/or inspired by skill of what at any particular time must be understood as usual mainstream fundamentalist Christian concept (even however in maximum circumstances "Christian concept" is, at superb, an oxymoron). bear in mind, too, that a majority of people who proudly profess their lack of expertise have under no circumstances study "The beginning place of the Species", nor have they study their very own scriptures and, in the event that they have study their scriptures they have study translations of translations of translations that have been quite edited and abridged for a definite purpose marketplace and function under no circumstances study the comparable in its unique language or with an information of the sociology of the time while it grew to become into written. education is annoying artwork and maximum are in simple terms too lazy. namaste

Answer 8

*raises hand*
Yup, I have plenty of monkey ancestors between the end of the Cretaceous and about 23 million years ago. So do you.

Yes, hoaxes are pathetic -- but a hoax doesn't invalidate a truth. If hoaxes did invalidate truth, no one would be Catholic or Mormon.

Answer 9

We didn't evolve from monkeys. We evolved from a common ancestor. Its descendants took many different evolutionary paths, including our own.

Reminds me of Mrs. Garrison's "retarded fish frog" lecture.

Answer 10

Is it a coincidence that the same ignorant people who don't believe in evolution throw around offensive words like “retarded”? Your unfortunate word choice speaks volumes.