The Origin of Race

[Q]

If one were to assume that evolution were true, what skin color were the original homo sapiens? My somewhat educated guess would be black or pretty dark since evolution says the origin of humans is in Africa and black skin was better equipped for that environment.
-This question just crossed my mind and figured the board might have some good input...(I couldn't find the question already posted)

[jcrawford]

Define 'sub-human' in context of your understanding of evolution first.

Sub-human simple means having non-human qualities and characteristics such as African apes and chimpanzees display.

Oh, and by the way, humans ARE a species of ape.

Only by racial definition and evolutionary classification.

I am no more an ape than you are, albeit your choice to be defined and classified as one by evolutionists.

Evolutionists make a monkey out of you by classifying you as an ape.

I choose to assert your human dignity and turn evolutionary apes into monkeys.

Grow up, will you, and be a man.

[jcrawford]

Well, let's discuss the TOE then and how it accounts for human evolution in Africa out of sub-human African apes.

Name one mutation which would have to occur in non-human African apes in order for them to become more human.

I think the TOE would propose that we are not descended from African apes (as they are today) but rather we have an ancestor in common with these apes.

I didn't ask for what you think, but to "name one mutation which would have to occur in non-human African apes in order for them to become more human."

Since you either cannot or refuse to answer one simple question about the evolution of human beings from non-human (sub-human) African apes, according to the TOE, the rest of your diatribe is as meaningless as it is purely rhetorical and dogmatic propaganda.

This ancestor did not necessarily become apes and humans and disappear. Rather the genetic code of this ancestor was transcended by but included in the code that became humans and apes. The apes went down their path. We went down ours.

Prove it, scientist.

the by-products of the human path was the development of the ability to ask the question "Who am I?". Today's God has evolved from previous models as the proposed, and only, place to find the answer that question.

We are selling ourselves short.

You are injecting religion into science here, and don't have a clue about what you are talking about.

[McCulloch]

Oh, and by the way, humans ARE a species of ape.

ape
–noun

1. any of a group of anthropoid primates characterized by long arms, a broad chest, and the absence of a tail, comprising the family Pongidae (great ape), which includes the chimpanzee, gorilla, and orangutan, and the family Hylobatidae (lesser ape), which includes the gibbon and siamang.
2. (loosely) any primate except humans.

Humans are primates. No tail. Long arms (compared to lemurs). In what way do we not belong in the category of ape? There is no scientific justification to create a separate taxonomic category for humans.

[QED]

John, I have a question for you: When it is said that man is created in God's image and likeness, do you think this refers to a visual appearance?

[Goat]

Well, let's discuss the TOE then and how it accounts for human evolution in Africa out of sub-human African apes.

Name one mutation which would have to occur in non-human African apes in order for them to become more human.

I think the TOE would propose that we are not descended from African apes (as they are today) but rather we have an ancestor in common with these apes.

I didn't ask for what you think, but to "name one mutation which would have to occur in non-human African apes in order for them to become more human."

Since you either cannot or refuse to answer one simple question about the evolution of human beings from non-human (sub-human) African apes, according to the TOE, the rest of your diatribe is as meaningless as it is purely rhetorical and dogmatic propaganda.

This ancestor did not necessarily become apes and humans and disappear. Rather the genetic code of this ancestor was transcended by but included in the code that became humans and apes. The apes went down their path. We went down ours.

Prove it, scientist.

the by-products of the human path was the development of the ability to ask the question "Who am I?". Today's God has evolved from previous models as the proposed, and only, place to find the answer that question.

We are selling ourselves short.

You are injecting religion into science here, and don't have a clue about what you are talking about.

Brain development. http://www.science.ngfn.de/10_264.htm

[bernee51]

Well, let's discuss the TOE then and how it accounts for human evolution in Africa out of sub-human African apes.

Name one mutation which would have to occur in non-human African apes in order for them to become more human.

I think the TOE would propose that we are not descended from African apes (as they are today) but rather we have an ancestor in common with these apes.

I didn't ask for what you think, but to "name one mutation which would have to occur in non-human African apes in order for them to become more human."

Since you either cannot or refuse to answer one simple question about the evolution of human beings from non-human (sub-human) African apes, according to the TOE, the rest of your diatribe is as meaningless as it is purely rhetorical and dogmatic propaganda.

Observe the structure of the human nervous system/brain...from cell excitability, through reptilian braiin stem, limbic system, neo cortex, complex neo-cortex. How would you propose this arose if not through an evolutionary process.

The brain we have is a composite of all (known) previous brains. Each additional 'layer' transcends and includes those 'preceding'

Observe the unfolding of the level of consciousness in homo sapiens. The same process occurs.

As to a 'specific mutation'. I doubt that there was only one. Nor did it happen overnight. For how many millions of years did hominids walk this earth before the first evidence of the arrival on the scen of h.s.

This ancestor did not necessarily become apes and humans and disappear. Rather the genetic code of this ancestor was transcended by but included in the code that became humans and apes. The apes went down their path. We went down ours.

Prove it, scientist.

I just did.

You are injecting religion into science here, and don't have a clue about what you are talking about.

Empty posturing. If you have nothing to say why bother posting.

[jcrawford]

Humans are primates. No tail. Long arms (compared to lemurs). In what way do we not belong in the category of ape? There is no scientific justification to create a separate taxonomic category for humans.

The scientific justification for creating a new taxonomic category for humans lies in the scientific fact that only humans have the scientific capacity to alter their physical environment and self-perception on the basis of free will.

Thus are scientists and other humans perfectly entitled and justified to taxonomically establish and classify themselves in the Kingdom of Man.

[jcrawford]

John, I have a question for you: When it is said that man is created in God's image and likeness, do you think this refers to a visual appearance?

Good question, since it causes us to wonder what form or appearance God or a god might assume if we were to personally meet up with Him one day.

Since I am of the opinion that the human form and function is god-like, I wouldn't be at all surprised if God takes on the form and appearance of the most beautiful human being on earth you could ever hope to imagine or encounter.

Whether we would love that form and appearance or whether God loved the condition we are in is another question.

[jcrawford]

I didn't ask for what you think, but to "name one mutation which would have to occur in non-human African apes in order for them to become more human."

Since you either cannot or refuse to answer one simple question about the evolution of human beings from non-human (sub-human) African apes, according to the TOE, the rest of your diatribe is as meaningless as it is purely rhetorical and dogmatic propaganda.

Observe the structure of the human nervous system/brain...from cell excitability, through reptilian braiin stem, limbic system, neo cortex, complex neo-cortex. How would you propose this arose if not through an evolutionary process.

So rather than answer my question above you respond with another question.

What kind of discussion is this? Are you conducting an inquistion?

The brain we have is a composite of all (known) previous brains. Each additional 'layer' transcends and includes those 'preceding'

That is only a theory.

Observe the unfolding of the level of consciousness in homo sapiens. The same process occurs.

Observe it yourself, since it seems to be beyond my powers of observation, cognition or comprehension.

As to a 'specific mutation'. I doubt that there was only one. Nor did it happen overnight. For how many millions of years did hominids walk this earth before the first evidence of the arrival on the scen of h.s.

Once again, you answer my question by posing another irrelevent question.

This ancestor did not necessarily become apes and humans and disappear. Rather the genetic code of this ancestor was transcended by but included in the code that became humans and apes. The apes went down their path. We went down ours.

Prove it, scientist.

I just did.

To who, yourself?

You are injecting religion into science here, and don't have a clue about what you are talking about.

Empty posturing. If you have nothing to say why bother posting.

I have as much to say as you do, and can say it as well as you can formulate and assert your opinions.

[bernee51]

I didn't ask for what you think, but to "name one mutation which would have to occur in non-human African apes in order for them to become more human."

Since you either cannot or refuse to answer one simple question about the evolution of human beings from non-human (sub-human) African apes, according to the TOE, the rest of your diatribe is as meaningless as it is purely rhetorical and dogmatic propaganda.

Observe the structure of the human nervous system/brain...from cell excitability, through reptilian braiin stem, limbic system, neo cortex, complex neo-cortex. How would you propose this arose if not through an evolutionary process.

So rather than answer my question above you respond with another question.

What kind of discussion is this? Are you conducting an inquistion?

You have a problem with questions?

You will note that have answered I cannot point out to you a 'specific mutation' to early primate geneteic material that that would eventuate in our species.

The brain we have is a composite of all (known) previous brains. Each additional 'layer' transcends and includes those 'preceding'

That is only a theory.

Give the man a cigar...

Observe the unfolding of the level of consciousness in homo sapiens. The same process occurs.

Observe it yourself, since it seems to be beyond my powers of observation, cognition or comprehension.

Don't worry - with practice you may overcome that difficulty. Give it a go.