did we evolve from monkeys
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$6 Answers
A ton of information on the 'web' of species that eventually led to present-day primates (of which humans are a species) can be found in this wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_evolution
As a more general answer, I also recommend you read my answer and sources on this question about evolution, since you probably meant to ask more generally what said question did ("Is evolution real?"):
http://www.mahalo.com/answers/evolution/is-evolution-real#a6210c92e85f9c82f17a4d51bc03a65c9a6835ae752196dc99b7bf5d79302e721
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
Sources: http://www.amazon.com/s?ie=UTF8&search-alias=stripbooks&field-keywords=human%20evolution&page=1
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
The species were similar, but it wasn't exactly a monkey. If you go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_evolution you can see a great timeline of each species that we evolved from, and get the specifics of each.
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
Genreal knowledge
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$Mind Over Matter: The Lubavitcher Rebbe on Science, Technology and Medicine
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
Or maybe, religion will catch up to science and realize that God was the greatest scientist of all and that science and the existence of God do not contradict one another.
In science a theory is supported by fact. In your statement above you are confusing the definition of hypothesis and theory. While scientific theories are often refined as additional facts come to like, they are not proven to be false. A hypothesis can be proven false. The Theory of Evolution is a scientific theory not a hypothesis. Please follow the link below for further clarification of scientific theory vs. hypothesis.
http://chemistry.about.com/od/chemistry101/a/lawtheory.htm
The claim that evolution is not supported by the fossil record is inaccurate:
"The history of life, as represented by the fossil record, generally supports the theory of evolution without considering other evidence. If you look at the fossil record, you find a succession of organisms that is suggestive of incremental development. You see very simple organisms at first and then new, more complex organisms appearing over time. The characteristics of newer organisms frequently appear to be modified forms of characteristics of older organisms. Thus, this succession of life forms, from simpler to more complex, showing relationships between new life forms and those that preceded them, is suggestive of evolution. There are gaps in the fossil record and some unusual occurances, such as what is commonly called the Cambrian explosion, but the overall impression one gets from the fossil record is one of incremental development."
Source: http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/evolution/blfaq_evolution_evidence15.htm
You just made my day.
Evolution is a fact and so is natural selection, one of evolution's many processes.
Ever since before Darwin, evolution was considered the best explanation for the world's biological diversity. Only the mechanisms were under discussion and now are very clear. Specially since the discovery of DNA and the genetic code. This simple and chemical fact links all living organisms o a single phylogenic tree. We all share the four basis of DNA (A C T G) and the same code (AAA=Lysine). The only way to share this is through common ancestry and phylogenetic relationships.
Now, I can keep explaning all day but if you need me to tell you it is a sin not to understand, you are barking at the wrong tree.
Well, I'm so glad we sign our votes. It is not surprising at all.
The notion that the diversity of life arose through random mutation and natural selection is neither an empirical fact nor a scientific theory, but rather a groundless conjecture based on weak, inferential methods of backward extrapolation through eons of unobserved time over unknown conditions.
According to Darwin's own criteria in Origin of Species, he himself would have rejected evolution based on today's knowledge of the fossil record. Even the most modern formulations of Darwinian evolution have been shown to be impossible, based on unchallenged statistical models of molecular genetics, as well as the irreducible biochemical complexity of all physiological processes.
All this does not prove that the Torah is true or that the Biblical story of creation is true. What it does show is that accepting Darwinian evolution requires a leap of faith that may be more radical and less substantiated than to believe that G‑d created the world in six days and on the seventh day He rested.
Theories are proved or disproved but there is nothing "only" about a theory once it is proven. Evolution was proven more than a century ago beyond any doubt. Since then, scientists in the course of their work have uncovered mountains of additional evidence. The advances have been in working out the details of how evolution occurs, the rate at which it happens, and the particular branches that it has taken. Meanwhile, certain religious persons have continued to ask the same questions over and over, even though they have been answered, because they hope for a different answer that will be easier to fit with their reading of their religious texts. But that is not scientific doubt, all scientific doubt was removed long ago. The Biblical account, in particular, was a guess by ancient peoples who knew absolutely nothing about the subject of geology and almost nothing of zoology and chemistry. It does not merit serious attention other than as one of countless mythological accounts.
Your science is way off/non-existent. I recommend that you read 'Your Inner Fish' by Neil Shubin and the 'Making of the Fittest: DNA and the Ultimate Forensic Record of Evolution' by Sean B. Carroll. I have included links for you below.
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/Your-Inner-Fish/Neil-Shubin/e/9780375424472/?itm=1
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/The-Making-of-the-Fittest/Sean-B-Carroll/e/9780393330519
Other things that are also "only a theory":
Gravity
Genetics
Einstein's (theory of) Relativity
Germ Theory
Saying that something is "only" a theory is a clear proclamation of your ignorance of science and the scientific method. A scientific theory is a collection of related scientific facts, and there is nothing "higher" than a theory in science (which is why the very well-established scientific concepts in the above list are all theories).
www.notjustatheory.com
Secondly, the Theory of Evolution is as well-established and accepted as gravity--in fact, gravity has bigger 'problems' (no scientific theory is perfect, after all) than evolution does. The fossil record DOES support the Theory of Evolution very strongly; there is nothing in it that contradicts it.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/
Thirdly, there is no "catching up" to be done in regards to the Bible. The Biblical account of creation is a story. It's not science (creation by a deity is not falsifiable, therefore it's by definition not science--you have to be able to prove something wrong for it to be scientific), and there is no evidence supporting it at all. It is rightly disregarded by the scientific community at large.
