And you then reduced evolution to an all-or-nothing proposal. Which I reject. And I have at least 10 times already, so you may as well stop bringing it up.
The possibility that species evolved separate and apart from the Creation of man is not only possible, I'd call it probable.
No other species has evolved this quickly or as a far.
The ancient civilizations like that of the Egyptians appear to have emerged from a complete void of even primitive cultures. If this was the product of man evolving, it was a relative 0 to 60 in 2 seconds of evolutionary speed.
It's basically saying, "OK, this species of bird over here evolved a broader bill over 50,000 years, and in the same time period this species of ape developed a written language, architecture, mathematics, music, engineering..."
No, it's illogical.
And all of those civilizations recognized that some greater power brought them into existence, separating them from the beasts of the world. That can not be a coincidence either.
I don't say I know what happened. Nobody does. But SOMETHING happened significantly beyond the ordinary scope of species evolving. I think that's rather obvious in fact.
I did not reduce it to an all or nothing proposal. I demonstrated that you reject evolution at a fundamental level. You have taken issue with a simple and common synopsis of the theory, not some minor detail. Whatever it is you believe, it is not the theory of evolution.
No other species has evolved this far or quickly??? Huh, I thought you said we did not evolve? Which is it?
How does one evolve "far"? What makes you think we have evolved more "quickly" and how is it possible that we did that without evolving?
You are obviously showing some basic misunderstanding of evolution and appear to be suggesting that man is the end result or "farthest" result evolution has reached while you claim we have not evolved (fuck your cognitive dissonance must be unbearable).
"OK, this species of bird over here evolved a broader bill over 50,000 years, and in the same time period this species of ape developed a written language, architecture, mathematics, music, engineering..."
Wait, you think that architecture was brought to us through an evolutionary process? I mean, the skillset was brought to us by an evolutionary process, but the actual practice is not a product of evolution.
Did beavers evolve into architects? Lots of animals demonstrate music skills (whales, dolphins, birds, etc), language skills (koko) etc. We still don't know for sure what animals know so you are mostly just speculating here about our "unique" abilities. None of your speculation has anything to do with science or testable and observable data.
If humans have not evolved then one would expect that we would not have those traits that indicate evolution in other animals. Yet, we share all the signs of common descent with apes, primates, mammals, vertebrates, etc that any other member of those groups displays. For instance, human fossils show signs of evolution just as the fossils of any other species shows signs of evolution. Our dna proves common ancestry just as it proves it with any other species. The facts of bio geography support our evolution just as it supports the evolution of other species.
There is no scientific reason to suppose that we alone did not evolve.
You are using illogical to mean anything that conflicts with your preconceived ignorance. You have not even bothered to identify any problem in the logic.
The only problem in logic here is your contradictory claims that we have evolved farther and more quickly than any other species but did not evolve at all.
