But why? For what purpose did apes evolve? And why to humans? Apes seem pretty happy and content. And just because our skeleton has a 'tail' does that really mean we came from that source? How would the spine end if it werent to have some natural terminator?
Evolution: natural selection. The genome mutates randomly (probably because of the random nature of quantum mechanics at some level). Some of the mutations are "fitter" for survival, especially for reproduction, than others. Over time, they will become more prevalent in the species and the less fit mutations will die out. Bigger mutations may result in different species, eventually. Apes evolved to become more "successful". You can see how this strategy has panned out. Apes may seem "pretty happy and content" but evolution is not about happiness, it's about breeding success. Apes still live in small geographical areas. Humans are all over the globe and their numbers are mounting rapidly. So the human is a more successful ape. That is the "purpose" for the ape's evolution. As for the physiology of the spine, you'll have to ask a biologist or a physiologist. I'm just a layman who likes reading.
@bradders Are you attempting to play devils advocate here or are you not aware of the fossil record, DNA and evolution, which all explain how we evolved into what we are. The evolution of life occurred long after the big bang and indeed long after the development of super novas in which elements heavier than iron are created which are required for life. All of this is well established knowledge, yet you dismiss it as if it was speculation. Or are you just trying to wind people up ?
Some humans are born with vestigal tails today, they are most often removed surgically, but not always. In just the same way, evolution revealing itself, whales are sometimes born with vestigal rear legs. I'd wager they are not usually surgically removed.
I'm no biologist but I seem to vaguely recall that the foetus goes through certain changes that mimic the amphibian to mamal thing like evolution But a bit faster
You're asking the wrong question. Also, apes did not evolve into humans, we just have a common ancestor with some ape species, and that is a process that has taken a huge amount of time to happen and started around 15-20 million years ago.
At last something that we can agree on - but I think the point that religion is just a man-made set of rules for subjugating the poor peasants was actually made about 30 pages ago...
Funny - it would appear that anyone who actually does disagree with you or your "facts" is automatically decried as being ill-informed, ill-educated or just plain stupid. "Better" by who's definition? Yours? But then, of course, there are no facts or arguments "better" than yours are there? (in your mid at least). I am a fan of debating - but when the other person (in this case you) refuses to accept even the slightest, tiniest, possibility that they may actually be wrong - then what's the point?
I've got this image in my head, Bradders, of you with your fingers in your ears shouting "la la la la la I can't hear you!!" I don't know what else to say: Apes ---> Neanderthals ---> humans over millions of years. Evolution. Nothing suddenly appeared. No magic was involved, nor was a divine creator, unless you want to postulate one for the very beginning of the universe. If so, it set the initial conditions, stood back and went to sleep as nothing further needed to be done.
Surely we can all agree that there are two, completely separate and distinct, concepts of "god" ? There's the creator of the entire universe, originator of the big bang or whatever caused the universe to exist; and then there's the "god" created by various religions in order to keep the poor peasants in line. I'm not saying that either exist or don't exist, I'm just saying there are two different concepts... Yes ?
