To: Finny; vladimir998; Coyoteman; allmendream; LeGrande; GunRunner; cacoethes_resipisco; ...
To: GodGunsGuts
Oh man, I need another cup of coffee. It says “wired: I read it as weird.
Sorry GGG
3 posted on
04/16/2009 9:27:09 AM PDT by
svcw
To: GodGunsGuts
Read the article and while I am not a creationist and I believe in the concept of adaptation of species over time to environmental pressures, I think that Chimps are not a descendant but more likely a cousin of the species that are out descendants.
I think that Humans are more than likely derived from a semi-aquatic Hominid species that dates back over 10 million years ago. The fine motor control referenced in the article would be a necessity for gathering food from coastlines, lakes, rivers and streams. Gathering foodstuff from the ocean coast may have required delicate hand control to prevent getting stung by creators of the sea which have deadly toxic stingers.
4 posted on
04/16/2009 9:34:02 AM PDT by
GraceG
To: GodGunsGuts
Creator specially made humans with features that set them apart from all other living things. And research has revealed uniquely human features that support the creation concept.also faculty of reason and ability to conceptualize
6 posted on
04/16/2009 9:35:15 AM PDT by
mjp
(Live & let live. I don't want to live in Mexico, Marxico, or Muslimico. Statism & high taxes suck)
To: GodGunsGuts
Interesting. One could rationalize from an evolutionary view that tool use has driven the need for fine motor skills. But such abilities would also be useful without tools, and chimps use tools to some degree as well. If anything I would expect that natural selection would push chimps harder for such skills, because the rise of technological aids in human society has reduced any selective influence on such motor skill development; if anything I would expect declining fine motor capabilities in the human population.
The finer motor capabilities look to be a combination of biomechanical adaptations and control (neural) adaptations. There is no point in having one without the other, so it would not be reasonable to conclude that these could evolve without an intelligent designer, even without know the further details of the complexity involved.
7 posted on
04/16/2009 9:35:20 AM PDT by
Liberty1970
(Democrats are not in control. God is. And Thank God for that!)
To: GodGunsGuts
Almost any animal, pound for pound, makes the most muscular human look like a weakling.
8 posted on
04/16/2009 9:36:47 AM PDT by
SWAMPSNIPER
(THE SECOND AMENDMENT, A MATTER OF FACT, NOT A MATTER OF OPINION)
To: GodGunsGuts
Interesting topic. I had a friend "Luche" who was much more diminutive than I in upper chest musculature, but he was a lot stronger than me. I always wondered why his muscles were physically smaller than mine, but he was so strong. Perhaps the answer is in here somewhere.
Hi Luche.
17 posted on
04/16/2009 10:00:36 AM PDT by
lafroste
(gravity is not a force. See my profile to read my novel absolutely free (I know, beyond shameless))
To: GodGunsGuts
"This story is contrary to biblical history, which states that the Creator specially made humans with features that set them apart from all other living things."
21 posted on
04/16/2009 10:19:00 AM PDT by
stormer
To: GodGunsGuts
Let me re-write the headline
Chimp Study Reveals Human Are Uniquely “Weired”.
23 posted on
04/16/2009 10:26:57 AM PDT by
Vendome
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson