Replies

There is no *proof* for any theory in science. There is evidence that does or doesn't support them.

My point exactly. If we evolved from fish-laying eggs, to egg-laying mammals, why couldn't we be mammals that laid eggs while swinging from trees. Birds lay eggs in trees. Seems a natural progression that primates, along their evolutionary path, would lay eggs in trees, unless they'd already learned about the live-birth thing. Eggs are much less fussy (unless you're a penguin) requiring more attendance after hatching. On the other hand, live births incapacitate the female to a certain extent due to carrying and nursing her young. Not to mention the immediate demands of the newborn, whether hatched or birthed. Laying eggs and letting the young develop outside the mother is much less demanding than the newborn developing inside the mother. Nobody has explained how we went from one to the other. If so, and we are so smart, why did we adapt to the more cumbersome and demanding live birth instead of egg laying. Because we were too busy swinging from trees and that whole egg-sitting thing was just a bother in ADHD primates? We were too busy eating parasites off our neighbor to sit on our own eggs, so lets just evolve to pop out our young. We'll carry them on our back today, and as soon as the first Walmart opens in a few cajillion years we'll get one of those sling thingys to carry them. Evolution at its finest.

If we evolved from fish-laying eggs, to egg-laying mammals, why couldn't we be mammals that laid eggs while swinging from trees.

Because by the time apes evolved their ancestors were far removed from the egg-laying mammals and were placental mammals.

"My point exactly."

Actually, your pint was that because evolution is a theory it was junk science.

"If we evolved from fish-laying eggs, to egg-laying mammals, why couldn't we be mammals that laid eggs while swinging from trees.?"

Because primates don't lay eggs. There is no evidence at all that there were ever egg laying primates.

"Birds lay eggs in trees. Seems a natural progression that primates, along their evolutionary path, would lay eggs in trees, unless they'd already learned about the live-birth thing."

No, this is ridiculous. There is nothing about living in trees that would push a population to adopt egg laying. What's more, even if there was, adaptations don't evolve just because it may be useful (I see no way it would have been useful in a tree to lay eggs). Evolution works with what's already there. The entire reproductive system of primates was already placental; this places contingencies on any further evolution of the reproductive system.

"If so, and we are so smart, why did we adapt to the more cumbersome and demanding live birth instead of egg laying."

Much better protection of the young. Also, it provides a great start for the mammal's immune system.

This is all a smokescreen of course; YOU said that evolutionary biologists DID say that our ancestors laid eggs in trees while swinging from trees (as our primate ancestors). You have failed to substantiate this absurd claim by citing ANY biologist who as ever said this.

You made the claim; put up or shut up.