I respect you too much to believe you came from an ape.

"I have a friend who's an artist, and he sometimes takes a view which I don't agree with. He'll hold up a flower and say, "Look how beautiful it is," and I'll agree. But then he'll say, "I, as an artist, can see how beautiful a flower is. But you, as a scientist, take it all apart and it becomes dull." I think he's kind of nutty.

First of all, the beauty that he sees is available to other people - and to me, too, I believe. Although I might not be quite as refined aesthetically as he is, I can appreciate the beauty of a flower. But at the same time, I see much more in the flower than he sees. I can imagine the cells inside, which also have a beauty. There's beauty not just at the dimension of one centimeter; there's also beauty at a smaller dimension.

There are the complicated actions of the cells, and other processes. The fact that the colors in the flower have evolved in order to attract insects to pollinate it is interesting; that means insects can see the colors. That adds a question: does this aesthetic sense we have also exist in lower forms of life? There are all kinds of interesting questions that come from a knowledge of science, which only adds to the excitement and mystery and awe of a flower. It only adds. I don't understand how it subtracts." -Richard Feynman

I don't think humans came from apes. They lack far too much data to conclude this.

One thing I would like explained is why humans are the only primate to exhibit the mammalian diving reflex. Data is clearly missing.

Please, please go actually learn what evolution is and says. (It does not say we are descended from apes.)

No-one thinks that humans came from apes. Would you be open to checking out one (or some) of the many books documenting the evidence that suggests that humans are cousins of apes?

Groups of Christians arive at various conclusions. Let me qualify what I said--I'm of the opinion God created a work-in-progress, with very real dinosaur bones embedded in the earth.

I foresaw someone saying that, and almost corrected myself by saying, "Excuse me, ape-like organism."

Tell you what, I'll carefully study a dozen or two pages of your most recommended book, if you'll carefully study either the book of Proverbs or the gospel of either Matthew, Luke, or John.

That is an incredibly cowardly way to say you're not interested.

Or is that actually how you usually read?

Your understanding of science can be summarized as your utterly wrong impression that it says humans came from apes, and your desire to learn more extends to being willing to "carefully study a dozen or so pages" of one book. Uh, okay. The fact that you spent your last thread accusing other people of closed mindedness makes this even funnier in context.

I can't wait to hear your well-informed reasons for thinking that the Earth was created with dinosaur bones in it.

Already done.

Is that at the very least slightly more extreme than my outburst the other day? Or are you afraid to read the Bible? Or do you want to indocrinate me with your doctrine and slight mine?

You have no idea if (or how recently) anyone here has read the Bible, because it's possible to do so and not reach your conclusions. Your refusal to even look at any evidence that you think you might disagree with is revealing. Your labeling of science as "doctrine" shows your level of understanding.

What an incredibly open-minded thing to say. Exactly the sort of thing you would hear from a well-informed person interested in learning about how things work.

With what care? Can I test you? You choose the book.

I'll keep it simple.

I'd like you to make an argument for why this would be relevant, please.

Or are you operating on the "logic" that if someone here can be deemed lacking in knowledge of the Bible, then everything ever discovered by science (which you've just stated that you'll refuse to look at) is wrong?