Did humans descend from other primates?

[McCulloch]

Man did not descend from the primates.

Did humans descend from other primates?
Are humans primates or should there be special biological taxonomy for humanity?
Please cite evidence.

[Berny]

Man made version? Man altered/manipulated version to be precise, developed from things which already exist. That's a very very long was from creating anything. In fact I'd go so far as to suggest it is beyond 'man' to 'create' anything, but can only modify what already exists.

And the same goes for nature. The whole first law thing. We are simply replicating that which nature did by itself.

Nature?

[Berny]

Man made version? Man altered/manipulated version to be precise, developed from things which already exist. That's a very very long was from creating anything. In fact I'd go so far as to suggest it is beyond 'man' to 'create' anything, but can only modify what already exists.

And the same goes for nature. The whole first law thing. We are simply replicating that which nature did by itself.

And not actually 'creating' [in the true sense of the word] anything. Copying maybe, creating????

[Grumpy]

Berny

And not actually 'creating' [in the true sense of the word] anything. Copying maybe, creating????

If you've got a moment to rest from all that goal post relocation, in "the true sense of the word" nothing has ever been created. Carry on.

Grumpy

[nygreenguy]

Man made version? Man altered/manipulated version to be precise, developed from things which already exist. That's a very very long was from creating anything. In fact I'd go so far as to suggest it is beyond 'man' to 'create' anything, but can only modify what already exists.

And the same goes for nature. The whole first law thing. We are simply replicating that which nature did by itself.

And not actually 'creating' [in the true sense of the word] anything. Copying maybe, creating????

Im afraid I dont understand what you are trying to say.

[Clownboat]

Man made version? Man altered/manipulated version to be precise, developed from things which already exist. That's a very very long was from creating anything. In fact I'd go so far as to suggest it is beyond 'man' to 'create' anything, but can only modify what already exists.

And the same goes for nature. The whole first law thing. We are simply replicating that which nature did by itself.

And not actually 'creating' [in the true sense of the word] anything. Copying maybe, creating????

Ahhhh... the semantics argument.
Where do you suggest the DNA came from if it was not created/made by the humans that created/made it?

[Berny]

Man made version? Man altered/manipulated version to be precise, developed from things which already exist. That's a very very long was from creating anything. In fact I'd go so far as to suggest it is beyond 'man' to 'create' anything, but can only modify what already exists.

And the same goes for nature. The whole first law thing. We are simply replicating that which nature did by itself.

And not actually 'creating' [in the true sense of the word] anything. Copying maybe, creating????

Ahhhh... the semantics argument.
Where do you suggest the DNA came from if it was not created/made by the humans that created/made it?

So what you're saying is it's a waste of time us trying to debate anything because your interpretation of words is simply to make them conform to anything you wish at any given time. This makes any discussion about anything totally irrelevant unfortunately. Not even dictionarys are a reliable source now because the language/s has been changed to accommodate various scenarios? Total confusion is the unfortunate result, a proposition predicted in the Holy Bible as it turns out.
John 1:1 - In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

[Goat]

Man made version? Man altered/manipulated version to be precise, developed from things which already exist. That's a very very long was from creating anything. In fact I'd go so far as to suggest it is beyond 'man' to 'create' anything, but can only modify what already exists.

And the same goes for nature. The whole first law thing. We are simply replicating that which nature did by itself.

And not actually 'creating' [in the true sense of the word] anything. Copying maybe, creating????

Ahhhh... the semantics argument.
Where do you suggest the DNA came from if it was not created/made by the humans that created/made it?

So what you're saying is it's a waste of time us trying to debate anything because your interpretation of words is simply to make them conform to anything you wish at any given time. This makes any discussion about anything totally irrelevant unfortunately. Not even dictionarys are a reliable source now because the language/s has been changed to accommodate various scenarios? Total confusion is the unfortunate result, a proposition predicted in the Holy Bible as it turns out.
John 1:1 - In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

This seems to be an avoidance of the point all together. He isn't saying that at all. That is your purposeful misunderstanding..

And, I don't see how misunderstanding is 'predicted' by that passage. That seems to be rather an odd interpretation of John 1:1. I find that bible 'predictions' are often that way,.. vague sentences taken out of context that can be interpreted in 1000's of different ways.

[Clownboat]

Man made version? Man altered/manipulated version to be precise, developed from things which already exist. That's a very very long was from creating anything. In fact I'd go so far as to suggest it is beyond 'man' to 'create' anything, but can only modify what already exists.

And the same goes for nature. The whole first law thing. We are simply replicating that which nature did by itself.

And not actually 'creating' [in the true sense of the word] anything. Copying maybe, creating????

Ahhhh... the semantics argument.
Where do you suggest the DNA came from if it was not created/made by the humans that created/made it?

So what you're saying is it's a waste of time us trying to debate anything because your interpretation of words is simply to make them conform to anything you wish at any given time. This makes any discussion about anything totally irrelevant unfortunately. Not even dictionarys are a reliable source now because the language/s has been changed to accommodate various scenarios? Total confusion is the unfortunate result, a proposition predicted in the Holy Bible as it turns out.
John 1:1 - In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

I'll try again...
Where do you think the DNA came from?

[Berny]

Man made version? Man altered/manipulated version to be precise, developed from things which already exist. That's a very very long was from creating anything. In fact I'd go so far as to suggest it is beyond 'man' to 'create' anything, but can only modify what already exists.

And the same goes for nature. The whole first law thing. We are simply replicating that which nature did by itself.

Replicating, Synthesizing, manipulating, copying isn't creating. Not even close IMO.
And even if we did 'create' life, it would only prove that creation requires the intervention of an intelligence, give we are intelligent, and made in the image of God.

[Berny]

duplication deleted