Do you believe in evolution?

[Kate..]

We were talking about it in science, i'm just not really sure lol
xx

[Sticks]

See this site (http://www.apologeticspress.org/)

You need to ask how you get that which is non living to give rise to that which is living

Also if the way a species is meant to change from one to another is by genetic mutation, how come we have never documented a good mutation? The only mutations we see in nature are bad ones, which nature will select against.

What about the lack of transitional forms in the fossil record?

How about what Lord Soley Zuckerman, who spent twenty years studying the Australopithecines who said that "If Mankind has evolved from the apes, then he has done so with out leaving a trace in the fossil record"

[DreadPirate]

Wasn't Charles Darwin on a ten pound note? I don't remember seeing God on a tenner. Says it all really.

[Conor]

What is really weird or else a freaky coinsidence is that the Creation and evelotion therys both go in kinda the same order in which things formed first, and thats not just animals, it's also the diffirent stages of the world being formed, when the bible was wrote, no one knew anything about that, so it would have been impossible for it to have been writen purposly like that.

[XxShortyxX]

What's Evolution mean? Sorry I'm thick :bigsmile:

[Sarah.]

Evolution is a myyysterryyyyyy ... Full of change that no one sees......:wink:

[XxShortyxX]

Originally posted by mrs_rko
Evolution is a myyysterryyyyyy ...


Ok, that helps me alot :bigsmile:

[indiemusic]

Yea i do. I mean i don't really believe in god and i can't believe we just popped out of the ground. As we certainly weren't around when dinosaurs where here.

Bit i still want to know how the first ever animal was "created" with nothing to evolve from:puzzled:

[Conor]

Originally posted by indiemusic
Yea i do. I mean i don't really believe in god and i can't believe we just popped out of the ground. As we certainly weren't around when dinosaurs where here.

Bit i still want to know how the first ever animal was "created" with nothing to evolve from:puzzled:

Only 1 word for me, God. :thumbs:

[Shaun]

Originally posted by DreadPirate
Wasn't Charles Darwin on a ten pound note? I don't remember seeing God on a tenner. Says it all really.

I don't know about Darwin, but I think assessing the meaning of life on the basis of £10 notes is a little bizarre.

Does Darwin have a religion with between 1 and 2 billion believers (maybe more, I'm not sure on the exact figure)? Says it all really.

As for evolution; I think it's a load of rubbish.

[Sticks]

Originally posted by indiemusic
Yea i do. I mean i don't really believe in god and i can't believe we just popped out of the ground. As we certainly weren't around when dinosaurs where here.


I have a book that publishes a pictogram produced by alleged cavemen which is of an upright dinosaur.

Also if you look at the Book of Job, the description of the Leviathan and the Behemoth matches that of dinosaurs. Some of the footnotes try and say that they were a hippo and a crocodile, but the description does not match

Originally posted by Shaun
As for evolution; I think it's a load of rubbish.


Whilst nominally being on your side of the argument, when you make an assertion you need to give a reason, which is what I attempted to do.

The General Theory of Evolution makes a number of assumptions which are hard to justify in the face of the evidence, mutation rates, lack of transitional forms and the shaky assumptions in radiometric rock dating.

This is not to be confused with the Special Theory of Evolution, which creationists accept, which simply put is "All things change with in limits. Phylogenetic boundaries are respected not violated"

[DreadPirate]

Originally posted by Shaun
I don't know about Darwin, but I think assessing the meaning of life on the basis of £10 notes is a little bizarre.


Its not really about the "meaning of life" though is it, its explanations from scientists.

I know more people that believe in money than believe in God.

[cepb]

The basic theory of evolution is that whilst genes copy themselves, sometimes they make mistakes known as mutations. Some mutations are beneficial and so the organism will survive for longer and so pass on more of its genes, whith its offspring in turn passing on spreading the beneficial gene. Most mutations are not beneficial. So evolution is a very slow process.

It makes sense, so yes I believe in evolution.

[Sticks]

Can you give us a documented case of a good mutation?

I know the old chestnut about bacterial resistance to antibiotics, but that was due to the flow of plasmids in the gene pool and nothing to do with genetic mutations.

[cepb]

I can't personally give you an example, but scientists have proved it?

If it wasn't as a result of mutations, how did evolution occur in your opinion?

[Sticks]

Originally posted by cepb
I can't personally give you an example, but scientists have proved it?

If it wasn't as a result of mutations, how did evolution occur in your opinion?

The alternative to Evolution is Special Creation, a k a Genesis Chapter 1

[bananarama]

Originally posted by Conor
Originally posted by indiemusic
Yea i do. I mean i don't really believe in god and i can't believe we just popped out of the ground. As we certainly weren't around when dinosaurs where here.

Bit i still want to know how the first ever animal was "created" with nothing to evolve from:puzzled:

Only 1 word for me, God. :thumbs:


Does that tell you who or what created "God".....Nope.....Sorry I think you are barking up the wrong tree as the saying goes.....

Do I believe in evolution. Answer Nope.....Bigger load of rubbish than the daily tabloids.....

Just accept the fact we don't know our origin and probably never will.........

[indiemusic]

[

Only 1 word for me, God. :thumbs: [/quote]

But how did 2 people create 6 billion?? Actually that means that whoever we marry we are essentially marrying a family member if it is true. Pretty sick

[bananarama]

Originally posted by indiemusic
[

Only 1 word for me, God. :thumbs:

But how did 2 people create 6 billion?? Actually that means that whoever we marry we are essentially marrying a family member if it is true. Pretty sick [/quote]

Is not mankind one huge family. Always has been the case. Your conclusions are true of course but does it matter after millions of generations of breeding has elapsed. Hardly family members except in that we are all genetically related as a human species that unfortunately behave more often then not in an inhuman way.....

By the way the animals we eat have the same basic internal design as us humans. We are all related in some way. That of course makes meat eaters canibals......

[Sticks]

Originally posted by indiemusic
[

Only 1 word for me, God. :thumbs:

But how did 2 people create 6 billion?? Actually that means that whoever we marry we are essentially marrying a family member if it is true. Pretty sick [/quote]

This is a variant of where did Cain get his wife.

Simply put he married his sister, which implies incest.

So why are we conditioned against incest?

Simply because it will cause and lock in genetic diseases in the gene pool.

But roll this back to the Garden of Eden and just a bit forward. At that time, the gene pool was pure, there were no genetic defects at all, so it was perfectly safe for Cain to marry his sister.

Later in the Book of Genesis, we see two examples of an incestuous relationship, which was not sanctioned, when Lot's daughters got him drunk, so that they could get him to make them pregnant. Was there any thing physically wrong with those children - no

The Gene pool at that time was still relatively safe, but as time wore on and the 2nd law of Thermodynamics takes place and genetic disorders do creep in, then incest is banned, to protect the human race, which is where we are at today.

Also, I do not know how many people follow this line, but this also means that one of our ancestors was Noah,.

[spacebandit]

Originally posted by Sticks
Originally posted by cepb
I can't personally give you an example, but scientists have proved it?

If it wasn't as a result of mutations, how did evolution occur in your opinion?

The alternative to Evolution is Special Creation, a k a Genesis Chapter 1

Do you believe the bible, in relation to creation [as that is the subject at hand}, is the true word of god ?

You have mentioned "Special Creation", which you described as "Genesis Chapter 1". it is also however another euphemism for "Intelligent Design", which I must suspect you knew, so beloved of the Charlatans of the Right Wing Christian Evangelical Movement within the United States as a back door way to promote the fiction of creation over evolution in the US public School System. Which would be the equivalent of putting Creationism on our School Syllabus and having it taught as fact.


Also when it comes to creationism, you put forward the alternative to evolution as Genesis Chapter 1.

So can you explain to me why does "creation" have to be the Judeo-Christian version of it ?. Faith or dogma cannot be included in the answer as you are the one using it to attempt to debunk evolution, whilst asking for hard scientific evidence - goose and gander come to mind.

You attempt to make an argument that evolution cannot be proven without a direct fossil record, strange that you do not make the same claim for the creationist version. Perhaps because the fiction of creation most certainly cannot be proven within the fossil record. I do find it hilarious when creationists attempt to use the fossil record to debunk evolution, as the very same fossil record absolutely destroys the creationist theory.

Creationism is a hypocrites tool, the very reasons they seek to debunk evolution, they know full well cannot be applied to them, from a scientifive perspective, Creationism explains nothing because it invokes a God / Creator, a conscious and intelligent designer. The idea of a Creator-God can not be falsified, the argument against is always "Faith" and always "Faith" without proof, the very opposite of what the Creation Hypocrites demand from scientists, and can therefore not be part of a scientific theory.

Should G-d actually exist, it can not be found in the part of reality that is observable by us and can therefore not be shown to be either existant or non-existant, and therefore not be falsified.

The concept of a "creator" is dictated by religious belief and it can not be falsified, because we are dealing with dogma which can not be tempered to any bounds the Creationists demand of scientists

[Dr43%er]

"But roll this back to the Garden of Eden and just a bit forward. At that time, the gene pool was pure, there were no genetic defects at all, so it was perfectly safe for Cain to marry his sister."

As you are always asking for documentation I thought I would ask you for some.

Where is the proof that they were genetically pure? Do you have copies of the DNA tests they had?

[Scarlett.]

The garden of eden didnt exist it was used to fill a blank space

The Big Bang was started by god, and from there on life was born and evolved:thumbs:

[indiemusic]

But guys if you look back to caveman times they were a less evolved form of us so surely it isn't much of a stretch to monkeys??

What about these fossils of walking apes they find?? did they just die out,and if so how??

But like i said it seems almost impossible for two people to become 6 billion, i mean how did they get different skin colours?? Also each generation would probably need to have about 1000 children atleast?:puzzled: to get to 6 billion.

Another question i want answered is how did we get surnames?? Who created them??

Actually there are loads of questions i want answered but i won't go into them.

[Sticks]

For the record, I do not support the proponents of Intelligent Design, as it is a classic theological trap of "God of the Gaps". Creationism should be at the front door and not the back door as critics of ID have labelled it as such.

Also we do not need ID, when we have the Anthropic Cosmological Principal, which was devised by atheists.

Also I have never advocated teaching Creationism in Science classes, but in RE classes, since to do the former upsets science teachers and puts them in a bind, another mistake made by creationists across the pond.

Dr43%er you asked for documentation, well there is the account in Genesis of Lot and his two daughters. Although that example of incest was definitely not sanctioned, there is no reference to anything being physically wrong with the two children born from that incident, showing that at that point the gene pool was still relatively clear at that point.

indiemusic, we still have cave-people to this day. People still live in caves. I am informed that there is a tribe of indigenous South American people who are the foremost workers of turquoise, and they still live in caves. Just because you live in a cave, does not make you less "evolved"

As for references to stone age, iron age and bronze age, these are false designations, as one lot of people could have been working with iron while another lot were still working with stone. Not every one progressed technologically at the same time. It is like that today. Compare our culture with that of the Australian aborigines who are living in the bush.

Also Evolution does not say we came from monkeys ore apes, but that apes, monkeys and humans have a common ancestor.

As far as skin colour there is an explanation for that which applies whether you believe in Adam and Eve or Mr and Mrs Australopithecus. The original couple would have to have had a mixture of the dominant and recessive genes that control melonine production in the skin. Depending on where you move to, a particular combination will win out, and by the Special Theory of Evolution, you get the variation required, but we are still one species, since someone from the Nordic countries could marry someone from Africa and they would be able to have children, who would grow up and have children of their own.

[Dr43%er]

"You need to ask how you get that which is non living to give rise to that which is living"

I wont complicate things by asking you to define 'living'. However a belief in the Theory Of Evolution can be held independently of an understanding of the origins of life. There are ideas proposed that life may have arisen from self-replicating molecules like RNA but as I've stated this is nothing to do with evolution.


"Also if the way a species is meant to change from one to another is by genetic mutation, how come we have never documented a good mutation? The only mutations we see in nature are bad ones, which nature will select against."


You seem to be lacking understanding in the basic concept of mutation.

"Beneficial mutations are commonly observed. They are common enough to be problems in the cases of antibiotic resistance in disease-causing organisms and pesticide resistance in agricultural pests (e.g., Newcomb et al. 1997; these are not merely selection of pre-existing variation.) They can be repeatedly observed in laboratory populations (Wichman et al. 1999). Other examples include the following:

* Mutations have given bacteria the ability to degrade nylon (Prijambada et al. 1995).
* Plant breeders have used mutation breeding to induce mutations and select the beneficial ones (FAO/IAEA 1977).
* Certain mutations in humans confer resistance to AIDS (Dean et al. 1996; Sullivan et al. 2001) or to heart disease (Long 1994; Weisgraber et al. 1983).
* A mutation in humans makes bones strong (Boyden et al. 2002).
* Transposons are common, especially in plants, and help to provide beneficial diversity (Moffat 2000).
* In vitro mutation and selection can be used to evolve substantially improved function of RNA molecules, such as a ribozyme (Wright and Joyce 1997)."


Dean, M. et al. 1996. Genetic restriction of HIV-1 infection and progression to AIDS by a deletion allele of the CKR5 structural gene. Science 273: 1856-1862.


Whether a mutation is beneficial or not depends on environment. A mutation that helps the organism in one circumstance could harm it in another. When the environment changes, variations that once were counteradaptive suddenly become favored. Since environments are constantly changing, variation helps populations survive, even if some of those variations do not do as well as others. When beneficial mutations occur in a changed environment, they generally sweep through the population rapidly (Elena et al. 1996)

Elena, S. F., V. S. Cooper and R. E. Lenski. 1996. Punctuated evolution caused by selection of rare beneficial mutations. Science 272: 1802-1804.



"What about the lack of transitional forms in the fossil record?"

Darwin himself had reasonable doubts about the consistency of his theory when faced by this problem. However since then many examples of transitional fossils have been discovered; such as those as believed to be the ancestors of the modern Horse, discovered by Othniel Charles Marsh. There will always be gaps in the fossil record, but to suppose that this means that all other evidence for transitional forms is null and void is foolish.


All the best,
Duncan

Doctor's Practice Manager

[Sticks]

But bacterial resistance to antibiotics is a function of plasmids (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasmids) floating through the bacteria population.

Mutations induced by husbandry, i.e plant breeders, may benefit us and how we manage the item we manipulate, but in nature would it happen or be beneficial in an uncontrolled open system?

See this article on Ancon Sheep (http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v17/i1/sheep.asp)

[Dr43%er]

"Dr43%er you asked for documentation, well there is the account in Genesis of Lot and his two daughters. Although that example of incest was definitely not sanctioned, there is no reference to anything being physically wrong with the two children born from that incident, showing that at that point the gene pool was still relatively clear at that point."

So because it was written in a book it is so. Frodo travelled through the caves of moria. It is in a book so it must be so.

With regards to any genetic deficiencies. As the book of Genesis does not contain the medical records of the protagonists you can not say that the gene pool is relatively clear. And as they did not have DNA testing then they would not be able to reference any disorders that were not visible or obvious. It does not mean they are not there and as such you can't really quote the book of Genesis to prove your point.

[Dr43%er]

"But bacterial resistance to antibiotics is a function of plasmids floating through the bacteria population."

Fair enough, this is a valid theory. However you asked:
"Also if the way a species is meant to change from one to another is by genetic mutation, how come we have never documented a good mutation?"

Using an excerpt from an article by S. F. Elena and co I made an effort to illustrate that your idea of a "good mutation" was extremely ambiguous as a mutation is only "good" subjectively. From the point of view of a mouse, the mutations that (arguably) allow owls to be damn efficient at ending the mouse's life are seriously "like not good". From the owl's point of view these mutations are "awesome". This is obviously assuming both mice and owls possess conciousness of conciousness and think in English.
:wink:

All the best,
Duncan

Doctor's Practice Manager

[bananarama]

Originally posted by Chewy
The garden of eden didnt exist it was used to fill a blank space

The Big Bang was started by god, and from there on life was born and evolved:thumbs:


You believe the big bang was started by god. A belief has no value without evidence. So. What started "God".....

[Sticks]

So you believe that nothing gives rise to something in violation of the First Law of Thermodynamics?

[Conor]

Originally posted by bananarama
Originally posted by Chewy
The garden of eden didnt exist it was used to fill a blank space

The Big Bang was started by god, and from there on life was born and evolved:thumbs:


You believe the big bang was started by god. A belief has no value without evidence. So. What started "God".....

God has always been here, and always will. No one crated him.

[spacebandit]

Originally posted by Sticks
So you believe that nothing gives rise to something in violation of the First Law of Thermodynamics?

unsure if you are being disingenous here or that you just do not know that the big bang theory does not "create" something from nothing.


prior to the Big Bang, according to the original theory , there was the "singularity"

A single "atom" in which all matter in the universe as we know it was condensed.

I suspect you also know that the big bang theory has supporting evidence, galaxies travelling away from each other from a single point, background "glow" of cosmiic background radiation, which the theory states is the residue of the explosion. The Big Bang theory predicted background cosmic radiation, and this was confirmed in 1964.

Lets not forget Edwin Hubbles work on the subject concering how galaxies speed away from us proportional to their distance.

Though in actuality the "big bang" does not actually refer to a single point of time and space where something went boom.

In its simplest terms "once upon a time the cosmos was smaller and hotter, the universe then expands and cools.


Of course it can't be proven absolutely, though the evidence is there.


And as for your argument that something cannot come out of nothing - Quantum Field theory disproves that

[bananarama]

Originally posted by Conor
Originally posted by bananarama
Originally posted by Chewy
The garden of eden didnt exist it was used to fill a blank space

The Big Bang was started by god, and from there on life was born and evolved:thumbs:


You believe the big bang was started by god. A belief has no value without evidence. So. What started "God".....

God has always been here, and always will. No one crated him.


That reply makes as much sense as the belief itself....Religious always avoid answereing awkward questions.......As to do so they would have to admit to a reality they cannot cope with....

[bananarama]

Originally posted by Sticks
So you believe that nothing gives rise to something in violation of the First Law of Thermodynamics?

A belief has no value excep to the pshychological happiness of the believer.

If or when a belief is proven then it would cease to be a belief and then become fact.

Theories are only of real value if they can be proven otherwise they are just another form of belief.......

[andyman]

God? Its funny how people think of god as a him!.. Could it be that we made god in our own minds in our own image and is not real outside the human mind?

[Sticks]

Wow the Coelocanth (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coelocanth) of the threads! :shocked:

[andyman]

Originally posted by Sticks
Wow the Coelocanth (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coelocanth) of the threads! :shocked: That is one mad fish... Of fish!

[Fom]

I believe in it, it makes complete sense to me. When you research into it properly it does make sense. The whole idea of natural selection explains a lot about life.

[Sticks]

Originally posted by Fom
I believe in it, it makes complete sense to me. When you research into it properly it does make sense. The whole idea of natural selection explains a lot about life.

Maybe to a limited extent, my issues are the mechanism for the change, genetic mutation and the origin of life.

[Fom]

Originally posted by Sticks
Originally posted by Fom
I believe in it, it makes complete sense to me. When you research into it properly it does make sense. The whole idea of natural selection explains a lot about life.

Maybe to a limited extent, my issues are the mechanism for the change, genetic mutation and the origin of life.

A lot of it is uncertain hence why Evolution is a theory rather than a law. Just like Religion is technically a theory.

They both have big gaping holes where things don't make sense, neither have a exact start... where did god come from? Where did the universe come from? My opinion on that is that the universe has always been here, it expands until it collapses in itself into a space as small as a grain of sand and then the pressure shoots everything out and things collide creating planets. That was a theory I heard a while ago... sounds logical.

[Tom4784]

I believe in it I'd like to believe that there was a force behind it though although im not religious.

[Sticks]

Originally posted by Fom
My opinion on that is that the universe has always been here, it expands until it collapses in itself into a space as small as a grain of sand and then the pressure shoots everything out and things collide creating planets. That was a theory I heard a while ago... sounds logical.


Except the evidence shows that the universe is an open system. For the oscillating universe, as that theory is called, you would need the universe to be closed, which it is not.

Almost all the theoreticians believe the universe will end in the Big Chill

Sorry!

[30stone]

Yeah, im evolved im a mutant i have special powers.

lol watched x men last night lol.


But yeh i believe in some parts..

[Tom]

Perhaps some people should take a look at the weaknesses of evolution

http://www.strengthsandweaknesses.org/Weaknesses/essential_weaknesses.htm

Also those going on about the big bang- there is nothing to say the world hasn't always been here and never had a beginning, even though our minds can't process that thought

[Fom]

Originally posted by Tom
Perhaps some people should take a look at the weaknesses of evolution

http://www.strengthsandweaknesses.org/Weaknesses/essential_weaknesses.htm

Also those going on about the big bang- there is nothing to say the world hasn't always been here and never had a beginning, even though our minds can't process that thought

I am open to most idea to be honest, I believe that the main drive behind religion is that people find the universe so complicated they refuse to believe it. And like to believe a more simpler idea like... a god that created everything.

[Ross]

yes I evolved from a monkey

[Tom]

Originally posted by Fom
Originally posted by Tom
Perhaps some people should take a look at the weaknesses of evolution

http://www.strengthsandweaknesses.org/Weaknesses/essential_weaknesses.htm

Also those going on about the big bang- there is nothing to say the world hasn't always been here and never had a beginning, even though our minds can't process that thought

I am open to most idea to be honest, I believe that the main drive behind religion is that people find the universe so complicated they refuse to believe it. And like to believe a more simpler idea like... a god that created everything.

Agree with that, and a lot of religious people then change what the bible says to fit science. But then again the bible isn't supposed to be taken literally ... or so we've been told.

But I just wish people wouldn't state the big bang theory as a fact. Its just the most common theory about how the world started, and as I've already said theres nothing saying it never had a start.

[letmein]

People who don't believe in Evolution are nothing more than moronic Chav trash with no education. Here's another shock, the world is not flat!

[noobslapper]

Insult removed - Insulting other members is not allowed on TiBB - Red

If you think God created all life then you need to audit some more body thetans noob. I have been a scientologist all my life, I have now reached OT5 and I have spent many hundreds of thousands of dollars discovering the truth!

[Sticks]

Do you want us to list the number of scientists and engineers who believe in Creationism?

Verna Von Braun is one that comes to mind

[Fom]

For people who say we have never seen a mutation, thats because they are very very subtle changes that happen over millions of years. An example of a modern mutation is one that involves humans, it is thought that our little toes are mutating very very slowly, slowly becoming smaller every generation. We don't need it so it is slowly going.

I haven't got any evidence to back that up, I heard that from word of mouth a while ago, it could be wrong. But we cant just point out a change, because they happen over such a big space of time.

[Tom]

^^ I heard we're slowly losing body hair as well because we don't need it anymore

[Mark]

Originally posted by Sticks
Do you want us to list the number of scientists and engineers who believe in Creationism?

Verna Von Braun is one that comes to mind

For every 1 you name, I bet there are 1000 who don't :shrug:

[Sticks]

Originally posted by Mark
For every 1 you name, I bet there are 1000 who don't :shrug:

My comment is with regards to what Letmein said


People who don't believe in Evolution are nothing more than moronic Chav trash with no education. Here's another shock, the world is not flat!


The point is there are educated scientists and engineers who do not subscribe to evolution, so that statement is wrong as well as insulting.

[Ninastar]

I am not being racist of anything but when our closest ancestors were alive where there all different kinds like different colours, launguages ( if they even spoke lol ) and ethnicity etc???
I really just want to know how people became so different in the world.
I know it sounds really thick but we are kinda doing this topic atm but i am scared to ask lol.

[Sticks]

Originally posted by Ninabitch
I am not being racist of anything but when our closest ancestors were alive where there all different kinds like different colours, launguages ( if they even spoke lol ) and ethnicity etc???
I really just want to know how people became so different in the world.
I know it sounds really thick but we are kinda doing this topic atm but i am scared to ask lol.

There is a concept called the Special Theory of Evolution or Micro Evolution.

Things change, but only within certain limits. Phylogenetic boundaries are respected, not violated.

[NettoSuperstar!]

Originally posted by Sticks
Originally posted by Mark
For every 1 you name, I bet there are 1000 who don't :shrug:

My comment is with regards to what Letmein said


People who don't believe in Evolution are nothing more than moronic Chav trash with no education. Here's another shock, the world is not flat!


The point is there are educated scientists and engineers who do not subscribe to evolution, so that statement is wrong as well as insulting.

show me a scientist who doesnt believe in evolution

[NettoSuperstar!]

Originally posted by Ninabitch
I am not being racist of anything but when our closest ancestors were alive where there all different kinds like different colours, launguages ( if they even spoke lol ) and ethnicity etc???
I really just want to know how people became so different in the world.
I know it sounds really thick but we are kinda doing this topic atm but i am scared to ask lol.

people developed languages over time in different places so obviously they developed different words and stuff for things. English is made up of celtic, germanic, latin, saxon influences as they invaded us over time. People have different skin colour because they come from different climates. And yer know people have different ways of life depending on how theyre society has been structured over 1000s of years....nowt wrong with asking questions Ninabitch (like the name)

[Ninastar]

Originally posted by NettoSuperstar!
Originally posted by Ninabitch
I am not being racist of anything but when our closest ancestors were alive where there all different kinds like different colours, launguages ( if they even spoke lol ) and ethnicity etc???
I really just want to know how people became so different in the world.
I know it sounds really thick but we are kinda doing this topic atm but i am scared to ask lol.

people developed languages over time in different places so obviously they developed different words and stuff for things. English is made up of celtic, germanic, latin, saxon influences as they invaded us over time. People have different skin colour because they come from different climates. And yer know people have different ways of life depending on how theyre society has been structured over 1000s of years....nowt wrong with asking questions Ninabitch (like the name)


Awww thanks!! x I thought it might have to do with that but i thought if i said it, people would be like wtf lol x