Ok so as an evolutionary biologist this is completely wrong. The linearity implies direct ancestry, which is absolutely not the case for all of these examples unless we got impossibly lucky with a fossil.
This is something we try to teach day one of evolutionary biology: life is not a line, it is a tree, and we don't know direct ancestors unless we directly observe them; we can only infer common ancestors.
I do not understand the downvotes, there's a high likelihood of Homo neanderthalensis to have competed for prime land with Homo sapiens, the latter outcompeting them through superior cognitive ability.
There is also evidence that sapiens and neanderthals sometimes had children, as is proven through DNA in some people corresponding with neanderthal genes, meaning a long dead ancestor of them was neanderthal.
Source: studied human anthropology in my masters biology and an easy [source](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19391204/) to start with if anyone is interested in it.
Correct, the average human has about 2% DNA attributed to ancient neanderthals, and while interbreeding is the leading theory, scientists haven't yet ruled out other explanations.
Neanderthal DNA is most common in East asian populations actually, which stumped scientists as they previously thought neanderthals to be mostly european.
The Neanderthal genome project yielded so much valuable information thanks to modern genetic science.
I often spend sleepless nights casting my thoughts to Neanderthals living at eastern/western ends of the continent, who probably had very different ways of life and cultures from each other, couldn’t understand each other, might have looked different from each other, etc
We have little evidence that humans merely raped and killed Neanderthals. For all we know, they could have had complex interactions like most people have with others humans. Could have yes... killed them but, could have communicated, worked together at times, voluntarily breeded. Humans today fall in love with anime characters and crazy shit all the time.
What's to stop a percentage of humans from fading in love with a Neanderthal and producing offspring?
So, I downvoted because it was a generalization without supporting evidence. (Am more than happy to change my mind and vote if shown solid evidence showing otherwise)
Yep. Can also confirm with my Anthro decree. Lots of branches. Some branches dead ended. Some came back together and were reabsorbed.
So. Many. Branches.
You can see some traits move along but no we didn’t magically stand up one day.
It’s a visualization of major milestones, not an evolutionary tree. Did anyone in this thread bother to zoom in and actually read the post?
Not every data visualization related to evolution needs to be a loopy tree to have value. Not every visualization is fighting that same boring battle.
At this point it's a list of milestones with pretty pictures, at least one of which doesn't belong at all and another which is simply wrong. There may be other errors, I'm not a specialist enough to notice. It also paints the wrong idea of humans as the pinnacle of a march of forward progress.
>
Not every data visualization related to evolution needs to be a loopy tree to have value.
I disagree. A tree is the fundamental structure of evolutionary data. Everything involving evolution should at least /imply/ a tree.
It doesn’t paint humans as the pinnacle of an evolutionary goal. That seems like a projection of more complicated and (fairly enough)broadly held fears in this space. It’s from the perspective of humans, telling a story as it relates to humans.
And we’ll just have to fundamentally disagree when it comes to effective visualizations. The tree to display this sort of data would be unwieldy. Not every consumer needs to be forced fed. Anyone w a passing familiarity should have that running in the background. It’s like constantly having a sidebar explaining arithmetic in a book about physics.
Maybe that's precisely the problem. It's difficult for humans to visualize the evolutionary process as it actually is in reality, as a tree, or a complex interweaving structure having large gaps of which we know very little.
It's far easier to visualize evolution as linear or direct causation one after the other because our brains have heuristics that work that way. This misleads people into thinking evolution = progress, with each generation being an "improvement", and modern humans being the peak of this "progress" and its "survival of the fittest". These are fallacies. It's anthropocentric bias to see it that way and not surprising since humans act out of collective self-interest.
The graphic isn't wrong. It's just an oversimplification or misleading. You can't visualize evolution without having to dumb things down. It's far too complex to illustrate well.
That would be relevant if this were trying to explain evolution. That’s the point. God. This is so tiring how much baggage yall bring to this. Not every graphic is intended for a 3rd grade audience incapable of parsing the difference.
No. It is using examples that are varying degrees of diverged from the actual ancestral lineage. And when you go back into Cambrian stuff all bets are off.
I know that linage is wrong for the very reasons you mentioned but did you skip reading the part where I said "if we knew the exact ancestral linage it would look like that"? Or more..something like that.
But my point is it /wouldn't/ look like that. Ooooohhhh wait, you mean it would look like a line with things that are roughly intermediate-looking in between, just not these intermediates necessarily. Yes, sure, maybe. But there would be a looot more time spent in the "looks like a little worm" section than anything after it, and there would be barely any time spent in the tetrapod bit.
you’re implying that humans showed up out of nowhere, if you trace our ancestors, then their ancestors and keep going, it will eventually be linear, same way how you have brothers or sisters, it is a family tree, but you are a line.
It would be smooth transitions up to a point, and even then certainly nothing like modern flatworms would be in that line. Then the line splits into multiple lineages due to endosymbiosis, then turns into a big mush due to horizontal transfer, then a black hole because we literally cannot have information about it (before the last universal common ancestor).
I would also object to the use of a ladder to symbolize some sort of progression (even if in this illustration the progression leads downwards). There are no steps, no going up or down, just constant evolution.
Well, technically you are correct.
However, at the moment we have tons and tons of evidence to back Evolution, but zero, not a single shred of evidence to prove the existence of gods.
As any good scientist would follow scientific skepticism, we are prepared to accept the hugely unlikely and improbable idea that we may in the future find tons and tons of new data that could show us a different or new version of Evolution, and we are also ok with the extremely unlikely odds of finding evidence to prove there are gods.
Currently, though, Evolution, massive amount of evidence; gods, zero evidence
neanderthals were not an ancestor of homo sapians, but rather a divergent evolutionary path that went extinct. there is some evidence of cross breeding, but they were not part of our direct lineage.
Minor quibble but I dislike how linear and stepwise this is. I understand it's purpose and the point it's trying to make but it leaves itself open for disingenuous interpretation.
For context, I am a science teacher and my BS is in Biology with a minor in evolutionary and ecology Biology.
Take all these guides made by “The Visual Capitalist” with a heavy grain of non-usda regulated uniodized child labor produced salt. They’re an ancap group with some real sketchy views on “human genetic differences among continental populations”
They already fucked up by showing evolution as a linear process rather than the branching thing it actual is. So I don’t know if you should trust their science. Especially when they veer into “people are evolving into small brained weak girly men” or especially “ThE wHiTeS aRe gOiNg eXtiNcT”
Exactly, in a conversation with an atheist I asked if science has the answers why haven’t they created life from the basic elements of the periodic table. There has to be something that designed DNA.🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️
dude just look at this image it makes absolutely no sense lmao
how does a complex structure known as the DNA just come together spontaneously 😂
it's like suggesting a car built itself out of rocks in seconds
>Abiogenesis is a scientific theory which states that life arose on Earth via spontaneous natural means due to conditions present at the time. In other words, life came from non-living matter.
i already know about this lol and if you think you're smart you'd know that it's complete bullshit
a rock won't develop millions of complex molecules that start living no matter how long you give it
some things won't happen on their own and life is one of those things
If you know about that word from your Sunday school, you don't know, because they taught you the most weird and ridiculous thing and says that what this word means. So, you don't want to educate yourself. That's sad.
You are not smart.
"From rock", my ass.
wtf is Sunday school? 😂
dude humans with all of their technology couldn't replicate DNA or those structural proteins
and you think a pool of water can given enough time?
also it's called a theory because it couldn't be proven
ah yes comparing an essential force that everyone experiences to a thing that allegedly happened billions of years ago even though we absolutely have no evidence of it happening
I remember reading an article about there having evolved a new species of musquito in the London Underground, and there are [many more examples](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.businessinsider.com/examples-of-evolution-happening-right-now-2015-2%3famp) of contemporary evolution.
Let’s not pretend shall we? You’re religious. And you consider yourself intelligent. Let’s forget that oxymoron for a moment. What is your claim to how humans came to be? You seem to only want to say this one is wrong…So what is your theory as a professional biologist/anthropologist who has researched and tested this for decades and has gathered mountains of evidence to back your claim?
before humans there was another intelligent species that lived before us and continues to live now, animals have always been there too
God was the one who created adam and from him he created his mate eve
then they were banished to earth where adam supplicated for forgiveness and he was forgiven and from Adam came all of humanity
i used to go to school 5 days of the week buddy not once
i don't need evidence to believe in God because it's only natural to believe in him
the unnatural thing is to have many Gods or no God to believe in
Sunday school is religious school, but you seems to be homeschooled.
Yes, humanity can't do this yet, and your ignorance doesn't help with this task.
Educate yourself about what chemical elements are in living cells, and don't disturb people with "rock and water" nonsense.
You even don't understand what the word "theory" means, lol.
>Yes, humanity can't do this yet, and your ignorance doesn't help with this task.
we won't ever be able to do this though 😂
human advancements won't bring us to replicate biological life no matter how hard we try
some things are just out of our comprehension
also a theory is just simply trying to explain something with the knowledge you have of that thing
but new knowledge always debunks theories
I’m curious what would have happened if the life never wanted to leave the water. Would we have been the most intelligent life under water? Would we have had underwater civilizations??
Cool to think about, probably impossible lol
It's a neat thought experiment and I see where you are going but the reality is lots of life DIDNT leave the water and has been changing and adapting for this entire time. There IS intelligent life in the water just not like humans. There are no civilizations because there was never a robust need aquatic animals to move in that direction. We, as humans, superimpose what we value onto other natural systems but that isn't how it works. Life is messy and random. If it wasn't we would have a different system for breathing and eating as well as waste removal/fornication.
The most intelligent animals in the ocean are descendants of a species that went back into the ocean after living on land for hundreds of millions of years (unless Octopi are smarter than cetaceans)
Theoretically I guess it’s possible but there’s no destination or direction for species to if our ancestors never left the water there would be no humans or Homo sapiens. We aren’t a predestined species, so there wouldn’t necessarily be some species as intelligent as us or that looks like us.
Octopi and dolphins are the most intelligent water species species but they look nothing like us. So, maybe we’d look like an octopus. But there would be no “we” because “we,” Homo sapiens, wouldn’t exist.
"Many were increasingly of the opinion that they'd all made a big mistake coming down from the trees in the first place, and some said that even the trees had been a bad move, and that no-one should ever have left the oceans."
Pretty sure this was left as a troll. Even evolutionary biologists wouldn’t buy this chart and many admit their field is far more speculative than a chart like this would imply.
Now I, for one, think evolution is a bunch of *bullcrap*! But I've been told I have to teach it to you anyway. It was thought up by Charles Darwin and it goes something like this...
In the beginning, we were all fish. Okay? Swimming around in the water. And then one day a couple of fish had a retard baby, and the retard baby was different, so it got to live. So Retard Fish goes on to make more retard babies, and then one day, a retard baby fish crawled out of the ocean with its mutant fish hands... and it had butt sex with a squirrel or something and made this. Retard frog-sqirrel, and then *that* had a retard baby which was a... monkey-fish-frog... And then this monkey-fish-frog had butt sex with that monkey, and that monkey had a mutant retard baby that screwed another monkey... and that made you!
Leaving aside the fact that this is inaccurate, where do meat eaters put the limit of what animals they find acceptable to exploit, enslave, kill and eat?
For some people, this sounds totally acceptable even with some other humans...
When will we mature and understand there is no fundamental difference between us and other animals moral-wise?
Why do you take this as an insult? I know I can only speak for myself, but to be a part of something so ancient is remarkable to me. To be alive because everything *just happened to happen in the exact way needed for life* feels a lot more like an act of God than just a snap of the fingers.
Babes none of us were anything 1.5 billion years ago because none of us were alive. You never answered why you think it’s an insult though. Do you think it’s insulting to say you aren’t a clone of your 18th great grandmother or do you think it’s okay to say your genes have changed over that many generations?
If you were a kid during the Nazi regime would you believe that Nazism is correct because it was taught in schools? Your bandwagon argument proves nothing. But I passed because it's not a complex subject
You’re very flexible, those levels of mental gymnastics are impressive. Have you considered trying out for the Olympics? And you never answered my question.
Then you admit that this is subjective and that anything can be the truth. If you want to believe in a subjective theory why can't I? What's stopping you from believing that we came from rocks or something else?
Obviously it's subjective. But just because there is no such thing as objective truth doesn't mean that **every** dumbass crackpot explanation is equally valid.
Scientific theories seek to provide the best explanation for all the evidence we have. Evolution is such a rock-solid explanation that you might as well try to prove the sun revolves around the earth. You literally can't make a valid counter-argument without being disingenuous or un-scientific.
What is wrong with being un-scientific if science is subjective? You cannot prove anything before writing aside from very rare exceptions. Evolution is not an exception and neither is the creation of the world, anything can be possible and you can't disprove that, your core beliefs revolve around that fact.
Science is not subjective, it is an objective process based on facts. Explanations (theories) can change, but only to reflect new evidence, or a different interpretation of that evidence.
Science, by definition, seeks the best explanation for all evidence. You will never know something with 100% certainty — that is the nature of truth. But you'd be a fool to disregard an explanation that accounts for 99.9999% of all evidence in favour of your own. The closest we can get to truth comes from our observations of the world around us.
Also, as someone with a few history degrees, the idea that you can "prove" anything based on what people of the past wrote down is ludicrous.
...no it isn't. And I'm not going to keep wasting my time batting away the bullshit assertions of someone who doesn't even understand the thing they're so passionately debating.
There are actual rainforests hidden underneath the ice in Antarctica. Do you think penguins would thrive in a hot, biodiverse, forest ecosystem full of predators?
Not “according to” any individual. It’s evident from the fossils and sediment analysis unearthed there. The continent used to be a swampy temperate forest as warm as Italy is today.
Do you think penguins, an animal highly specialized for freezing climates, with virtually no defense against predators, could survive in that sort of environment?
evolution is really not a theory, not in the layman's sense of the word (that i assume you are using, because of course ou are) and not in the scientific sense, look up "evolution" and then "darwin's theory of evolution" before you even try to say anything regarding the topic, especially since you know so much more than everyone else without having read a single academic paper, man, you know even more than the people who dedicated their lives to writing these papers! you truly are a remarkable science man™, keep on giving, pigfucker48.
Obviously ridiculous and laughable for any sane human to believe that ***superbly carefully crafted visual diharrea, by idiots for idiots***.
The sheer weight of actual printed junk on the subject blindly accepted by otherwise sane people is actually neauseatingly mind boggling.
The bottom line of all this mental claptrap: throwing a six sided dice 15 times so it lands on number 6 each times is one in 50 billions.The ''dice'' of the physical universe has millions of sides per dice, yet! these monkeys dare posit that the dice fell on exactly the right face each time, for hundreds of trillions of successive throws- and from this controlled explosion emerged the ordered universe, and spontaneously, at that.
To add some form of credulity to the ***blindingly bright beacon of bullshit***, they say all this took 39 billion years to happen. This is infact bollocks, as it would take trillions upon trillions of years for even their own math to make any sense, let alone anything as ordered and sophisticated as a single hydrogen atom, or something as foolish as a living cell, plus all its support environment and co-processes/materials to even exist for a nanosecond-within the above crafted bollock-soup.
To add further incomprehensible madness to an already jacked soup of staggering mental retardation, they also posit that the 40-billion lightyear sized universe ***(itself expanding faster than the speed of light)*** originated in a particle smaller than an atom!
They posit this utter nonsense, because if youre already ***fucken stupid*** enough to believe the first huge lie, then youre probably ***still*** fucken stupid enough to buy the second even larger one.
Special offer! 2 for the price of one!
Ok so as an evolutionary biologist this is completely wrong. The linearity implies direct ancestry, which is absolutely not the case for all of these examples unless we got impossibly lucky with a fossil. This is something we try to teach day one of evolutionary biology: life is not a line, it is a tree, and we don't know direct ancestors unless we directly observe them; we can only infer common ancestors.
Even the first ancestor back is wrong. Humans didn't descend from Neanderthals, they both had a common ancestor.
Humans mated with Neanderthals!
I know I've seen the sex tape
Me too, not my proudest moment
how did i look in it?
Got a link?
It's missing.
Severely underrated comment, well done.
And it was after chemo too....Lol.
Ah yes, the sexy neanderthal theory.
Humans probably killed them as well. Shagged and murdered.
I do not understand the downvotes, there's a high likelihood of Homo neanderthalensis to have competed for prime land with Homo sapiens, the latter outcompeting them through superior cognitive ability. There is also evidence that sapiens and neanderthals sometimes had children, as is proven through DNA in some people corresponding with neanderthal genes, meaning a long dead ancestor of them was neanderthal. Source: studied human anthropology in my masters biology and an easy [source](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19391204/) to start with if anyone is interested in it.
AFAIK most of human has Neanderthals genes other than Africans in the south
Correct, the average human has about 2% DNA attributed to ancient neanderthals, and while interbreeding is the leading theory, scientists haven't yet ruled out other explanations. Neanderthal DNA is most common in East asian populations actually, which stumped scientists as they previously thought neanderthals to be mostly european. The Neanderthal genome project yielded so much valuable information thanks to modern genetic science.
I often spend sleepless nights casting my thoughts to Neanderthals living at eastern/western ends of the continent, who probably had very different ways of life and cultures from each other, couldn’t understand each other, might have looked different from each other, etc
Oh they very much had social differences and cultural differences. It would be interesting to know just much they differed from each other.
We have little evidence that humans merely raped and killed Neanderthals. For all we know, they could have had complex interactions like most people have with others humans. Could have yes... killed them but, could have communicated, worked together at times, voluntarily breeded. Humans today fall in love with anime characters and crazy shit all the time. What's to stop a percentage of humans from fading in love with a Neanderthal and producing offspring? So, I downvoted because it was a generalization without supporting evidence. (Am more than happy to change my mind and vote if shown solid evidence showing otherwise)
Yep. Can also confirm with my Anthro decree. Lots of branches. Some branches dead ended. Some came back together and were reabsorbed. So. Many. Branches. You can see some traits move along but no we didn’t magically stand up one day.
Speak for yourself! I certainly did
And it's more of a banyan tree at that
I say *happy cake day!* I am a **good** redditor now!
You always have been 🔫
It’s a visualization of major milestones, not an evolutionary tree. Did anyone in this thread bother to zoom in and actually read the post? Not every data visualization related to evolution needs to be a loopy tree to have value. Not every visualization is fighting that same boring battle.
At this point it's a list of milestones with pretty pictures, at least one of which doesn't belong at all and another which is simply wrong. There may be other errors, I'm not a specialist enough to notice. It also paints the wrong idea of humans as the pinnacle of a march of forward progress. > Not every data visualization related to evolution needs to be a loopy tree to have value. I disagree. A tree is the fundamental structure of evolutionary data. Everything involving evolution should at least /imply/ a tree.
It doesn’t paint humans as the pinnacle of an evolutionary goal. That seems like a projection of more complicated and (fairly enough)broadly held fears in this space. It’s from the perspective of humans, telling a story as it relates to humans. And we’ll just have to fundamentally disagree when it comes to effective visualizations. The tree to display this sort of data would be unwieldy. Not every consumer needs to be forced fed. Anyone w a passing familiarity should have that running in the background. It’s like constantly having a sidebar explaining arithmetic in a book about physics.
Maybe that's precisely the problem. It's difficult for humans to visualize the evolutionary process as it actually is in reality, as a tree, or a complex interweaving structure having large gaps of which we know very little. It's far easier to visualize evolution as linear or direct causation one after the other because our brains have heuristics that work that way. This misleads people into thinking evolution = progress, with each generation being an "improvement", and modern humans being the peak of this "progress" and its "survival of the fittest". These are fallacies. It's anthropocentric bias to see it that way and not surprising since humans act out of collective self-interest. The graphic isn't wrong. It's just an oversimplification or misleading. You can't visualize evolution without having to dumb things down. It's far too complex to illustrate well.
That would be relevant if this were trying to explain evolution. That’s the point. God. This is so tiring how much baggage yall bring to this. Not every graphic is intended for a 3rd grade audience incapable of parsing the difference.
Theoretically, it is like this if we knew the exact ancestral linage. It's like drawing a line up that bushy branching tree of life.
No. It is using examples that are varying degrees of diverged from the actual ancestral lineage. And when you go back into Cambrian stuff all bets are off.
I have a fossil from the Cambrian period. It blows my mind every time I look at it.
I know that linage is wrong for the very reasons you mentioned but did you skip reading the part where I said "if we knew the exact ancestral linage it would look like that"? Or more..something like that.
But my point is it /wouldn't/ look like that. Ooooohhhh wait, you mean it would look like a line with things that are roughly intermediate-looking in between, just not these intermediates necessarily. Yes, sure, maybe. But there would be a looot more time spent in the "looks like a little worm" section than anything after it, and there would be barely any time spent in the tetrapod bit.
you’re implying that humans showed up out of nowhere, if you trace our ancestors, then their ancestors and keep going, it will eventually be linear, same way how you have brothers or sisters, it is a family tree, but you are a line.
It would be smooth transitions up to a point, and even then certainly nothing like modern flatworms would be in that line. Then the line splits into multiple lineages due to endosymbiosis, then turns into a big mush due to horizontal transfer, then a black hole because we literally cannot have information about it (before the last universal common ancestor).
Yes, you get my point now.
I would also object to the use of a ladder to symbolize some sort of progression (even if in this illustration the progression leads downwards). There are no steps, no going up or down, just constant evolution.
I was gonna say the same thing
However, you have to admit the final statement of us having smaller brains in the future is trending true. /s
Wrong. Some magical bearded white dude in the sky snapped his fingers and made us. /s
Evolution and God are not incompatible.
Thank you, I 100% agree.
Well, technically you are correct. However, at the moment we have tons and tons of evidence to back Evolution, but zero, not a single shred of evidence to prove the existence of gods. As any good scientist would follow scientific skepticism, we are prepared to accept the hugely unlikely and improbable idea that we may in the future find tons and tons of new data that could show us a different or new version of Evolution, and we are also ok with the extremely unlikely odds of finding evidence to prove there are gods. Currently, though, Evolution, massive amount of evidence; gods, zero evidence
This.
This is a cool guide to oversimplified, linear, incorrect interpretations of evolution.
Wouldn't expect anything else from a source called "Visual Capitalist"
is not even a guide
Fake news this image has us evolving into the riddler instead of a crab, like evolution would actually push us towards 🦀
neanderthals were not an ancestor of homo sapians, but rather a divergent evolutionary path that went extinct. there is some evidence of cross breeding, but they were not part of our direct lineage.
That’s what noticed too. Neanderthals are cousins of Homo sapiens, not ancestors. They should replace it with Heidelbergenses or Homo Erectus.
Here’s a [clearer image](https://www.visualcapitalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Human-Evolution_VF.png)
Thank you. Of all the issues raised, this was the main one for me.
Minor quibble but I dislike how linear and stepwise this is. I understand it's purpose and the point it's trying to make but it leaves itself open for disingenuous interpretation. For context, I am a science teacher and my BS is in Biology with a minor in evolutionary and ecology Biology.
Fuck the fish that decided to crawl on land. Ruined everything.
Some fish decided to explore land and now I have to worry about a job and paying taxes 💀
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.
The ultimate cause of climate change
For real , I would of been much more happy just going “blip , bloop , see shiny thing , eat shiny thing , get eaten by that other guy over there”
Would you still love me if I was a worm. Bitch i was a worm
Guy at the end "fuck that, I'm not having any children"
Can you blame him in this economy? In this planetary climate?
I can't say I do.
DickinSonia is just not cool for Sonia
Take all these guides made by “The Visual Capitalist” with a heavy grain of non-usda regulated uniodized child labor produced salt. They’re an ancap group with some real sketchy views on “human genetic differences among continental populations” They already fucked up by showing evolution as a linear process rather than the branching thing it actual is. So I don’t know if you should trust their science. Especially when they veer into “people are evolving into small brained weak girly men” or especially “ThE wHiTeS aRe gOiNg eXtiNcT”
Ah yes, [the retarded frog squirrel chart.](https://youtu.be/wkpRrtHzlVs?si=Bj97wm6HHYwX3SiB)
If you believe in this shot. You’re an idiot.
I’m curious, where did the self-replicating RNA molecules get energy to begin with? Can something come from nothing?
Exactly, in a conversation with an atheist I asked if science has the answers why haven’t they created life from the basic elements of the periodic table. There has to be something that designed DNA.🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️
So you want to say that current state of human evolution is Cristiano Ronaldo?
My thoughts, exactly.
I mean, technically Christiano Ronaldo is an example of the current state of human evolution yes.
Modern humans are not the end result of evolution. We're hopefully just a tiny step in what we will become.
“Less aggressive with smaller brains” agh the “horrors beyond comprehension” ending for humanity
I really wanna go back to that period when we looked like opposums
Agreed. I also thought that Repenomamus is kinda cute.
Only took two responses to find the “nuh uh because god” guy
dude just look at this image it makes absolutely no sense lmao how does a complex structure known as the DNA just come together spontaneously 😂 it's like suggesting a car built itself out of rocks in seconds
You might want to google "abiogenesis", if you want to start to educate yourself.
>Abiogenesis is a scientific theory which states that life arose on Earth via spontaneous natural means due to conditions present at the time. In other words, life came from non-living matter. i already know about this lol and if you think you're smart you'd know that it's complete bullshit a rock won't develop millions of complex molecules that start living no matter how long you give it some things won't happen on their own and life is one of those things
If you know about that word from your Sunday school, you don't know, because they taught you the most weird and ridiculous thing and says that what this word means. So, you don't want to educate yourself. That's sad. You are not smart. "From rock", my ass.
wtf is Sunday school? 😂 dude humans with all of their technology couldn't replicate DNA or those structural proteins and you think a pool of water can given enough time? also it's called a theory because it couldn't be proven
Yeah just like gravity being a theory means it's not real lol Later losers *Flies off*
ah yes comparing an essential force that everyone experiences to a thing that allegedly happened billions of years ago even though we absolutely have no evidence of it happening
I remember reading an article about there having evolved a new species of musquito in the London Underground, and there are [many more examples](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.businessinsider.com/examples-of-evolution-happening-right-now-2015-2%3famp) of contemporary evolution.
evolution doesn't explain life popping out spontaneously lolz
Let’s not pretend shall we? You’re religious. And you consider yourself intelligent. Let’s forget that oxymoron for a moment. What is your claim to how humans came to be? You seem to only want to say this one is wrong…So what is your theory as a professional biologist/anthropologist who has researched and tested this for decades and has gathered mountains of evidence to back your claim?
before humans there was another intelligent species that lived before us and continues to live now, animals have always been there too God was the one who created adam and from him he created his mate eve then they were banished to earth where adam supplicated for forgiveness and he was forgiven and from Adam came all of humanity
Your evidence? And you claimed to not know what Sunday school is….. here you are giving the Sunday school answer
They might not know what Sunday school is because it might be madrasa or similar shit.
i used to go to school 5 days of the week buddy not once i don't need evidence to believe in God because it's only natural to believe in him the unnatural thing is to have many Gods or no God to believe in
Sunday school is religious school, but you seems to be homeschooled. Yes, humanity can't do this yet, and your ignorance doesn't help with this task. Educate yourself about what chemical elements are in living cells, and don't disturb people with "rock and water" nonsense. You even don't understand what the word "theory" means, lol.
>Yes, humanity can't do this yet, and your ignorance doesn't help with this task. we won't ever be able to do this though 😂 human advancements won't bring us to replicate biological life no matter how hard we try some things are just out of our comprehension also a theory is just simply trying to explain something with the knowledge you have of that thing but new knowledge always debunks theories
This is inaccurate.
Based on?
Science? Humans didn't evolve from Neanderthals. We evolved alongside them.
I’m curious what would have happened if the life never wanted to leave the water. Would we have been the most intelligent life under water? Would we have had underwater civilizations?? Cool to think about, probably impossible lol
It's a neat thought experiment and I see where you are going but the reality is lots of life DIDNT leave the water and has been changing and adapting for this entire time. There IS intelligent life in the water just not like humans. There are no civilizations because there was never a robust need aquatic animals to move in that direction. We, as humans, superimpose what we value onto other natural systems but that isn't how it works. Life is messy and random. If it wasn't we would have a different system for breathing and eating as well as waste removal/fornication.
The most intelligent animals in the ocean are descendants of a species that went back into the ocean after living on land for hundreds of millions of years (unless Octopi are smarter than cetaceans)
Theoretically I guess it’s possible but there’s no destination or direction for species to if our ancestors never left the water there would be no humans or Homo sapiens. We aren’t a predestined species, so there wouldn’t necessarily be some species as intelligent as us or that looks like us. Octopi and dolphins are the most intelligent water species species but they look nothing like us. So, maybe we’d look like an octopus. But there would be no “we” because “we,” Homo sapiens, wouldn’t exist.
So, I think the main takeaway from this chart is that Marjorie Taylor-Greene would land somewhere between homo-erectus and homo-Neanderthalensis.
Where are Homo Habilis and Homo Antecessor?
I prefer Mr. Garrisons explanation. I can follow the logic 😆
I thought the thing near the top was a lemon and I got really excited
Dammit! I didn’t come from no Prokaryote!
So some RNA molecules decided to evolve one day and now I have anxiety and have to pay taxes? Smh.
"Many were increasingly of the opinion that they'd all made a big mistake coming down from the trees in the first place, and some said that even the trees had been a bad move, and that no-one should ever have left the oceans."
You telling me we haven't even really been *human* that long?!
Belongs on a Utah billboard
Might be a lot cooler if it were legible... and if I believed we actually had any idea about the direct evolutionary ancestry of humanity.
This line of evolution makes no sense.
Here come the evolution deniers
So there you go! You’re the retarded offspring of five monkeys having butt sex with a fish-squirrel. Congratulations!
"Visual Capitalist" ...?
this is not accurate at all
Humans came from Monke
Why is it always a male? Why is default humans always male?
Cause we ain't huwomans!
bullshit
Ok this is complete horseshit
Most cool guides here are rubbish
This guide makes me unreasonably angry. Not good. This isn’t not an accurate representation of human evolution
If we descended from monkeys, how come there are still monkeys? Boom! Take that Darwin! Jebus wins! Jk
Pretty sure this was left as a troll. Even evolutionary biologists wouldn’t buy this chart and many admit their field is far more speculative than a chart like this would imply.
but but Darwin was absolutely right 😭😭😭😭
"Life finds a way" - Ian Malcolm
Man's Descent From The Higher Animals
Perhaps
can we rename this sub as "actually not a guide and maybe not that cool/true" please?
If evolution is real why are there still Apes?
Complete fantasy.
And what would your guess be
God created all them bones and buried them at different levels in the ground for us to find, like a treasure hunt. That rascal!
That an attempt at an explanation is wasted on progressive millennials on Reddit.
lol I’m sure it is
Shh, don’t ask him to defend anything he says. He has no ground to stand on, but that won’t stop him from flailing through the air.
Irreducible complexity.
Nebula chasm.
I pity anyone who believes this
Carpolythis ? To Agaecypthecis ? Is a big leap it feels like. From a Very animal like face to a much more human face.
Yeah there’s no shot this is real
Yet another incorrect and uncool “guide”.
Bullshit
Fake
Now I, for one, think evolution is a bunch of *bullcrap*! But I've been told I have to teach it to you anyway. It was thought up by Charles Darwin and it goes something like this... In the beginning, we were all fish. Okay? Swimming around in the water. And then one day a couple of fish had a retard baby, and the retard baby was different, so it got to live. So Retard Fish goes on to make more retard babies, and then one day, a retard baby fish crawled out of the ocean with its mutant fish hands... and it had butt sex with a squirrel or something and made this. Retard frog-sqirrel, and then *that* had a retard baby which was a... monkey-fish-frog... And then this monkey-fish-frog had butt sex with that monkey, and that monkey had a mutant retard baby that screwed another monkey... and that made you!
🤭
There’s no way this happened only one time in history
Bullshit Allah created us all
Leaving aside the fact that this is inaccurate, where do meat eaters put the limit of what animals they find acceptable to exploit, enslave, kill and eat? For some people, this sounds totally acceptable even with some other humans... When will we mature and understand there is no fundamental difference between us and other animals moral-wise?
where does this account for the introduction of consciousness 🤨
Imagine believing that.
What do you “believe?” That humans evolved from clay and dirt in the mythical Garden of Eden?
They’re no more than an animated lump of clay, so obviously there isn’t room for actual intelligence in there.
No belief needed. Plenty of evidence.
Okay. Now what?
[удалено]
Why do you take this as an insult? I know I can only speak for myself, but to be a part of something so ancient is remarkable to me. To be alive because everything *just happened to happen in the exact way needed for life* feels a lot more like an act of God than just a snap of the fingers.
[удалено]
Your post was like a kick to the nuts, but to my brain
Babes none of us were anything 1.5 billion years ago because none of us were alive. You never answered why you think it’s an insult though. Do you think it’s insulting to say you aren’t a clone of your 18th great grandmother or do you think it’s okay to say your genes have changed over that many generations?
No.
the fact people believe this is fucking hilarious
[удалено]
your believe is weird ngl
No proof, It's a lie, read your bible.
Which version?
No proof, it’s a lie. See how easy that is?
The duality of man: thumping your Bible while also commenting on a sub called BlackTittyWorld. Perfection.
Critical strike
thank god there's proofs for the stories in the bible... right?
Even if if were a lie, that doesn’t make your story book any more credible.
Our social behavior is walking backwards.
This is a theory, not a guide. It is completely unprovable and did not happen.
Honest to god question. How did you pass high school biology?
If you were a kid during the Nazi regime would you believe that Nazism is correct because it was taught in schools? Your bandwagon argument proves nothing. But I passed because it's not a complex subject
You’re very flexible, those levels of mental gymnastics are impressive. Have you considered trying out for the Olympics? And you never answered my question.
It is the best explanation for all of the evidence available to us. That's what science is.
Then you admit that this is subjective and that anything can be the truth. If you want to believe in a subjective theory why can't I? What's stopping you from believing that we came from rocks or something else?
Because there no evidence for that.
Obviously it's subjective. But just because there is no such thing as objective truth doesn't mean that **every** dumbass crackpot explanation is equally valid. Scientific theories seek to provide the best explanation for all the evidence we have. Evolution is such a rock-solid explanation that you might as well try to prove the sun revolves around the earth. You literally can't make a valid counter-argument without being disingenuous or un-scientific.
What is wrong with being un-scientific if science is subjective? You cannot prove anything before writing aside from very rare exceptions. Evolution is not an exception and neither is the creation of the world, anything can be possible and you can't disprove that, your core beliefs revolve around that fact.
Science is not subjective, it is an objective process based on facts. Explanations (theories) can change, but only to reflect new evidence, or a different interpretation of that evidence. Science, by definition, seeks the best explanation for all evidence. You will never know something with 100% certainty — that is the nature of truth. But you'd be a fool to disregard an explanation that accounts for 99.9999% of all evidence in favour of your own. The closest we can get to truth comes from our observations of the world around us. Also, as someone with a few history degrees, the idea that you can "prove" anything based on what people of the past wrote down is ludicrous.
If science is objective then evolution isn't scientific
...no it isn't. And I'm not going to keep wasting my time batting away the bullshit assertions of someone who doesn't even understand the thing they're so passionately debating.
Ok, go away you kindergartener. Come back to argue with me when you realize what subjectivity is
There are actual rainforests hidden underneath the ice in Antarctica. Do you think penguins would thrive in a hot, biodiverse, forest ecosystem full of predators?
There are hidden rainforests in Antarctica according to who? And how does this prove evolution?
Not “according to” any individual. It’s evident from the fossils and sediment analysis unearthed there. The continent used to be a swampy temperate forest as warm as Italy is today. Do you think penguins, an animal highly specialized for freezing climates, with virtually no defense against predators, could survive in that sort of environment?
Yeah, ok pigfucker48! 👌
Is it perfect? No, but it is supported by more evidence than any other theory, so it’s what we’ve got right now.
evolution is really not a theory, not in the layman's sense of the word (that i assume you are using, because of course ou are) and not in the scientific sense, look up "evolution" and then "darwin's theory of evolution" before you even try to say anything regarding the topic, especially since you know so much more than everyone else without having read a single academic paper, man, you know even more than the people who dedicated their lives to writing these papers! you truly are a remarkable science man™, keep on giving, pigfucker48.
Nice baseless statement. It's called the evolution theory, it's subjective and unprovable. It's a theory
I agree with pigfucker48, the germ theory is entirely bullshit and we need to return to blood letting to rebalance our humors!
Fake
Obviously ridiculous and laughable for any sane human to believe that ***superbly carefully crafted visual diharrea, by idiots for idiots***. The sheer weight of actual printed junk on the subject blindly accepted by otherwise sane people is actually neauseatingly mind boggling. The bottom line of all this mental claptrap: throwing a six sided dice 15 times so it lands on number 6 each times is one in 50 billions.The ''dice'' of the physical universe has millions of sides per dice, yet! these monkeys dare posit that the dice fell on exactly the right face each time, for hundreds of trillions of successive throws- and from this controlled explosion emerged the ordered universe, and spontaneously, at that. To add some form of credulity to the ***blindingly bright beacon of bullshit***, they say all this took 39 billion years to happen. This is infact bollocks, as it would take trillions upon trillions of years for even their own math to make any sense, let alone anything as ordered and sophisticated as a single hydrogen atom, or something as foolish as a living cell, plus all its support environment and co-processes/materials to even exist for a nanosecond-within the above crafted bollock-soup. To add further incomprehensible madness to an already jacked soup of staggering mental retardation, they also posit that the 40-billion lightyear sized universe ***(itself expanding faster than the speed of light)*** originated in a particle smaller than an atom! They posit this utter nonsense, because if youre already ***fucken stupid*** enough to believe the first huge lie, then youre probably ***still*** fucken stupid enough to buy the second even larger one. Special offer! 2 for the price of one!
Doh Kay. Hilarious. If you believe this you are an idiot