How can people still be religious and spiritual when we are just apes ?

Are you implying birds are what allow us to be spiritual?

no, but maybe I should be implying that

And birds are just dinosaurs, but im sure you still differntiate a bird from a trex no?

>There are actually people who believe they're descended from apes.

Attached: e5tw45w4tr.jpg (1100x733, 95K)

We are apes though. We share a common ancestor with chimpanzees because we are both species of ape.

because if you read genesis, we became true humans when we acquired free will and were able to choose both good and evil

we did not become true humans when some random fucker used their opposable thumbs to tie a rock to a stick

Genesis is a parable about how morality and free will are the burden of man, you're not meant to take it literally.

Unproven theory.

It's not though. Stop spreading fake news.

If there is proof, where is it. And don't tell me " oh it's because we have tail bones maaaaan. We used to have tails until one day they evolved away" without actually pointing me to recorded data.

Per biological definition we are in the superfamily of the Hominoidea, also known as Apes. Which we share with the other apes like chimpanzees, orangutans and gorillas.

But definitions are just that, definitions. Scientists classify things to keep track of their relationship. Nothing really follows from that in terms of the "worth" of humans.

This particular classification is based on genetic ancestry. But you could also classify species by their intelligence for instance, or their behavior. And then you would get quite different categories. There is no inherent reason why this particular classification would take precedent when judging the "worth" of a species.

Shared DNA. The genetic difference between humans is around 0.6% at most. The difference between humans and chimpanzees / bonobos is 2% at most, but even lower down to 1% depending on the population. Gorillas are the next closest relative, also at around 2% difference. Then come orangutans and then the lesser apes.

If you compare all species by their genetic similarity and order them in a tree data structure, then you get the "tree of life" that you have probably seen in biology class. Which happens to be quite similar to what Darwin already drew in On the Origin of Species, which predates genetics by quite some time.

These genetic similarity confirmed earlier classifications based on similar expressions such as bone structure, brain structure, behavior and other outwards appearances. Though we also found quite a few false classifications in the animal kingdom and species that looked similar actually had a more distant relationship, meaning their common ancestor lied further back in the past than initially thought.

Fossil records are also in line with what you would expect from this tree. And you can sometimes use them to reconstruct the divergence of two populations until they became different species over time.

Not him, but it is still a theory. Wn can share some DNA, but that doesn't mean we evolved from monkeys or a common ancestor. It is a approximation used to fill in the gaps and don't leave us without an answer

What about the Cambrian Explosion? How do you account for it? Intervention Theory by Lloyd Pye is what I subscribe to.