[Infinity]

Re: If we came from monkeys, why don't we have tails?

We didn't come from monkeys. Darwin did not claim this, nobody claims this except uneducated Christians. We share a common ancestor with monkeys. I relation to tails, have you heard of the tailbone? Humans have one. It's small and useless, it has been shrinking over the years as an ancestor long ago had a tail. We have no use for a tail, but it takes a very long time for anything to completely disappear. Soon that tailbone won't even be there in future generations.

[James Hutchins]

Re: If we came from monkeys, why don't we have tails?

..... We share a common ancestor with monkeys. ......

Sure... Bobs your uncle!

.........it takes a very long time for anything to completely disappear.....

What is your timeline?

[MitzaLizalor]

Re: If we came from monkeys, why don't we have tails?

We didn't come from monkeys. Darwin did not claim this, nobody claims this except uneducated Christians..

Christians do not claim that humans come from monkeys.

[Brother Harold Porter]

Re: If we came from monkeys, why don't we have tails?

We didn't come from monkeys. Darwin did not claim this, nobody claims this except uneducated Christians. We share a common ancestor with monkeys. I relation to tails, have you heard of the tailbone? Humans have one. It's small and useless, it has been shrinking over the years as an ancestor long ago had a tail. We have no use for a tail, but it takes a very long time for anything to completely disappear. Soon that tailbone won't even be there in future generations.

You again. I don't know why I waste my time with hateful atheists that are just here to antagonize us for loving Jesus, but of course, you are wrong.

The tailbone or coccyx has often been presumed to be vestigial and a leftover remnant to our alleged mammal and reptilian ancestors who also had tails. Evidence that is cited includes the variable number of bony segments humans can have (usually 4 but can be 3 or 5) as well as “babies born with tails.” But these so called tails are not really tails at all and instead are a type of fatty tumor. There are no bones or muscles in them at all, and thus, it cannot truly be considered a vestigial organ.

Spinney acknowledges that the coccyx now has a “modified function, notably as an anchor point for the muscles that hold the anus in place.” In fact, the coccyx is the anchor point for the muscles that form the entire pelvic diaphragm. Therefore, while the coccyx has a clear function in humans today, the only reason to claim that the function has been modified is because of evolutionary assumptions. If you believe that humans descended from animals that possessed tails, then there must have been a modification of the tailbone. In contrast, if our ancestor Adam was created by God then there was no modification, and our tailbone is just as it always was. Without the evolutionary presupposition, the evidence that the tailbone is vestigial evaporates.

I'm certain a mean-spirited and filthy atheist doesn't care if God created a part of our bodies to hold our anus in place, but normal and decent people do, and we are thankful for the intelligent design. How would you propose to anchor the anus, smarty pants?

In Christ

[Infinity]

Re: If we came from monkeys, why don't we have tails?

Sure... Bobs your uncle!

Denying easily, accessible, testable evidence. How childish...

Christians do not claim that humans come from monkeys.

I stand corrected. They don't claim it, but they do think evolution tells us we evolved from moneys, for examples, the title of this thread?

You again. I don't know why I waste my time with hateful atheists that are just here to antagonize us for loving Jesus, but of course, you are wrong.

The tailbone or coccyx has often been presumed to be vestigial and a leftover remnant to our alleged mammal and reptilian ancestors who also had tails. Evidence that is cited includes the variable number of bony segments humans can have (usually 4 but can be 3 or 5) as well as “babies born with tails.” But these so called tails are not really tails at all and instead are a type of fatty tumor. There are no bones or muscles in them at all, and thus, it cannot truly be considered a vestigial organ.

Spinney acknowledges that the coccyx now has a “modified function, notably as an anchor point for the muscles that hold the anus in place.” In fact, the coccyx is the anchor point for the muscles that form the entire pelvic diaphragm. Therefore, while the coccyx has a clear function in humans today, the only reason to claim that the function has been modified is because of evolutionary assumptions. If you believe that humans descended from animals that possessed tails, then there must have been a modification of the tailbone. In contrast, if our ancestor Adam was created by God then there was no modification, and our tailbone is just as it always was. Without the evolutionary presupposition, the evidence that the tailbone is vestigial evaporates.

I'm certain a mean-spirited and filthy atheist doesn't care if God created a part of our bodies to hold our anus in place, but normal and decent people do, and we are thankful for the intelligent design. How would you propose to anchor the anus, smarty pants?

In Christ

"Vestigial" does not mean without function. It means "of reduced or changed function" and it has always meant that. The coccyx is indeed a modified set of tail bones. Humans were not created we evolved. It is called exaptation. When a trait, either anatomical, physiological, or behavioral, changes its function in the organism's evolution. It is part of the theory of natural selection that explains the fact of evolution.

[Nobar King]

Re: If we came from monkeys, why don't we have tails?

You must think that you are really smart however one thing does not necessarily equate the other. I don't believe that my ancestors were monkeys. Why do you?

[MitzaLizalor]

Re: If we came from monkeys, why don't we have tails?

"Vestigial" does not mean without function. It means "of reduced or changed function" and it has always meant that. The coccyx is indeed a modified set of tail bones. Humans were not created we evolved. It is called exaptation. When a trait, either anatomical, physiological, or behavioral, changes its function in the organism's evolution. It is part of the theory of natural selection that explains the fact of evolution.

from an earlier post

In relation to tails, have you heard of the tailbone? Humans have one. It's small and useless, it has been shrinking over the years as an ancestor long ago had a tail. We have no use for a tail, but it takes a very long time for anything to completely disappear. Soon that tailbone won't even be there in future generations.

[Brother Harold Porter]

Re: If we came from monkeys, why don't we have tails?

"Vestigial" does not mean without function. It means "of reduced or changed function" and it has always meant that. The coccyx is indeed a modified set of tail bones. Humans were not created we evolved. It is called exaptation. When a trait, either anatomical, physiological, or behavioral, changes its function in the organism's evolution. It is part of the theory of natural selection that explains the fact of evolution.

Again, when your "theory" demands that the coccyx disappears altogether because you claim it is "useless", what will hold the human anus and associated muscles in place? Do you propose that we will all die from the obvious health and exposure issues of trailing and prolapsed rectums?

It's not that difficult, blues clues. Every part of our bodies is here for a reason, as they were intended by our Creator.

In Christ

[James Hutchins]

Re: If we came from monkeys, why don't we have tails?

Denying easily, accessible, testable evidence. How childish...

'Testable'? Please. Present the scripture to back up your fairy 'tail'.

I stand corrected. They don't claim it, but they do think evolution tells us we evolved from moneys, for examples, the title of this thread?
.........

Backpedal much?

[MitzaLizalor]

Re: If we came from monkeys, why don't we have tails?

We DID evolve from monkeys, the only logical answer I have to this question is we don't have tails because when we were monkeys having a tail was like having an extra arm, and over time after monkeys had developed the ability to use their hands more delicately and accurately, this effectively replaced the tail over time because they just started to focus on training their hands, not their tail.
Over a few generations of not using the tail, monkeys lost their skill and strength with their tail, which made using their hands easier and more effective.
This eventually led to monkeys losing their tails.

But monkeys have not lost their tails.

some monkeys:

[Infinity]

Re: If we came from monkeys, why don't we have tails?

You must think that you are really smart however one thing does not necessarily equate the other. I don't believe that my ancestors were monkeys. Why do you?

My far ancestors were roughly 'monkey-like', yes. Modern monkeys are just as evolved as we are, compared to those shared ancestors. They are another branch on the same tree. Every two living things on this planet have a common ancestor somewhere down the line.

Evolution does not require belief. Over the years, we've examined the evidence for evolution. It can be observed in the present day, all around us. Evolution is a fact. It's not an opinion in which one can "believe" or "disbelieve" in. A disbeliever is merely ignorant of reality.

"Vestigial" does not mean without function. It means "of reduced or changed function"...in relation to tails, have you heard of the tailbone? Humans have one. It's small and useless, it has been shrinking over the years as an ancestor long ago had a tail. We have no use for a tail, but it takes a very long time for anything to completely disappear. Soon that tailbone won't even be there in future generations.

You do know we are talking about evolution? A vestigial feature is completely useless for humans. Why is this? Because "of reduced or changed function" during evolution.

Every part of our bodies is here for a reason, as they were intended by our Creator.

• Males Nipples?
• Human vestigiality?
• Wisdom Teeth?
• Body Hair?
• Vomeronasal Organ?
• Auricular Muscles?
• The Appendix?
• Coccyx?

Just a few things that you claim your God created for us humans for no reason. Would you like me to list more?

[Nobar King]

Re: If we came from monkeys, why don't we have tails?

• Males Nipples?
• Human vestigiality?
• Wisdom Teeth?
• Body Hair?
• Vomeronasal Organ?
• Auricular Muscles?
• The Appendix?
• Coccyx?

Just a few things that you claim your God created for us humans for no reason. Would you like me to list more?

I think I'm going to lose my lunch.

[MitzaLizalor]

Re: If we came from monkeys, why don't we have tails?

You do know we are talking about evolution? A vestigial feature is completely useless for humans.

There is no such thing as evolution.

• Males Nipples? have a function
• Human vestigiality? Christians do not subscribe to such superstitions
• Wisdom Teeth? have a function (chewing food)
• Body Hair? has a function
• Vomeronasal Organ? has a function
• Auricular Muscles? have a function
• The Appendix? has a function
• Coccyx? has a function

Just a few things that you claim your God created for us humans for no reason.

We claim no such thing. God created everything for a reason.

Would you like me to list more?

Perhaps if you list more you would like to anticipate our answers?

Genesis 1:31–2:1 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day. Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. KJV

No unwanted detritus, nothing more to be made. Job done. The idea that after day 7 God continued creating things through "evolution" is absurd.

[Didymus Much]

Re: If we came from monkeys, why don't we have tails?

...Every part of our bodies is here for a reason, as they were intended by our Creator...

Oh, the stuff you learn reading the Bible. Who knew that wheat has kidneys? Or that grapes have blood in them?

Deuteronomy 32:14 "Butter of kine, and milk of sheep, With fat of lambs, and rams of the breed of Bashan, And goats, with the fat of kidneys of wheat; And thou didst drink the pure blood of the grape."

[Use your logic]

Re: If we came from monkeys, why don't we have tails?

But monkeys have not lost their tails.

some monkeys:
[ATTACH]21747[/ATTACH]

I meant monkeys eventually lost their tails and became what we now know as humans.