I'm sure you've heard it before; humans and chimpanzees are about 98.8% similar. What does that really mean though? This number refers to comparing single nucleotide changes in the DNA, or changes in the sequence of the A,C,G,T code.
Comparing genetic duplications in genes, the number lowers to 96%. What's a duplication? As Even Eichler of University of Washington says, if we consider the genetic code as a book, entire pages will be repeated in one species but not the other. So conservatively, we are 96% alike with out closest cousin. Here's some other common animals and our genetic similarites (these numbers are consistent across all reliable sources):Cat: 90%
Cow: 80%
Mouse: 75%
Fruit Fly: 60%
Banana: 50%
Interesting to look at. What I find most fascinating is the 50% match to bananas! Animal and plant life share so much ancient DNA coding from way back when plant and animal life diverged approximately 1.5 billion years ago.
The sequencing technology allowing for genetic comparison has been huge for anthropologists and evolutionary biologists. Anthropologists have used comparisons of genes between humans and our closest cousins to better understand when and how genetic variations occurred. Evolution was already well established before this technology existed with fossil records, embryology, comparisons of skeletal systems, study of vestigal appendages, and finally the understanding of the driver of evolution: natural selection. Genetic sequencing confirmed our understanding of species divergence and evolution, and also allowed scientists to better understand and build the the fascinating "tree of life."
The banana thing is interesting, but for me the fruit fly thing even more so. I don't know if you remember the 2008 presidential election, but Sarah Palin got caught making a big deal over the federal government funding fruit fly research (her point was that big government had gotten too big and was bordering on the absurd). Others followed up with the point, however, that what was funded was actually genetic research on fruit flies, which was intended to benefit people who were born with genetic anomalies. Like Down's Syndrome, which Palin's son has.
ReplyDeleteIt's a political stretch on both sides, these arguments, but pretty fascinating to see how it all plays out. Would have been even more interesting if she had picked on banana research!
Yes, but spending will happen in the private sector if the government isn't there and the private sector will be much more flexible, moving with the development of the technology than the government can possibly be. I've worked in both sectors and have see it first hand. Also no one knows the future, so investing everyone's wealth in a few government mega-progams run counter to the need for diverse investment that the private sector does give in a real free market (which we don't have). Check out http://mises.org Also look up Stefan Molyneux on youtube and freedomainradio
DeleteI know this is more than a year after you'd posted this, but I hope you'll bear with me.
DeleteWhile the private sector is necessarily more flexible and efficient, there is no guarantee that the private sector will ever enter, sustain or complete fruit fly genetic research to better understand human genetic anomalies.
It needs a motivation, particularly one that provides a profit, to warrant any useful expectation of the private sector.
We need a private sector to do the things government can't: Be creative, fluid, create and distribute fantastic new products and services at reasonable prices and go where no man had thought to go.
And we need a government to do the things the private sector can't: be rooted, diligent, sit still and ensure that contracts are met without the prospect of unmitigated violence and stay where no man is willing to stay.
Bloody hell, a backed up, well structured argument below something on the internet, I applaud both of you! and that early in the morning as well!
DeleteRead this all. Why do ppl state thier "beliefs" with so much assertion? like they witnessed or actually managed to evolve anything in terms of speciation. Forget micro evolution. Is natural selection an entity? Sounds like it "chooses" which animal must die out or does it choose which is allowed to live? And how many years does it give for a species to die? If it cant survive in an environment why/how did it evolve to do so initially?
DeleteSo.many questions but the answers will b nothing more than, this is the belief we hold told to us by our priests(scientists) so we will make a link through some proven facts and hope later on we can prove what we dont know or have no answer to right now. But lets laugh at ppl who do the same but with a different origin/angle
Lool
"like they witnessed or actually managed to evolve anything in terms of speciation."
DeleteSpecies are taxonomic classifications. They're not the end of evolution. Organisms become more specific than species, and the lines diverge further from there.
"Is natural selection an entity? Sounds like it "chooses" which animal must die out or does it choose which is allowed to live?"
It's just environmental pressure, and a description of how organisms who aren't fit (can't reproduce and have offspring that survive to the point where they reproduce) have genetic lines that die out. It's not conscious.
"And how many years does it give for a species to die?"
Natural selection can happen in hours. Phenomena like floods are part of natural selection. So is competition for food sources.
"If it cant survive in an environment why/how did it evolve to do so initially?"
You're making the mistake of thinking this happens in individuals, and not populations.
Coming from an overly religious town (small town in the south), I know a lot of people that fight the opposite side. They claim genes are a perfect display of "God's work". The fact genes are so similar and the animals (or fruit!) are different means God created us from the same material, but gave us different lifestyles.
ReplyDeleteIf you ever get the chance, talk to someone that has that view. I haven't met anyone up here that is like that- but it makes for an interesting conversation!
If I needed to talk to someone who thought like that then there are plenty of asylums and retards right here
DeleteCam's viewpoint is fairly well represented in the documentary Expelled, which some of your fellow students suggested I watch. It's not a fantastic documentary, but it does provide an interesting counterpoint to pro-GM arguments.
ReplyDeleteWhen considering just the genetic percentage similarities I presented above, it is a very easy argument to make that God created life: since God made humans similar to chimps, slightly less like mice, and very different from bananas, the genetic percentages work out.
ReplyDeleteWhen considering that these percentages reaffirmed evolutionary biologists' already constructed "tree of life", and that this genetic information is only a small slice of the large pie of evidence for evolution, the argument Cam presents is difficult to make.
As I have heard and read, the similarities argue for a common designer.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
Deletenice! were common ancestors with a bananas too.
ReplyDeleteDoes that mean when we eat cows or bananas we are cannibals?
ReplyDeletei hope your not serious
DeleteSo please tread carefully and eat mindfully with the knowledge that the grass we walk on and the plants we harvest and animals we kill are our relatives and have a right to live on this earth as we do!
DeleteThis is why 2500 years ago Buddha went barefoot and only eat before midday what he had collected in his alms bowl.
No.. It means we're canabananibals.. Jk I hope you enjoyed my joke
DeleteHaha! I love this! ^^^^^^
DeleteHa! That was awesome. Well played!
DeleteLuv the banana joke,as a lot of people like monkeying a round,i can think of a few politicans that should have stayed in the trees.
Deletegod created human being from a soil, we are connect to earth. so as bananas grow theru soil, surely we might even have similarities to an apple?
ReplyDeleteAll things are conected through nature - which we are part of. All from same building blocks. Not very likely that an alien life form decided to make all this trash up, spin it about and then leave it alone unless this said alien has got bored with this toy and gone off somewhere else... Humans love to think we're important, but we aren't, just half a banana.
DeleteDid god really now? We have substantially more proof that the gods are the products of man's imagination, than the other way around. But that is a topic for another forum.
ReplyDeleteI'm quite pleased about the banana, I'm even more pleased that my banana isn't 50% of my body.
Maybe plants are gods because they appear to suffer less than animals and provide us with food, shelter and peace?
DeleteDepends on which part of your body..... I can think of a place where being part Banana would help
DeleteHahahaha. I get that
DeleteFunny you
How very improper of all of you. If a person who believes in a creator presents there theory to oppose your theory, who then is the smarter of the pair? You may not agree with their views, however, they are endeavoring to learn the truth in both sides, whilst you choose to mock their efforts to understand a common ground. You who make reference to a study that cannot be proven given the knowledge of the limitations of science, are almost undoubtedly clueless concerning the proverbial "flip side" to your own beliefs. But I now have an intestine view of possible reasons for the genetic connections. Thank you first person in this section. And I apologize for the delay in seeing this unfortunate realm of ignorance.
DeleteThen God made us with a sense of humour then?
DeleteOr, is it just simple... I mean, really- when God created the Earth- why would He not use similar features? Just like when you paint a painting- everything you do is not 100% different- yet the painting is never the same. It is simple common sense.
ReplyDeleteCommon sense is realizing that science is backed by proof not just some word of mouth fairy tale story that contradicts itself. Science proves that the earth and universe is older than the bible says it is how does that make sense or Noah having a boat full of 2 of every animal do you realize how many animals that is and how far he would have to travel to get all those animals then build a boat big enough or the big one how did he keep them from eating each other? How did he keep the cold animals cold enough to live or the fresh and salt water animals alive how did no one die of disease from animal dung all over And If he and his wife and kids were the only people on the boat then they were insestuous so they were the first hillbilly family. "If your to stupid for science then try religion"
DeleteI agree. lrn 2 grammar.
DeleteThere's no need to bring God in for that to make sense. Genetics and informatics are remarkably similar, and in informatics, when a piece of code works, you don't throw it away, you reuse it as much as possible. And really, if you look at it, the biosphere is basically a gigantic computer grinding away possible solutions to the single answer "what is better at surviving?" for the best part of the last 4 billion years. It is a bit abstract, but in a way, it is an 'intelligent' system.
DeleteYou, having to use the abusive word, "stupid", just made all what you said pointless. Because you won't need to abuse anyone if truly you're right.
DeleteOk, after reading that painfully punctuated paragraph from March 3rd I felt the need to say something. If you were to fully read through the bible, I think you would find that it does not, in fact, contradict itself and that since you're going to go off on a tangent of Noah that I'll follow. When it says two of every animal, it does not literally mean 2 of every animal on Earth. Interpretations, recently, of that passage leaves it to be that maybe He didn't flood the entire Earth, and only flooded that which the evil of Humans had tainted, not even bothering with the polar ice caps or the polar bears and penguins, because, obviously, there were no humans there. Meaning that the animals were all taken from that continent or area. Oh and, I hope you know that the water mammals and such would have stayed IN the ocean, not flopping around in the ship. And sure it must have smelled, but it's not like they lived in the dung-it was a large, large ship. As well as, if you have ever personally read the story of Noah and the Ark, you'd know that the people upon the ship were Noah, his wife, their three sons, and their UNRELATED wives. I also completely disregard that last horribly stated sentence of being too stupid for science and going to religion instead. As a christian, I'm actually open to scientific claims, and how they relate alongside my religion-because, if you could think through your words before spouting off about the bible being a "fairytale", maybe you should try to read through the book and evaluate all options as science is meant to do. Rather than decide without any sort of idea what you're talking about. Thank you.
DeleteSome say Noah's ark may have been a metaphor for aliens and/or people leaving the earth on a spaceship. They didn't have literal animals but just DNA samples. Kind of like if we are to realistically repopulate another planet a handful of scientists would go with many DNA samples for diversification.
DeleteSome say Noah's ark may have been a metaphor for aliens and/or people leaving the earth on a spaceship. They didn't have literal animals but just DNA samples. Kind of like if we are to realistically repopulate another planet a handful of scientists would go with many DNA samples for diversification.
DeletePeople are so confused. Devolution is actually what is happening, not evolution. Some of us are DEvolving, and the devolved subject may devolve even further, and so on.
ReplyDeletePlease don't state your misinformation as fact, it confuses the creationists. There is no such thing as devolution. To evolve is to change, whether you perceive it as benfecial or not bares no consequence.
DeleteThe fact is..there has never been any proof of something evolving or mutating anything beneficial..anytime there has been a mutation or de-evolution... it has taken away from the dna not added to it! So actually everything he said was spot on!
Deletehttp://myxo.css.msu.edu/ecoli/ Please don't lie on the internet, it makes you look an absolute fool when reality is so easily researched.
DeleteThey see me trolling; they hatin'.
DeleteCome hither and learn.god did not create humans.the most evil and destructive force on earth
DeleteI don't agree with this bit...
ReplyDelete"the driver of evolution: natural selection."
Natural selection is not the driver. Mutation and genetic drift is the driver. The genetic body would be the car. Natural selection is the road, and all the road blocks in it. If you don't have the proper car, you can't navigate the different roads or their obstacles.
Nothing ever evolved because they died (natural selection). They evolved because they survived, had offspring and mutated over vast amounts of time. All the mutated versions of organisms lived and died by the laws of life. Natural selection hacks the branches and gives us what we see. But the actual branching, the drive of difference, is mutation.
I find it hard to believe that mutation is a driver of evolution. I have never heard of a positive mutation. Mutations delete information, they don't add information. Also why haven't we found a "missing link" as they call it? For evolution to work you would think that there would be millions of remains of creatures in the in between stages of evolution. Yet the missing links that we have found have all turned out to be fakes. (Nebraska man was thought to be the missing link. But all scientists found was a tooth. They made great drawings of Nebraska man's lifestyle and what he looked like. But in the end it was found that this 'Missing link was no more than a PIGS TOOTH!) In all I have ever heard about missing links, all science has found has been just a few bones. Most times these bones are hundreds of feet sometimes even miles apart! If you put some of my bones with the bones of someone else (even a couple of others) you would come out with a very bizarre result. Some might even think it was the missing link.
DeleteSome say our DNA is so alike because of a common ancestor, I say our DNA is so alike because of a common creator. Think about that.
Please allow me to correct a couple of flaws in this; you are working from a faulty premise. Mutations are any change in the DNA. Mutations can be insertion, deletion, substitution, duplication, or transposition. That is, many different kinds of mutations can occur, and destruction of information is only one kind of mutation. Mutations can and do create new traits. You are correct that deletion mutations almost always cause a loss of function; most of the time, the resulting mutant does not survive.
DeleteThe ability to see red is the result of two mutations. First we had a duplication of an existing vision gene, then one of the copies mutated, creating the ability to see red. That is a beneficial mutation. Another beneficial mutation is lactose tolerance; some people have lost the ability to turn off their production of lactase, meaning that they can continue to drink milk and eat yogurt throughout their adult lives.
As for 'all missing links are conspiracies', clearly nothing I can write will convince you of anything, so I won't bother addressing it. All I can say is, you need a new source of information for those things. You also seem to be laboring under a misconception of how scientist use the term 'missing link'. You should look into it.
Evolution does not require fossils to 'work'. Fossils are merely the accidental result of a plant or animal dying in a time and a place where the circumstances were right for preservation. Since these circumstances occur very, very rarely, fossils are rare.
Further, you should be aware that deliberate fraud or data manipulation is a serious crime for a scientist, and will end the career of any scientist found doing it. Think carefully before you malign people with that sort of accusation, as your previous post implied.
"Deliberate fraud or data manipulation is a serious crime for a scientist", what about unintentional manipulation or misinterpretation of data? This, because they were so blinded with the possibility of evolution that they couldn't give truthful readings or understanding of things discovered.
DeleteScience is based on facts, while Creation is based on the Truth.
Facts are misinterpreted or misunderstood Truth.
"Deliberate fraud or data manipulation is a serious crime for a scientist", what about unintentional manipulation or misinterpretation of data? This, because they were so blinded with the possibility of evolution that they couldn't give truthful readings or understanding of things discovered.
DeleteScience is based on facts, while Creation is based on the Truth.
Facts are misinterpreted or misunderstood Truth.
"Science is based on facts, while Creation is based on the Truth.
DeleteFacts are misinterpreted or misunderstood Truth."
This is the most amazing, and revealing statement I have seen in a very long time.
It reminds me of a joke in a very similar vein -
-- Engineers work to the nearest 'thou', but Carpenters are more accurate because they work 'spot on' ...
So now we have a clear working requirement for religious belief, that stated Truth has more credibility than observed Fact.
Against such momentous statements, is there really any chance of the Truth believer being able to understand what a Fact is and why they need to pay attention to it???
You have totally got that the wrong way round. Mutations are the roads and natural selection is the driver steering the vehicle towards solutions. IMO.
ReplyDeleteHow about God being the designer that built the vehicle and the roads. Our own conscience being the determinent factor that decides which roads we take and our own good choices being the type of vehicle we choose to drive these roads? Different perspective....that's all. I also believe in the big bang theory. I just know who banged it....God.
DeleteSo true Lisa! Science finds that the world came into existence in just a fraction of a second. That was the second that God spoke the universe into existence.
Delete“I can see how it might be possible for a man to look down upon the earth and be an atheist, but I cannot conceive how a man could look up into the heavens and say there is no God.”-Abraham Lincoln
weenies
ReplyDeleteHE LAWS OF NATURE.
ReplyDeleteWe live in a world of natural laws and would not be alive without them. We test & observe such laws with modern science.
So while evolution remains full of limitless possibilities & fanciful claims for 150 years (and counting), thankfully modern science allows us to now decipher it's mixture of facts from fairy tales.
Example; natural selection & mutations are facts, and are considered key mechanisms & drivers of evolution.
Now for the fairy tale; evolution also states that humans evolved from pond scum to fish to humans to whatever is next, say flying unicorns.
But is this even scientifically possible?
Such a transition requires, first of all the origin of live matter, DNA & coding requiring precise programming, then new DNA would need to be added somewhere along the way, say for our next step of evolving into unicorns.
So start looking at the whole picture, and you begin to see the greater part of evolution is illogical nonsense.
When you look at the human form you see a well constructed, fully functioning form with incredibly complex functions & features. We can observe & appreciate the incredible complexity of our own forms from an outside perspective.
Now try and picture what evolution is saying; unintelligent matter was able to in time, create the human form at random with no logic, no outside perspective, no intelligence, no knowledge, no thought, no purpose & no concept of design or function.
It's like giving a group of deaf dumb & blind people wood & nails & expecting them to work together & build an entire mansion, so long as they are given long enough.
It's completely illogical.
Yet evolution says this is how humans & all life forms were made, because enough time was given to allow this process to take place.
So lets add time to this equation, say billions of years, as the evolution process requires plenty of time to make millions of fully functioning humans & other species.
What does your logical mind conclude?
My logical thinking mind tells me that time does little to change the original factors of unintelligent random matter. Add natural selection & mutations, and you still have the original problem of explaining where the DNA information, coding & crucially precise programming come into existence.
Dude, Evolution is a Natural Law.
DeleteIt happens, whether you choose to believe or not.
Please do mankind a favor, and don't get on any school boards.
"Such a transition requires, first of all the origin of live matter"
Deletewhich is refferred to as "abiogenesis", has nothing to do with the theory of evolution.
" then new DNA would need to be added somewhere along the way, say for our next step of evolving into unicorns. "
just because an organism looks more sophisticated it doesn't necessarily have to have a larger genome, for example: the genome of the amoeba, a single-cell organism, is MANY times larger than that of humans.
"create the human form at random with no logic,"
evolution is the exact opposite of randomness, what drives the evolutionary process is 'natural selection' simply:weak ones die, strong ones don't.it's that easy.
i suggest you try to understand what evolution actually is before you post things like this, you clearly don't understand the term and show an obvious lack of understanding when it comes to genetics.
So your 'logical' mind prefers to believe some divine being poofed a man into existence, took a bone of his body and made a woman? Then what? They weren't allowed to have sex without being married right? Who married them? Here's where it gets really creepy... after they had sex out of wedlock, where did their grandchildren come from?!
DeleteEven our eyes are more advanced computers than any man made computer on earth.
ReplyDeleteYet evolutionists continue to claim that unintelligent, randomly selected matter created all life. Even our functioning, rational brains? So unintelligent matter is more intelligent than us and can create more complex computers & functions than the human race could ever attempt? And does our intelligence & logic come from no intelligence & no logic?
If I told you my perfectly landscaped garden randomly did so by itself over millions of years you would probably consider that illogical nonsense and conclude that I am not in touch with reality. Yet if millions of people started claiming it is true and began constructing theories in how it came about & began writing many books about it, would you start believing it?
It's hard to believe how something as simple as a garden could organize itself without a gardener or landscaper. Yet many believe that all the millions of complex & fully functioning life forms, the earth, ocean, billions of planets and so on, all created themselves from a spec of matter & energy, with no programmer creator or designer necessary.
Evolutionists continue to dodge important points & truths that may jeopardize their beliefs or power. Why? Because evolution is a way to take God out of the equation, so it HAS to work. Therefore, as with any man made religion, ignorance, power & control are crucial in order for it to survive.
Perhaps power, human pride & ignorance are the true drivers of evolution.
Take pride out of the equation, seek the truth and you shall find it.
1. Did you know that scientists are mapping out the genes and mutations that made our eyes? Yes, it was through evolution.
Delete2. Life is not a perfectly landscaped garden. All living things have a host of problems to deal with. Thats why your perfect landscaped garden does not exist in nature.
3. Evolution may be hard to believe, but like all science, when an over whelmeing amount of evidence supports an idea, then hover improbable, that idea is probably correct. How probable is it that all matter is made of atoms? Have you seen an atom? Scientists have found an overwheling evidence that all matter is made of atoms, hence the Atomic Theory.
4. Evolutionary scientists do not dodge truths, thats a myth in your head.
Human Pride, power and ignorance. Exactly right! But do not forget Money, Books, jobs, federal and also private grants are at stake if you claim to be wrong.
Delete"our eyes are more advanced computers than any man made computer on earth"
DeleteWho told you that? Whoever it was, you should check what they tell you in future as it might just be even more rubbish.
Our eyes do a reasonable job for a limited range of light frequencies and in a limited range of light intensities and for a very limited range of speed of movement. But can they see infrared, or in very low light, or Xrays or radio waves, or a speeding bullet? No they can't, but today our sensors and computers can do exactly that. So you have been told - and believed - a load of nonsense.
The reality is that you and I are a million miles away from any definition of perfection. We are a hodge podge of disasters, just capable of getting by. We are an recently new hybrid and as such we are way off from being optimised by natural selection, and in fact because we now use science to protect us from the environment and predators, we are starting to accumulate negative characteristics (like belief in imaginary friends) instead of allowing natural selection to wipe out the misfits.
Don't be arrogant, you are not the perfect creation of the perfect creator, we are hybrid monstrosities who have become a serious plague on this planet.
It has been observed that 'Nature abhors a vacuum' and that it also 'abhors a monoculture'. Perhaps you will live long enough to see nature bring our monoculture under control. I wonder then how much prayer will protect us from our greed, inadequacy and stupidity then...
Evolution implies the belief that given enough time, anything is possible. This is untrue. The truth is given enough time, anything is possible WITHIN THE LAWS OF NATURE.
ReplyDelete(oops this is the missing part of my first post above)
Study on DNA reveals that it contains huge informations which is equal to 10000 books, each containing 500 pages. How these informations/ instructions about the life came and from where? If even scienists can create a DNA molecule in future is it possible to put that information for creating life? If even it is possible then scientists will transfomed into "GOD" and still the question will remain : who created the 'FIRST DNA'?
DeleteIt was the 'ORGANIC SOUP' that is responsible for life on this universe and surely 'WE' are not 'ALONE'. Because 'ALL' is 'ONE'.
To confirm see the similarity between DNA of human & banana. It is true that We all came from one origin but with the help of designer - 'THE GREAT SENSIBLE DESIGNER OF THIS UNIVERSE'
To use your own argument against you, who created this 'great sensible designer of the universe'? Please note that saying he/she/it didn't need creating is not a valid answer!
DeleteWhy wouldn't that count as a valid answer? Saying the God of the bible did it means answering it from the descriptions the bible gives us. We don't make up who God is, He is what He is.
DeleteTrying to say that a god exists because the bible says so is illogical.
DeleteAfter all, who guarantees the bible is accurate about the existence of a god?
If you were going to say the supposed god guarantees it, you just commited a circular logic, which is a logical fallacy.
" Please, honorable judge, Kevin will vouch for me! "
" Who, then, vouches for Kevin? "
" Well, honorable judge, I do, and you know that Kevin vouches for me."
That is what you are trying to do just now
I actually respect Darwin's THEORYS on how things MAY have evolved over time, but how anyone can come to the conclusion that "Intelligent Design" does NOT exist is beyond me(!?) It is so unfortunate how so many of us get STUCK "inside the (DARWIN) box" when there are such factually compelling & less contrivercial "outside the box" examples ... the very FACT that we reside on a giant sphere which is SPINNING at apprx 1000 Miles/Hour WHILE simultaniously WHIRLING AROUND THE SUN at apprx 67000 Miles/Hour...is just about all the compelling proof I need to understand that Darwin's Theory of Evolution is NOT the final, end all "say" against the highly probable likely hood that an "intelligent designer" does indeed exist.
ReplyDeleteGenetics identifies the mechanics of inherited characteristics and mutation that are necessary to validate Darwin's original theory.
DeleteIf genetics proved otherwise, evolution would have failed this crucial test and have long since been rejected as a valid scientific theory.
How much proof do you need?
And I can easily look at "Intelligent Design" and declare it bunk because it can't be tested, unlike evolution.
i think you have no idea what the word "theory" actually means in a scientific context.
DeleteHow does the speed at which the celestial bodies are moving affect the scientific correctness of evolution?
DeleteRed Herring, if you ask me
The engine of evolution is NOT natural selection. The driving force creating new types and greater diversity of life forms is in fact hybridisation, while natural selection is in fact the opposite, it is the agent of extinction.
ReplyDeleteWhen new life forms are created by hybridisation, their genomes are in turmoil and their fertility is low. NAtural and sexual selection starts to get to work on the new genome immediately, adopting hte characteristics which enhance breeding success and survivability. In doing so, natural selection starts to eliminate variability from the genome. Innitially, the new life form prospers from its greater fertility and survivability, but as its genome becomes increasing more uniform, its ability to adapt to changing environmantal pressures is reduced, exposing the life form eventually to the fate of the great majority - EXTINCTION.
See the theory which shows that Darwin was wrong.
http://www.macroevolution.net/support-files/forms_of_life.pdf
Evidence of hybridisation driving diversity is all around us.
Derek Smith
If you learn nothing else, Creationist reading here, learn these facts: 1) Evolution is NOT random. Repeat. Evolution is NOT random. 2) Nothing about any part of the human body is perfect. Amazing? Yes. Perfect? No.
ReplyDeleteNote to Anonymous: Darwin's achievement is almost without parallel in any field of human endeavor. He has been proven correct beyond a shadow of a doubt. To say he was wrong is... well, "embarrassing" is the first word that comes to mind...
Alfred Russel Wallace, he was the original worker on the evolution theory, yeah Darwin was also researching at the same time, but ARW is the true theorist, he just had less air time so to speak
DeleteWe are what we eat... well at least partially. The proof is that we share genetic material with something like a banana and potato. It is difficult to say what the exact path of our evolution was but obviously, many species share the same genetic material because at the time of its acquisition, it was useful for survival in that specific environment. When the environment changes, so does the behavior. Logically, it would mean that species diverged because they happened to move to different environments (perhaps to reduce competition with other species) and by the same token they obviously had to adapt and develop different strategies for their survival. I wonder if pandas share a lot genes with bamboo?
ReplyDeleteEverything is made of stardust. So how could we be different from plants, animals, insects, bacteria, fungus etc.?
ReplyDeleteEverything is stardust.
In all the genetic comparisons and percentages touted in early studies. It is now revealed that 1/3 of the total genetic material of a chimpanze was prefiltered out as it was too disimilar to match up. Therefore accurate true scientific methods and more honest approaches have lowered the genetic similarites between humans and apes. Each human cell has about 10,000 complex molecular machines to do all the necessary work. These machines need every part assembled to work and every machine working for the cell to live. How did this extremely complex system come into being and then be able to make a copy of itself without inteligent design. Certainly not the weather and environmental conditions. As for organs that were not of any use, true modern science no longer say that as there purpose have all been discoverd. But you may need to research these facts as they will not appear on our TVs.
ReplyDeleteHumans are apes, did you mean to write "similarities between humans and chimpanzees"?
DeleteAs difficult as it may be for many people to comprehend evolution, that is to say the argument that life is too complex to have come about by natural means, a designer would by definition be orders of magnitude more complicated then organic Earth life. A designer would had to have planed far in advance, to create the carbon in our bodies from the furnace of stars, to have the stars then supernova in a stellar explosion. Send these heavy elements out into space as dust and then with gravity , forming the Earth and allowing for all the basis of all life on our planet.
When you think about this process that is ~14 billion years in the making. Everything needed for life, all the ingredients are present. The process does not require a designer. Even though for many minds it is easier to add a designer. But if one does add an intelligent designer on top of this long process, one also adds complexity. Immense complexity. In other words, it is a simpler conclusion to look to natural processes. Because an intelligent designer adds vast complexity on top of natural processes, an intelligent designer is therefore mathematically far less likely to exist when compared to the ability of natural and observable processes simply working as they do. The probability of an intelligent designer is quite low when you run the numbers.
For some people, the possibility that the laws of physics might illuminate even the creation of our own universe, without the need for supernatural intervention or any demonstration of purpose, is truly terrifying. But just because one may not find it comforting life exists without a designer, doesn't make it any less true.
Furthermore, people have trouble separating populations from individuals. Evolution only occurs on a population level. An individual does not change. The following generations from that individual expresses a difference in phenotypic qualities. This is classified as micro-evolution. On a larger scale, speciation occurs. This is called macro-evolution. Though they function through the same phenomena, they are on scales that differ as much as a human life time does to a geologic period.
DeleteCreationists already have issues with separating scales of time, so its not farfetched that they have issues separating the scales of evolution. That's only an issue because of adamant ignorance though. It disappoints me that I can point someone to answers and they either cannot understand them, or refuse to understand them. I see this frequently when teaching mathematics.
Nothing is perfect in this existence. The very air we breathe makes us age. As humans we are susceptible to many diseases. We have managed to conquer many of them through our study if genetics and chemistry.
ReplyDeleteChemistry: the interaction of elements, is what makes everything work. As soon as the conditions needed for life are present it shows up, life uh uh uh uh finds a way.
DeleteSame building blocks, not necessarily ancestor linked.
ReplyDeleteThe LACK of a SPECIES to SPECIES transitional fossil makes the case for no MACRO evolution clear.
as noted BY DARWIN HIMSELF....
"So that the number of intermediate and transitional links, between all living and extinct species, must have been inconceivably great. But assuredly, if this theory be true, such have lived upon the earth."
-Darwin
Yes, you are right. The amazing jumps recorded in the fossil record do indeed indicate that the present Darwinian microevolutionary theory of species conversion is faulty. And as we find more fossils that continue to show alarming jumps, then science has to start looking for a model that can work with these uncomfortable facts.
DeleteAs you read Darwin, it starts to become clear that the great man actually understood what this missing model would be. But as it was going to be near blasphemy to suggest that we had descended from an ape parentage, he might have decided that the whole story might just see him lynched or burned at the stake.
The reality is that genetic diversity is created by hybridisation and that this process is capable of hybrid jumps when two plants hybridise to form a new plant, when two fish hybridise to create a new vigorous hybrid, and in our case, when our ape ancestors hybridised with some other animal, and in a jump that has only happened a few dozen times in the last few million years, created - us.
When you look at known hybrids, they have a number of predictable characteristics - a massively unstable (variable) genome, and because of this, the process of forming gametes is fraught with failure, so they produce lots of genetic failures. If you look at the variability of our genome and the dysfunctionality of our gametes, you see exactly the picture of a recently formed hybrid, and a pretty extreme hybrid at that.
Indications are that we are not just the result of a hybrid between an ape and a monkey. No, we have lost our valuable prehensile toes, and in the hybridisation process we have gained a whole load of characteristics like undeveloped hoofs, a totally new type of skin and method of cooling, and a shedload of other characteristics that are almost unbelievably PIG like.
Genetic research is underway to see if there is a pig daddy in our genome giving us all these features. Micro evolution totally fails to explain this massive evolutionary jump, but hybridisation explains it perfectly.
Crazily, human arrogance, partially stemming from religious belief that the creator made us, is blocking mainstream science from jumping on this revealing theory.
So, way Darwin right all along? Read his books, he was heavily into Pigeon hybridisation...
I do not think that you understand evolution at all.
DeleteYou remind me of someone asking me why are there no fronkeys if monkeys evolved from frogs.
That is like asking why there are no Jemma if John and Emma has same parents...
Uneducated, if you ask me.
I hear we are related to Cheese by 40% too ?
ReplyDeleteOh, you're just being silly now. I am not a cheese!
DeleteI Like CATS
ReplyDeletesame
DeleteWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
ReplyDeleteWhen was the last time you saw a good project manager doing all the work by himself? God would not have created the entire world. He just set some rules and decisions, dumped it somewhere and created a world that creates itself.
ReplyDeleteWhat a great thread...Loved the puns and humour in some of the replies...With the sticky DNA as part of pathogen response of some root systems like banana and tomato plants coming to light, I wonder if we share some of our immune response with them and if this has any pointers to drug discovery in these areas...
ReplyDeleteTo what should I attribute my finding of this fascinating site?Not hybridization, not natural selection. Random access? Act of God? I'm not a scientist, not a theologian. I just wanted to find out how we could be 50% bananas! I will venture to say that Darwin (or A R Wallace)had a theory on the evolution of species. But he did not put forth a theory on the origin of life itself. Sometimes it seems the posters here were confusing the two issues. It is interesting to read what theories and defenses of those theories people come up with. Let us hope that some practical use can be made of them--like the curing of cancer, or anticipating the appearance of some new deadly virus. I am left with some questions I never thought of before--such as how could the animate originate from the inanimate? So Darwin's theory is interesting, but it doesn't really answer those Ultimate questions.
ReplyDeleteMakes u wonder if ancient bananas had a higher dose of radiation changin cells compared to bananas we have today
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, our DNA has been most affected by the foods we have eaten over time, especially the ANIMAL meat we have consumed! SO if herbivores consumed certain foods, I'm sure their DNA was altered BY those foods, just as OUR ancestral and present diets have affected our present DNA/Human Genome, and so it is MUCH MORE LIKELY that FOODS we ate have more to do with WHY we have DNA in common with them than the fish tale and fairy story that we somehow "Evolved" from earlier species. Besides, there is no way the earth is credibly older than 25,000 years old, even if you factor in a bunch of other things. Most likely it is around 13,000 years old, and humans have been around for about 9000 of those years, and most likely we did NOT evolve from other things, but were created or placed here by an alien species of some sort, because honestly, we started record keeping about 5500 years ago, that WE KNOW OF, as the other forms may have degraded long before it became important that we preserve them, and certainly, the types of products we were using to keep those records may have taken some experimentation with to determine the best way to do that, as experience is the best teacher, so while record-keeping showed up 5500 years ago, credibly, it has probably existed for much, much longer than that, only to be lost due to natural causes. ALSO, thanks to space research, we know that without the atmosphere, there's no way on earth we could have any of this "stuff" we have, and without plants, and certainly plants without animals CAN NOT SURVIVE and maintain the atmosphere that we have, so the theory that we "descended" or "evolved" over millions or billions of years is nothing but a Fish Tale and Fairy Story, told with Stoic Self Confidence which has NO credibility nor proof whatsoever. DNA has a half-life of 521 years. Gosh, wait a few thousand years and you'll believe humans evolved from RICE if you base it on "common DNA" as a "credible proof" that we "evolved". If, for instance, 5500 years ago, we actually "started" keeping records, which is HIGHLY DOUBTFUL, and only this relatively SHORT period of time later, here we are, then, technically, "Human Evolution" is actually FAR FAR FAR MORE ACCELERATED than you are suggesting, and THERE IS NO WAY ON EARTH it took that long WHATSOEVER for "Evolution" to play a part in ANY part of human development, to say the least. And as for having "common genes" to suggest we all originated from an original species that plants and animals ALSO came from, well, that's STATISTICALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO CONCEDE. You may as well sit down and see the Native American stories of creation, any religious accounting of it, or just about ANYTHING you or I could come up with right now from our imaginations, as just about AS CREDIBLE as suggesting Evolution is a PLAUSIBLE concept...
ReplyDeleteThat's the biggest load of jumbled up, unconnected, illogical supposition and nonsense that I have read in awhile - you either ignored your education or went to a strong faith school - either way, you've sadly wasted your brain!!
DeleteIf we evolved from a common ancestor of monkeys, why are are there still monkeys? We evolved from an older common ancestor of the banana. So why are there bananas?
ReplyDeleteThe answer is similar to why human siblings exist separately and individually from each other. Each sibling may be different, but they can each survive and create different families.
DeleteMonkeys and bananas lead different existences than humans, but all of us manage to survive in our own diverse ways.
Read this all. Why do ppl state thier "beliefs" with so much assertion? like they witnessed or actually managed to evolve anything in terms of speciation. Forget micro evolution. Is natural selection an entity? Sounds like it "chooses" which animal must die out or does it choose which is allowed to live? And how many years does it give for a species to die? If it cant survive in an environment why/how did it evolve to do so initially?
ReplyDeleteSo.many questions but the answers will b nothing more than, this is the belief we hold told to us by our priests(scientists) so we will make a link through some proven facts and hope later on we can prove what we dont know or have no answer to right now. But lets laugh at ppl who do the same but with a different origin/angle
Lool
Even though this is an old comments section, i still had to say how funny all the dumb ass religious idiots have been to read!! Some of the deluded and illogical nonsense they believe in is hilarious, and is it me or do Christian's defending their stupid beliefs sound alot like Flat Earthers & Illuminati freaks do??! Very similar mindset in my opinion, and delusional stupidity seems to be a prerequisite for belief in both religion and conspiracy theories!!
ReplyDeleteI'm quite happy to say screw all the numbskulls who believe in god - I hope you burn in your totally non-existent hell: you deserve to for all the pain, bigotry, death & suffering that all religions have brought to this earth. To hell with religious tolerance - people who believe in the god are idiots and an insult to my intelligence.
^ The most emotionally unbalanced and cruel post in this thread. Ironic.
DeleteWhy would anyone be surprised humans and chimps share so much DNA, when we are so alike?
ReplyDeleteIt would be more surprising if we didn't share so many similarity, as clearly we should since we are so similar, proven by the pre-NDA era views on our similarity.
The idea that this proves evolution is similar to the puddle thinking falacy that evolutionists argue against. Just as the conditions of the universe had to be right, so did the genes need to be so similar.
I visit this site and found this site really fruitful containing vital information. i also recommend this informative site to others and also for daily latest urdu news recommend.world news in urdu
ReplyDeleteis also a beautiful urdu sharing link
Cool and I have a swell supply: Full House Reno home renovation victoria
ReplyDelete