Common ancestor between chimps and humans

[DDan]

It's always fun to read the opinion of creationists on science.

Yes but it's not funny Ha Ha it's funny in a peculiarly sad way, it's a somehow damaged funny.

 

[whois]

Thanks for that, very interesting. I appologise, there is in fact evidence for HGT in complex eukaryotes.

no problem.

. . .the leading researchers into HGT think that it is very important to the evolutionary history of life on Earth, but are still firmly convinced by evolution and in particular VGT clades as accurate descriptions of life.

How does that mesh with your skepticism?

why the negative tone?
why is it so hard for you to believe that what you "know" about evolution is wrong?
even VGT might not be what you think it is, epigenetics is proof of that.
IOW, genes aren't solely responsible for inheritance.

the really big question is, why attribute gene acquisition to HGT instead of the gene evolving?
do you understand what this is actually saying?

 

[Loudmouth]

no problem.


why the negative tone?
why is it so hard for you to believe that what you "know" about evolution is wrong?

Why are 3 human genes acquired by HGT since the common ancestor with primates such a problem for evolution?

even VGT might not be what you think it is, epigenetics is proof of that.

Your posts have proven that it is your understanding of epigenetics that is lacking.

Do you really think that the physical differences between humans and chimps is due to epigenetics?

the really big question is, why attribute gene acquisition to HGT instead of the gene evolving?
do you understand what this is actually saying?

Do you understand that 3 genes by HGT vs. 30,000 genes by VGT is not a problem for the theory of evolution?

 

[AV1611VET]

Don't go assuming things AV, next it'll be suppositions and you'll be on a slippery slope to becoming an evilutionist.

You sure know how to scare a guy, don't you!?

 

[UCDavis]

We don't need remains to know that we share a common ancestor with chimps. We have the DNA.

You mean we have a common creator.

 

[Loudmouth]

You mean we have a common creator.

Why would a common creator produce a nested hierarchy?

"Although it is trivial to classify anything subjectively in a hierarchical manner, only certain things can be classified objectively in a consistent, unique nested hierarchy. The difference drawn here between "subjective" and "objective" is crucial and requires some elaboration, and it is best illustrated by example. Different models of cars certainly could be classified hierarchically—perhaps one could classify cars first by color, then within each color by number of wheels, then within each wheel number by manufacturer, etc. However, another individual may classify the same cars first by manufacturer, then by size, then by year, then by color, etc. The particular classification scheme chosen for the cars is subjective. In contrast, human languages, which have common ancestors and are derived by descent with modification, generally can be classified in objective nested hierarchies (Pei 1949; Ringe 1999). Nobody would reasonably argue that Spanish should be categorized with German instead of with Portugese."
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section1.html#nested_hierarchy

 

[HitchSlap]

You mean we have a common creator.

This is a religious proposition, and antithetical to all available evidence.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Humans have 23 pairs pairs of chromosomes. Apes have 24! Are u saying we share a common ancestor with tobacco also, since the tobacco plant has 24 chromosomes also? Lol

You might want to watch this...
It's funny how our 23 chromosome pairs actually is part of the rather bullet proof evidence that we share an ancestor with the other great apes.

In a nutshell....
A chromosome starts and ends with a telomere. Between them, there sits one centromere.

Chromosomal fusion is a known genetic mutation. If this happens, we expect to find TWO centromeres in the fused chromosome, as well as telomeres in the middle (=the fusion site).

Lo and behold that's exactly what we find in our second chromosome.
More then that even, if we pull that chromosome apart at that fusion site, what we get is a perfect match with chromosome 2 and 13 from the chimp.

So the very thing you try to push forward as evidence "against" common ancestry with the other great apes, is really rather slam dunk evidence of the very opposite.

And just for clarity, if it makes you feel bett: Ken Miler (the guy in the video) is a christian.

 

[DogmaHunter]

In other words, shared DNA is a meaningless way to determine common ancestry.

Have you informed the courts that every DNA paternity test to see if some man is someone's biological father is faulty?

 

[loveofourlord]

Humans have 23 pairs pairs of chromosomes. Apes have 24! Are u saying we share a common ancestor with tobacco also, since the tobacco plant has 24 chromosomes also? Lol

it's the fact that our chromosones lineup, that our chromosone 2 is a combination of two ape chromosones, including markers for endings and two middles in the middle of it. At some point in our past one of our chromosones fused.

 

[loveofourlord]

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn27325-baboon-bone-found-in-famous-lucy-skeleton?cmpid=RSS%7cNSNS%7c2012-GLOBAL%7conline-news Lol

Dang...your right I guess lucy and the other dozen of her species are now all frauds because 1 bone out of hundreds was wrong..

 

[loveofourlord]

Just as a reminder, we are talking about chimp/human common ancestry. Here is a chart showing the occurrence of HGT in the Drosophila, C. elegans, and primate phylogenies. Humans are at the bottom.

View attachment 163775

http://www.genomebiology.com/2015/16/1/50

Since the common ancestor of primates, just three genes have been acquired by the human lineage. Just 3. Only 1 gene has been acquired by HGT since chimps and humans split. There are about 30,000 human and chimp genes that were acquired by vertical inheritance from a common ancestor.

Can anyone explain to me why HGT is such a hindrance for detecting common ancestry between humans and chimps, or even humans and all other primates?

It would require some crazy concidence for HGT to place genes and such in the exat same spot.

 

[loveofourlord]

You mean we have a common creator.

A common creator that not only used all the good designs, but the bad ones? Thats a pretty terrible creator, frankly I rather believe in one that let evolution work it's magic then one that is so incompetent that he just c/p's everything including errors, extra copies of genes that he then has to break so that humans can talk and such. As we have genes that if they still coded wouldn't allow us to talk, and do other things. Why did god c/p 4% of our DNA for smell we never use?

 

[crjmurray]

Have you informed the courts that every DNA paternity test to see if some man is someone's biological father is faulty?

Oh no....if Vaccine is right.... I gotta look over some cold cases.

 

[Crowns&Laurels]

While chimps may have an alleged 98% percent of our DNA, it is also true that our craniums are extraordinarily different. The circuits of our brains, you see, seem to have have evolved rapidly in a very, prohibitively short time- science has no reasonable theory for that that makes any rational sense whatsoever, so let chimps have 98% of our DNA, or even 99.5..

 

[whois]

It would require some crazy concidence for HGT to place genes and such in the exat same spot.

i think everyone is missing the point with regards to HGT.
why does science ascribe these genes to HGT as opposed to evolved?
science has no real way of knowing they didn't evolve, unless of course genes don't evolve.
this places evolution as you know it in a real conundrum.

in the particular case of humans, these genes currently number about 145:
The first report of the human genome sequence highlighted 223 protein sequences (of which 113 were confirmed as present in the genome by PCR) that were proposed to originate from bacteria by HGT [19]. While some of these genes were later confirmed as foreign, many were rejected [20-22]. At the time of writing, it is difficult to assess all of these sequences because some early identifiers have not been maintained, but we have been able to confirm or reclaim 17 previously reported examples as foreign (some also confirmed by other studies; Additional file 4). Furthermore, we identified up to 128 additional foreign genes in the human genome (128 class C, of which 93 are class B and 33 class A), giving a total of 145 class C genes, of which 110 are class B and 39 class A.
-Expression of multiple horizontally acquired genes is a hallmark of both vertebrate and invertebrate genomes.htm

 

[DogmaHunter]

While chimps may have an alleged 98% percent of our DNA, it is also true that our craniums are extraordinarily different. The circuits of our brains, you see, seem to have have evolved rapidly in a very, prohibitively short time- science has no reasonable theory for that that makes any rational sense whatsoever, so let chimps have 98% of our DNA, or even 99.5..

You are demonstrably wrong about that.

http://news.sciencemag.org/biology/2015/02/xeroxed-gene-may-have-paved-way-large-human-brain

Last week, researchers expanded the size of the mouse brain by giving rodents a piece of human DNA. Now another team has topped that feat, pinpointing a human gene that not only grows the mouse brain but also gives it the distinctive folds found in primate brains. The work suggests that scientists are finally beginning to unravel some of the evolutionary steps that boosted the cognitive powers of our species.

“This study represents a major milestone in our understanding of the developmental emergence of human uniqueness,” says Victor Borrell Franco, a neurobiologist at the Institute of Neurosciences in Alicante, Spain



http://www.livescience.com/49960-human-big-brain-gene-found.html

A single gene may have paved the way for the rise of human intelligence by dramatically increasing the number of brain cells found in a key brain region.

This gene seems to be uniquely human: It is found in modern-day humans, Neanderthals and another branch of extinct humans called Denisovans, but not in chimpanzees.

 

[Loudmouth]

You might want to watch this...
It's funny how our 23 chromosome pairs actually is part of the rather bullet proof evidence that we share an ancestor with the other great apes.

To be fair, I have always found this to be poor evidence. Even if humans and apes were separately created, it is still possible that the chromosomal fusion occurred in the human lineage after the first humans were created, and that fusion became fixed in the population. The accumulation of mutations in the old centromere would be decent evidence showing how long it has been since the fusion, but the fusion itself is rather poor evidence, IMHO.

On the flip side, having different chromosomal counts is certainly not evidence against common ancestry as some creationists try to claim. There are modern humans who have 22 pairs of chromosomes, and that condition has a finite probability of becoming fixed in the population.

"In a recent article, a doctor in China has identified a man who has 44 chromosomes instead of the usual 46. Except for his different number of chromosomes, this man is perfectly normal in every measurable way.

His chromosomes are arranged in a stable way that could be passed on if he met a nice girl who had 44 chromosomes too. And this would certainly be possible in the future given his family history."
http://genetics.thetech.org/original_news/news124

 

[Loudmouth]

i think everyone is missing the point with regards to HGT.
why does science ascribe these genes to HGT as opposed to evolved?
science has no real way of knowing they didn't evolve, unless of course genes don't evolve.
this places evolution as you know it in a real conundrum.

in the particular case of humans, these genes currently number about 145:

Those aren't human specific genes. 101 of them are found at the base of the primate tree which means that the bulk of them are found in all primates.

They only found 1 human specific HGT event. 1 event of HGT compared to 30,000 genes acquired by VGT from the common ancestor of chimps and humans. Hmmm, which do you think is more important?

 

[Aman777]

it's the fact that our chromosones lineup, that our chromosone 2 is a combination of two ape chromosones, including markers for endings and two middles in the middle of it. At some point in our past one of our chromosones fused.

It is because Noah's grandsons, like Cain on Adam's Earth, had NO other Humans to marry. They married and produced children Gen 6:4 with the sons of God (prehistoric) people who were already here when Noah arrived on Planet Earth some 11k years ago. That is when and how our Human genes were mixed with the DNA and ERVs of the common ancestor of Apes.

History recorded this arrival of the FIRST farmers, city builders with ALL of the traits of modern Humans (descendants of Adam). http://www.fsmitha.com/h1/map00-fc.html

That is the Truth of Scripture AND History which NO Evolutionist can refute. Amen?