Any thoughts on EES?

[Loudmouth]

How do these mutations manifest themselves?

They manifest as changes in the DNA sequence.

 

[Aman777]

Pick any stretch of human DNA that you want, and many mutations will be found in that stretch of DNA. At a minimum, 99% of all possible synonymous mutations in every gene will be present in at least one person in the population.

Dear Loudmouth, Since Humans have been on this Earth for only the past 10k years, can you show us Human DNA from 50k years ago? Or MUST we accept your unsupported belief that the sons of God (prehistoric people) were Humans? God Bless you

 

[Loudmouth]

Dear Loudmouth, Since Humans have been on this Earth for only the past 10k years, can you show us Human DNA from 50k years ago? Or MUST we accept your unsupported belief that the sons of God (prehistoric people) were Humans? God Bless you

I can show you fossils from anatomically modern humans going back 200k years:

The Omo remains are a collection of hominid bones discovered between 1967 and 1974 at the Omo Kibish sites near the Omo River, in Omo National Park in south-western Ethiopia.[1] The bones were recovered by a scientific team from the Kenya National Museums directed by Richard Leakey and others.[2] The remains from Kamoya's Hominid Site (KHS) were called Omo 1 and those from Paul's Hominid Site (PHS) Omo 2.[3]

Parts of the fossils are the earliest to have been classified by Richard Leakey as Homo sapiens. In 2004, the geologic layers around the fossils were dated, and the authors of the dating study concluded that the "preferred estimate of the age of the Kibish hominids is 195 ± 5 ka [thousand years ago]", which would make the fossils the oldest known Homo sapiens remains.[3] Because of the fossils' age, Ethiopia is the current choice for the cradle of Homo sapiens".[4]
Omo remains - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​

I can also show you DNA from anatomically modern humans going back 45k years:

A 45,000-year-old leg bone from Siberia has yielded the oldest genome sequence for Homo sapiens on record — revealing a mysterious population that may once have spanned northern Asia. The DNA sequence from a male hunter-gatherer also offers tanta[bless and do not curse]li[bless and do not curse]zing clues about modern humans’ journey from Africa to Europe, Asia and beyond, as well as their sexual encounters with Neanderthals.
Oldest-known human genome sequenced : Nature News & Comment​

 

[OldWiseGuy]

I can show you fossils from anatomically modern humans going back 200k years:

The Omo remains are a collection of hominid bones discovered between 1967 and 1974 at the Omo Kibish sites near the Omo River, in Omo National Park in south-western Ethiopia.[1] The bones were recovered by a scientific team from the Kenya National Museums directed by Richard Leakey and others.[2] The remains from Kamoya's Hominid Site (KHS) were called Omo 1 and those from Paul's Hominid Site (PHS) Omo 2.[3]

Parts of the fossils are the earliest to have been classified by Richard Leakey as Homo sapiens. In 2004, the geologic layers around the fossils were dated, and the authors of the dating study concluded that the "preferred estimate of the age of the Kibish hominids is 195 ± 5 ka [thousand years ago]", which would make the fossils the oldest known Homo sapiens remains.[3] Because of the fossils' age, Ethiopia is the current choice for the cradle of Homo sapiens".[4]
Omo remains - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​

I can also show you DNA from anatomically modern humans going back 45k years:

A 45,000-year-old leg bone from Siberia has yielded the oldest genome sequence for Homo sapiens on record — revealing a mysterious population that may once have spanned northern Asia. The DNA sequence from a male hunter-gatherer also offers tanta[bless and do not curse]li[bless and do not curse]zing clues about modern humans’ journey from Africa to Europe, Asia and beyond, as well as their sexual encounters with Neanderthals.
Oldest-known human genome sequenced : Nature News & Comment​

Does DNA reveal when and how man became a spiritual (as in spiritual minded) being?

 

[Loudmouth]

Does DNA reveal when and how man became a spiritual (as in spiritual minded) being?

We don't even know if other species have such beliefs.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

We don't even know if other species have such beliefs.

But since science believes that human thought also evolved there must be evidence present in our DNA (never mind other critters). This too would have to be an identifiable mutation wouldn't it? Also, wouldn't great changes in contemporary human thought would also require the presence of DNA evidence?

 

[Loudmouth]

But since science believes that human thought also evolved there must be evidence present in our DNA (never mind other critters). This too would have to be an identifiable mutation wouldn't it? Also, wouldn't great changes in contemporary human thought would also require the presence of DNA evidence?

All science can do is point to the mutations that gave humans a big enough brain to make stories and believe in stories.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

All science can do is point to the mutations that gave humans a big enough brain to make stories and believe in stories.

So you are not in the camp that believes that thought evolved?

 

[whois]

You don't seem to offer any alternatives to either evolution or special creation for the origin of species. Do you have any?

there are a number of options for the "origins" of life.
1. there was no beginning, life and the universe has always existed.
this is the most probable answer in my opinion.
2. life arose naturally from pre existing substances, matter "becomes alive"
3. life is the result of the interaction of quantum physics with biomolecular structures.
i believe this interaction will be along the timeline, this interaction will prevent time travel and the associated paradoxes.
4. there actually is a god.
for some reason, i just don't buy the "all powerful" creator bit.

there is strong reason to believe that life is indeed intimately related to quantum physics.
the uncertainty principle has been documented in numerous experiments.
this principle, in part, says " the result of an experiment is dependent on whether an observer (life) is present".

 

[Justatruthseeker]

there are a number of options for the "origins" of life.
1. there was no beginning, life and the universe has always existed.
this is the most probable answer in my opinion.
2. life arose naturally from pre existing substances, matter "becomes alive"
3. life is the result of the interaction of quantum physics with biomolecular structures.
i believe this interaction will be along the timeline, this interaction will prevent time travel and the associated paradoxes.
4. there actually is a god.
for some reason, i just don't buy the "all powerful" creator bit.

there is strong reason to believe that life is indeed intimately related to quantum physics.
the uncertainty principle has been documented in numerous experiments.
this principle, in part, says " the result of an experiment is dependent on whether an observer (life) is present".

1. That is self evident - there was no beginning to "One" thing.

Energy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

2. All matter came from a pre-existing "state".

Energy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

But that does not explain how those exact same protons, neutrons and electrons that make up a rock, also make up you, yet the end result is spectacularly different.

3. So why does the rock still remain a rock, if those same quantum physics are acting on all things?

4. Agreed.

For some reason I just don't buy the random chance bit.

So, you believe that if you ain't there, it ain't happening? Supernovas didn't explode millions of years in the past, because you only observed them now? The Big Bang never happened because no one was there to observe it? No life ever arose because again, no one ever observed it? The cat in the box should of stayed boxed up and never been released. It's done more damage to rational thought then anything in history.

Can't explain the miraculous? Why it's virtual this or virtual that. Or only happens because we are observing it. Ad-hoc explanation relying on ad-hoc explanation. Inflation of self so profound, the universe only exists because "we" perceive it. And without us it wouldn't be here. So who perceived the universe before "we" came into existence?

We agree someone perceives the entire universe and therefore it exists, it just ain't us.

 

[whois]

So, you believe that if you ain't there, it ain't happening?

it doesn't matter what i believe.
what matters is what can be demonstrated.
it seems physics can get pretty strange.

 

[Loudmouth]

So you are not in the camp that believes that thought evolved?

The ability to think did evolve.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

The ability to think did evolve.

Others say that thoughts themselves evolved.

 

[Loudmouth]

Others say that thoughts themselves evolved.

References?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

References?

In past threads on the subject (I wouldn't know where to begin looking for them).

 

[Loudmouth]

In past threads on the subject (I wouldn't know where to begin looking for them).

I would hope that you would forgive me for taking your comments with a grain of salt?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

I would hope that you would forgive me for taking your comments with a grain of salt?

Do I detect a possible difference of opinion between you and other evolutionists? With that in mind I believe there are actually more differences of opinion within the scientific community regarding evolution than there are doctrinal differences among Christians (can't prove it, don't ask me to try).