Originally posted by ikester7579
I will read this tomarrow. Got to get some sleep. should have been in bed 3 hours ago. But this forum can get so interesting sometimes time just seems to fly. See ya tomarrow, that is if I can stay awake after staying up late lol.
While you are reading, try these websites:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/a_nebraska.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/wolfmellett.html
"Field work resumed in the spring of 1925 at the site where Cook had found the original <I>Hesperopithecus</I> tooth in 1917. It was material uncovered at the site during 1925 that undoubtedly sowed the seeds of doubt about the true possessor of the Nebraska tooth. As evidence accumulated in subsequent field seasons, Gregory became aware that, despite the tooth's uncanny superficial resemblance to an anthropoid molar, <I>Hesperopithecus</I> was probably an extinct peccary. Gregory announced his retraction in Science at the end of 1927. (Gregory, 1927) The self-correcting feature of science thereby aborted America's only entry in mankind's prehistoric lineage before Nebraska Man significantly affected opinions of most scientists regarding human evolution. "
"The consequences for science of the downfall of <I>Hesperopithecus</I> might have been more serious were it not for other substantial discoveries in the 1920's, especially <I>Australopithecus</I> and "<I>Sinanthropus</I>" (Peking Man), that helped shore up the argument for the evolution of humans from ape- like ancestors at a time when the concept of human evolution was being attacked by the likes of William Jennings Bryan.
In fact, Bryan played a pivotal role in the <I>Hesperopithecus</I> episode. At the end of a colorful political career, Bryan became an instant leader in the so-called Fundamentalist crusade against evolution in the early 1920's. In 1921, trying out arguments that would receive wider attention during the Scopes "monkey trial" in 1925, Bryan preached that, "The greatest enemy of the Bible is the numerous enemy, and the numerous enemy today is the believer in the Darwinian hypothesis that man is a lineal descendant of the lower animals." (Bryan, 1921, p. 19) "Darwin," Bryan continued, "gives us a family tree which begins in the water . . . and then traces the line of descent to European apes -- he does not even allow us the patriotic pleasure of descending from American apes." (1921, p. 39) Osborn, in his role as an established American defender of evolution, went after Bryan in a March 5, 1922 article in <CITE>The New York Times</CITE> (Osborn, 1922a). Osborn optimistically believed that, "If Mr. Bryan, with open heart and mind, would drop all his books and all the disputations among the doctors and study first-hand the simple archives of Nature, all his doubts would disappear; he would not lose his religion; <I>he would become an evolutionist</I>." Osborn's answer to Bryan was published just nine days before the <I>Hesperopithecus</I> tooth arrived at the American Museum from Nebraska. The tooth seemed to be the very evidence he needed -- and from Bryan's home state! Here, perhaps, was the <I>American</I> ape that Bryan had chauvinistically and sarcastically wished for. Osborn's glee must not have been entirely scientific as he studied the tooth from Cook. Perhaps the opportunity to undercut Bryan colored Osborn's analysis of the tooth and perhaps induced him to rush into print prematurely. "
"
<I>Hesperopithecus</I> was not mentioned by anyone during the course of the Scopes trial, although other major discoveries of fossil hominids were discussed from the stand and in written testimony. Recent claims by Hitching that "the <I>Hesperopithecus</I> tooth was proudly displayed [at the trial] as evidence that man had a long evolutionary past" (1982, p. 211) are simply untrue; it is equally false that "the trial that became a significant turning point in U.S. educational history . . . was steered towards its verdict by a pig's tooth." (Hitching, 1982, p. 212) "
"Today, with the evolutionary prehistory of humans firmly documented by African fossil discoveries beginning with <I>Australopithecus</I> in 1924, <I>Hesperopithecus</I> is little more than a peashooter in the creationists' arsenal. George Gaylord Simpson even wondered whether the whole matter needs re-airing -- "So even famous scientists make mistakes, as all humans do. Jove does nod. No one was hurt. No one was even misled for long. So what of it?" (pers. comm., 1983)
But this mistake involved mankind's origins, a topic that is inherently provocative, especially in the context of a creation/evolution conflict. Even after being corrected by scientists themselves, mistakes in descriptions of human ancestors are likely to be immortalized in the diatribes of the creationists. Whereas a few of the creationists' criticisms of the fossil evidence for human evolution are technically correct -- as in the case of <I>Hesperopithecus</I> -- they are often trivial. The reality of human evolution cannot be challenged by reference to one misidentified peccary tooth! "
What gene do you think is missing? Also, remember that the number of genes expressed can increase or decrease. Pseudogenes are genes that were once expressed but a mutation inserted a stop sequence and now they aren't. Gene duplication makes new copies of genes that then evolve into new genes. 
