Bye Bye Ape Man!!!

[ReverendDG]

I disagree, and so does the weight of years of taxonomy.

what taxonomy? not modern taxonomy

 

[ChordatesLegacy]

Chimpanzees are closer to us in more ways than Christian fundamentalists would care to admit. Below are two links that show chimpanzees use medication knowingly and tools in everyday living. Evolution has given us a bigger brain, this does not make us special, just different.

Chimp self medicate

Chimp toolsl

 

[Blayz]

what taxonomy? not modern taxonomy

Maybe he meant taxidermy?

Also, if indels are taken into account, the genetic similarity between chimps and humans drops to only 86.7% (See Anzai, Shiina, Kimura, et al.)

I sure hope you don't mean [SIZE=-1]PNAS 2003 vol. 100: 7708-7713 Because thats kooky in a sad, demented kind of way. Otherwise, could you provide a full reference, not just three of the authors. [/SIZE]

 

[Brennin]

I sure hope you don't mean [SIZE=-1]PNAS 2003 vol. 100: 7708-7713 Because thats kooky in a sad, demented kind of way. Otherwise, could you provide a full reference, not just three of the authors. [/SIZE]

That's it.

 

[Brennin]

Its a mantra? whose mantra? this is what modern cladistics lists it as
sorry but your post is not really convincing and its rather irrelevant when we are talking about taxonomy

seems to me you are basically doing what i said people do. try to find any way they can to deny our relations to apes and other primates

by the way do you have any evidence i could read, otherwise most of genetics show we are at least a 96% range

edit:by the way the things about common disease is such a minor difference i don't understand why its important, the differences do not outweigh how we are alike. macaques differ from us only 7%, but are like is genetically 93%

Incoherent.

 

[consol]

You have put your faith in science, yet science continually proves itself to be wrong. Things that you accept as fact for years, all of sudden comes crumbling down. That fossil really isnt man's grandmother, it's really his sister. Wonder what else science is wrong about? Some people are betting eternity on a discipline that constantly has to regroup and say, "Ooops, guess we were wrong. So now we think it happened this way...."

Would you please tell us what it's like to:

Spend your whole life wishing that what you didn't believe in, was wrong, and what you did believe in, was right,
and you are unable to do anything about it because if you changed, it would mean your whole life has been a lie.

I'm glad I don't have your troubles.

Do yourself a favour, stop wishing your life away and see sense.

 

[Impaler]

I disagree, and so does the weight of years of taxonomy.

So can you explain how modern taxonomy places humans as separate from apes without begging the question?

 

[Blayz]

So can you explain how modern taxonomy places humans as separate from apes without begging the question?

Yep,
I was right, he meant taxidermy.

I sure hope you don't mean [SIZE=-1]PNAS 2003 vol. 100: 7708-7713 Because thats kooky in a sad, demented kind of way. Otherwise, could you provide a full reference, not just three of the authors. [/SIZE]

That's it.

Riight...so you are quoting a paper written before the chimp genome was sequenced, that looks at the hypervaribale MHC region of the genome, and you are taking a measure of orthologous similarity including indels, and completely ignoring the full genome comparison that brings the level of similarity to 95%

Why am I not surprised. Do you even know what an indel is?

 

[Brennin]

Riight...so you are quoting a paper written before the chimp genome was sequenced, that looks at the hypervaribale MHC region of the genome, and you are taking a measure of orthologous similarity including indels, and completely ignoring the full genome comparison that brings the level of similarity to 95%

Why am I not surprised. Do you even know what an indel is?

I believe so.

 

[Edx]

Really? I thought ape man was a fact and only looneys didnt believe in it. Do tell...

Whats an ape-man? Is it like a bird-duck?

 

[ChordatesLegacy]

You have put your faith in science, yet science continually proves itself to be wrong. Things that you accept as fact for years, all of sudden comes crumbling down. That fossil really isnt man's grandmother, it's really his sister. Wonder what else science is wrong about? Some people are betting eternity on a discipline that constantly has to regroup and say, "Ooops, guess we were wrong. So now we think it happened this way...."

You are right, science sometimes gets things wrong, that is the nature of science and scientists, and we are always searching for new evidence to refine theories.

The most ignorant thing any scientist could say is we know it all, but I do not know a single scientist that would say that.

It is religious people who think they know it all. Not only that the things they know are openly admitted to be based on mysticism. YECs are the most ignorant of all badly informed people, who’s views have never one stood up to rigorous scientific scrutiny.

 

[sfs]

Riight...so you are quoting a paper written before the chimp genome was sequenced, that looks at the hypervaribale MHC region of the genome, and you are taking a measure of orthologous similarity including indels, and completely ignoring the full genome comparison that brings the level of similarity to 95%

Why am I not surprised. Do you even know what an indel is?

Even the 95% overstates the degree of difference. Where chimpanzees and humans have similar sequence, they differ by 1.2%. In addition, each species has ~1.5% of sequence not present in the other. Thus a little less than 3% of human DNA differs from chimpanzee DNA.

 

[DMagoh]

The OP is grossly ignorant on all matters raised it seems

Nothing. It's just one ignorant person's excuse to go "See? Science is wrong AGAIN! It can't be trusted and everything it has ever said is worthless!"

This is stupid. The beauty of science isn't that it claims to be infallible, but rather that it provides a reliable system for catching its mistakes. Was this mistake discovered by religion? Philosophy? I know, it was painters! Oh, wait it was science that corrected itself. I challenge you to find one instance of scientific error that wasn't corrected by scientists.

Gah, this is useless.

Yes and this is a better way to do it than to believe that something always has been this way and is found wrong and ignoring that its wrong, like the dogma that creeps into religion

Would you please tell us what it's like to:

Spend your whole life wishing that what you didn't believe in, was wrong, and what you did believe in, was right,
and you are unable to do anything about it because if you changed, it would mean your whole life has been a lie.

I'm glad I don't have your troubles.

Do yourself a favour, stop wishing your life away and see sense.

I love it! Obviously this new information is disturbing to all of you. You feel the need to lash out, and since you dont know what to say, you resort to name calling. The OP is "grossly ignorant", "one ignorant person's excuse", "this is stupid", and "glad I dont have your troubles."

All very nice scientific arguments you have there. What's next? Will you say, "I know you are but what am I?" (from Pee Wee Herman), or "You're ugly and your mama dresses you funny?"

If evolutionist's got this wrong, which they did, you know there are other things that are wrong and being corrected everyday. My point is, you are placing your faith in something that admittedly doesnt have all the answers and is constantly having to correct itself. Yet you are willing to bet your enternity on the fact that science says there can't be a God.

 

[DMagoh]

Would you please tell us what it's like to:

Spend your whole life wishing that what you didn't believe in, was wrong, and what you did believe in, was right,
and you are unable to do anything about it because if you changed, it would mean your whole life has been a lie.

I'm glad I don't have your troubles.

Do yourself a favour, stop wishing your life away and see sense.

Hmmmm.... I think you just described a person who believes in atheistic evolution.

 

[GoSeminoles!]

I hear two sounds:

1. the evolution House of Cards tumbling, and
2. the evolutionists trying desperately to "spin" the new finding

Isnt' the Evolutionist Goon Squad supposed to squash all discoveries which confict with their dogma?

You can't have it both ways.

 

[sfs]

Evolution Has To Be Rethunk
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/H/HUMAN_EVOLUTION?SITE=DCTMS&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT




Really? I thought ape man was a fact and only looneys didnt believe in it. Do tell...

.

So... ape-man is a joke. Hmmm, I guess atheists better start rethinking their strategem.



So this ape-like creature co-existed with man, instead of man evolving from him..... interesting.



Sort of like man and chimps today, huh? I always wondered why if man evolved from monkeys why some quit evolving and were still monkeys.

Why are you doing this? Do you realize that you're simply holding your faith up for ridicule? You don't understand human evolution, you don't understand paleontology and you don't understand the meaning of this paper, and yet you're perfectly happy to make sweeping pronouncements about the collapse of evolution based on the paper. The only effect you're going to have on atheists here is to convince them that Christianity is only for people too stupid or too frightened to deal with reality. Is that what you want?

 

[GoSeminoles!]

My point is, you are placing your faith in something that admittedly doesnt have all the answers and is constantly having to correct itself.

When did correcting and updating things become a bad idea?

Don't you think the Bible is long overdue for a good correcting and updating?

 

[consol]

I love it! Obviously this new information is disturbing to all of you. You feel the need to lash out, and since you dont know what to say, you resort to name calling. The OP is "grossly ignorant", "one ignorant person's excuse", "this is stupid", and "glad I dont have your troubles."

All very nice scientific arguments you have there. What's next? Will you say, "I know you are but what am I?" (from Pee Wee Herman), or "You're ugly and your mama dresses you funny?"

If evolutionist's got this wrong, which they did, you know there are other things that are wrong and being corrected everyday. My point is, you are placing your faith in something that admittedly doesnt have all the answers and is constantly having to correct itself. Yet you are willing to bet your enternity on the fact that science says there can't be a God.

When are you going to get it into your thick scull that evolution is there wether we like it or not,
it's not a case of believing it, it just is.

If everyone stopped believing in God, God would disappear, and evolution would just carry on,
if every human disappeared from the earth, evolution would carry on it's merry way oblivious to everything.

Gods need people, without people there are no Gods,
as long as something lives, evolution exists.

So you can see, it is inevitable that Creationism, Chritianity and all the other religions will loose,
because evolution will outlive you all, and when you die, your Gods will die with you.

 

[Army of Juan]

I love it! Obviously this new information is disturbing to all of you. You feel the need to lash out, and since you dont know what to say, you resort to name calling. The OP is "grossly ignorant", "one ignorant person's excuse", "this is stupid", and "glad I dont have your troubles."

All very nice scientific arguments you have there. What's next? Will you say, "I know you are but what am I?" (from Pee Wee Herman), or "You're ugly and your mama dresses you funny?"

If evolutionist's got this wrong, which they did, you know there are other things that are wrong and being corrected everyday. My point is, you are placing your faith in something that admittedly doesnt have all the answers and is constantly having to correct itself. Yet you are willing to bet your enternity on the fact that science says there can't be a God.

Wow, you have apparently no idea what this really means do you? They call you ignorant because you are, this finding doesn't change evolution itself one bit. This just means the hominid lineage is more complex than first thought but...so what?

I'd almost feel sorry for you but I get the impression that you think being ignorant if a virtue or something.

Read up on the Dunning-Kruger effect, you'll find it sounds alot like you.

 

[sfs]

I love it! Obviously this new information is disturbing to all of you. You feel the need to lash out, and since you dont know what to say, you resort to name calling. The OP is "grossly ignorant", "one ignorant person's excuse", "this is stupid", and "glad I dont have your troubles."

All very nice scientific arguments you have there. What's next? Will you say, "I know you are but what am I?" (from Pee Wee Herman), or "You're ugly and your mama dresses you funny?"

There aren't any scientific responses because the original post didn't have any scientific content to respond to. The Nature paper shows (assuming it holds up) that H. erectus did not derive from H. habilis by anagenesis; instead, it either split off from H. habilis or was a sister species to it, with both being descended from a slightly different ancestor. An anagenic relationship between habilis and erectus was never more than a hypothesis, and couuldn't be, given the spotty fossil record.

So this paper clarifies one detail of the evolution of humans. Just why are we supposed to in a panic? As far as you're concerned, both species are "ape-men" (both have much smaller brains than modern humans).