Do Chimps and Humans Share a Common Ancestor? Primer for a formal debate

[mark kennedy]

I have posted a formal debate invitation and I wanted to post a duplicate thread here since you guys are lot more chatty when you can swarm a thread as a group.

I am a young earth creationist with an avid interest in the life sciences from a fundamentalist point of view. I am opposed to evolution as natural history, specifically, I consider the human/chimp common ancestor to be a modern myth.

I have a special interest in the life sciences, paleontology and the Bible as history.

Have a nice day
Mark

 

[Mumbo]

Since no one seems to want to be the one to start the swarm, I'll ask a few questions to start things off.

In your opinion, what do the fossils that have been labeled as belonging to man's ancestors (Australopithecus afarensis, Homo habilis, etc) actually belong to?
How do you regard the genetic similarities between chimpanzees and humans? Are they a coincidence, remnants of a divine design plan, or what?

Edit: Or Loudmouth can skip straight to the ending, that works too :/

 

[Loudmouth]

ERV's, fused chromosomes, and intermediate fossils. The ABC's of the debate that have never been refuted and consistently ignored. Even Michael Behe has accepted common ancestry, he just happens to differ on the mechanism of DNA mutation.

I am gone until late next week, but would like to be part of the debate. PM me if you are interested.

 

[Phred]

I am a young earth creationist with an avid interest in the life sciences from a fundamentalist point of view. I am opposed to evolution as natural history, specifically, I consider the human/chimp common ancestor to be a modern myth.

I have a special interest in the life sciences, paleontology and the Bible as history.

Please explain Endogenous retroviruses and how their appearance in all primates including humans jives with your "fundamentalist point of view".

 

[mark kennedy]

Please explain Endogenous retroviruses and how their appearance in all primates including humans jives with your "fundamentalist point of view".

Short version;

(ERVs) have become all but extinct in the human lineage, HERV-K. The chimpanzee genome has two active retroviral elements (PtERV1 and PtERV2) that must have been introduced by mutation since the split. PtERV2 is not in the human genome and it is too large to have been introduced by mutation since the split. PtERV1-like elements are present in the rhesus monkey, olive baboon and African great apes but not in humans. (Nature 2005)

Here's the thing, if ERVs are such sweeping proof of common ancestry, the inverse logic must be intuitively obvious. With the ERV there has to be a null hypothesis for a LSCA. I fully intend to show exactly what that is and why this argument is not only counter productive to TOE as natural history. It is vivid proof that TOE apologists are either oblivious to what the evidence is, or grossly disingenuous when presenting it.

That's the readers digest version, I'll save the detailed exposition for the debate.

Have a nice day
Mark

 

[mark kennedy]

Since no one seems to want to be the one to start the swarm, I'll ask a few questions to start things off.

In your opinion, what do the fossils that have been labeled as belonging to man's ancestors (Australopithecus afarensis, Homo habilis, etc) actually belong to?

If these are the human ancestors then where are the chimpanzee's ancestors from, say, 1-5 mya? How many of their ancestors are represented in Natural History museums around the world? Just a rough estimate, how many?

How do you regard the genetic similarities between chimpanzees and humans?

How much DNA do you think Chimpanzees and Humans have in common?

Try Chimpanzee Genome in your google search engine, Nature has an estimate at the top of the results.

Are they a coincidence, remnants of a divine design plan, or what?

What is the mutation rate for Homo sapien sapiens? Again, a rough estimate will do. Try 'spontaneous mutation rates' in your google search engine.


Have a nice day
Mark

 

[USincognito]

While anomoulous insertions (ex. present in Orangutans and Chimpanzees, but not in Gorillas or humans) do present an interesting area for investigation, they don't undermine the fact that we do find hierarchical nesting in primates especially (ex. Humans and chimps A, B C, + gorillas A, B, C, D, E, + Orangs A, B, C, D, E, F, G, etc.)

 

[mark kennedy]

While anomoulous insertions (ex. present in Orangutans and Chimpanzees, but not in Gorillas or humans) do present an interesting area for investigation, they don't undermine the fact that we do find hierarchical nesting in primates especially (ex. Humans and chimps A, B C, + gorillas A, B, C, D, E, + Orangs A, B, C, D, E, F, G, etc.)

I'll concede that this would be evidence for common ancestry, do you concede the inverse logic?

 

[sbvera13]

Sounds like you are setting up a prelude to Haldane's dilemma with your references to mutation rates. This should be fun.

 

[USincognito]

I'll concede that this would be evidence for common ancestry, do you concede the inverse logic?

I will concede that anamolous insertions would definately be problematic, but only fatal if no post LCA insertion evidence is found.

 

[Mumbo]

If these are the human ancestors then where are the chimpanzee's ancestors from, say, 1-5 mya?

I recall hearing of a chimpanzee ancestor's fossilized teeth being found around Kenya a few years back. They're only from about 500,000 years back, which means that they fall outside of your timeframe. Did you pick "1-5 mya" years for any specific reason? Being a young earth creationist, I wouldn't think that you'd be very picky when it comes to such dates.

How many of their ancestors are represented in Natural History museums around the world? Just a rough estimate, how many?

Admittedly, the chimpanzee fossil record is poor, at least from the few accounts that I've heard. How, precisely, does that discount the supposed human fossil record, which consists of thousands of fossils? Does the disparity seem fishy to you?

How much DNA do you think Chimpanzees and Humans have in common?

98.5%, give or take. I take it you're unimpressed by that number.

Try Chimpanzee Genome in your google search engine, Nature has an estimate at the top of the results.

Nifty.

What is the mutation rate for Homo sapien sapiens? Again, a rough estimate will do. Try 'spontaneous mutation rates' in your google search engine.

About one mutation per 10,000 genes per generation.

Phew, glad that quiz is over. Now that I'm finished giving you ammunition for your next post, would you mind answering my questions? Since you couldn't answer them without my help, I'll take the liberty of rephrasing them for you.

What, exactly, are the supposed fossils of man's ancestors?
If chimps and humans are unrelated, why are they genetically similar?

 

[USincognito]

I'm going to predict Mark's answers.

What, exactly, are the supposed fossils of man's ancestors?
If chimps and humans are unrelated, why are they genetically similar?

1. They are either fully non-H. sapien apes or fully H. sapiens.
2. Common designer.

You didn't think you're the first to ask those questions to a Creationist do you.

 

[Mumbo]

You didn't think you're the first to ask those questions to a Creationist do you.

No, but I was curious about the answers I'd receive. If I'd known that I would first have to earn those answers, I probably wouldn't have bothered.

 

[Split Rock]

If these are the human ancestors then where are the chimpanzee's ancestors from, say, 1-5 mya? How many of their ancestors are represented in Natural History museums around the world? Just a rough estimate, how many?

The reason those species are considered hominids is because they walked erect. Neither chimps nor their ancestors walked erect.

 

[Chalnoth]

The reason those species are considered hominids is because they walked erect. Neither chimps nor their ancestors walked erect.

Well, not as a normal means of locomotion, at least.

 

[JBJoe]

Short version;

(ERVs) have become all but extinct in the human lineage, HERV-K.

Um? What? I'm not sure what you're saying here. There are thousands of HERVs in the human genome. HERV-K is a family of ERVs that is present in both human and chimpanzee.

The chimpanzee genome has two active retroviral elements (PtERV1 and PtERV2) that must have been introduced by mutation since the split. PtERV2 is not in the human genome and it is too large to have been introduced by mutation since the split.

Individual ERVs are not introduced by mutation slowly over time. They are knocked out reverse-transcribed viral RNA that infected a germ cell. This happens in a single generation.

 

[anunbeliever]

Individual ERVs are not introduced by mutation slowly over time. They are knocked out reverse-transcribed viral RNA that infected a germ cell. This happens in a single generation.

I think Mark is trying to say that, PtERV2 being found in Chimps and Orangs, but not in humans, breaks the theory.

 

[Cirbryn]

Short version;

(ERVs) have become all but extinct in the human lineage, HERV-K. The chimpanzee genome has two active retroviral elements (PtERV1 and PtERV2) that must have been introduced by mutation since the split. PtERV2 is not in the human genome and it is too large to have been introduced by mutation since the split. PtERV1-like elements are present in the rhesus monkey, olive baboon and African great apes but not in humans. (Nature 2005)

Here's the thing, if ERVs are such sweeping proof of common ancestry, the inverse logic must be intuitively obvious. With the ERV there has to be a null hypothesis for a LSCA. I fully intend to show exactly what that is and why this argument is not only counter productive to TOE as natural history. It is vivid proof that TOE apologists are either oblivious to what the evidence is, or grossly disingenuous when presenting it.

That's the readers digest version, I'll save the detailed exposition for the debate.

Have a nice day
Mark

Mark, you do realize that for an ERV to provide evidence of common ancestry in two species, it must be found in the same place in the genome of both species, right? The same ERV found in different parts of the two genomes would only indicate two separate infections. As they explain in this review of a 2005 paper that happens to discuss PTERV1: "[FONT=&quot]The authors compared the sites of viral integration in each of these primates and found that few if any of these insertion sites were shared among the primates. It appears therefore that the sequences have not been conserved from a common ancestor, but are specific to each lineage."

Or did that just screw up your whole debate strategy? Sorry about that.
[/FONT]

 

[WhiteMageGirl]

I think Mark is trying to say that, PtERV2 being found in Chimps and Orangs, but not in humans, breaks the theory.

it's interesting how much cherry picking mark is doing. He ignores multiple erv's as just 'mutation' even though that violates the definition of evr. Then finds one evr and asserts it as proof against common ancestory ignoring the millions of years when it was most likely added to the genome.

Really Mark already lost the EVR debate in the formal section a long time ago.

 

[mark kennedy]

I recall hearing of a chimpanzee ancestor's fossilized teeth being found around Kenya a few years back. They're only from about 500,000 years back, which means that they fall outside of your timeframe. Did you pick "1-5 mya" years for any specific reason? Being a young earth creationist, I wouldn't think that you'd be very picky when it comes to such dates.

That was three maybe four teeth, now how many human family ancestors do they have from the same time frame. The reason I picked the timeframe was pretty obvious, I'm dating back to the LCA.

Admittedly, the chimpanzee fossil record is poor, at least from the few accounts that I've heard. How, precisely, does that discount the supposed human fossil record, which consists of thousands of fossils? Does the disparity seem fishy to you?

Four teeth verses thousands of fossils, yea, that sounds pretty fishy to me.

98.5%, give or take. I take it you're unimpressed by that number.

The number is wrong, what are you using as a source?

Nifty.

About one mutation per 10,000 genes per generation.

It's not per gene, it's per diploid generation and the effect of the gene is what triggers natural selection.

Phew, glad that quiz is over. Now that I'm finished giving you ammunition for your next post, would you mind answering my questions? Since you couldn't answer them without my help, I'll take the liberty of rephrasing them for you.

Just stringing the thread out, I knew you would have the wrong answers. You guys are so predictable.

What, exactly, are the supposed fossils of man's ancestors?

I could catalog them for you but I have to save something for the debate if anyone ever steps up.

If chimps and humans are unrelated, why are they genetically similar?

About that, you are saying that homology is a compelling proof of a common ancestor. Does that mean that you accept that divergence is a compelling proof of special creation?

Go back and check your facts because you are you are mistaken on some key facts.