Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
since you agree that an artificial penguin is a robot
and since an object that is identical to a robot is a robot then a "natural" penguin is a robot too be definition.
Oh you may celebrate it differently, but celebrate it you do
And you still reject that the Grants came to the conclusion that interbreeding affected numerous genetic loci simultaneously and was 2 to 3 magnitudes more important than mutations. Mutations affect one gene loci, if they even manage to do anything, as we all understand the majority are neutral, then harmful, then in rare circumstances beneficial. So one mutation may take effect every 20,000 generations (E coli), while interbreeding affects those multiple genetic loci with every single mating.Yet he still claims that it is interbreeding/hybridization that produced the 'original' variation that produced Asians from middle easterners.
The same way you ignore the facts and I accept them.How do you get to tell a Belgian citizen what they do and don't celebrate in their country.
My word.........!
Deflection an personal attacks is all they have, that’s why they continually engage in both.
Oh we agree the Catholic Church has a long history of combining pagan beliefs into Christian beliefs. But then it’s those that claimed to be Christians that led the crusades and inquisition both.Indeed. And nevertheless, his birth is celebrated on 25th of december.
Which incidently, also happens to be the birthdays of Mithras, Osiris, Adonis, etc.
Funny, isn't it?
Yes - it is so true. Cats do not give birth to dogs.And though what you have said here is 100% correct and has been demonstrated here
(and on dozens of other forums)
it is like a reasoning cog is stuck (typical mostly with of victims of cults and sufferers of Stockholm)
and they automatically go into a thinking loop that eventually brings them back to insisting again on the originally undemonstrated claim. Others have "faith" in their hypothesis so will not (as opposed to cannot) admit to anything that shows the emperor has no clothes.
It's when you type paragraphes like that one, that one can know that you don't understand the evolutionary process at all.
The common ancestor of humans and chimps was some kind of ape primate.
That primate produced more primates. One lineage became chimps and the other became humans. Both still primates.
Just like lions, housecats and tigers are still felines.
Just like all of the above are still mammals.
And yet invertebrates produced vertebrates. Fish produced amphibians. Amphibians produced reptiles and mammals.At no point in evolutionary history, did one "type" of animal give birth to another "type" of animal.
Just like at not point in history, did a latin-speaking mother raise a spanish-speaking child.
It’s not my fault you think infection by viruses when two separate kinds lived in proximity means shared ancestory.Sure it is. For example, find a non-primate that shares more ERV's with humans then a primate.
Didn’t think that through did you. What do you think your abiogenesis had to work with?Yes - it is so true. Cats do not give birth to dogs.
My gosh, evolution is wr-wr-wr-wrong!
But wait - I've not seen dust be formed into a human before.... Hmmm....
More projecting from the brainwashing and coccyx expert.
Still refuse to admit that your OP on the coccyx was just about 100% wrong?
"because the coccyx is known to be there to support a ganglia of nervous tissue covered in grey matter (like a little brain - coccygeal plexus) and not only is the connective source of the two coccygeal and also sciatic nerves, but assists (and is necessary to) the autonomic urogenital functions. In its parasympathetic stimulated phase it is essential to our sexuality, thus mating, thus perpetuation and survival of the species. It carries the sensation/information through the axons to the central nervous system and back through transmission across the dentrites."
list in order of apeparance of errors:
1 plural used to denote a single thing
confusing a plexus with a ganglion
confusing anatomy (twice)
fabricating autonomic function (referring to a ganglion and not even the coccyx - fabricating and conflation)
confusion of parasympathetic/sympathetic
confusion re: nerve impulse transmission
I give that a F+ - the + for effort...
And yet the wolf does not have poodle genomes, but produced one anyways through interbreeding.So why do you refuse to tell us where your original Asian and African came from, seeing as how, according to you, it is all interbreeding/hybridization, and also according to you, Adam and Eve had "perfect" non-Asian, non-African genomes.
Are you claiming we didn’t get poodles from one breed of middle eastern wolf? The biologists would disagree with you.Surely even you must know that you need 2 different things to hybridize. So where did the variation come from to get the original Asians and Africans from?
What two non-Asians mated to produce an Asian?
And how do you know?
EVIDENCE PLEASE.
And you still reject that the Grants came to the conclusion that interbreeding affected numerous genetic loci simultaneously and was 2 to 3 magnitudes more important than mutations.Yet he still claims that it is interbreeding/hybridization that produced the 'original' variation that produced Asians from middle easterners.
Mutations affect one gene loci,
if they even manage to do anything, as we all understand the majority are neutral, then harmful, then in rare circumstances beneficial. So one mutation may take effect every 20,000 generations (E coli), while interbreeding affects those multiple genetic loci with every single mating.
That’s how you get from wolf to chiwawah [sic] in a few thousand years.
That’s how ground finch mating with tree finch got to a new variation.
And while I can provide and have done so, numerous examples of change in form through interbreeding, you have yet to provide any.
Right! So you were incorrect about the unrelated Christmas Zinger...you could have simply admitted as such...
And to end with: it wasn't "unrelated". It was in reply to a specific post that made a specific point. I was countering that specific point. It was very much related to that point.
Would you feel better if every time I had to type when a Husky mated with a Mastiff type dog
I’ve known it was never just the Husky and Mastiff but I ain’t typing all that just to prove the point it’s interbreeding, and not mutation which causes changes in subspecies, breeds, strains, variants, whatever they want to call something day to day.
I’d be here all day typing if I had to do that every time since you all can’t seem to grasp the importance of interbreeding.
But it’s the act of interbreeding which causes the changes, and as the Grants informed you because it affects almost the entire genome when they combine. A mutation may affect a single allele, which is why interbreeding is on the conservative estimate 2 to 3 orders of magnitude more important.
No. Did you not read the post, or are you unable to work out how many 3+22 is?
I'll help out: it's 25.
There's nothing to admit.
Christmass IS a continuation of pagan festivities. Almost every culture, especially in the northern hemisphere, throughout history has festivities (both religious and not religious) pinned to one or more days from the 20th to the 25th of december.
Even the christmass tree, is literally an old pagan tradition.
Is this really news to you? As the other poster said, it's widely known that Jesus' birthday would not have been in december. Yet, that's when it is "officially" celebrated. In a period that was considered holy/divine/reason-to-celebrate to almost all pre-christian ancient cultures - for very different reasons then the christian holiday.
During Saturnalia, Romans used to decorate their houses with evergreen plants etc, things now associated with christmass.
Ancient Vikings worshipped trees and also did special things with them during the winter festivities.
Then there's also "Yule tide", the ancient winter fest of the winter solstice from ancient germanic people who worshipped Odin. It was later literally rebranded as "christmastide".
So yes.... "christmass", most definatly is a pre-christian pagan festival, that got hijacked by christianity and rebranded as "christmass".
The only thing all these holidays have in common, is that they all land in the period of the winter solstice. Most cultures then placed it in a context of their religious beliefs.
It doesn't take a scholar to work out why early christians choose that date to celebrate the birth of Jesus.... Which wasn't in december.
And to end with: it wasn't "unrelated". It was in reply to a specific post that made a specific point. I was countering that specific point. It was very much related to that point.
Yet he still claims that it is interbreeding/hybridization that produced the 'original' variation that produced Asians from middle easterners.
No, I reject your earlier depiction of it.
Ok, your mutation affects one locus, while interbreeding affects multiple loci simultaneously. Does that make you feel better?Loci is plural.
Every single solitary one, that’s why parents can have 10 children and none of them are identicle.Every single mating?
Interesting.
We agree that mutations can affect coat color. I’ve repeatedly asked you to show were it can cause change in form, you continually fail to do so.No, it really isn't.
i am surprised that you linked to the fox paper - did you not read it, or did you not understand it? For I saw several mentions of mutant genes and the like - things which you say are irrelevant.
From the paper you linked:
"As Morey pointed out, inbreeding might well have been rampant during the early steps of dog domestication. But it certainly cannot explain the novel traits we have observed in our
foxes, for two reasons. "
and, in a figure caption:
"Piebald coat color is one of the most striking mutations among domestic animals. The pattern is seen frequently in dogs (border collie, top right), pigs, horses and cows. Belyaev's hypothesis predicted that a similar mutation he called Star, seen occasionally in farmed foxes, would occur with increasing frequency in foxes selected for tamability."
And in your Grant paper - something I suppose you ignored (or never got to, since you had already found your juicy quote):
" Despite the low production of hybrids, by 2007, over 30% of the population of G. scandens possessed alleles whose origin could be traced back to G. fortis. The two populations had become more similar to each other morphologically and genetically..."
2 populations became MORE SIMILAR due to sharing of alleles... Hmmm... doesn't bode well for your claim of Asians and Africans and Inuit and Aborigine and Nordic from a perfect-genomed pair of middle easterners...
And where do alleles come from, again?
Ah yes:
where do alleles come from? - Google Search
But no, you go on asserting (with zero evidence) your fantasies.
How did ground finch and tree finch come to possess different alleles in the first place?
I find it simultaneously frustrating and hilarious that you keep digging your own hole deeper yet refuse to even try to see it.
That is fantastic.
What you still cannot do is provide evidence that we can get an Asian or an African from a middle easterner with 'perfect' created genomes via interbreeding, since, by definition, they would be interbreeding with other middle easterners with no new alleles.
Did the Chinook come from a hybrid of two different breeds of sheep?We were warned to beware of wolves in sheeps clothing.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?