Gene Number Changes Between Humans and Chimps

Hespera · Jun 18, 2009

oh well while we are at it lets hear him again with the moldy canard about how "everytime and" (sic) "ape skull is dug up its immediately celebrated as human".

We preserve the spelling for the sake of those who had him jump on their typos.

Naraoia · Jun 22, 2009

double post

Naraoia · Jun 22, 2009

I think it's time for a bump. Mark, if you are around, would you please explain what you mean by this:

Mark Kennedy said:
What I love about genetics is that they can't hide the actual facts. With the fossil record they were able to hide the Piltdown fraud for nearly half a century, only to find that it wasn't even a cleaver hoax. Same thing with Homo habilis, these contrived tools they keep pointing to are not recognized by archeologists.

(SOURCE)

So, what tools, who keeps pointing to them, what archaeologists don't recognise them and why?

loveiseverywhere · Jun 24, 2009

mark kennedy said:
The last thread I participated in had an Opening Post that was passing off the same of propaganda of humans and chimps being '98% the same'.

Propaganda?

It's DNA, not propaganda. Learn the difference.

SLP · Jun 27, 2009

I always get a kick out of creationists like MK who suddenly become 'too busy to comment' when their feet are being held to the fire...

Hespera · Jun 27, 2009

Or whose response to being told that something they said is demonstrably false, they start complaining that it is an "ad hom' and then start calling names and questioning character and motive.

Naraoia · Jun 27, 2009

I'm patient...

SLP · Jun 28, 2009

Hespera said:
Or whose response to being told that something they said is demonstrably false, they start complaining that it is an "ad hom' and then start calling names and questioning character and motive.

Isn't that a fun one?

Creto: Look at this science paper! Even the evo's admit X!
Evo: Um, dude? Look at this paragraph from that paper - it says the opposite of what you claimed.
Creto: Nice ad hom!

Naraoia · Jun 30, 2009

Mark was here, but Mark still hasn't explained what he meant in post 172. Patience is running out. The countdown approaches the inevitable conclusion: Mark was making accusations he knows he can't back up.

I would love to be proven wrong.

Hespera · Jul 1, 2009

Naraoia said:
Mark was here, but Mark still hasn't explained what he meant in post 172. Patience is running out. The countdown approaches the inevitable conclusion: Mark was making accusations he knows he can't back up.

I would love to be proven wrong.

That last sentence is the profound difference in the approach to knowledge between a theist and a scientist.

The theist CANNOT be wrong, and the mind is utterly closed to the possibility. One gets the impression that if the least jot or tittle of their belief were conceded to be in error, the entire structure would collapse, they would be left adrift in a sea of confusion.

A person with a scientific way of thinking is as noted above by Naraoia, delighted to find out they were wrong.

If in the extraordinarily remote chance that all of ToE were to be falsified, it would take a while to grasp the meaning of it, but, after I did I would love to find out how things really are. Dream world of illusion isnt for me.

mark kennedy · Jul 3, 2009

Hespera said:
oh well while we are at it lets hear him again with the moldy canard about how "everytime and" (sic) "ape skull is dug up its immediately celebrated as human".

We preserve the spelling for the sake of those who had him jump on their typos.

Yea never mind the fact that you already know that the ancestry of chimpanzees is represented by three teeth.

theFijian · Jul 3, 2009

Hespera said:
That last sentence is the profound difference in the approach to knowledge between a literalist fundamentalist and everyone else.

fixed it for you

Hespera · Jul 3, 2009

Mark kennedy sez.....

Originally posted by hespera...

oh well while we are at it lets hear him again with the moldy canard about how "everytime and" (sic) "ape skull is dug up its immediately celebrated as human".

We preserve the spelling for the sake of those who had him jump on their
typos." QUOTE

Mark sez.............

Yea never mind the fact that you already know that the ancestry of chimpanzees is represented by three teeth. Quote///////////////

Hespera sez....

Never mind that YOU said every APE, not "chimpanzee". Why are you changing it now to "chimpanzee"? It wasnt true either way, may as well leave it as you originally said it.

Never mind that you said EVERY ape fossil, not mentioning that 3 teeth exception..

Never mind all the other exceptions; that a good many other ape fossils have been found including in Europe and Asia.

Never mind that "immediately celebrated" is just not so, as you knew all along.

Noted that rather than ever simply acknowledging that you misstated the facts, you have tried to change the story, consistently denied being wrong, and in most honourable fashion have tried to turn this once again back on me.

I did not make a false statement, you did. Its not about me, its about how you still cant just accept it that you were wrong, no matter how plain it is.

Its always an interesting test of people to see if they can admit to being wrong. It says many things about them. Do you know what some of those things are?

AV1611VET · Jul 3, 2009

mark kennedy said:
Yea never mind the fact that you already know that the ancestry of chimpanzees is represented by three teeth.

I'm waiting for someone to find a tooth, then scientists rushing in and creating a whole race of prehistoric man from it, and it getting profiled on TV and Scientific Americant and Nutional Geographic --- then someone noticing that the tooth has a filling ---

mark kennedy · Jul 3, 2009

Naraoia said:
I think it's time for a bump. Mark, if you are around, would you please explain what you mean by this:

What I love about genetics is that they can't hide the actual facts. With the fossil record they were able to hide the Piltdown fraud for nearly half a century, only to find that it wasn't even a cleaver hoax. Same thing with Homo habilis, these contrived tools they keep pointing to are not recognized by archeologists

(SOURCE)

So, what tools, who keeps pointing to them, what archaeologists don't recognise them and why?

Oh for crying out loud but you guys do love to dwell on tangents. First of all the Louis Leaky found exactly what he was looking for, he was inspired by a book called Days Before History. It was a children's book about mythical stone age tool makers:

The author described the flint arrowheads and axeheads of these people, and included drawings of each tool. Louis was enchanted. "He lived in that book." said Julia. "it became his Bible, really. I think it made him feel that the place he was living had been full of Stone Age men and that he could find their tools. He began to pick up these pieces of rock that were all over the place and we teased him about it because we thought there were just stones. But he thought they were tools, and he made a collection" (Ancestral Passions, Virgina Morrell)

Strangely these supposed tools would appear after heavy rainfall, the Kikuyu called them 'spirit razors' because they believed they fell from the sky. What was happening was that the rainfall was chipping them and flaking them. Any hoot, my off the cuff reference to archeologists was a passing reference to his Calico misadventure where he applied the same principles to a site in the Calico Hills in California where Leaky used the same logic to find the earliest man in America. It was a disaster, he presented these contrived choppers and scrappers presented at a conference in October of 77:

He really thought that everyone would be convinced when they saw these beautiful stone tools and heard about the hearth. He pinned a lot of hope on what they would decide. (Joan Travis, Leakey Foundation director)

They examined the supposed tools and saw only rocks, which is all the Homo habilis tools were. What is interesting about you insistence over a passing remark is that you guys will go to any lengths to derail the topic.

You guys seem to be under the mistaken impression that I am still pursuing this topic. I enjoy sparring over some of these things from time to time but I was convinced a long time ago that evolutionists are using fallacious arguments to hide the real evidence.

That's why I don't bother arguing in circles with you in these open threads. When you get the worst of it you just step aside and let your minions cast aspersions. If you seriously want to talk about paleontology I am open to that, if you want to talk about gene comparisons bring it on. You don't though, you just cherry pick whatever passing remark that resembles an error and obsess about that.

All this error correcting going on and not one of you have ever admitted that the statement that Chimpanzee and Human DNA is 99% the same is an error or a lie.

Hespera · Jul 3, 2009

Av sez....I'm waiting for someone to find a tooth, then scientists rushing in and creating a whole race of prehistoric man from it, and it getting profiled on TV and Scientific Americant and Nutional Geographic --- then someone noticing that the tooth has a filling --- QUOTE////////

Hespera sez.. any chance you could sit somewhere, quietly till then?

We note of course that you are saying something that isnt true, for the purpose of an effect, primarily a bit of a light hearted ad hom, I guess. So we wouldnt call you on stating things that are not true. "dog walks into a bar" jokes arent true either, tho they are funnier than you were there.

MK of course, said something untrue, for ad hom effect, but he stated it as fact, defended it as fact, and used it as an integral part of his argument. That is the reason for calling him on it.

When i see something written by a non Christian that I think / know is unture, i will call them on it. Do you feel compelled to stand up for someone's falshood just because they are on your side?

Hespera · Jul 3, 2009

MK sez...."All this error correcting going on and not one of you have ever admitted that the statement that Chimpanzee and Human DNA is 99% the same is an error or a lie."

Hespera sez....

Toss it back to the others again. Why dont YOU admit YOUR error? YOU made the error, not some third party. Whats with trying to get people to admit someone elses mistake?

As for the 99% similarity? If thats wrong, then its wrong, not that its anything for me to 'admit". Maybe its even stupid and wrong done deliberately to sow confusion and discord? So?

One person in one publication says represtns all of scientific thinking?

And of course, unlike with cettain people and institutions, making mistakes and correcting them is just how it works........ in science.

Perhaps you are mixed up with all the different churches that all say different things and have different interpretations of the same perfect error free book? If a preacher, say jessie jackson says something, that speaks for all Christianity?

Now back to you. Gonna admit you were wrong about 'everytime and ape skull...."?

mark kennedy · Jul 3, 2009

Hespera said:
Mark kennedy sez.....

Originally posted by hespera...

oh well while we are at it lets hear him again with the moldy canard about how "everytime and" (sic) "ape skull is dug up its immediately celebrated as human".

We preserve the spelling for the sake of those who had him jump on their
typos." QUOTE

Mark sez.............

You just keep chanting that like it's a mantra, does it give you some feeling of peace and satisfaction to chant the same empty rhetoric over and over?

Yea never mind the fact that you already know that the ancestry of chimpanzees is represented by three teeth. Quote///////////////

Why don't you try quote brackets some time and give yourself a chance to organize your thoughts before you go into flame mode.

Hespera sez....

Never mind that YOU said every APE, not "chimpanzee". Why are you changing it now to "chimpanzee"? It wasnt true either way, may as well leave it as you originally said it.

First of all I have said it so many times it is nearly impossible to know when the first time was or exactly how I said it. It is true that every chimpanzee skull dug up in Africa is immediately celebrated as one of our ancestors, there are no exceptions.

Never mind that you said EVERY ape fossil, not mentioning that 3 teeth exception..

While I really don't care what context I made the statement in other apes are included in this mass propaganda of homology arguments and mythology based on ape skulls. There have been Gorilla ancestors included in our lineage but there are some that are just too different.

Never mind all the other exceptions; that a good many other ape fossils have been found including in Europe and Asia.

Never mind that "immediately celebrated" is just not so, as you knew all along.

Never mind that you are just typing at random without reference to a single skull or announcement of a fossilized ape skull. Generalities made by the trolling minions of evolutionists are never challenged by evolutionists. They will simply pat you on your head and say, good job.

Noted that rather than ever simply acknowledging that you misstated the facts, you have tried to change the story, consistently denied being wrong, and in most honourable fashion have tried to turn this once again back on me.

No you go into this third person monologue ad hominem plea for affirmation. Sad really, not that you did but that they almost always do.

I did not make a false statement, you did. Its not about me, its about how you still cant just accept it that you were wrong, no matter how plain it is.

I don't care to chase you fallacious fault finding rhetoric around the mulberry bush, thanks just the same. You scan the minutia of the thread for the slightest misstatement but can't discern a glaring error involving hundreds of millions of base pairs.

How close are humans and chimpanzees in their DNA? Is it 99% or do you know?

Its always an interesting test of people to see if they can admit to being wrong. It says many things about them. Do you know what some of those things are?

It really says a lot about people when they abandon all line of evidence to focus on the individual making the statement rather then considering the reason behind it. It saddens me that evolutionists are breeding growing levels of ignorance in an attempt to bury real world evidence beneath an avalanche of controversy.

The honest thing to do would be to admit the weaknesses of Human/Chimpanzee common ancestry while expounding on its strengths. They almost never do that on here, instead they encourage these shallow criticisms and semantic spam tactics.

Now if any of you want to try a real debate my invitation is waiting at the top of the forum. Otherwise you can continue to wallow in the muck and mire of these empty mud slinging feasts. Take a good look at the post by Hespera and ask yourself, is there anything remotely scientific in it?

You guys actually wonder way I get bored with this kind of childish banter. It's because you are conceding my central points by omission and I have dozens that have went unaddressed for years. I taking my kids to see some of the sites here in Colorado Springs or maybe I can stay here and field your fallacious arguments and insults...hmmm...I think I'll go out and enjoy nature rather then having an a priori assumption about it forced down my throat.

AV1611VET · Jul 3, 2009

Hespera said:
Do you feel compelled to stand up for someone's falshood just because they are on your side?

No --- I rant against science in general --- that's why my profile says I'm a presuppositionalist.

Wikipedia --- Presuppositional apologetics said:
In Christian theology, presuppositionalism is a school of apologetics that aims to present a rational basis for the Christian faith and defend it against objections primarily by exposing the perceived flaws of other worldviews while the Bible, as divine revelation, is presupposed.

I don't have 1/10th of the knowledge Mark Kennedy has; so how can I call it a 'falsehood'?

My "crusade" here, which started out three years ago as showing science and nature being so diametrically opposed to God, is now starting to branch out into a different direction.

I believe God has opened my eyes to the way many people select their words --- showing a predisposition against the Bible.

For example, calling miracles "magic", or saying "poofed" instead of "created".

Another good point is how they defend themselves when I point it out to them.

They usually come back with, "Well, what's the difference?" or "Tomato/tomatto" --- yet, if there's no difference, why did they change the word in the first place?

One poster here just recently had Galileo almost burning at the stake, when in reality, he was placed under a very liberal house arrest.

Hespera · Jul 3, 2009

Hespera sez. Nah, "mantras' are for the religious. Im just having fun bringing it up to see what you will do next instead of being honest.

lets see what we got this time...

question my motives
you forget
you change the story
talk about propaganda
"typing at random"
claim that i didnt provide references which i did, earlier, a long list

oh what else is good... pick and choose...

"third person monologue ad hominem plea for affirmation."
"childish banter"
"semantic spam attack"
and name calling! back to "minion" again.

But here is the best part...

MK sez...
"Now if any of you want to try a real debate my invitation is waiting at the top of the forum. Otherwise you can continue to wallow in the muck and mire of these empty mud slinging feasts. Take a good look at the post by Hespera and ask yourself, is there anything remotely scientific in it?" QUOTE//////////////

All of this just to avoid admitting that you were wrong. If some are reading this, i hope they will ask themselves: what kind of person never can admit he is wrong, and,
calls names instead?

And more to the point, what credibility does someone have when they make a glaring error, deliberately or otherwise, and will do all the above, and presumably more, to avoid admitting it?

Someone will have to tell me how to have a "real debate" under those circumstances.

May as well try to talk calculus with someone who doesnt understand algebra, but is sure its wrong and satanic.

Gene Number Changes Between Humans and Chimps

Junior Member

Apprentice Biologist

Apprentice Biologist

Theistic Evolutionist / Ex-Atheist

Senior Member

Junior Member

Apprentice Biologist

Senior Member

Apprentice Biologist

Junior Member

Natura non facit saltum

Well-Known Member

Junior Member

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Natura non facit saltum

Junior Member

Junior Member

Natura non facit saltum

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Junior Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency