Human Evolution only

[Shemjaza]

So it gave credence to the myth of evolution. right?

I'm a little concerned about my interpretation of your tone here. I appologise if I'm wrong, but could you be a little clearer if you are accusing evolutionists of cherry picking data to match their preconceived ideas?

Of course it helped be more confident about what scientists had been sure about, right?

Absolutely. However if the evidence came back and it showed Neanderthals having having huge swathes of DNA found in Bears, but not other primates or of humans with fundamentally different DNA to chimps then our knowledge of biological history would be back to the drawing board.

If humans had different genetic structure to all other life, similar enough to be able to live and eat Earth life, but clearly from a different history then I'd see that as pretty good evidence for ID.

Now, whether either of these two guys is right would require more research:

 

[sfs]

I checked the link and there were hundreds of words, now that you've shared a few more by way of a description of what is there -- why not enlighten us further by bringing it onto this thread. A summary, with that link again might help bring a little sunshine. Thanks in advance.

I did provide a summary and bring it into this thread: that's precisely what I linked to, the best summary I could come up with. It probably took me several hours to write. If you have questions, I'll answer them. But if not . . . Ὃ γέγραφα γέγραφα, as Pilate is reputed to have said.

 

[SkyWriting]

I will grant you physicists are divided and uncertain, but biologist and geneticists do not suffer the same problem when it comes to Human Evolution -- for there are lines of evidence relating to Evolution which establish it as a scientific fact, unless you actually have some real science to convince them otherwise?

Neither of those are learned professions. And the
majority of their useful bodies of knowledge are
testable and open to hostile examination by
interested researchers.

Just not the small parts you are likely referring to.

 

[MissRowy]

Not a learned profession? You need a university degree to be a geneticist. I happen to know one who got her PhD because she discovered a new gene. Also you need university degrees to be a physicist and a biologist.

 

[juvenissun]

Did you read his link? The patterns with which the two genomes have diverged since evolving from a common ancestor match almost perfectly the mathematical models of probability we can use to measure that divergence.

I am not looking at the divergence. I am looking at the one which continued to human. Do that data suggest a continuous change of genome from that special ape species to human?

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

I did provide a summary and bring it into this thread: that's precisely what I linked to, the best summary I could come up with. It probably took me several hours to write. If you have questions, I'll answer them. But if not . . . Ὃ γέγραφα γέγραφα, as Pilate is reputed to have said.

I don't have time to wade through thousands of words. If you would like a response, then please present a more substantial summary. Thanks in advance.

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

Not a learned profession? You need a university degree to be a geneticist. I happen to know one who got her PhD because she discovered a new gene. Also you need university degrees to be a physicist and a biologist.

Not to worry, this person has very little interest or respect for the sciences.

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

I'm a little concerned about my interpretation of your tone here. I appologise if I'm wrong, but could you be a little clearer if you are accusing evolutionists of cherry picking data to match their preconceived ideas?

Please explain yourself clearly, as I cannot follow your point or conclusions about what it is I apparently said or not?

Absolutely. However if the evidence came back and it showed Neanderthals having having huge swathes of DNA found in Bears, but not other primates or of humans with fundamentally different DNA to chimps then our knowledge of biological history would be back to the drawing board.

That would be puzzling, but unlikely -- right?

If humans had different genetic structure to all other life, similar enough to be able to live and eat Earth life, but clearly from a different history then I'd see that as pretty good evidence for ID.

It is not so. ID is SC in another package

Now, whether either of these two guys is right would require more research:

You have to be kidding me!

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

I am not looking at the divergence. I am looking at the one which continued to human. Do that data suggest a continuous change of genome from that special ape species to human?

I think your question should have gone to SFS (refer post 7) Thank you very much.

 

[juvenissun]

I think your question should have gone to SFS (refer post 7) Thank you very much.

I know. That guy intercepted the question and I thought sfs agreed with his response.

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

I know. That guy intercepted the question and I thought sfs agreed with his response.

Reading back through the thread, I see that SFS did not respond to either of you:

Are you saying that there is a continuous change between chimp genome and human genome?

If so, you think it is an excellent evidence of genetic relationship?

Did you read his link? The patterns with which the two genomes have diverged since evolving from a common ancestor match almost perfectly the mathematical models of probability we can use to measure that divergence.

I am not looking at the divergence. I am looking at the one which continued to human. Do that data suggest a continuous change of genome from that special ape species to human?

 

[juvenissun]

Reading back through the thread, I see that SFS did not respond to either of you:

I know. May be he does not take my question as a worthy one. My experience was that he is not a patient teacher.

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

I know. May be he does not take my question as a worthy one. My experience was that he is not a patient teacher.

Perhaps he did it just to draw discussion to whatever it was he was talking about and had no intention of engaging it here. No harm.

 

[Euler]

Perhaps he did it just to draw discussion to whatever it was he was talking about and had no intention of engaging it here. No harm.

Or perhaps he's off being busy in doing the real work and research involved with evolutionary biology!

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

Or perhaps he's off being busy in doing the real work and research involved with evolutionary biology!

Yeah that too.

 

[jacknife]

Or perhaps he's off being busy in doing the real work and research involved with evolutionary biology!

if you look at her profile you can see that this is the case.

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

if you look at her profile you can see that this is the case.

So many real hands on biologists here. Cool. When I get on a computer I will give her stuff a read, but this android with its tiny screen and one finger typing makes it difficult to wade through stuff. Perhaps she will grace us with a response in due time. I ain't in no hurry.

 

[MissRowy]

I have to say even on a Note4 its hard to read stuff especially on here

 

[Euler]

She??

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

I have to say even on a Note4 its hard to read stuff especially on here

I bet. My screen ain't too bad, but one finger typing and the awkwardness of trying to navigate multiple pages -- just ain't happening. I can't wait to get a computer, again.