They haven't, chief. The only case I am aware of is a single scientist who confused a peccary tooth with a hominid, and the entire scientific community quickly rejected his claims.
It didn't happen the way you claim.
Upvote
0
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.
I know that science has tried numerous of times to pass a ape tooth, as some evolutionary species of humans.
would you say this unfortunate truth has never happened?
No, is rather you find a more legit website seriously that also indicates a alien gene.
So you would say all websites that have indicated an alien gene in humans to be of non-truth?
Like I would say all Mormon websites are of little interest to the truth of Christianity.
Unless you know of a website that does indicate the alien gene in human DNA, to be of a better scientific nature.
That by itself doesn't answer the question; some ethnic groups are more closely related to Neandertals than others, after all. But no, there's no reason to think any ethnic group is closer to chimpanzee than any other.
Correction there are more Neanderthal genes in Eurasian populations but not in African populations.Just to clarify (hopefully I get this right . . .)
The reason that some groups are more closely related to neanderthals is interbreeding between limited human and neanderthal populations after the two split from their common ancestor. This is why you tend to find neanderthal genes in European populations but not Asian populations.
Yup.For chimps, there was no interbreeding between the populations. All humans are genetically equidistant from all chimps because we all share the same common ancestor. Any bias towards chimps in any population will be due to selection against other more derived alleles. Given the size the genome I highly doubt that any ethnic group will be significantly "more like chimps" than any other.
But you just stated at one point they were sexually compatible, therefore there should be a species if humanzee's.
Firstly we can investigate those skulls and show the stress marks if they were deformed during development.The problem is a skull is a skull is a skull.
View attachment 130895
View attachment 130896
I don't see these skulls in your picture, why?
It's called a deformity, or a intentional tribal look.
View attachment 130897
View attachment 130898
Maybe some humans come from Giraffe's.
And since we know the famous chimpanzee from the 70's; that was thought to be a humanzee, was in fact 100% chimp.
USincognito said:If you're talking about Oliver, he was marketed as such, but that hypothesis was never taken seriously by scientists.
I know that science has tried numerous of times to pass a ape tooth, as some evolutionary species of humans. would you say this unfortunate truth has never happened?
Actually, it was scientists who exposed it as a fraud.
There are many species of turtle, tortoise and alligator. Some of them are extinct, some not. The evidence is that current species came from past ones via evolution.Sure, and where do we find this? Let alone the turtle, tortoise, and alligator,etc. why are there no new species that have came from them?
Why did the T-Rex and Brontosaurus not develop into more advanced creatures?
The key is that the interbreeding with Neandertals was recent, and uit took place in a branch population that has mixed relatively little with African populations since then because of our geographic dispersal. It is possible that the human and chimpanzee lineages hybridized after their initial split (precisely this scenario was proposed some years back by Nick Patterson and David Reich to explain some peculiar genetic features), but if this happened it was millions of years ago; any genetic contribution to modern humans from it have probably spread throughout the entire species by this time.Just to clarify (hopefully I get this right . . .)
The reason that some groups are more closely related to neanderthals is interbreeding between limited human and neanderthal populations after the two split from their common ancestor. This is why you tend to find neanderthal genes in European populations but not Asian populations.
For chimps, there was no interbreeding between the populations. All humans are genetically equidistant from all chimps because we all share the same common ancestor. Any bias towards chimps in any population will be due to selection against other more derived alleles. Given the size the genome I highly doubt that any ethnic group will be significantly "more like chimps" than any other.
So, it's possible to market a subject such as evolution to the world, and best of all to schools and little children.
So, it's possible to market a subject such as evolution to the world, and best of all to schools and little children.
StormanNorman said:Not without lots of scientific evidence across a wide range of scientific disciplines supporting it.
Think about it. Can your evidence fit in a box? Can you explain it all in a paragraph? Can anyone see all the evidence you have with their own eyes? No, No, and, No.
If you have the answers, then explain all our evidence?You can't see God yet you believe already in what you can not see with your own eye. You put your trust in Science, I put my trust in God. I read the bible and I am filled, you read your journals and are left with more questions.
I know that science has tried numerous of times to pass a ape tooth, as some evolutionary species of humans. would you say this unfortunate truth has never happened?
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?