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.
Somehow most people can't see that, they just take what ever they learned from books or told by so called authorities without doubt.
Let's take a look at one of the citations I left you:
One of the anomalies that affects fertility in cattle is called a Robertsonian translocation. This type of translocation was named after a person called Robertson from Scotland. Because cattle autosomes always have their centromere at the end, two chromosomes can fuse at the centromere and result in 1 larger bi-armed chromosome with a Robertsonian translocation. This also changes the chromosome number in cattle with this to 59 instead of 60. This fusion or Robertsonian translocation does not alter any genes, just alters the position of such genes. Therefore carriers of such translocations look perfectly normal.
The most common type of Robertsonian translocation in cattle is the t(1;29) which is a fusion of a chromosome 1 (the largest of the autosomes) with a chromosome 29 (the smallest of the chromosomes). This translocation has been shown to occur in most beef breeds which came from the European continent. It therefore is either very old or arose many times or most likely, both.
The second most common Robertsonian translocation in cattle is the t(14;20) which has primarily been seen only in Simmental cattle. It is very rare, occuring in less than 1% of Simmentals.
It's just a fact. There are more examples in the literature, but these are sufficient to debunk the ICR claims.
Read the links. I cut and pasted one here for you.
Is there are proof of either?
Proof of either what?
Evolution is both a fact and a theory. It is a fact that existing life forms have evolved from ancestral life forms and share common ancestry. There is also a large body of theory that explains how and why evolution has occurred.
And, its seems..sad to say. Too often, science lies outside the scope of God.Sure. That question lies wholly outside the scope of science.
And, its seems..sad to say. Too often, science lies outside the scope of God.
Science is after all the study of God's creation. That creation is too awesome for certain scientists to admit how insignificant their intellects are in comparison to whomever designed and created what they study.
So? They arrogantly push the artist out of the gallery in their desire to receive the praise for the work on display they claim is now in their possession, in seeking to satisfy their approbation lust by peer review presentations with their name tacked on it.
When the serpent lost its legs in the Garden it was NOT evolution.
When the Lord scattered mankind away from the Tower of Babel by separating them with speaking new languages? God evidently did the same thing with men that he did when the serpent lost his legs... For the Lord also transformed men as they settled into different parts of the world to take on physical attributes that would enable them to acclimated to wherever they found themselves settling.
The serpent being transformed into crawling on his scuts (minus having once had legs) happened very quickly.
(Goal posts shifted again)
So now the new line of defense is "O.K, chromosome fusions are a fact, but I want to see a telomere to telomere fusion."
O.K., let's see...
Nucleic Acids Res. 2013 Mar; 41(5): 3056–3067.
Spontaneous telomere to telomere fusions occur in unperturbed fission yeast cells
Looking forward to the next movement. Meantime, the evidence for this fusion in humans is overwhelming:
The first big discovery came in 1982, when scientists looked at the patterns of bands on human and ape chromosomes. Chromosomes have a distinctive structure in their middle, called acentromere, and their tips are calledtelomeres. The scientists reported that the banding pattern surrounding the centromere on human chromosome 2 bore a striking resemblance to the telomeres at the ends of two separate
shorter chromosomes in chimpanzees and gorillas. They proposed that in the hominid lineage, the ancestral forms of those two chromosomes had fused together to produce one chromosome. The chromosomes weren’t lost, just combined.
Other researchers followed up on this hypothesis with experiments of their own. In 1991, a team of scientists managedto sequence the genetic material in a small portion of the centromere region of chromosome 2. They found a distinctivestretches of DNA that is common in telomeres, supporting the fusion hypothesis. Since then, scientists have been able to study the chromosome in far more detail, and everything they’ve found supports the idea that the chromosomes fused.
In this 2002 paper, for example, scientists at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center reported discovering duplicates of DNA from around the fusion site in other chromosomes. Millions of years before
our chromosome 2 was born, portions of the ancestral chromosomes were accidentally duplicated and then relocated to other places in the genome of our ancestors. And this past April[2005], scientists published the entire sequence of chromosome 2 andwere able to pinpoint the vestiges of the centromeres of the ancestral chromosomes–which are similar, as predicted, to the centromeres of the corresponding chromosomes in chimpanzees.
http://www.indiana.edu/~ensiweb/lessons/ChromShuffle.pdf
Turns out, the earliest known people in England had dark skins. Over time, they evolved fair skins. Your theory doesn't seem to work.
I am going to answer this for @genez , If what you said is true, it just shows how we were all one people from tower of Babel,
where it is hot and we all got dark skins. And as God designed us to be "configurable" like any other software,
after people migrated to cooler places they either adjusted naturally
Well, you failed to understand the original article
and that is why you think the goal post is shifting.
If you read the original article, you will see clearly that it refers to telomer to telomere fusion, and the icr article is stating why such such fusions are unlikely in nature.
Fits perfectly.
Long before Babylon, humans had separated. Neanderrtals, for example, had light skins, and probably red hair, from the genetic information we have found.
That's what evolution is, after all.
Nice try. But that early Englishman also had blue eyes. Sorry. As people migrated north, natural selection would favor lighter skins (because of vitamin D), but it's not a sure thing. Inuits live farther north than any other human population, but have dark skins, because their diet was traditionally rich in vitamin D. Natural selection didn't favor light skins for them.
That's why He created evolution.
You first argued that we don't know of any chromosome fusions. As you just learned, chromosome fusions are well-known. After you then argued that only centromere fusions were known, I showed you examples of telomere fusions. When I showed you that, you shifted the story to "you don't understand."
Go figure.
Chromosome fusions without health affects are not common, but as you learned, such telomere fusions are known to happen. Prezwalski's horse is such an example. The most common human chromosome fusion is trisomy 21, in which a telomere fusion occurs between chromosomes 14 and 21.
In over 200,000 generations, a fusion without health consequences seems to have happened once in humans. Rather rare, but they do happen.
Yep.
I have talked this with either you or Kom before, this 'fusion' is not as simple as you thought and it might hurt your case: http://www.icr.org/article/new-research-debunks-human-chromosome/ "In 2002, 614,000 bases of DNA surrounding the fusion site were fully sequenced, revealing that the alleged fusion sequence was in the middle of a gene originally classified as a pseudogene because there was not yet any known function for it.5,6 The research also showed that the genes surrounding the fusion site in the 614,000-base window did not exist on chimp chromosomes 2A or 2B—the supposed ape origins location. In genetics terminology, we call this discordant gene location a lack of synteny."
Do you have any repeatable, verifiable test that show in nature the same fusion can happen? In fact detailed study has shown this is not a fusion that we have seen, and it is in question if this can indeed happen in nature.
In my first paragraph I am quoting the article, which are talking about the human chromosome 2 fussion that you addressed earlier. And in my paragrah I said "same fusion can happen?", which clearly is talking about chromosome 2 fussion. Then you tried to move it to just chromsome fussion. I hope it is clear now.
I am going to answer this for @genez , If what you said is true, it just shows how we were all one people from tower of Babel, where it is hot and we all got dark skins. And as God designed us to be "configurable" like any other software, after people migrated to cooler places they either adjusted naturally or God helped them to adjust. Fits perfectly.
Of course, they are passed on. How would reproduction undo a chromosome fusion?
Evolution very clearly talks about Eden and Adam. Science (time magazine) uses these Bible words (Adam - Eden) for a VERY good reason. Eden for Science could be any of the many biodiverse ecosystems we read about in our Biology books. For science Eden was the ecosystem that Science Adam and Eve came from back in Africa before they came out of Africa around 43,000 years ago. The Eden we read about in our Bible has to do with the neolithic revolution where we find many many many beginnings 6,000 years ago. The beginning of domesticated plants and animals, the beginning of civilization and cities. The beginning of recorded history. Science Adam and Eve goes back a lot further. Still the basic principle is the same in the evolutionary theory of common ancestor.Evolution is probably true. Doesn't mean there wasn't an Eden or Adam
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?