Transitional human fossils

[Jackson Cooper]

I made a meme! I would like to know how YEC and OEC explain the various human transitional fossils found. Tons can be found with a quick Internet search.
The other points I added for fun. I make lots of memes.

 

[Anguspure]

I made a meme! I would like to know how YEC and OEC explain the various human transitional fossils found. Tons can be found with a quick Internet search.
The other points I added for fun. I make lots of memes.View attachment 230518 View attachment 230519

Transitioning from what?

 

[The Ark Hive Mind]

Transitioning from what?

Maybe these:

 

[Jackson Cooper]

Maybe these:

So you think those skulls were of humans or animals?

 

[The Ark Hive Mind]

So you think those skulls were of humans or animals?

I would like to see the originals personally and without all the added grey putty and interpolated areas, as well as a multi-angle video [or photography where available] on all sides including the profile sides so I can see any slope of the nasal and frontal area of the skulls, and also the underneath where the formen magnun is and size and angle, and a direct measurement in 'mm' on a rule next to slide for actual scale, and the skulls placed in actual size photgrphy/video, along with all other in area insitu bones [jaw bones, flanges and hand and feet bones, hips, joints, sockets, and so on [laymen's terms], elements [food stuffs, teeth, tools, coins, etc], along with information about where they were specifically found [cave, desert, city dump, etc], depth of find [along with survey map of the find with location of all elements listed found], the finding persons [who actually found them insitu, not the lead person who claims them on their dig site, but the actual person who dug them up, along with the offiically written statments about the find, etc; signed and dated, who the grants were actually given to for the dig, etc, where the grants came from, and how much] as a straight on shot of the skull in such a limited [small] size, etc, doesn't really give much to work with, though I could probably guess at most of them.

Otherwise I might as well be looking at [and I might require the same data for these three, nyuk, nyuk]:

 

[Jackson Cooper]

I would like to see the originals personally and without all the added grey putty and interpolated areas, as well as a multi-angle video [or photography where available] on all sides including the profile sides so I can see any slope of the nasal and frontal area of the skulls, and also the underneath where the formen magnun is and size and angle, and a direct measurement in 'mm' on a rule next to slide for actual scale, and the skulls placed in actual size photgrphy/video, along with all other in area insitu bones [jaw bones, flanges and hand and feet bones, hips, joints, sockets, and so on [laymen's terms], elements [food stuffs, teeth, tools, coins, etc], along with information about where they were specifically found [cave, desert, city dump, etc], depth of find [along with survey map of the find with location of all elements listed found], the finding persons [who actually found them insitu, not the lead person who claims them on their dig site, but the actual person who dug them up, along with the offiically written statments about the find, etc; signed and dated, who the grants were actually given to for the dig, etc, where the grants came from, and how much] as a straight on shot of the skull in such a limited [small] size, etc, doesn't really give much to work with, though I could probably guess at most of them.

Otherwise I might as well be looking at [and I might require the same data for these three, nyuk, nyuk]:

Well, there's still the massive genetic similarities between humans and chimps. If God wanted to make it look like evolution didn't happen, why make such similarities?

 

[Hiscosmicgoldfish3]

Well, there's still the massive genetic similarities between humans and chimps. If God wanted to make it look like evolution didn't happen, why make such similarities?

Good point - it looks like evolution of humans, but isn't - God hasn't been much of a help - but the scriptures say that God isn't deceptive, so I suppose it was not a demiurge that created?
The way I see it, is that homo-sapiens originated in east Africa about 60,000 years ago. Then they moved out, into Europe, shot some Neanderthals with guns, interbred with some - which is why we have 2-3 % Neanderthal DNA. Whether they were furry like Chewbacca the Wooky - I don't know.
The homo-erectus were from ages past (about 2m yrs). So they became extinct before the arrival of homo-sapiens and the fabulous furry Neanderthal brothers.
So, thanks a lot God - for making it look a lot like human evolution, and making it much harder to believe in God.
There are no transitional fossils - just evidence for different species, which could interbreed, and other hominids which became extinct.
I don't know what a Meme is, except that it's something that Dawkins made popular. And I don't know if Sponge-Bob is an evolutionist.

 

[The Ark Hive Mind]

Well, there's still the massive genetic similarities between humans and chimps. If God wanted to make it look like evolution didn't happen, why make such similarities?

You are looking at tiny windows of evidence and assuming massively incorrect conclusions. Similarities among 'genomes' between anything living on earth will share similar structures and percentages, why? The foundational building blocks are the same. Think of it like Legos. With Legos, there are a variety of blocks to build with, and yet with those same blocks, even same colored blocks can be placed in a specific arranged and orderly structure (designed that way) to reach a specific end desire, of shape, form, color, and so on.

Lego Car:

Lego Go-Cart:

Lego Trains:

One did not 'evolve' from the other, but both have similar design, function, and thus share similar parts, basic foundational plans (4 wheels, steering wheel, motor, seat and so on). A company, with designers fashioned the blocks, even with the design of snapping together parts (ridges, etc) with a purpose. It was directed energy, funneled through intelligence, with an end goal.

The DNA thing with 'chimps, apes, etc', is way over rated, and even blown out pf proportion (what part of the genome was sequeneced, what was ignored, what was left out, and so on), I am just citing to show that numbers can be reached by several methods (and a goal can be achieved by tweeking the experimnt, controlling the data (I am not negating the similar building blocks where real)):

"Humans and mice share nearly 90 percent of human DNA." - Animals That Share Human DNA Sequences

See also:

- Lineage-Specific Biology Revealed by a Finished Genome Assembly of the Mouse
- 2002 Release: The Mouse Genome And The Measure of Man
- Human biology by proxy
​

"Humans and dogs share 84 percent of their DNA" - Animals That Share Human DNA Sequences

"birds ... they, too, share a lot of DNA -- 65 percent." - Animals That Share Human DNA Sequences

""It turns out that cats actually share 90 percent of our genes."

"That's right, we're related to cows. Research has shown that we share more genomes with these beautiful, big girls than we do with rodents, even though we share a more recent ancestor with mice." - 9 Animals Who Have More In Common With Humans Than You Think &

"For dog, 92% of the cat orthologs are exact syntenic triplets. Inexact triplet gene matches (when at least one of two upstream neighbors and one of two downstream neighbor genes matched) reach a high of 94% in dog–cat and 90% in human–cat comparisons (Table 1)." - Initial sequence and comparative analysis of the cat genome

"A comparative analysis examined the rate of protein evolution and the conservation of gene repertoires among orthologs in the genomes of dog, human, mouse, and rat (representing placental mammals); opossum (marsupial); and platypus (monotreme). Orthology was resolved for >75% of cattle and >80% of human genes (Fig. 1A)." - The Genome Sequence of Taurine Cattle: A Window to Ruminant Biology and Evolution

"The fledgling field of comparative genomics has already yielded some dramatic results. For example, a March 2000 study comparing the fruit fly genome with the human genome discovered that about 60 percent of genes are conserved between fly and human. Or, to put it more simply, the two organisms appear to share a core set of genes. Researchers have found that two-thirds of human cancer genes have counterparts in the fruit fly." - Background on Comparative Genomic Analysis

"In September 2002, the cow (Bos taurus), the dog (Canis familiaris) and the ciliate Oxytricha (Oxytricha trifallax) joined the "high priority" list of organisms that the National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) decided to consider for genome sequencing as capacity becomes available. Other high-priority animals include the chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes), the chicken (Gallus gallus), the honey bee (Apis mellifera) and even a sea urchin (Strongylocentrotus purpuratus). With sequencing projects on the human, mouse and rat genomes progressing rapidly and nearing completion, NHGRI-supported sequencing capability is expected to be available soon for work on other organisms." - Background on Comparative Genomic Analysis
​

Therefore, please read the following:

"In 2002, a study analyzed roughly 1 million base pairs of the human genome and the chimp genome, and it found that those sections of DNA were about 95% similar.2 Given that there are roughly 3.2 billion base pairs in the human genome, it is clear that such a comparison, while better than that done by King and Wilson, is still such a tiny sample that you really can’t reasonably say anything about how the human and chimp genomes compare.

In 2003, another study looked at 1.9 million base pairs on another part of the chimp and human genome, and it found only 87% similarity. 3 Once again, compared to the total size of the genome, this is a pretty small chunk.

Then things became a lot clearer…sort of. In 2005, the complete draft sequence of the chimpanzee genome was published.4 As a result, the entire chimpanzee genome could be compared to the entire human genome. What was learned? Well, that depends on exactly how things are compared. ...

... So…if those 2.4 billion base pairs lined up perfectly, the chimp and human genome would be about 75% similar. However, given that 3% of those base pairs don’t line up perfectly, human and chimp DNA are about 72% similar." - 99%? 95%? 87%? 70%? How Similar is the Human Genome to the Chimpanzee Genome?

I also love this material as well:

Words are the same way, like as DNA (RNA etc). They have basic lettters, which can make a variety of words and sentences (ordered structure, and even syntax). Yet the words "cat" and "hat" and "bat" share a great percent similarity, yet they did not evolve one from the other.​

 

[Jackson Cooper]

You are looking at tiny windows of evidence and assuming massively incorrect conclusions. Similarities among 'genomes' between anything living on earth will share similar structures and percentages, why? The foundational building blocks are the same. Think of it like Legos. With Legos, there are a variety of blocks to build with, and yet with those same blocks, even same colored blocks can be placed in a specific arranged and orderly structure (designed that way) to reach a specific end desire, of shape, form, color, and so on.

Lego Car:

Lego Go-Cart:

Lego Trains:

One did not 'evolve' from the other, but both have similar design, function, and thus share similar parts, basic foundational plans (4 wheels, steering wheel, motor, seat and so on). A company, with designers fashioned the blocks, even with the design of snapping together parts (ridges, etc) with a purpose. It was directed energy, funneled through intelligence, with an end goal.

The DNA thing with 'chimps, apes, etc', is way over rated, and even blown out pf proportion (what part of the genome was sequeneced, what was ignored, what was left out, and so on), I am just citing to show that numbers can be reached by several methods (and a goal can be achieved by tweeking the experimnt, controlling the data (I am not negating the similar building blocks where real)):

"Humans and mice share nearly 90 percent of human DNA." - Animals That Share Human DNA Sequences

See also:

- Lineage-Specific Biology Revealed by a Finished Genome Assembly of the Mouse
- 2002 Release: The Mouse Genome And The Measure of Man
- Human biology by proxy
​

"Humans and dogs share 84 percent of their DNA" - Animals That Share Human DNA Sequences

"birds ... they, too, share a lot of DNA -- 65 percent." - Animals That Share Human DNA Sequences

""It turns out that cats actually share 90 percent of our genes."

"That's right, we're related to cows. Research has shown that we share more genomes with these beautiful, big girls than we do with rodents, even though we share a more recent ancestor with mice." - 9 Animals Who Have More In Common With Humans Than You Think &

"For dog, 92% of the cat orthologs are exact syntenic triplets. Inexact triplet gene matches (when at least one of two upstream neighbors and one of two downstream neighbor genes matched) reach a high of 94% in dog–cat and 90% in human–cat comparisons (Table 1)." - Initial sequence and comparative analysis of the cat genome

"A comparative analysis examined the rate of protein evolution and the conservation of gene repertoires among orthologs in the genomes of dog, human, mouse, and rat (representing placental mammals); opossum (marsupial); and platypus (monotreme). Orthology was resolved for >75% of cattle and >80% of human genes (Fig. 1A)." - The Genome Sequence of Taurine Cattle: A Window to Ruminant Biology and Evolution

"The fledgling field of comparative genomics has already yielded some dramatic results. For example, a March 2000 study comparing the fruit fly genome with the human genome discovered that about 60 percent of genes are conserved between fly and human. Or, to put it more simply, the two organisms appear to share a core set of genes. Researchers have found that two-thirds of human cancer genes have counterparts in the fruit fly." - Background on Comparative Genomic Analysis

"In September 2002, the cow (Bos taurus), the dog (Canis familiaris) and the ciliate Oxytricha (Oxytricha trifallax) joined the "high priority" list of organisms that the National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) decided to consider for genome sequencing as capacity becomes available. Other high-priority animals include the chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes), the chicken (Gallus gallus), the honey bee (Apis mellifera) and even a sea urchin (Strongylocentrotus purpuratus). With sequencing projects on the human, mouse and rat genomes progressing rapidly and nearing completion, NHGRI-supported sequencing capability is expected to be available soon for work on other organisms." - Background on Comparative Genomic Analysis​

Therefore, please read the following:

"In 2002, a study analyzed roughly 1 million base pairs of the human genome and the chimp genome, and it found that those sections of DNA were about 95% similar.2 Given that there are roughly 3.2 billion base pairs in the human genome, it is clear that such a comparison, while better than that done by King and Wilson, is still such a tiny sample that you really can’t reasonably say anything about how the human and chimp genomes compare.

In 2003, another study looked at 1.9 million base pairs on another part of the chimp and human genome, and it found only 87% similarity. 3 Once again, compared to the total size of the genome, this is a pretty small chunk.

Then things became a lot clearer…sort of. In 2005, the complete draft sequence of the chimpanzee genome was published.4 As a result, the entire chimpanzee genome could be compared to the entire human genome. What was learned? Well, that depends on exactly how things are compared. ...

... So…if those 2.4 billion base pairs lined up perfectly, the chimp and human genome would be about 75% similar. However, given that 3% of those base pairs don’t line up perfectly, human and chimp DNA are about 72% similar." - 99%? 95%? 87%? 70%? How Similar is the Human Genome to the Chimpanzee Genome?

I also love this material as well:

Words are the same way, like as DNA (RNA etc). They have basic lettters, which can make a variety of words and sentences (ordered structure, and even syntax). Yet the words "cat" and "hat" and "bat" share a great percent similarity, yet they did not evolve one from the other.​

I'm going to trust professional biologists over Internet warriors like Ian Juby and Kent Hovind.

 

[Jackson Cooper]

.

 

[Jackson Cooper]

.