What if?

[cupid dave]

Man evolved from 22 species? You can't be serious. We aren't even directly descended from every species in the Homo genus.

If you are going to include the discovered hominids as part of our lineage, then you would be as accurate counting the bonabo or chimpanzee as a direct part of our distinct ancestry.

Nah...
Its all detailed specifically here: http://kofh2u.tripod.com/id31.html

The Last Human: A Guide to T
by G. J. Sawyer (Author), Viktor Deak (Author), Esteban Sarmiento (Author), Richard Milner (Author), Donald C. Johanson (Foreword), Maeve Leakey (Afterword), Ian Tattersall (Introduction)

http://www.amazon.com/Last-Human-Tw..._m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=0ABGJDWD85JKZFZWTV3D

Editorial Reviews
From Publishers Weekly
Remarkable in scope and clarity, this stunning collaboration among scientists, scholars and artists reveals the vast panorama of hominid evolution. The project began when the Fossil Hominid Reconstruction and Research Team, led by a anatomical data for each species were combined with anthropological and climatological research to produce this volume, covering 22 species and 7 million years. As chapters move chronologically from our most primitive antecedents, the poorly known "ape-men" of the African Sahel, through more well-known ancestors, such as the ` the data grows in complexity and quantity; happily, fictional accounts of individual hominids draw readers into each new chapter. Illustrated with astonishingly life-like portraits of long-gone species, this volume also includes appendices that describe in detail how
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

From Booklist
As paleoanthropologist Ian Tattersall points out in his introduction to this marvelous new book on our ancestors, we Homo sapiens find ourselves in the unusual situation of being alone on the planet as the sole surviving hominid. For most of the history of the hominid lineage, the world was home to coexisting prehumans and humans. From paleontological and anthropological data previously available only in scientific publications, the authors have created an accessible field guide to our extinct cousins. Beginning each section with a short slice-of-life story abouossil bones. This very current book explains the science as it now stands and is a must-buy for all libraries. Nancy Bent
Copyright © American Library Association. All rights reserved

http://kofh2u.tripod.com/id31.html

 

[Huram Abi]

Nah...
Its all detailed specifically here: The text of Genesis 5 compared to the present paleonotology.

The Last Human: A Guide to T
by G. J. Sawyer (Author), Viktor Deak (Author), Esteban Sarmiento (Author), Richard Milner (Author), Donald C. Johanson (Foreword), Maeve Leakey (Afterword), Ian Tattersall (Introduction)

Amazon.com: The Last Human: A Guide to Twenty-Two Species of Extinct Humans (9780300100471): G. J. Sawyer, Viktor Deak, Esteban Sarmiento, Richard Milner, Ian Tattersall, Maeve Leakey, Donald C. Johanson: Books

Editorial Reviews
From Publishers Weekly
Remarkable in scope and clarity, this stunning collaboration among scientists, scholars and artists reveals the vast panorama of hominid evolution. The project began when the Fossil Hominid Reconstruction and Research Team, led by a anatomical data for each species were combined with anthropological and climatological research to produce this volume, covering 22 species and 7 million years. As chapters move chronologically from our most primitive antecedents, the poorly known "ape-men" of the African Sahel, through more well-known ancestors, such as the ` the data grows in complexity and quantity; happily, fictional accounts of individual hominids draw readers into each new chapter. Illustrated with astonishingly life-like portraits of long-gone species, this volume also includes appendices that describe in detail how
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

From Booklist
As paleoanthropologist Ian Tattersall points out in his introduction to this marvelous new book on our ancestors, we Homo sapiens find ourselves in the unusual situation of being alone on the planet as the sole surviving hominid. For most of the history of the hominid lineage, the world was home to coexisting prehumans and humans. From paleontological and anthropological data previously available only in scientific publications, the authors have created an accessible field guide to our extinct cousins. Beginning each section with a short slice-of-life story abouossil bones. This very current book explains the science as it now stands and is a must-buy for all libraries. Nancy Bent
Copyright © American Library Association. All rights reserved

The text of Genesis 5 compared to the present paleonotology.

Sorry, guy. Your "bait and switch" appeals to authority don't substantiate what you claim. Notice the description of the book says "a field guide to our extinct cousins." Try reading the book rather than just skewing the title.

And even if you've given a detailed explanation for your pseudoscience on an external website created by you, it is still pseudoscience.

 

[cupid dave]

Sorry, guy. Your "bait and switch" appeals to authority don't substantiate what you claim. Notice the description of the book says "a field guide to our extinct cousins." Try reading the book rather than just skewing the title.

And even if you've given a detailed explanation for your pseudoscience on an external website created by you, it is still pseudoscience.

?
Neanderthal is your brother, then??????



Amazon.com: The Last Human: A Guide to Twenty-Two Species of Extinct Humans : G. J. Sawyer, Viktor Deak, Esteban Sarmiento, Richard Milner, Ian Tattersall, Maeve Leakey, Donald C. Johanson: Books

 

[Huram Abi]

?
Neanderthal is your brother, then??????



Amazon.com: The Last Human: A Guide to Twenty-Two Species of Extinct Humans : G. J. Sawyer, Viktor Deak, Esteban Sarmiento, Richard Milner, Ian Tattersall, Maeve Leakey, Donald C. Johanson: Books

Uh, no.


And a publicist's decision to use a misnomer doesn't change the scientific definition of what a human is or put these other hominids in the Homo genus.

 

[cupid dave]

Uh, no.


And a publicist's decision to use a misnomer doesn't change the scientific definition of what a human is or put these other hominids in the Homo genus.

Read the title of the book, written by six or so PALEONTOLOGISTS.

It says 22 extinct links of HUMANS.

 

[Huram Abi]

Read the title of the book, written by six or so PALEONTOLOGISTS.

It says 22 extinct links of HUMANS.

No, it is not written by six or so paleontologists. And, no, it does not say 22 extinct links of humans. It is dishonest for you to indicate these species are "linked" ie. direct lineage.

I have sent an email to Richard Milner to ask for an explanation of the erroneous title and when he responds I will be sure to post his response in full.

 

[Jazer]

Show me a scientific paper that shows Abraham was a real person based on genetics and I'll give you a medal.

I gave you a book on that and here is a chapter out of that book that you can read for free:
Abraham's Chromosomes?

http://genome.cshlp.org/content/early/2008/04/02/gr.7172008.abstract

J1c3
The P58 marker which defines subgroup J1c3 (previously J1e) was first announced in Karafet et al. (2008), but had been announced earlier under the name "Page08" in 2006 in Repping, Van Daalen & Brown (2006).[4]

This cluster in turn contains three well-known related sub-clusters. First, it contains the majority of the Jewish "Cohen modal haplotype", found amongst Jewish populations, but especially in men with surnames related to Cohen. It also contains both the so-called "Galilee modal haplotype" and "Palestian & Israeli Arab modal haplotype" associated with Palestinians and Israeli Arabs by Nebel et al. (2000).[8] Nebel et al. (2002) then pointed out that this so called Galilee modal is also the most frequent type of J haplotype found in northwest Africans, and in Yemen, so it is not isolated to the area of Israel and the Palestine.

Human populations which exhibit greatly reduced overall genetic diversity, presumably resulting from severe bottlenecks or founder events, are particularly interesting, not least because of their potential to serve as valuable resources for health studies. Do you want to get into the heath studies that are a result of this founders effect? For one thing they do have an average IQ that is 10 points higher then normal.

If you do not want to send the medal you can send a certificate. My son has a BUNCH of those things and I need to try to compete with him. All I ever seem to get is those stupid ones from Ebay for making them rich.

The Hebrews over at that University in Jerusalam take that stuff very serious. The DNA shows us exactly what the Bible tells us. Abraham had two sons: One with Hagar the handmaid egyptian and the other son with Sarah his wife. That is why when it comes to Y-DNA the Arabs and the Hebrews have almost identical DNA.

You may not know it from the Scientific articals, but this is hot stuff over in the middle east where there are so many battles over the land and who owns the land.

 

[Nostromo]

I gave you a book on that and here is a chapter out of that book that you can read for free:
Abraham's Chromosomes?

A book isn't a scientific paper.

New binary polymorphisms reshape and increase resolution of the human Y chromosomal haplogroup tree

No mention of Abraham here.

The P58 marker which defines...

This cluster in turn contains three well-known...

No mention of Abraham here either.

The Hebrews over at that University in Jerusalam take that stuff very serious. The DNA shows us exactly what the Bible tells us.

No, you're assuming the DNA is confirming the Bible. You've yet to show me any scientific paper which equates the DNA evidence to a real life Abraham.

Human populations which exhibit greatly reduced overall genetic diversity, presumably resulting from severe bottlenecks or founder events, are particularly interesting, not least because of their potential to serve as valuable resources for health studies. Do you want to get into the heath studies that are a result of this founders effect?

Yes, let's.

Jewish Genetic Diseases

 

[Jazer]

Read the title of the book, written by six or so PALEONTOLOGISTS.

It says 22 extinct links of HUMANS.

Here is the first review on Amazon: 158 of 160 people found the following review helpful: "The authors admit to a blending of science and art, and they admit that the more flimsy the fossil record, the greater their artistic license. It is said that all of the known fossils of proto-humans would fit in the bed of a pickup truck, and it is with this implicit caveat in mind that you must evaluate the accuracy of the reconstructions."

No one seems to claim that this information is accurate.
Just an artistic impression of how things COULD have been.

 

[Jazer]

A book isn't a scientific paper.
No mention of Abraham here.

I gave you LOTS of scientific papers. Abraham is considered to have the Cohan Gene. J1c3 The P58 marker. As you know mutations do not show up every generation and there were very few Generations between Abraham and Aaron the brother of Moses that the Cohan Gene is based on. All this information is in the Bible and backed up by Science. There is no question that the geneologys in the Bible are accurate and true. Science verifys that though DNA and population genetics. Of course if you want to deny population genetics then you will be throwing the whole theory of evolution out the window. You can not have it both ways. I bet that drives evos up their evolutionary tree that I use their very own theory to prove that the Bible is accurate and true.

 

[cupid dave]

The Hebrews over at that University in Jerusalam take that stuff very serious. The DNA shows us exactly what the Bible tells us. Abraham had two sons: One with Hagar the handmaid egyptian and the other son with Sarah his wife. That is why when it comes to Y-DNA the Arabs and the Hebrews have almost identical DNA.

You may not know it from the Scientific articals, but this is hot stuff over in the middle east where there are so many battles over the land and who owns the land.

It is serious stuff because it answers back these Bible Vashers we see everywhere today.

It confirms Moses, the exodis, amd the date of the Pharaoh who opposed God and Moses.

As you say, it supports that the people now called Israeli are, in fact, the Jews of the Bible.

 

[cupid dave]

Here is the first review on Amazon: 158 of 160 people found the following review helpful: "The authors admit to a blending of science and art, and they admit that the more flimsy the fossil record, the greater their artistic license. It is said that all of the known fossils of proto-humans would fit in the bed of a pickup truck, and it is with this implicit caveat in mind that you must evaluate the accuracy of the reconstructions."

No one seems to claim that this information is accurate.
Just an artistic impression of how things COULD have been.

?
point?

The Bible lists the same number of specoes on the line of ascent as Modeb science SUSPECTS or HYPOTHEIZES to be the case.

In both disciples, Theology and Science, people can BELIEVE this is right or not.
BUT science so far agrees with genesis 5:


see this link: http://kofh2u.tripod.com/id31.htm

 

[Nostromo]

I gave you LOTS of scientific papers.

And how many of them mentioned Abraham? None.

Abraham is considered to have the Cohan Gene. J1c3 The P58 marker.

According to who, geneticists? No. Rabbis? Probably.

Of course if you want to deny population genetics then you will be throwing the whole theory of evolution out the window. You can not have it both ways. I bet that drives evos up their evolutionary tree that I use their very own theory to prove that the Bible is accurate and true.

Have you found me a paper that mentions Abraham yet? Didn't think so.

How about you show me something to support the idea that your Abraham Cohen is only 18 generations removed from the first man, Adam, as he is in the Bible.

 

[cupid dave]

How about you show me something to support the idea that your Abraham Cohen is only 18 generations removed from the first man, Adam, as he is in the Bible.

There were not "18 generations" but 22 species.

Though I believe that the jews would be a reliable source about who Abraham was, since he was the grandfather of Jacob who took the family into Egypt (i.e.; genetics proves the jews were actualluy there and t5he exodus story part of their History)

 

[Huram Abi]

?
point?

The Bible lists the same number of specoes on the line of ascent as Modeb science SUSPECTS or HYPOTHEIZES to be the case.

In both disciples, Theology and Science, people can BELIEVE this is right or not.
BUT science so far agrees with genesis 5:


see this link: http://kofh2u.tripod.com/id31.htm

The bible lists species, now? This is more "bacteria are plants" nonsense, isn't it?

 

[Jazer]

According to who, geneticists?

Yes according to geneticists. You need to put a little bit of effort into the study of population genetics so you can at least pretend you know what your talking about. As it is I am embarrassed for you that you know so little about the subject. After all this is not religion, this is evolution. We can understand if you do not study religion, but there is no excuse to try having a conversation about evolution when you put no effort to study it. Saying: "not true, not so, I do not believe a word your saying", does not qualify you for anything. If you were to show up at a formal debate with nothing, you would lose for sure.

How about you show me something to support the idea that your Abraham Cohen is only 18 generations removed from the first man, Adam, as he is in the Bible.

It's all there. Plenty of information on WIKI about the Y-DNA and the Mt-DNA of the Hebrews. For me the Bible is enough, but there is plenty of rock solid Scientific DNA evidence to back up the Bible.

Actually your the one with the absurd notion that the Bible is not a real history book about real people. At the time of Jesus no one questioned that Jesus was a real person and that His disciples were real people. No more then you question that I am a real person. They just claimed that they did not support or believe the teaching of the disciples. Now your trying to say Jesus is not real. The disciples were not real people and that nothing and no one in the Bible exists. That kind of a departure from reality is just to far removed for me. It is as if your not functioning as a part of the real world.

 

[Jazer]

(i.e.; genetics proves the jews were actually there and t5he exodus story part of their History)

There is archeology also. They know the city they lived in. They were making bricks at the time. They know the taskmaster they had. A son of the pharaoh or something like that. I worked for the son of a boss once and it was not a fun experance. So I know why they would not be happy with the situation that they were in. There are mines they worked in that has Hebrew scriptures on the walls and prayers asking for God to get them out of there. Of course half way across the desert they decided it was not so bad in Egypt and they wanted to go back, but then it was to late. I guess the moral of the story is be careful what you ask for.

Egypt is no friend of Isreal, so they are not proud to display the Hebrew artifacts in Egypt, but the artifacts are there and available. There is a Jewish Journalist that has found quite a bit of it and that guy on TV.

 

[Nostromo]

Yes according to geneticists.

Then where are the papers that say Abraham was real? I'm not asking for something that you imagine might support it, I'm asking for actual evidence from actual geneticists that what your saying is true. You don't have it because it doesn't exist.

Actually your the one with the absurd notion that the Bible is not a real history book about real people.

As absurd as it seems to you, that's actually an opinion shared by millions of Christians.

At the time of Jesus no one questioned that Jesus was a real person and that His disciples were real people.

And I'm not questioning it now. Stop trying to derail this conversation with nonsense and show me the evidence.

 

[Loudmouth]

Yes according to geneticists. You need to put a little bit of effort into the study of population genetics so you can at least pretend you know what your talking about. As it is I am embarrassed for you that you know so little about the subject.

"People think that this title has some deep theological or religious consequences. Nothing of that sort. Someone you come across who claims that the bible (or the book of Genesis) has been validated by the discovery of the Mitochondrial Eve, is talking cr-p -you should feel free, and even obligated, to tell them so."
The Mitochondrial Eve - Misconceptions | Javier Carrete

The same applies to Y-haplotypes. These MRCA's are produced by the extinction of lineages and pedigree collapse, not by a founder. I have told you this numerous times, and yet you repeat the same mistake.

It's all there. Plenty of information on WIKI about the Y-DNA and the Mt-DNA of the Hebrews.

Somehow you must have missed this part:

"One of the misconceptions of mitochondrial Eve is that since all women alive today descended in a direct unbroken female line from her that she was the only woman alive at the time.[10][11] Nuclear DNA studies indicate that the size of the ancient human population never dropped below tens of thousands. There may have been many other women alive at Eve's time with descendants alive today, but sometime in the past, those lines of descent included at least one male, who do not pass on their mother's mitochondrial DNA, thereby breaking the line of descent."
Mitochondrial Eve - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mit-Eve's are only created in retrospect. Mit-Eve in no way indicates a founding woman of an entire population, nor does a Y-Adam.

 

[Naraoia]

Actually, I was just wondering if science has proof for anything.

Then you know what to do with your stupid word games.

But if evidence is proof then I guess science does have proof.

Is it possible for the science to be wrong?

In any case, the Bible doesn't actively disagree with your theory.

Wait. "The earth was created before the sun and stars in the span of a day" does not actively disagree with "The earth was formed from a protoplanetary disc around a collapsing protostar that included material from previous generations of stars over millions of years".

Ehhem...

Nor does it tell us your theory is correct.

It's not "my" theory. I'm merely a purveyor of others' theories, and astronomy is not even my field

Why would I not be interested? God was doing a work back then the same as He is doing a work now. If He is interested to leave us evidence then there must be a reason and we should try to figure it all out as best we can. The Bible is very clear that there will be things where there is no memory and no record. So there are things that God has eliminated so we can not look into it and study them. All the more we should look into what He does give us a memory and a record of.

Hey, that's great. (But if you don't like any of the following, don't come with the Bible at me. Seeing as you keep saying that the Bible only applies to the Neolithic onwards.)

Since it's been a few days ago, let's recap. Doveaman's problem was with my claim that life started in the sea.

Well, I should correct that and say the earliest evidence for life is from marine rocks. The oldest reported ?fossils (>3 billion years old) are quite possibly not from living things at all (Wikipedia gives this critical review), but AFAIK all of the candidate life forms and chemical signatures of life from that period come from marine settings.

(Andrew Knoll's book Life on a Young Planet discusses early evidence for life, too. It's a very good read, though maybe getting outdated now.)

Recently I saw a talk from a woman who studies microbial mats, and she basically said that she found exactly the same structures we see in cyanobacterial mats today in shallow marine and intertidal sediments around 3 billion years old. (Here's a Google Scholar search of her work, and here's her book on microbial mats).

Now, you can quibble over whether the tidal zone counts as the sea, but (1) the mat-makers, if these studies are right, included cyanobacteria. Cyanobacteria are, evolutionarily speaking, quite far from where life started, (2) the earliest trace of land life is still several hundred million years younger than them (according to this review I cited in the post you quoted.)

(Note that all of this is bacterial life. Nothing resembling the animals and plants the Bible describes appeared on earth until much, much later.)

In addition to fossil evidence, I don't think there is a mainstream theory of the origin of life that does not involve some sort of submarine environment. (Unless you count "the RNA world on ice" as a mainstream theory) Abiogenesis researchers seem pretty convinced that life had to originate in a watery solution, which kind of makes sense if you think about it. Life is still basically (salt) water wrapped in bubbles of fat.

Yes, I did not mention the Stars reigning over Sidereal Time, which is illustrated in the thumb below.

What does sidereal time have to do with anything? Stars are older than the solar system, older than the earth. That's a fact no matter how you measure time.