|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,908 Year: 4,165/9,624 Month: 1,036/974 Week: 363/286 Day: 6/13 Hour: 1/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: ERV's: Evidence of Common Ancestory | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
iceage  Suspended Member (Idle past 5944 days) Posts: 1024 From: Pacific Northwest Joined: |
refpunk writes: So how does that prove that animals bred humans descendants? It is evidence of common descent. There are several other independent lines of evidence pointing to common descent such as comparative anatomy, biochemistry, geographical distribution, etc.
refpunk writes: All your post shows is what could have happened before there were any witnesses. We know all sorts of things are real without having any witnesses! For instance, where I live there were once great glaciers. I know that not because there are any witnesses but because the are significant geological features that the theory of an ice age best explains all the evidence.
Refpunk writes: That's called science fiction, not science. Not at all.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
molbiogirl Member (Idle past 2671 days) Posts: 1909 From: MO Joined: |
I'd like to second WK and iceage.
And the topic of this thread is very specific. "ERVs as Evidence of Common Ancestry". Not "Evidence of Common Ancestry". There are any number of threads that deal with the latter and only one thread that deals with the former. I strongly suggest you stay on topic.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Refpunk Member (Idle past 6082 days) Posts: 60 Joined: |
LOL. Again, claiming there were glaciers is as much science fiction as claiming that the world was once covered with lava. It's all speculation that comes from looking at a piece of ground, then claiming that the whole ground was once that way.
In fact, that's how scientists make up reality. That's how they speculate how the world was formed and anything else that happened before there were any witnesses. I saw a show on the Discovery Science Channel where one guy was playing with a baloon filled with salt and watched how that salt settled, then claimed, "that's how the world was formed!" And that's how scientists (it's importnant that they call themselves scientists so people will listen to them)have formulated: 1) That apes turned into humans2) How the world was formed 3) That the world was covered in ice 4) That if there's life on Mars, that means there were Martians (as some "scientists" now claim. So again,since that's how science fiction writers come up with their plots, then that's called science fiction, not science. Edited by Refpunk, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
bluegenes Member (Idle past 2507 days) Posts: 3119 From: U.K. Joined: |
The O.P. writes: In fact, there are seven ERVs between humans and chimps... If you understand the O.P. and what ERVs are, Refpunk, you will know that there are two possible explanations for these seven ERVs. (a) Common ancestry of humans and chimps. (b) Magic is at work. Common ancestry happens. Siblings have parents in common, and first cousins have one set of grandparents in common. Intelligent scientists think that the first explanation is the most likely. You, Refpunk, presumably prefer the second. How often have you observed magical things happening? Do you still believe that Santa Claus brings presents at Christmas time, or have you grown up?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
EighteenDelta Inactive Member |
I saw a show on the Discovery Science Channel where one guy was playing with a baloon filled with salt and watched how that salt settled, then claimed, "that's how the world was formed!"
Reminds me of a program I watched one time with a bunch of 'biblical archeologists' explaining how Sodom and Gamora were destroyed by building a model city and putting it in a centrifuge. Utterly rediculous. You failed to understand what that scientist with the balloon was connecting in that experiment. I believe I saw the same program you are misrepresenting in this, the latest of, strawmen. Just like your over simplification of evolution as
1) That apes turned into humans
and by the way, 'martian' by definitian means from mars. It does not imply 'martians' are little inteligent life forms. An example would be 'martian soil'
4) That if there's life on Mars, that means there were Martians (as some "scientists" now claim. So again,since that's how science fiction writers come up with their plots, then that's called science fiction, not science.
Yet a book with untenable sources, written in ancient times is something other than 'science fiction' -x Idiots speak louder than words (yes its supposed to be ironical... twice)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 314 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
LOL. Again, claiming there were glaciers is as much science fiction as claiming that the world was once covered with lava. It's all speculation that comes from looking at a piece of ground, then claiming that the whole ground was once that way. In fact, that's how scientists make up reality. That's how they speculate how the world was formed and anything else that happened before there were any witnesses. I saw a show on the Discovery Science Channel where one guy was playing with a baloon filled with salt and watched how that salt settled, then claimed, "that's how the world was formed!" And that's how scientists (it's importnant that they call themselves scientists so people will listen to them)have formulated: 1) That apes turned into humans2) How the world was formed 3) That the world was covered in ice 4) That if there's life on Mars, that means there were Martians (as some "scientists" now claim. So again,since that's how science fiction writers come up with their plots, then that's called science fiction, not science. Did it not occur to you that before you went lecturing people on the subject of "science" in a public place, you should have found out something about it? Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1496 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
LOL. Again, claiming there were glaciers is as much science fiction as claiming that the world was once covered with lava. Where did all the rocks come from, then, if not from lava? Where did all the valleys come from, then, if not from glaciers? Why is there all this evidence of glaciers all over the place if there were no glaciers? Do you ever watch shows like CSI? Do you complain about Gil Grissom "making up reality" when he finds a hair at a crime scene and DNA matches it to a suspect? Do you complain about him "using his imagination" when he finds a bloody knife in someone's car and imagines the scenario of how it got there? CSI is fiction, but it's based (to some degree) on the real crime-lab work that puts criminals in jail all the time. We use science all the time to solve crimes that no one witnessed. Is that "making up reality?" Is that "all just speculation?" Or, rather, isn't that what science can do? Come to conclusions - sometimes very definitive ones - about events that happened when no one was looking? Instead of lampooning the idea of something that, to the whole world, seems completely reasonable - the idea that science can investigate events in the past that nobody witnessed - maybe you should learn about the science. You might find out what your major malfunction is that leads you to lampoon as ridiculous something that everybody knows actually works.
I saw a show on the Discovery Science Channel where one guy was playing with a baloon filled with salt and watched how that salt settled, then claimed, "that's how the world was formed!" Right. It's actually a great example of size-based sorting. The problem is - you weren't paying enough attention to understand what was being communicated to you. You simply thought it was ridiculous that someone would use salt in a balloon to talk about the formation of the Earth. If you're not going to even try to understand, then yes, obviously things are going to seem ridiculous to you. That is because you are ignorant.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Refpunk Member (Idle past 6082 days) Posts: 60 Joined: |
That's no more evidence of common descent than looking at a woman who looks like my aunt then claiming that she's a close relative of my aunt. That's making imaginary connections where none exist.
Evidence is OBERSVABLE PHENOMENA, not imaginary connections. And since an ape has never been witnessed giving birth to a human or anything resembling a human since man has walked the earth, then evolution is not observable phenomena, only imaginary connections.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DrJones* Member Posts: 2290 From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 6.9 |
And since an ape has never been witnessed giving birth to a human
False, an ape gave birth to you and every other human on the planet. Live every week like it's Shark Week! Just a monkey in a long line of kings. If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! *not an actual doctor
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 314 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
That's no more evidence of common descent than looking at a woman who looks like my aunt then claiming that she's a close relative of my aunt. That's making imaginary connections where none exist. Evidence is OBERSVABLE PHENOMENA, not imaginary connections. And since an ape has never been witnessed giving birth to a human or anything resembling a human since man has walked the earth, then evolution is not observable phenomena, only imaginary connections. You do talk a lot of rubbish, don't you? As I've ponted out, this is because you've never bothered to find out what you're talking about. This will inevitably result in you reciting ridiculous falsehoods. Ah yes ... creationism.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1496 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
That's no more evidence of common descent than looking at a woman who looks like my aunt then claiming that she's a close relative of my aunt. That's making imaginary connections where none exist. You know that we can genetically test for paternity, right? How do you explain the fact that the same genetic tests that establish paternity beyond doubt in a court of law also establish degree of relationship between all human beings, and between all organisms?
Evidence is OBERSVABLE PHENOMENA, not imaginary connections. And you can observe the results of the genetic tests that prove common descent. So what's the problem?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Refpunk Member (Idle past 6082 days) Posts: 60 Joined: |
Sorry, but since the OP's scenario doesn't happen in real life then it's called science fiction, not science. Forensics deals in observable phenomena, not imaginary scenarios. And since it's never been observed that an animal's DNA has ever been inserted into a human and produced a half-man, half beast, then evolution is a fairy tale which is why it's still only called a theory.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
molbiogirl Member (Idle past 2671 days) Posts: 1909 From: MO Joined: |
And since it's never been observed that an animal's DNA has ever been inserted into a human ... Wrong.
The first publicized case of animal-human hybrids took place in 1996 when Jose Cibelli, a scientist at the University of Massachusetts, took DNA from his white blood cells by swabbing the inside of his cheek. He then inserted the DNA sample into a hollowed-out cow egg. If such an embryo (were allowed) develop, he said, the result would resemble a human being but carry bovine mitochondria, the energy-producing component of every cell. http://www.mindfully.org/GE/GE3/Human-DNA-Cow-Egg.htm Note: This is a 2001 article. Definitely not half and half, but not half bad.
Last October (2001), Greenpeace Germany dug up a patent claim for a similar human-animal hybrid, only this time it involved a pig. U.S.-based Biotransplant and Australia-based Stem Cell Sciences grew a pig-human embryo to 32 cells before ending its life. "If the embryo had lived, it would be 95% human." http://www.mindfully.org/GE/GE3/Human-DNA-Cow-Egg.htm Still not half and half, but not bad.
... a flock of about 50 smelly sheep, many of them possessing partially human livers, hearts, brains and other organs...(The researcher couldn't) wait to examine the effects of the human cells he had injected into the fetus’ brain about two months ago. In the past two years, scientists have created pigs with human blood, fused rabbit eggs with human DNA and injected human stem cells to make paralyzed mice walk. MSN | Outlook, Office, Skype, Bing, Breaking News, and Latest Videos Note: This is a 2005 article. Still not half and half, but getting closer.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 314 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
Sorry, but since the OP's scenario doesn't happen in real life ... Wrong.
Forensics deals in observable phenomena, not imaginary scenarios. Forensic science deduces the unobserved from the observed.
And since it's never been observed that an animal's DNA has ever been inserted into a human and produced a half-man, half beast, then evolution is a fairy tale .... The theory of evolution does not state that "an animal's DNA has ever been inserted into a human and produced a half-man, half beast".
which is why it's still only called a theory. No. Why don't you find out what the word "theory" means, instead of using words you don't know to write about subjects of which you're ignorant?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
iceage  Suspended Member (Idle past 5944 days) Posts: 1024 From: Pacific Northwest Joined: |
Refpunk writes: Forensics deals in observable phenomena Human ERV are observable as fingerprints on a weapon. At this reference Plagiarized Errors and Molecular Genetics An interesting parallel is provided linking the situation of Human ERV to lawsuits involving plagiarized works and the critical importance of copied errors to the bearing of the case.
Referenced Link writes:
One way to distinguish between copying and independent creation is suggested by analogy to the following two cases from the legal literature. In 1941 the author of a chemistry textbook brought suit charging that portions of his textbook had been plagiarized by the author of a competing textbook ... In 1946 the publisher of a trade directory for the construction industry made similar charges against a competing directory publisher... In both cases, mere similarity between the contents of the alleged copies and the originals was not considered compelling evidence of copying. After all, both chemistry textbooks were describing the same body of chemical knowledge (the books were designed to "function similarly") and both directories listed members of the same industry, so substantial resemblance would be expected even if no copying had occurred. However, in both cases errors present in the "originals" appeared in the alleged copies. The courts judged that it was inconceivable that the same errors could have been made independently by each plaintiff and defendant, and ruled in both cases that copying had occurred. The principle that duplicated errors imply copying is now well established in copyright law. (In recognition of this fact, directory publishers routinely include false entries in their directories to trap potential plagiarizers.) Can "errors" in modern species be used as evidence of "copying" from ancient ancestors? In fact, the answer to this question appears to be "yes," since recent molecular genetics investigations have uncovered some examples of the same "errors" present in the genetic material of humans and apes. To understand these findings it is necessary to know a little about DNA, the chemical molecule in which genetic information is stored. But then you write
Refpunk writes: And since it's never been observed that an animal's DNA has ever been inserted into a human and produced a half-man, half beast, then evolution is a fairy tale which is why it's still only called a theory. Ah! so you do not even understand what Endogenous Retrovirus remnants are! You don't even know what you are arguing against! This has *absolutely nothing* to do with half-man/half-beast or anything close. You are tilting at windmills. I recommend that if you are confident of your position you should educate yourself and present your findings and views on this issue and not make wild ignorant claims that only serve to classify you objections as trollish, uninformed and pointless.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024