Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 108 (8806 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 12-15-2017 2:33 PM
331 online now:
Aussie, Coragyps, DrJones*, jar, JonF, Larni, Meddle, NoNukes, PaulK, Percy (Admin), xongsmith (11 members, 320 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: jaufre
Post Volume:
Total: 824,254 Year: 28,860/21,208 Month: 926/1,847 Week: 301/475 Day: 66/82 Hour: 1/5

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
1415
16
1718
...
21Next
Author Topic:   The SEVEN "DAYS" WERE GEOLOGICAL ERAS
Percy
Member
Posts: 16324
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 226 of 310 (683171)
12-08-2012 9:53 AM
Reply to: Message 180 by kofh2u
12-06-2012 9:51 AM


Re: My Thread on the Science of Genesis
Hi Kofh2u,

I'm not moderating this thread - I'm just a participant.

I think you need to connect your ideas to evidence. For example, what evidence leads you to believe that Adam was a Sahefanthropus tchadensis? What evidence leads you to believe that a member of one species can give birth to a member of a different species?

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 180 by kofh2u, posted 12-06-2012 9:51 AM kofh2u has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 227 by kofh2u, posted 12-08-2012 11:42 AM Percy has responded
 Message 228 by kofh2u, posted 12-08-2012 11:46 AM Percy has responded
 Message 229 by kofh2u, posted 12-08-2012 11:47 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

    
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 227 of 310 (683180)
12-08-2012 11:42 AM
Reply to: Message 226 by Percy
12-08-2012 9:53 AM


Re: My Thread on the Science of Genesis

1) I'm not moderating this thread - I'm just a participant.

1) I'm not moderating this thread - I'm just a participant.

ANS: You are openly bias against my point of view and seem eager to silence it simply because of that.
It seems fair that you avoid the urge to press your own views such as to make sure my own are not available here.
I thank you for the fair play.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 226 by Percy, posted 12-08-2012 9:53 AM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 231 by NoNukes, posted 12-08-2012 12:16 PM kofh2u has responded
 Message 232 by Percy, posted 12-08-2012 2:13 PM kofh2u has responded

    
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 228 of 310 (683181)
12-08-2012 11:46 AM
Reply to: Message 226 by Percy
12-08-2012 9:53 AM


Re: My Thread on the Science of Genesis

2) I think you need to connect your ideas to evidence. For example, what evidence leads you to believe that Adam was a Sahefanthropus tchadensis?

ANS:

A) The theological evidence of 22 links to the present human population are enumerated in Genesis.
The Scientific evidence for 22 links to the present human population are enumerated in The Last Human: the 22 now extinct humans.

B) Paleontologists hypothesize that Sahefanthropus tchadensis is a good candidate for the first branch from chimps to the new species, Humanoids.

Re:
Search for the First Human (Sahelanthropus Tchadensis)

Sahelanthropus Tchadensis is one of the oldest known species on the human family tree. This species lived sometime between 7 and 6 million years ago.

topdocumentaryfilms.com/search-first-human-sahelanthropus-tchade...

And, conversely, Gen 5:2 says that Adam is the first of the human species:

Gen 5:2 Male and female created he THEM; and blessed THEM, and called THEIR name Adam, (a species), in the day when THEY were created.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 226 by Percy, posted 12-08-2012 9:53 AM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 233 by Eli, posted 12-08-2012 2:16 PM kofh2u has not yet responded
 Message 235 by Percy, posted 12-08-2012 3:04 PM kofh2u has not yet responded

    
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 229 of 310 (683182)
12-08-2012 11:47 AM
Reply to: Message 226 by Percy
12-08-2012 9:53 AM


Re: My Thread on the Science of Genesis

3) What evidence leads you to believe that a member of one species can give birth to a member of a different species?

ANS:

"Chromosome 2 presents very strong evidence in favour of the common descent of humans and other apes."

According to researcher J. W. IJdo, "We conclude that the locus cloned in cosmids c8.1 and c29B is the relic of an ancient telomere-telomere fusion and marks the point at which two ancestral ape chromosomes fused to give rise to human chromosome 2.

Because the fused chromosome is unique to humans and is fixed, the fusion must have occurred... before modern humans spread around the world, that is, between 6 million and ~1 million years ago (Mya; Chen and Li 2001; Yu et al. 2001) (Fig.5).

References:
1.Fan Y, et al. Genomic Structure and Evolution of the Ancestral Chromosome Fusion Site in 2q13-2q14.1 and paralogous regions on other human chromosomes. Genome Research 2002, volume 12, pages 1651-1662.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 226 by Percy, posted 12-08-2012 9:53 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 230 by NoNukes, posted 12-08-2012 12:11 PM kofh2u has not yet responded
 Message 234 by Eli, posted 12-08-2012 2:24 PM kofh2u has responded

    
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 10122
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 1.7


Message 230 of 310 (683183)
12-08-2012 12:11 PM
Reply to: Message 229 by kofh2u
12-08-2012 11:47 AM


Re: My Thread on the Science of Genesis
ANS:

"Chromosome 2 presents very strong evidence in favour of the common descent of humans and other apes."

People who believe in evolution believe in common descent, so it should be clear that Percy's question was not so simply answered.

The question is whether fusion alone would produce a new species such that the offspring with a fused gene is of a different species than his/her parent not having the fused gene.

That question is decidedly more difficult to answer.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison.

If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass


This message is a reply to:
 Message 229 by kofh2u, posted 12-08-2012 11:47 AM kofh2u has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 236 by Eli, posted 12-08-2012 3:06 PM NoNukes has acknowledged this reply

    
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 10122
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 1.7


Message 231 of 310 (683185)
12-08-2012 12:16 PM
Reply to: Message 227 by kofh2u
12-08-2012 11:42 AM


Re: My Thread on the Science of Genesis
You are openly bias against my point of view and seem eager to silence it simply because of that.

This thread was created for you to discuss your point of view. Expressing disagreement is not an attempt to silence you. Expressed disagreement is instead an opportunity for you to provide evidence and argument in support of your view. In other words, you are being invited to have further discussion.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison.

If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass


This message is a reply to:
 Message 227 by kofh2u, posted 12-08-2012 11:42 AM kofh2u has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 244 by kofh2u, posted 12-08-2012 6:52 PM NoNukes has responded

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 16324
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 232 of 310 (683192)
12-08-2012 2:13 PM
Reply to: Message 227 by kofh2u
12-08-2012 11:42 AM


Re: My Thread on the Science of Genesis
Hi Kofh2u,

I'm just bringing to your attention the lack of fact connecting your ideas to reality. There's no bias and no one wants to silence you, just the opposite in fact. I want you to shout your evidence from the rooftops.

So let's try to get the evidence train going, we can start with those same questions I asked before: What evidence leads you to believe that Adam was a Sahefanthropus tchadensis? What evidence leads you to believe that a member of one species can give birth to a member of a different species?

AbE: Whoops, don't bother replying, I see now that you posted three replies to my message, I'm looking at the other ones now.

--Percy

Edited by Percy, : AbE.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 227 by kofh2u, posted 12-08-2012 11:42 AM kofh2u has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 240 by kofh2u, posted 12-08-2012 6:34 PM Percy has responded

    
Eli
Member (Idle past 1106 days)
Posts: 274
Joined: 08-24-2012


Message 233 of 310 (683193)
12-08-2012 2:16 PM
Reply to: Message 228 by kofh2u
12-08-2012 11:46 AM


Re: My Thread on the Science of Genesis
kofh2u writes:

A) The theological evidence of 22 links to the present human population are enumerated in Genesis.

Uh, there is no such specific enumeration.

kofh2 writes:

The Scientific evidence for 22 links to the present human population are enumerated in The Last Human: the 22 now extinct humans.

You've aslready been shown that this claim is wrong. There isn't a lot of evidence in that book and the species under discussion are not in a straight lineage. Most of them are our distant cousins, not in our direct lineage.

kofh2u writes:

B) Paleontologists hypothesize that Sahefanthropus tchadensis is a good candidate for the first branch from chimps to the new species, Humanoids.

Re:
Search for the First Human (Sahelanthropus Tchadensis)

Sahelanthropus Tchadensis is one of the oldest known species on the human family tree. This species lived sometime between 7 and 6 million years ago.

topdocumentaryfilms.com/search-first-human-sahelanthropus-tchade...

And, conversely, Gen 5:2 says that Adam is the first of the human species:

Gen 5:2 Male and female created he THEM; and blessed THEM, and called THEIR name Adam, (a species), in the day when THEY were created.

The pronoun "them" does not imply anything but except "more than one."

Genesis doesn't say that Adam and Eve were a species. It says that adam was a single man placed in the garden and alone. Eve was made specifically to be his wife.

That is not a species.

The bible does not say that Adam was the first human species. It says, quite plainly for anyone with reading comprehension, that Adam was the first man.

In fact, "Adam" in Hebrew means "man."


This message is a reply to:
 Message 228 by kofh2u, posted 12-08-2012 11:46 AM kofh2u has not yet responded

  
Eli
Member (Idle past 1106 days)
Posts: 274
Joined: 08-24-2012


Message 234 of 310 (683194)
12-08-2012 2:24 PM
Reply to: Message 229 by kofh2u
12-08-2012 11:47 AM


Re: My Thread on the Science of Genesis
kofh2u writes:

Because the fused chromosome is unique to humans and is fixed, the fusion must have occurred... before modern humans spread around the world, that is, between 6 million and ~1 million years ago (Mya; Chen and Li 2001; Yu et al. 2001) (Fig.5).

Wait just a second.

You removed the most important part. The part that completely demolishes your claim.

That means that you understand that what you are claiming is bogus. You know that you are lying.

Let's see the part that you removed:

Because the fused chromosome is unique to humans and is fixed, the fusion must have occurred after the human-chimpanzee split, but before modern humans spread around the world, that is, between 6 and 1 million years ago

Yeah, so that proves you know you are wrong. What exactly is your point in participating in forums if you are just going to remove all evidence that proves you wrong?

Obviously humans were not born out of this fusion (mostly because chromosome fusions don't change gene expression on their own) because the line that leads to modern humans HAD ALREADY SPLIT OFF FROM OTHER APES.

Wake up, Kofh2u.

It's time to leave your little fantasy. You know you are lying.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 229 by kofh2u, posted 12-08-2012 11:47 AM kofh2u has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 238 by kofh2u, posted 12-08-2012 5:41 PM Eli has responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 16324
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.4


(1)
Message 235 of 310 (683195)
12-08-2012 3:04 PM
Reply to: Message 228 by kofh2u
12-08-2012 11:46 AM


Re: My Thread on the Science of Genesis
kofh2u writes:

And, conversely, Gen 5:2 says that Adam is the first of the human species:

And Sahefanthropus tchadensis wasn't human. Did you mean to say that Adam was the first of the hominid line? What is it that you're finding in the Bible that leads you to think Adam wasn't human?

"Chromosome 2 presents very strong evidence in favour of the common descent of humans and other apes."

Yes it does, but it isn't evidence that a member of one species can give birth to a member of a different species. Evolution has to be gradual and in terms of entire populations because any new species produced in a single generation would have no breeding partners. The genetic accident that produced the chromosome 2 fusion could not have introduced a species reproductive barrier, else the individual possessing it could never have passed it on.

The questions only get worse for you. For example, what evidence leads you to conclude that Ardipithecus ramidus is descended from Sahefanthropus tchadensis, and what leads you to believe that Cain was an Ardipithecus ramidus? How can Tubal-cain be Jabal's descendant if, according to the Bible, he's Jabal's half-brother? And so on. And there's still the major question of why you believe Adam and his descendants up until the flood were not human.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 228 by kofh2u, posted 12-08-2012 11:46 AM kofh2u has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 237 by Eli, posted 12-08-2012 3:12 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply

    
Eli
Member (Idle past 1106 days)
Posts: 274
Joined: 08-24-2012


Message 236 of 310 (683196)
12-08-2012 3:06 PM
Reply to: Message 230 by NoNukes
12-08-2012 12:11 PM


Re: My Thread on the Science of Genesis
NoNukes writes:

The question is whether fusion alone would produce a new species such that the offspring with a fused gene is of a different species than his/her parent not having the fused gene.

That question is decidedly more difficult to answer.

Not really. The question is decided.

Domestic horses have one fewer chromosome pair than a Przewalski's horses which have 33 pairs, but they can interbreed, and their offspring are fertile.

Centric fusion translocations have been found in Italian cattle, yet the cattle remain cattle.

Pampas deer have fused chromosomes and have 3 subspecies. The genetic variation has to do with an extreme population size in the past and not the fusion.

And, of course, Down Sydrome children have a different chromosomal pattern than the rest of us.

Species are not created in a single pregnancy.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 230 by NoNukes, posted 12-08-2012 12:11 PM NoNukes has acknowledged this reply

  
Eli
Member (Idle past 1106 days)
Posts: 274
Joined: 08-24-2012


Message 237 of 310 (683202)
12-08-2012 3:12 PM
Reply to: Message 235 by Percy
12-08-2012 3:04 PM


Re: My Thread on the Science of Genesis
Percy, you are exactly right.

The relational patterns alone, even if the rest of the biblical account was completely disregarded, show that these comparisons do not line up.

Father/son relationships are cannot be matched to cousin/cousin relationships.

Not to mention that these biblical characters dwelt in tents, farmed, did metal work, and played musical instruments.

Is kofh2u suggesting that Lucy was a sword-maker?

These comparisons are just silly.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 235 by Percy, posted 12-08-2012 3:04 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 242 by kofh2u, posted 12-08-2012 6:45 PM Eli has responded

  
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 238 of 310 (683207)
12-08-2012 5:41 PM
Reply to: Message 234 by Eli
12-08-2012 2:24 PM


Re: My Thread on the Science of Genesis

Obviously humans were not born out of this fusion (mostly because chromosome fusions don't change gene expression on their own) because the line that leads to modern humans HAD ALREADY SPLIT OFF FROM OTHER APES.


You are reading to that sentence something that OBVIOUSLY the writer could NOT have meant, because he specifically is saying that this fusion is the very evidence of common descent:

"Chromosome 2 presents very strong evidence in favour of the common descent of humans and other apes. "

His point is merely that the branch of humans appeared after this fusion.
He is also reserving the opinion that this immediately produced such a stark difference between the surrogate mother Ape to this early first divergence as to question whether it was still more ape than Hominid, but that after this the common decent followed:


"Chromosome 2 presents very strong evidence in favour of the common descent of humans and other apes.

According to researcher J. W. IJdo, "We conclude that the locus cloned in cosmids c8.1 and c29B is the relic of an ancient telomere-telomere fusion and marks the point at which two ancestral ape chromosomes fused to give rise to human chromosome 2.
Because the fused chromosome is unique to humans and is fixed, the fusion must have occurred after the humanchimpanzee split, but before modern humans spread around the world, that is, between 6 million and ~1 million years ago (Mya; Chen and Li 2001; Yu et al. 2001) (Fig.5).

References:
1.Fan Y, et al. Genomic Structure and Evolution of the Ancestral Chromosome Fusion Site in 2q13-2q14.1 and paralogous regions on other human chromosomes. Genome Research 2002, volume 12, pages 1651-1662.

Edited by kofh2u, : No reason given.

Edited by kofh2u, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 234 by Eli, posted 12-08-2012 2:24 PM Eli has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 239 by jar, posted 12-08-2012 5:56 PM kofh2u has responded
 Message 253 by Eli, posted 12-08-2012 9:44 PM kofh2u has responded

    
jar
Member
Posts: 29779
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 1.6


Message 239 of 310 (683210)
12-08-2012 5:56 PM
Reply to: Message 238 by kofh2u
12-08-2012 5:41 PM


Re: My Thread on the Science of Genesis
More nonsense. Is the 44 chromosome man not a human?

Do you have any evidence to support your assertion that Adam was a Sahefanthropus tchadensis?

What do either of those utter nonsense assertions have to do with the topic which was " The SEVEN "DAYS" WERE GEOLOGICAL ERAS "?


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 238 by kofh2u, posted 12-08-2012 5:41 PM kofh2u has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 241 by kofh2u, posted 12-08-2012 6:36 PM jar has responded

  
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 240 of 310 (683213)
12-08-2012 6:34 PM
Reply to: Message 232 by Percy
12-08-2012 2:13 PM


Re: My Thread on the Science of Genesis

What evidence leads you to believe that Adam was a Sahefanthropus tchadensis? What evidence leads you to believe that a member of one species can give birth to a member of a different species?

Of course I did respond to that question.

But this thread is not about providing evidence that Adam was Sahefanthropus tchadensis.

Science History of the Earth enumerates and refers to evidence that science already accepts, while Genesis states what the Bible has long said.

I am merely comparing the two lists.

Science does NOT refute that Sahefanthropus tchadensis was the oldest and first species in our common ascent, and that is DE FACTO comparable to the first Adam of the Bible story.

Science does NOT refute a short list of 22 species in the ascent of man.

Science does NOT refute that seven durations of time are marked with the events of the History of the Earth.

Science does NOT refute that the first of our species was the source of the current three racial stocks that differentiated into the seven genetic races now here.

Science does NOT refute that there was an In the beginning they call the Big Bang.

Science does NOT refute that a Cosmic Dark Age existed before light transversed the universe.

Science does NOT refute that Rodinia/Pangaea was an event when "all the waters, (plural) had been gathered together into one place."

Science does NOT refute that a Two Kingdom System of life began with Plants on the third "duration" of the history of the earth.

Science does NOT refute that the long 4th duration incubated the plant life while the Sun energy transformed the atmosphere into enough Oxygen to allow animal life to appear.

Science does NOT refute that the first man appeared in the Cenozoic 6th "day."

Science does NOT refute 22 members in the ascent tot modern man.

Science does NOT refute that that different kinds of mankind hybridized with each other as an event =in the ascent of modern man.

Science does NOT refute that Modern man initially was rooted in three racial stocks.

Science does NOT refute Genesis.

WHERE IS YOUR EVIDENCE THAT IS DOES?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 232 by Percy, posted 12-08-2012 2:13 PM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 249 by Coyote, posted 12-08-2012 7:58 PM kofh2u has responded
 Message 258 by Percy, posted 12-09-2012 8:11 AM kofh2u has responded

    
RewPrev1
...
1415
16
1718
...
21Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017