|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: How will creationists react to the first human-chimp hybrid? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2191 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Gee, Phat, I wonder if you would have invited this person into chat so quickly if their username was "middleagedmom4christ"?
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
teen4christ Member (Idle past 5820 days) Posts: 238 Joined: |
quote:Ok, let me see where we lost each other. quote:Completely agreed. quote:This is where you lost me. A paternity test looks for certain genetic markers that should match between the child and its parent, or the child and any relative. While I understand what you are saying, that similarities between the genetic makeup of a horse and a donkey could be accounted for a common ancestor in the past (and please, don't think that I am denying this possibility), I am simply pointing out that the similarities could also be accounted by a common design.
quote:I never said they could not be distant cousins. All I said was there are things out there that we see that are obviously related not through genetic inheritance but through other means, like similar artworks. quote:Well, I wouldn't put it that way, but if you want to describe it that way, fine. Take a look at the following pictures.
Are the first 2 pictures related? Well, sort of. They are both visual representations of concepts or objects in life. Someone was "creative" enough to draw a relation between those two.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
molbiogirl Member (Idle past 2663 days) Posts: 1909 From: MO Joined: |
Teen, it looks like this discussion is going to derail the thread.
If you'd like to continue a design debate, please take it to the appropriate thread:
Message 1.
Message 1.
Message 1.
Message 1.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 433 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
teen4christ writes: ... I am simply pointing out that the similarities could also be accounted by a common design. "Could also be accounted" isn't what we're going for though. We're looking for the best possible explanation - and a useful explanation, preferably. If my car won't start, it "could be accounted for" by the Martians who want me to be late for work. But the loose battery cable is a more useful explanation. It allows me to actually fix the problem. Similarly, recognizing the genetic relationship between humans and other animals is useful in medical research. By the way, why couldn't the genetic markers in paternity testing be accounted for in some other way? Why do you cherry-pick which parts of genetics you want to believe but feel free to make up phoney-baloney "other accounts" for the ones you don't like? “If you had half a brain, wouldn't you have realized after the second time, that it was you, not God?” -- riVeRraT (see context here) “The endearing controvertist! One needs to become acute in the ploys of his kind.” -- ThreeDogs
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jon Inactive Member |
Gee, Phat, I wonder if you would have invited this person into chat so quickly if their username was "middleagedmom4christ"? How horribly rude and unnecessary! I enjoy studying languages, and if I saw someone on here talking about languages, I'd invite them into a chat. Phat enjoys helping troubled teenagers, so of course he'll invite them into chat when he sees them on here! And just because his interest seems to be in people instead of books or making the sale and filling his pocket with loot doesn't make him a bad person! You never seem to tire with making fun of poor Phat! So shameful. Beware the Jabberwock, my son!
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
WOW.
You deserve a suspension for that one. WAAAY uncalled for....
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
sidelined Member (Idle past 5929 days) Posts: 3435 From: Edmonton Alberta Canada Joined: |
teen4christ
I am simply pointing out that the similarities could also be accounted by a common design. That is correct only if you can present a reasonable mechanism to explain how common design occurs.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
johnfolton  Suspended Member (Idle past 5613 days) Posts: 2024 Joined: |
Mitochondrial DNA is only inherited through your maternal side The answers from genesis folk actually agree with you but they point out that the Y chromosome is inherited through the male so it can be used in the same way to look for Adam. Technically if Eve was made from Adams rib then mitochondrial came from Adam thru Eve to all living. The bible says Eve is the mother of all living humans and Mitochondrial Eve supports the human race goes back to Eve akjv genesis 3:20. I've not heard of any chimp having Eve's mitochondria so the evidence is no mitochondrial evidence to support Eve is not the mother of all living !!!!!!! --------------------------------------------------------- Its apparently possible to trace all modern humans back to one father also. The Y chromosome is inherited only through the male, so can be used in the same way to look for an 'Adam'
Why 'Adam' never met 'Eve'
| Answers in Genesis
Edited by johnfolton, : No reason given. Edited by johnfolton, : No reason given. Edited by johnfolton, : No reason given.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
sidelined Member (Idle past 5929 days) Posts: 3435 From: Edmonton Alberta Canada Joined: |
johnfolton
The answers from genesis folk actually agree with you but they point out that the Y chromosome is inherited through the male so it can be used in the same way to look for Adam. However it is unlikely these good folk will accept that the male Y chromosome is the likely result of degradation of a female X chromosome.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
molbiogirl Member (Idle past 2663 days) Posts: 1909 From: MO Joined: |
The answers from genesis folk actually agree with you but they point out that the Y chromosome is inherited through the male so it can be used in the same way to look for Adam. Neither the Y chromosome nor mtDNA are truly representative of heritage. Let me walk you thru this. The Y chromosome is inherited only by the boys. You are a son. You inherited your Y from your dad. Therefore, nothing of your mom's side (that Y lineage) is represented. It is lost. Repeat backwards for 10 generations on your dad's side, keeping in mind, of course, that each female's contribution to that line is completely lost. 10 generations back, you have 1,024 paternal ancestors. Your Y chromosome will represent only one of those 1,024 paternal ancestors. Both Y chromosomes and mtDNA represent only a very, very tiny fraction of the whole picture. Edited by molbiogirl, : No reason given.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 306 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
For example. As a strategy for my laziness, I've taken subroutines and portions of my friends' programs and combine them with my programs that had absolutely nothing to do with their original programs to create, if you'd prefer, "hybrid" programs. All this proves is that if done right we could combine segments of codes to form new protocols because these codes are all written in the same language. Yes, but that would be more like combining the two genomes by genetic engineering, which I agree wouldn't prove anything.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
johnfolton  Suspended Member (Idle past 5613 days) Posts: 2024 Joined: |
Both Y chromosomes and mtDNA represent only a very, very tiny fraction of the whole picture. It appears the mutation rate of mitochondrial Eve is more accelerated than they first believed making the human race approximately 6000 years old. However nuclear DNA which is inherited by both parents thus is not as subject to mutations as is mitochondrial Eve. P.S. Thus its a very big part of the picture because its not lost in ten generations within the gene pool, etc... ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Unlike nuclear DNA, which is inherited from both parents and in which genes are rearranged in the process of recombination, there is usually no change in mtDNA from parent to offspring. Although mtDNA also recombines, it does so with copies of itself within the same mitochondrion. Because of this and because the mutation rate of animal mtDNA is higher than that of nuclear DNA,[2] mtDNA is a powerful tool for tracking ancestry through females (matrilineage) and has been used in this role to track the ancestry of many species back hundreds of generations. Mitochondrial DNA - Wikipedia The mitochondrial Eve data does not force the belief that there was only one woman from whom we all descended”in other words, it doesn’t prove the Bible”but”a very important ”but’”it is most definitely consistent with it. In other words, had there been more than one mitochondrial ”surname’, it would have been a severe challenge to the biblical scenario.
Missing Link
| Answers in Genesis
Edited by johnfolton, : No reason given.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 306 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
It appears the mutation rate of mitochondrial Eve is more accelerated than they first believed making the human race approximately 6000 years old. This is, of course, not true, which is why you have no evidence for it.
The mitochondrial Eve data does not force the belief that there was only one woman from whom we all descended”in other words, it doesn’t prove the Bible”but”a very important ”but’”it is most definitely consistent with it. In other words, had there been more than one mitochondrial ”surname’, it would have been a severe challenge to the biblical scenario. There is. Haven't you been following this? People have mitochondrial genes which differ from one another. This is why it's possible to use 'em as a basis for molecular phylogeny. There would be no point if mitochondrial genes were totally conserved. * sigh *
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
molbiogirl Member (Idle past 2663 days) Posts: 1909 From: MO Joined: |
john writes: Unlike nuclear DNA, which is inherited from both parents and in which genes are rearranged in the process of recombination, there is usually no change in mtDNA from parent to offspring. Although mtDNA also recombines, it does so with copies of itself within the same mitochondrion. Because of this and because the mutation rate of animal mtDNA is higher than that of nuclear DNA,[2] mtDNA is a powerful tool for tracking ancestry through females (matrilineage) and has been used in this role to track the ancestry of many species back hundreds of generations. Mitochondrial DNA - Wikipedia This is also from wiki:
Mitochondrial Eve (mt-mrca) is the name given by researchers to the woman who is defined as the matrilineal most recent common ancestor (MRCA) for all living humans. Passed down from mothers to offspring for over a hundred thousand years, her mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) is now found in all living humans: every mtDNA in every living person is derived from hers. Mitochondrial Eve is the female counterpart of Y-chromosomal Adam, the patrilineal most recent common ancestor, although they lived at different times. Please note. They mention Y chromosome Adam, yet they don't mention the problem in tracing ancestral heritage.
She is believed to have lived about 140,000 years ago in what is now Ethiopia, Kenya or Tanzania.[citation needed] The time she lived is calculated based on the molecular clock technique of correlating elapsed time with observed genetic drift. In for a dime, in for a dollar. If you accept the science re: mitochondrial Eve, you have to accept the evidence re: the molecular clock. So there goes your 6,000 years. In addition, Homo sapiens has been around a lot longer than 140,000 years. More like 500,000. That should tell you something.
Mitochondrial Eve is the most recent common ancestor (MRCA) of all humans via the mitochondrial DNA pathway, not the unqualified MRCA of all humanity. Got that? NOT the most recent common ancestor OF ALL HUMANITY. You want to know how they know that? Because tracing lineage thru mtDNA has the exact same kind of problems as tracing it thru the Y chromosome. It misses hundreds of millions of ancestors. If you're going to rely on wiki, be sure and read the whole thing next time.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
johnfolton  Suspended Member (Idle past 5613 days) Posts: 2024 Joined: |
The answering from genesis folk said the mutation rate today is more accelerated than assumed thus one could also assume Mitochondrial Eve was 6,000 years old. The evolutionist assumed the mutation rate it says by their interpretation of the fossil record.
I mean we all know there is no evidence to support an old earth in that no evidence of cold fusion within the earth to establish when the radioisotope clocks were initially wound up, etc...For all we know these isotope clocks were wound up before the earth was formed in some kind of big bang? But by making assumptions no leaching of these clocks in this way theyassume everything is old and that they call science. The creationist to a creationists are giving the correct spin on the age of the fossil the evolutionists are not aging the fossil by the fossil as baumgardener has been questioning why commercial labs are fudging out up to 40000 years of 14C so everyting appears old. Give the rate boys a thumbs up, etc.... The answering from genesis folks said: In other words, had there been more than one mitochondrial ”surname’, it would have been a severe challenge to the biblical scenario. I'm taking a little trip so just don't lose your cool, later, etc.... Enjoy !!!!!!!! ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Evolutionists have guessed at when their mitochondrial Eve lived via the idea of the ”molecular clock’”i.e., that there is a more or less fixed rate of mutational substitutions per year in any population. How do they know what this rate is”in other words, how is the ”molecular clock’ calibrated? By using evolutionary assumptions about the timing of events based on their interpretation of the fossil record. Creationists have correctly countered both Eve’s ”age’ and the Neandertal assertions by saying that the molecular clock calibrations are way off.2 Since, for example, the creationist’s (true) Eve lived only a few thousand years ago, the mutational substitutions in mtDNA must have happened at a much faster rate than assumed by evolutionists to date.
Missing Link
| Answers in Genesis
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024