Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 81 (8950 total)
39 online now:
DrJones*, Faith, Percy (Admin) (3 members, 36 visitors)
Newest Member: Mikee
Post Volume: Total: 867,364 Year: 22,400/19,786 Month: 963/1,834 Week: 33/430 Day: 33/63 Hour: 1/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   You are...
M82A1
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 21 (72266)
12-11-2003 10:15 AM


Hello! Seeing as this is my first post here, I would like to start it off with a big bang. lol

You are a metabolic organism.
As such, you are basically a collection of replicative proteins that function according to metabolic chemical reactions and processes. A virus is similar, in that it too is a replicative protein complete with mutable DNA and RNA, just as you have. But viruses lack metabolism, and so may not be considered to be alive in the same manner that you definitely are.

You are a eukaryote.
All remaining organic life is distinguished by structural differences at the cellular level between different groups of prokaryotes (which are essentially bacteria) and the eukaryotes (us). Unlike bacterial or viral cells, our cells have a nucleus. Hence, all non-viral/bacterial lifeforms are as we are; eukaryotes.

You are an animal.
Now I've heard a few creationists argue that there are plants and there are animals and then there are human beings. And that none of them are actually related to one another other than through a common creator. They adamantly argue that we are not animals, as if there is some insult in that association. But you are one of only about a half-dozen kingdoms of eukaryotic life forms. Unlike those of most other biological kingdoms, you are incapable of manufacturing your own food and must compensate for that by ingesting other organisms. In other words, your most basic structure requires that you cause death to other living things. Otherwise, you wouldn't have a means of digestion. This, along with some very specific anatomical differences in the chemical composition of our metazoic cells, are the factors that define and distinguish an animal like yourself from all other kingdoms of life. Given the alternative choice between plants, molds, or fungus, animalia should seem reasonable even to the most adamant fundamentalist.

You are a chordate.
You have a spinal chord and every other minute physical distinction of that classification. You also have a skull, which classifies you as a craniate. Note: Not all chordates have skulls, or even bones of any kind. Once one of the chordates has enough calcium deposited around the brain to count as a skull, all of its descendants will share that. This is why absolutely all animals with skulls have spinal chords. And that is yet another commonality that implies common ancestry as opposed to common design.

You are a vertebrate.
Like all mammals, birds, dinosaurs, reptiles, amphibians, and most fish, you have a spine. Not everything with a spinal cord has a spine to put it in, but everything with a spine has a spinal cord in it, implying common descent.
Every animal that has a jaw and teeth (Gnathostomata) also has a backbone. And of course, you have both as well, again implying common descent.

You are a tetrapod.
You have only four limbs. So you are like all other terrestrial vertebrates including frogs. Even snakes and whales are tetrapods in that both still retain vestigial or fetal evidence of all four limbs. This is yet another consistent commonality implying a genetic relationship. There certainly is no creationist explanation for it.

You are synapsid.
Unlike turtles (which are anapsid) and "true" reptiles, dinosaurs and birds (which are all diapsid), your skull has only one temporal fenestra, a commonality between all of the vast collection of "mammal-like reptiles", which are now all extinct without any Biblical recognition or scriptural explanation either for their departure or their presence in the first place.

You are a mammal.
You are homeothermic (warm-blooded), follicle-bearing and have lactal nipples. And of course, not all synapsids are or were mammals, but all mammals are synapsid, implying common descent.

You are eutherian.
Or more specifically, you are a placental mammal, like most other lactal animals from shrews to whales. All eutherians are mammals, but not all mammals are eutherian. There are six major divisions in mammalia, only three of which still exist; those that hatch out of eggs like reptiles (monotremes), marsupials, that are born in the fetal stage and complete their development inside the mother's pouch, and those that developed in a shell-like placenta and were born in the infant stage, as you were. Your own fetal development seems to reveal a similar track of development from a single cell to a tadpole-looking creature, then growing limbs and digits out of your finlike appendages, and finally outgrowing your own tail. Some would consider this an indication of ancestry. Especially since fetal snakes, for example, actually have legs, feet, and cute little toes, which are reabsorbed into the body before hatching, implying common descent.

You are a primate.
You have five fully-developed fingers and five fully-developed toes. Your toes are still prehensile and your hands can grasp with dexterity. You have only two lactal nipples and they are on your chest as opposed to your abdomen. These are pointless in males, which also have a pendulous penis and a well-developed ceacum or appendix, unlike all other mammals. Although your fangs are reduced in size, you do still have them along with some varied dentition indicative of primates exclusively. Your fur is thin and relatively sparse over most of your body. And your claws have been reduced to flat chitinous fingernails. Your fingers themselves have distinctive print patterns. You are also susceptible to AIDS and are mortally allergic to the toxin of the male funnel web spider of Australia (which is deadly to all primates, but only dangerous to primates, which is why you'd better beware of these spiders). And unlike all but one unrelated animal in all the world, your body cannot produce vitamin-C naturally and must have it supplemented in your diet, just as all other primates do. Nearly every one of these individual traits are unique only to primates exclusively. There is almost no other organism on Earth that matches any one of these descriptions separately, but absolutely all of the lemurs, tarsiers, monkeys, apes, you, and I match all of them at once perfectly, implying common descent.

You are an ape.
Your tail is merely a stub of bones that don't even protrude outside the skin. Your dentition includes not only vestigial canines, but incisors, cuspids, bicuspids, and distinctive molars that come to five points interrupted by a "Y" shaped crevasse. This in addition to all of your other traits, like the dramatically increased range of motion in your shoulder, as well as a profound increase in cranial capacity and disposition toward a bipedal gait, indicates that you are not merely a vertebrate cranial chordate and a tetrapoidal placental mammalian primate, but you are more specifically an ape, and so was your mother before you.

Genetic similarity confirms morphological similarity rather conclusively, just as Charles Darwin himself predicted more than 140 years ago. While he knew nothing of DNA of course, he postulated that inheritable units of information must be contributed by either parent. He rather accurately predicted the discovery of DNA by illustrating the need for it. Our 98.4% to 99.4% identical genetic similarity explains why you have such social, behavioral, sexual, developmental, intellectual, and physical resemblance to a bonobo chimpanzee. Similarities that are not shared with any other organism on the planet. Hence you are both different species of the same literal family. In every respect, you are nearly identical. You, are an ape.

From www.Talkorigins.com post of the month, May 2003.
------------------
"The only thing necessary for the Triumph of Evil is for Good Men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke

[This message has been edited by M82A1, 12-11-2003]


Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by roxrkool, posted 12-11-2003 10:31 AM M82A1 has responded
 Message 9 by Matt Tucker, posted 12-11-2003 4:02 PM M82A1 has not yet responded
 Message 20 by Ian C, posted 01-17-2004 12:19 AM M82A1 has not yet responded
 Message 21 by Ian C, posted 01-17-2004 12:19 AM M82A1 has not yet responded

  
roxrkool
Member
Posts: 1497
From: Nevada
Joined: 03-23-2003


Message 2 of 21 (72269)
12-11-2003 10:31 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by M82A1
12-11-2003 10:15 AM


Hi and welcome.

Did you happen to post this on Talk.Origins? I seem to remember something similar. In fact, I think it won POTM.

edited to add:

Yes. This is the post that won POTM on Talk.Origins for the month of May, 2003, though it appears some of it is missing - like the very last paragraph:

quote:
And as I have witnessed the birth of both of my children, I have now met the criteria for your reward. Please make my $1,000,000.00 payable to L. Aron Nelson. Thank you.

Unless you are L. Aron Nelson, I suggest you post the source so no one thinks you willfully plagiarized this essay.

[This message has been edited by roxrkool, 12-11-2003]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by M82A1, posted 12-11-2003 10:15 AM M82A1 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by M82A1, posted 12-11-2003 10:33 AM roxrkool has responded

  
M82A1
Inactive Member


Message 3 of 21 (72271)
12-11-2003 10:33 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by roxrkool
12-11-2003 10:31 AM


Yeah, actually. I kind of hijacked it from that site, hee hee. I just love that article so much!

------------------
"The only thing necessary for the Triumph of Evil is for Good Men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke


This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by roxrkool, posted 12-11-2003 10:31 AM roxrkool has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by roxrkool, posted 12-11-2003 10:38 AM M82A1 has responded

  
roxrkool
Member
Posts: 1497
From: Nevada
Joined: 03-23-2003


Message 4 of 21 (72274)
12-11-2003 10:38 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by M82A1
12-11-2003 10:33 AM


So you are L. Aron Nelson?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by M82A1, posted 12-11-2003 10:33 AM M82A1 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by M82A1, posted 12-11-2003 10:44 AM roxrkool has responded

  
M82A1
Inactive Member


Message 5 of 21 (72277)
12-11-2003 10:44 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by roxrkool
12-11-2003 10:38 AM


No I'm not. I edited the message, happy now?

------------------
"The only thing necessary for the Triumph of Evil is for Good Men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke


This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by roxrkool, posted 12-11-2003 10:38 AM roxrkool has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by roxrkool, posted 12-11-2003 1:55 PM M82A1 has not yet responded
 Message 7 by Adminnemooseus, posted 12-11-2003 2:04 PM M82A1 has not yet responded

  
roxrkool
Member
Posts: 1497
From: Nevada
Joined: 03-23-2003


Message 6 of 21 (72306)
12-11-2003 1:55 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by M82A1
12-11-2003 10:44 AM


Take it easy. It's just extremely important to provide sources when posting other people's work.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by M82A1, posted 12-11-2003 10:44 AM M82A1 has not yet responded

  
Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3911
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 7 of 21 (72309)
12-11-2003 2:04 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by M82A1
12-11-2003 10:44 AM


Copy/pastes of such length are generally frowned upon here, even if properly atributed. This, however, is more of an Admin/Percy thing as far as administrative action goes. I'll leave any further comment to him.

Adminnemooseus


This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by M82A1, posted 12-11-2003 10:44 AM M82A1 has not yet responded

  
Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3911
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 8 of 21 (72313)
12-11-2003 2:10 PM


Thread moved here from the Evolution forum.

  
Matt Tucker
Inactive Junior Member


Message 9 of 21 (72327)
12-11-2003 4:02 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by M82A1
12-11-2003 10:15 AM


Homologous to Monkeys and we're animals?
Personally, I am not an animal. If you are an animal, you surely would know. As such you would be able to adequately comment on their social, behavioral, sexual, developmental, and intellectual abilities as you claim to have in the last paragraph of your first post. I, however much you dislike it, am not an animal. Second, I think that humankind should be a kingdom of it's own. We have superior intelligence to anything you can name except for God, and that should most definitely set us apart. Third, what you said about the monkey's and human's similarity in DNA sequences is true, yet you failed to mentioned that there are 3.1 BILLION nucleotide sequences accounted for! Evolutionists always put forth this crap as definitive proof for the homology of men and chimps, and fail to show that there are over 62 THOUSAND completely different DNA sequences that have no relation in the Man/monkey comparison! This is the fallacy of not portraying the whole truth. In laymen's terms, A LIE! If a measley difference of 62,000 proves homology to you, then sobeit. It sure doesn't prove it to me. I suggest you research evolution more and look for ALL the evidence, for or against, before you start saying we are monkeys, have tails, et al...

Matt


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by M82A1, posted 12-11-2003 10:15 AM M82A1 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by Rei, posted 12-11-2003 4:21 PM Matt Tucker has not yet responded
 Message 11 by NosyNed, posted 12-11-2003 4:44 PM Matt Tucker has not yet responded
 Message 12 by :æ:, posted 12-11-2003 4:45 PM Matt Tucker has not yet responded
 Message 14 by MrHambre, posted 12-11-2003 9:57 PM Matt Tucker has not yet responded

  
Rei
Member (Idle past 5358 days)
Posts: 1546
From: Iowa City, IA
Joined: 09-03-2003


Message 10 of 21 (72329)
12-11-2003 4:21 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by Matt Tucker
12-11-2003 4:02 PM


Re: Homologous to Monkeys and we're animals?
quote:
and fail to show that there are over 62 THOUSAND completely different DNA sequences that have no relation in the Man/monkey comparison! This is the fallacy of not portraying the whole truth. In laymen's terms, A LIE! If a measley difference of 62,000 proves homology to you, then sobeit. It sure doesn't prove it to me.

Are you sure you don't mean 62,000 BP difference? (note: Not 62,000 genes. One gene is comprised of many BP).
Common ancestor = 6 million years ago
12 million total years of divergence.
An average of 1 bp mutation fixating every 193 years

And this seems... *fast* ... to you???

So, Matt, at what point would one consider something an animal and not an animal? For example, if we were to splice 30,000 of those BP differences into a chimp (or vice versa), would it be an animal? Or a human? What would be the moral issues concerning it (since you think we should have dominion over animals, where would it lie in your scheme of things?)

We're all made of the same stuff, and have the same morphology; we just have some extra synapses going on up there. I'm sorry if this bothers you, but our bodies are the exact same stuff.

(Edit: I should probably check his 62,000 number, that doesn't look right)

------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

[This message has been edited by Rei, 12-11-2003]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Matt Tucker, posted 12-11-2003 4:02 PM Matt Tucker has not yet responded

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8868
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003
Member Rating: 7.2


Message 11 of 21 (72340)
12-11-2003 4:44 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by Matt Tucker
12-11-2003 4:02 PM


What is an animal?
Personally, I am not an animal.

Oh? Then you need to define what an "animal" is. We are talking biology here and there is a perfectly good definitionof animal.

If you are not an animal are you a fungus, a bacterium, a plant or maybe a virus? What are you?

So you have a count of 62,000 differences (you didn't site a source for that but I'll take it as given, it has already been noted that they are different BPs not "sequences", apparently). You make it sound like you think that is a large number. Let's see 62,000 divided by 3,100,000,000, mmmm drop the zero's, carry something, mmmm, that comes out to, mmm don't tell me let me get it myself, uh, 6.2 divided by 310,000 which some out to about 2 divided by 100,000. Nah that can't be right. I thought we were something like 2% different from our nearest cousins. Your numbers hints at some tiny part of one percent.

I guess I must misunderstand, I thought you were arguing we were a lot different from our cousins. Apparently you're data doesn't support that. Care to try again?

[This message has been edited by NosyNed, 12-11-2003]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Matt Tucker, posted 12-11-2003 4:02 PM Matt Tucker has not yet responded

  
:æ: 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5530 days)
Posts: 423
Joined: 07-23-2003


Message 12 of 21 (72341)
12-11-2003 4:45 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by Matt Tucker
12-11-2003 4:02 PM


Re: Homologous to Monkeys and we're animals?
Matt Tucker writes:

Personally, I am not an animal.


I regret to inform you that this statement is false.

If you are an animal, you surely would know.

I am, and I surely do know it.

As such you would be able to adequately comment on their social, behavioral, sexual, developmental, and intellectual abilities as you claim to have in the last paragraph of your first post.

I don't know how any of this necessarily follows from being an animal, but scientists are actually quite capable of commenting upon all of those phenomena regardless.

I, however much you dislike it, am not an animal.

I'm sorry, friend. No matter how much you dislike it, you are.

We have superior intelligence to anything you can name except for God...

What God?

...and that should most definitely set us apart.

Yet dolphins have superior swimming capabilities to humans and high intelligence. Surely that sets them apart.

Yet gorillas have superior brute strength to humans and high intelligence. Surely that sets them apart.

Yet bats have superior sonar capabilities to humans and they can fly. Surely that sets them apart.

The point is that simply because you arbitrarily define "intelligence" as your distinguishing criterion doesn't mean that those distinguished by it are meaningfully "superior" in any general sense to those that aren't. Humans are quite inferior to other animals in equally many if not more categories than those in which they are superior.

yet you failed to mentioned that there are 3.1 BILLION nucleotide sequences accounted for! Evolutionists always put forth this crap as definitive proof for the homology of men and chimps, and fail to show that there are over 62 THOUSAND completely different DNA sequences that have no relation in the Man/monkey comparison!

So what? That still means that humans and chimps are 99% identical. And curiosly enough, as we trace those similarities back through the phylogenic tree, we can see declining similarities that indicate points of genetic divergence... exactly what is predicted by evolutionary theory. You can see it beatifully illustrated here.

This is the fallacy of not portraying the whole truth. In laymen's terms, A LIE!

He plainly states that the genetic similarity is 98-99%. That is the whole truth. The percentage is just another way of expressing the the number of similarities compared to the number of difference.

If a measley difference of 62,000 proves homology to you, then sobeit. It sure doesn't prove it to me.

I've learned to never underestimate the incredulity of the ignorant. Believe me, your resistance is sadly unsurprising.

I suggest you research evolution more and look for ALL the evidence...

I can't believe that you can read that post as well-informed as it obviously is, first falsely accuse its author of lying, and then almost immediately after accuse him of ignorance of the subject matter. Is there no end to creationist hubris?

before you start saying we are monkeys, have tails, et al...

Umm... no one's saying you're a monkey. You're a primate. And yes, you have a tail. Anyone who's ever fallen on his ass learning to roller/ice skate should know that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Matt Tucker, posted 12-11-2003 4:02 PM Matt Tucker has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by M82A1, posted 12-11-2003 7:35 PM :æ: has not yet responded

  
M82A1
Inactive Member


Message 13 of 21 (72375)
12-11-2003 7:35 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by :æ:
12-11-2003 4:45 PM


Re: Homologous to Monkeys and we're animals?
quote:
Umm... no one's saying you're a monkey. You're a primate. And yes, you have a tail. Anyone who's ever fallen on his ass learning to roller/ice skate should know that.
Yes, we have a tail, it's called the Coccyx. Every Homo sapiens sapiens has one, as do the [EDIT]apes[/EDIT]. Apparently Matt didn't take any biology classes.

[This message has been edited by M82A1, 12-12-2003]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by :æ:, posted 12-11-2003 4:45 PM :æ: has not yet responded

  
MrHambre
Member (Idle past 458 days)
Posts: 1494
From: Framingham, MA, USA
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 14 of 21 (72401)
12-11-2003 9:57 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by Matt Tucker
12-11-2003 4:02 PM


How Ironic
Matt,

The very post you're replying to is a good example of the methodology of determining common descent. Our new buddy M82A1 decided to cut-and-paste something from the popular Talk Origins board, and roxrkool had no problem establishing the fact that it was a copy job.

The two posts were not exact, in fact. M82A1 deleted the last paragraph and added an intro of his own. For some reason he snipped the word 'sir' from the conclusion of the original post, leaving the comma after 'You' which looks a bit odd. In the chordate paragraph, however, his copy of Nelson's bad capitalization ('Note: Not all' should read 'Note: not all') makes it impossible to believe that these two articles were independently created.

So what's different between the way we deduced this and the argument for common descent between humans and other modern apes? The similarities in our genomes are the products of the DNA copying process, which is as well understood as a computer geek's ability to copy-and-paste an article from another website. Geneticists recognize the exact spot in the ape genome that corresponds to the place in the human genome where two chromosomes fused somewhere in our ancestry, and they understand the processes by which this phenomenon could come about. You can't say the same for independent creation. The mutation in the human vitamin-C pseudogene is shared by primates, too: are we supposed to think that the DNA copying process tells us nothing about such similarities? The same with our teeth, our skeletons, and so forth. These are all vestiges of common ancestry, and the cumulative effect of all these similarities is very difficult to explain away, knowing as much as we do about genetics and morphology.

So would you have advised M82A1 to deny he had copied the Talk Origins article? After all, the two articles were not exact, and no one witnessed M82A1 do the copying, right? No, that would admittedly be stretching the imagination far beyond its breaking point. No one would seriously believe the two posts were products of two completely separate acts of creation.

Unfortunately, you're asking us to believe that humans and other modern apes have just about everything in common except ancestry. And no one here can ignore the mountain of evidence you're telling us means nothing.

------------------
The dark nursery of evolution is very dark indeed.
Brad McFall


This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Matt Tucker, posted 12-11-2003 4:02 PM Matt Tucker has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by roxrkool, posted 12-11-2003 10:28 PM MrHambre has not yet responded

  
roxrkool
Member
Posts: 1497
From: Nevada
Joined: 03-23-2003


Message 15 of 21 (72410)
12-11-2003 10:28 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by MrHambre
12-11-2003 9:57 PM


Re: How Ironic
Very nice, MrHambre.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by MrHambre, posted 12-11-2003 9:57 PM MrHambre has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by TruthDetector, posted 01-16-2004 11:33 PM roxrkool has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019