Any practical use for Universal Common Ancestor?

You understand the question. Answer it for whatever time frame you think appropriate. What has to change in whatever time frame you think appropriate? What has to happen to the genome to cause the change? Etc. \Gosh you don't say. It's also not a map. Or a recipe. Or an instruction booklet. But any will do as a metaphor to express the relationship between gene and protein and trait. Or if you don't think so, then please provide the best word for the job.Anything to confuse the issue.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This is again just another obfuscation and distraction. There are plenty of genes that are actually defined by the trait they build, and researchers are always identifying genes by the particular traits they produce, for various reasons including studying how to deal with genetic diseases. So picking one gene that doesn't fit with my question is sheer fraud.I don't care how you want to go about it but the question is about how you get a new species from the genome of another species and of course you can't do it because it is impossible. The ToE is impossible and all anyone is doing is putting up one smoke screen after another.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

You are again confusing things which I am not confusing. I used chimp because caffeine used chimp, not because I don't know the ToE drill. You are the confused one.If mutation could bring about a new species you have to say how, you have to specify the pathway step by step from a genome that can only produce a particular species to the traits of a completely new species that are not in that genome.It is clear that insofar as anyone understands the question there is no motivation to try to answer it because you know it's impossible. You all prefer to repeat the same ToE false belief system. Oh mutations will do it. No they won't. Millions of years will do it. OK, how?Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I've many times identified barriers to change beyond the species, both in the genome and in population genetics. But now I'm asking for anyone to show how I'm wrong by specifying the genetic pathway by which such changes could occur step by step. It's amusing how nobody can do that and just keep trying to throw it back on me.It's hard to believe that nobody really understands the question so I assume it's dishonesty that precludes a reasonable discussion of the facts. Well, that's nothing new for my opponents at EvC. I'd really really like to see someone honestly address the question but I guess it isn't going to happen.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Nice try, sort of, but not really. If you're going to claim that microevolution just proceeds without a glitch to macroevolution you should be able to come up with some kind of idea of how that could happen genetically, some kind of pathway, some idea of what genetic changes would be necessary to get from the genome that always makes only its own particular species to at least one trait of some completely different species. If you can't you really need to stop saying it happens with all the certainty usually put behind that statement. If you can't show how mutations could get from that species-specific genome to something entirely different, even one trait of it, you need to stop claiming that it happens as you all do. If you can't even come up with a reasonable guess let alone actual evidence, it becomes a lie to keep stating it.

\\The necessary changes are what I was asking for but you haven't even tried to spell them out. This gives the impression that you really don't know what those changes would have to be. You don't need to bother about the order, but giving even a very sketchy idea of the necessary changes would go a long way to answering the question I keep asking. Your job at the moment is to answer my question. It's understandable that you want to distract from it since obviously you have no answer, but that is what is on the table at the moment.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I've already answered your objections a million times. A genome IS indeed "species-specific." That is, it can build the species it belongs to and no other. For even a single recognizable trait that belongs to another species to be the product of such a genome is impossible. Although that is the question and you can still try to answer it. You will never get even a human fingernail from the chimp genome. If you want to show how that could be possible over millions of years then please explain. You'd have to describe the sort of genetic changes that would have to occur over those millions of years. And I would guess that you need millions of small changes to accumulate so maybe you could spell out what has to happen to make that possible. You claim the genome can change so show us how it does so. So far all you are doing is reciting the Evo Creed over and over again.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I know you know that a chimp genome can't produce a human fingernail and I also know that you don't know how or why that is the case, and neither do I, but we all know that what I'm saying is true: a genome is specific to the species and produces ONLY the charcteristics of that species. You know it, I know it,, everybody here knows it.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I'm still waiting for someone to show how the changes occur that need to occur to get a human being from whatever ancestral ape you choose. Detailing differences does not answer that question, it doesn't show how you get from the one to the other. You certainly can't assume that each change just happens to occur. There must be many, hundreds, thousands, of variations that are likely to pop up before you get even one change toward the outcome you have in mind. Spell it out.

Why don't you just read through the argument for a change? You say really stupid irrelevant things because you don't.

The science on this subject amounts to a bald assertion that the ToE is true and nothing more than that, an assertion that you can indeed get from one species to another. It's nothing but a statement of the Evo Creed, there is no actual science involved. I'm ASKING for science and nobody is producing it because it does not exist, there is nothing BUT the Evo Creed.Not only are you a vile ******* slanderer you are a blind adherent of the ToE who can't see that there is no science holding it up.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Don't be silly. I know you can't show anything I've asked you to show because it's impossible. You think it's possible so the burden is on you to show it, show SOMETHING, ANYTHING genetic that would show that you can get a completely new species from an existing species.Since there is order in the created world of course you could predict a human genome from a human creature.

I have to come back to this later but please answer this question: Isn't it true that the human genome will create only a human being with human characteristics and there is nothing in it that could produce anything else or even a single characteristic of another species? I'm not interested in the specific differences between chimp and human skin etc., just in the fact that we all recognize the difference between a chimp hand and a human hand and you cannot get either from the genome of the other. I'm not thinking of embryos either, just the fully formed creature.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

You guys are good at making unsupportable assertions or stating the Evo Creed over and over again and thinking you've actually said something scientific. It's ridiculous, Taq. You have to SHOW that mutations can turn an ape into a human. You have to show first of all how they can change something that is characteristic of a species into something entirely different that doesn't belong to that species. That is impossible for starters. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Not to mention that mutations, being random, aren't going to occur where you want them when you want them and it would take hundreds or thousands or millions of them before you'd get anything remotely close to the inner ear bones of the mammal, by which time you should have accumulated that many transitionals with so many bizarre looking bone things growing out of the reptile jaw all utterly useless to the animal, but still you think this is possible? Oh I'm sure. Too bad it's impossible.