It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Gawdzilla
reply to post by DohBama
Evolution is no longer a theory. The evidence for evolution is overwhelming. (Well, if you don't live in the Bronze Age, anyway.) Evolution is certainly good for debunking creation myths.
Originally posted by Gawdzilla
reply to post by spy66
"You dont know the difference between evolution and creations. "
On what do you base that? I don't believe some Great Sky Fairy created everything. Nor would I care if it did.
Originally posted by Gawdzilla
reply to post by spy66
Again, what do you base that on? The Nehner-nehner-nehner Theory of Creation, perhaps? Or have you just dug yourself into a hole you can't get out of.
I have a dozen books on evolution here, perhaps Prothero would be a good read for you. Or Kenneth Miller? How about Jerry A. Coyne or Michael Shermer?
Originally posted by Gawdzilla
reply to post by DohBama
Evolution is no longer a theory. The evidence for evolution is overwhelming. (Well, if you don't live in the Bronze Age, anyway.) Evolution is certainly good for debunking creation myths.
24/08/2006
"Scientists believe they have found a key gene that helped the human brain evolve from our chimp-like ancestors. In just a few million years, one area of the human genome seems to have evolved about 70 times faster than the rest of our genetic code. It appears to have a role in a rapid tripling of the size of the brain's crucial cerebral cortex, according to an article published Thursday in the journal Nature. Study co-author David Haussler, director of the Center for Biomolecular Science and Engineering at the University of California, Santa Cruz, said his team found strong but still circumstantial evidence that a certain gene, called HAR1F, may provide an important answer to the question: `What makes humans brainier than other primates?' Human brains are triple the size of chimp brains. Looking at 49 areas that have changed the most between the human and chimpanzee genomes, Haussler zeroed in on an area with `a very dramatic change in a relatively short period of time.' That one gene didn't exist until 300 million years ago and is present only in mammals and birds, not fish or animals without backbones. But then it didn't change much at all. There are only two differences in that one gene between a chimp and a chicken, Haussler said. But there are 18 differences in that one gene between human and chimp and they all seemed to occur in the development of man, he said. Andrew Clark, a Cornell University professor molecular biology who was not part of Haussler's team, said that if true, the change in genes would be fastest and most dramatic in humans and would be `terrifically exciting.' However, the gene changed so fast that Clark said that he has a hard time believing it unless something unusual happened in a mutation. It's not part of normal evolution, he said. ....
The scientists still don't know specifically what the gene does. But they know that this same gene turns on in human fetuses at seven weeks after conception.(Borenstein, S., "Scientists Find Brain Evolution Gene," ABC News/Associated Press, August 16, 2006)
CHIMP GENE GAP GROWS: Using a new measure of genetic similarity--the number of copies of genes that two species have in common--researchers report that chimps and humans share only 94 percent of their genes, not the 98 to 99 percent frequently cited.
By Aaron Logan, from www.lightmatter.net...
A lot more genes may separate humans from their chimp relatives than earlier studies let on. Researchers studying changes in the number of copies of genes in the two species found that their mix of genes is only 94 percent identical. The 6 percent difference is considerably larger than the commonly cited figure of 1.5 percent.
The new finding supports the idea that evolution may have given humans new genes with new functions that don't exist in chimps, something researchers had not recognized until recently. The older value of 1.5 percent is a measure of the difference between equivalent genes in humans and chimps, like a difference in the spelling of the same word in two similar languages. Based on that figure, experts proposed that humans and chimps have essentially the same genes, but differed in when and where the genes turn on and off.
The new research takes into account the possibility for multiple copies of genes and that the number of copies can differ between species, even though the gene itself is the same or nearly so. "You have to pay attention to more than just the genes that are shared," says geneticist Matthew Hahn of Indiana University, Bloomington, lead author of the new report. Researchers believe that additional copies of the same gene allow evolution to experiment, so to speak, finding new functions for old genes.
Hahn and his colleagues set out to study these gains and losses in gene number over the millennia by examining the genomes of humans, chimps, mice, rats and dogs. They looked at 110,000 genes that fall into 9,990 different families of similar genes.
The size of a gene family differed between species in 5,622 cases, or 56 percent of all the families. These size changes are so frequent in the evolutionary history of mammals that genes might as well be going through a revolving door, the researchers write in a paper published in a new online journal, PLoS ONE.
In humans and chimps, which have about 22,000 genes each, the group found 1,418 duplicates that one or the other does not possess. For example, humans have 15 members of a family of brain genes linked to autism, called the centaurin-gamma family, whereas chimps have six, for a difference of nine gene copies.
The group estimated that humans have acquired 689 new gene duplicates and lost 86 since diverging from our common ancestor with chimps six million years ago. Similarly, they reckoned that chimps have lost 729 gene copies that humans still have.
The culture war waged by America’s liberal elite has taken our society far down the road to perdition. But it is not too late to turn back.
The battle for the soul of America has reached a pivotal point. The tattered shreds of what remains of Christian civilization are under assault as never before, yet who is willing to stand in the breach against the attacking barbarian hordes? Certainly not those who now pose as our political, moral, and spiritual leaders. The ongoing public and shameful lynching of Senator Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) is painful enough evidence of that.
For daring to speak against the militant homosexual lobby’s perverse agenda and growing power, Senator Santorum has been subjected to a relentless barrage of hate and vitriol. It was to be expected that the most vehement voices of the Lavender Left would go on the attack. Ditto for the usual suspects among the liberal-left media and the Clintonite Democrats. But that combined chorus could not have kept its ridiculous refrain going for more than one news cycle except for the deafening sounds of silence from those who claim to defend morality and family values. The leadership of the Republican Party and many of the so-called social conservative leaders have bailed out at one of the most crucial junctures in the culture war. They have either sinned by silence or aided and abetted the attackers by offering "defenses" of Santorum that are so lame they do more harm than good.
What did the senator say that was so earth-shatteringly provocative? In an April 22nd interview with the Associated Press concerning the U.S. Supreme Court’s review of a Texas law against sodomy, the Republican lawmaker noted that "we have laws in states, like the one at the Supreme Court right now," and that these laws "were there for a purpose." Senator Santorum went on to remark: "And if the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything. Does that undermine the fabric of our society? I would argue yes, it does."
That is the offensive statement that launched a thousand screaming headlines and ranting diatribes! To listen to the squeals of outrage from the perversity apologists, one would think that the senator had endorsed the murder of Matthew Shepard or called for rounding up and executing all homosexuals. What is so remarkable about the present flap is that Senator Santorum is being pilloried and flayed for a statement so eminently reasonable and universally accepted only a generation ago.
Even a decade ago, most politicians — even liberal Democrats — would have rushed to agree with Santorum’s defense of mom-and-apple-pie morality. Elected officials choosing to side with the sodomites would have been on the defensive. Relatively few would have openly disagreed with the view of homosexuality expressed in Sir William Blackstone’s famous Commentaries on the Laws of England (1765). Blackstone, who greatly influenced the American Founding Fathers and who is still reverently quoted in court decisions, described sodomy as the "infamous crime against nature … the very mention of which is a disgrace." It is, said Blackstone, a gross crime condemned "by the voice of nature and of reason, and the express law of God."
Today this "infamous crime" is being enshrined as a right, and champions of law and morality are in danger of being prosecuted for "hate crimes." How is it possible for such a radical sea change to have taken place virtually overnight?
Originally posted by spy66
I can agree a lot to this theory. I do think we are related to monkeys. But we have never been a chimp. Chimps are chimps and will always be chimps. Evolution so far can't prove that a chimp has changes even a bit since we started to study them. We can only find relations. But that dosent prove anything. It only creates a theory.
A specie is like any other dimension. Because it is a dimension on this Earth.
But the dimensions are made up by two totally different mathematical equations.
The equation for a human might have the same matter as the equation for a chimp because we share common grounds like Earth. But the power or symbols that makes up the equation is totally different. Creating a totally different dimension.
Now this is hard to grasp for some one who dont know what math or a dimension is. Things has to add up to have a function.
To put this in a easy way. A human can only produce an other human. Because a human has to evolve inside an other human. You can only use the equation set for humans to produce a human. There is no other way to produce a different human. Mutations is a poor way of trying to escape. The fact is that you inherit what gets passed on but you will still be a human with inherited mutations. The mutations you inherit can make you stronger or weaker to the environment you are exposed to and that's about it.
[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]
Originally posted by Gawdzilla
reply to post by spy66
So how does the Great Sky Fairy fit into all of this, then? At some point you either say, "And then a miracle occurs" or you don't. Which way do you go?
Originally posted by Gawdzilla
reply to post by Aermacchi
"I have read many of your posts spy and I find them interestingly in alignment with what genesis says about "pre man" and small changes the creator makes to the man he makes in his image having some tweak if you will where all the difference was made. This some postulate to be the merging of a chromosome the one Ken Miller says proves evolution but the phony Christian doesn't even consider the fact that it may not have been a mutation at all. It may very well have been done ON PURPOSE"
When I ask you for your evidence in support of that all I'm going to hear is echoes, right? But, please, do tell how the Great Sky Fairy works in mysterious ways. Like changing that chromosome.