The nail in the Evolutionary Coffin, the final spike placed there by the Royal Society itself.

reply to post by squiz

Ok, I'll give you a chance - source for the genome comparisons you've seen between human and chimpanzee? I'm open minded, but the only studies I've seen were the same ones posted by Astyanax. If there's proof, that comes from a reputable source, I'm willing to change my mind...

reply to post by squiz

The data I have already posted contradict your claims. There is nothing further to discuss.

So how is that the chimp genome is 10 to 12% larger than human but the diference in the full genome sequence is 96%?

I've already explained why.

Originally posted by philosopheroftruth
reply to post by squiz

 

Ok, I'll give you a chance - source for the genome comparisons you've seen between human and chimpanzee? I'm open minded, but the only studies I've seen were the same ones posted by Astyanax. If there's proof, that comes from a reputable source, I'm willing to change my mind...

www.nih.gov...

Original paper here:

www.nature.com...

reply to post by HappyBunny

I think you misunderstood - I was asking squiz to post a source saying humans and chimps have less than 95% similarities. I've only seen reliable sources saying we share around 95-96%. If there is some secret, groundbreaking paper that states humans and chimps are only around 70% similar, I may be willing to change my mind.

Originally posted by pikestaff
Bare feet in 'fresh' lava, was the lava hot? so no one would walk on it, or was it cold? so its too hard for an imprint?
that is simple enough.

Lava starts out really hot,but it does cool off and can easily be walked in pain free while its mostly cooled down,yet still warm and malleable,like stepping into and leaving your footprints in soft,thick mud...

reply to post by philosopheroftruth

Probably some such source as this.

Originally posted by philosopheroftruth
reply to post by Rocketman7

 

As a final note, if you believe that we were created in an alien's image, then why on earth are there so many unique "images" of humans like you claim? Wouldn't they make us in one image, rather than a billion?

We probably were first genetically manipulated by benevolent aliens to appear in their image,but then there was an atomic war on earth between the benevolent aliens and earth invading malevolent aliens and the global radioactive fallout from that nuclear war created mutations in our genome...www.bibliotecapleyades.net...

C'mon guys do the math, where's my answer? how do we get that figure? You post the papers I've already read them.
Do you know how this figure is calculated? I gave that answer back in my first post. BLAST.

And yes Jeffery Tomkins PHD knows his stuff. Perhaps he is biased because of his faith? Perhaps Darwinist were biased when they claimed 99% similarity way back in 1975 when it was impossible to know for sure? In fact quite certainly. Perhaps they were also biased when they claimed junk DNA was left over evolutionary noise with no function?

Dr Richard Buggs is another.

To compare the two genomes, the first thing we must do is to line up the parts of each genome that are similar. When we do this alignment, we discover that only 2400 million of the human genome’s 3164.7 million ’letters’ align with the chimpanzee genome - that is, 76% of the human genome. Some scientists have argued that the 24% of the human genome that does not line up with the chimpanzee genome is useless ”junk DNA”. However, it now seems that this DNA could contain over 600 protein-coding genes, and also code for functional RNA molecules.

Looking closely at the chimpanzee-like 76% of the human genome, we find that to make an exact alignment, we often have to introduce artificial gaps in either the human or the chimp genome. These gaps give another 3% difference. So now we have a 73% similarity between the two genomes.

In the neatly aligned sequences we now find another form of difference, where a single ’letter’ is different between the human and chimp genomes. These provide another 1.23% difference between the two genomes. Thus, the percentage difference is now at around 72%.

We also find places where two pieces of human genome align with only one piece of chimp genome, or two pieces of chimp genome align with one piece of human genome. This ”copy number variation” causes another 2.7% difference between the two species. Therefore the total similarity of the genomes could be below 70%.

This figure does not take include differences in the organization of the two genomes. At present we cannot fully assess the difference in structure of the two genomes, because the human genome was used as a template (or ”scaffold”) when the chimpanzee draft genome was assembled.

www.richardbuggs.com...

I know it's a hard pill to swallow, you've been mislead.

See that last part there, the Human genome was used as a template when this draft was assembled. Biased?
It's incomplete yet we are so sure of ourselves.

The only real reason why there even was a fabricated evolution "theory" shoved down everyones throat and rammed into everyones mind,was to keep us away from the supressed truth,about our past and about our origins and the sad and sorry fact that "Those We Call Cavemen Were All That Remained Of Humanity After The Last Time We Destroyed Ourselves' > www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by blocula


I simply find that hard to believe. I do not think that it would be possible to walk on malleable rock that wouldn't destroy the feet. Hot hot do you think rock has to be to be flexible? As posted earlier by someone working with volcanologists, the researchers walking in their special boots near flows do not leave footprints. Besides the material in question is a tuff.

reply to post by squiz

I'm pretty suspicious of anything from the ICR (pretty hard to be unbiased when it's your sole goal to prove something wrong), but I haven't heard anything discrediting Richard Buggs. I'll also state it again and say that I'm no biologist, so I can't personally prove/disprove what he says on the matter. I'm open minded on the subject, and would like to see what other scientists say about his findings (I don't close myself off to anything, but I will admit that I currently assign a lot more probability to the side of the theory of evolution due to logic and evidence). Anyway, I feel this is gonna derail the OP's thread, so I'll leave it there for now.

reply to post by blocula

So according to your theory of nuclear fallout causing more diversity, would you make a prediction that over time, Japan should show more diversity in life than other geological locations from around the 1950s onward?

Originally posted by philosopheroftruth
reply to post by blocula

 

So according to your theory of nuclear fallout causing more diversity, would you make a prediction that over time, Japan should show more diversity in life than other geological locations from around the 1950s onward?

Well, they did invent the Walkman...as Marty McFly put it, everyone knows the best stuff is made in Japan.

Just kidding, the reason the Japanese grew so quickly is from our guilty feelings for bombing them, so we poured tons of money into the country to help them rebuild.

Although there are all sorts of claims about an ancient nuke war we see none of the effects of such war such as:
1. blast craters
2. ancient artifacts from a high tech society

Where are the artifacts and blast marks?

The problem is that these claims are no more true than the 3 claims that are the OP.

reply to post by Rocketman7


What a load of nonsense from a position of delusion, with nothing to back it up.

Originally posted by aorAki
reply to post by Rocketman7

 

What a load of nonsense from a position of delusion, with nothing to back it up.

Just for the hell of it,would you or anyone else please try and "back up" the often claimed and professed fact that the sun is really 93,000,000 miles away and try and "back up" the often claimed and professed fact that the earth is not hollow,it cant really be done,but go ahead and try,because i know,that all we really know,is what they want us to know and what we are led to believe and the things they think they know as fact,are sooner or later proved to have been false,again and again and again...

reply to post by blocula

Just for the hell of it,would you or anyone else please try and "back up" the often claimed and professed fact that the sun is really 93,000,000 miles away and try and "back up" the often claimed and professed fact that the earth is not hollow,it cant really be done,but go ahead and try,because i know,that all we really know,is what they want us to know and what we are led to believe and the things they think they know as fact,are sooner or later proved to have been false,again and again and again...

The mantra of the hoaxer is that science is proved false time and time again. It isn't.

The distance to the Sun changes. We ow that. We know the distance to such precision that it has been determined each year the Earth moves 15cm away from the Sun.

A hollow Earth is simply not possible. It is structurally impossible. Seismic evidence shows that the Earth is not hollow. The mass of the Earth shows that the volume cannot be hollow.

I think part of the problem is understanding that there is a difference between the truth and fact. Fact is simply what we believe to be true. It may not be true and sometimes we learn that our facts are not facts.

Is science proved wrong at times? Sure. Science gets checked again and again and again and new material makes science adjust to new information. For example, is the world flat? If I build a building or do not wander far from home a flat Earth model is more than adequate. If I travel it becomes apparent that the world is not flat. Is the world a ball? Not really, but a ball works for a lot of situations. These different models suit different situations. Is a flat earth wrong? Yes if that model does not match what you do.

Originally posted by blocula

Originally posted by pikestaff
Bare feet in 'fresh' lava, was the lava hot? so no one would walk on it, or was it cold? so its too hard for an imprint?
that is simple enough.

Lava starts out really hot,but it does cool off and can easily be walked in pain free while its mostly cooled down,yet still warm and malleable,like stepping into and leaving your footprints in soft,thick mud...

edit on 5-3-2012 by blocula because: (no reason given)

Uh, no.

Have you tried this?

Just plain wrong!

Originally posted by philosopheroftruth
reply to post by HappyBunny

 

I think you misunderstood - I was asking squiz to post a source saying humans and chimps have less than 95% similarities. I've only seen reliable sources saying we share around 95-96%. If there is some secret, groundbreaking paper that states humans and chimps are only around 70% similar, I may be willing to change my mind.

You're right, I did misunderstand.

Going back to my cave now!