the extinction of evolutionsist apes

this is what they been hiding from you
Y chromsome comparsion between humans and chimps .
notice the yellow and blue are not from chimps or a common ancestor.
they are found in all animals. and everything is in reverse the heterochromatin, the pseudoautosomal terminal cap, the (other) section only in chimps,Y chromosome is known to have not recombined for 400 million years, how did all this rearranged like this????
human and chimp y chromosome comparision

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...


notice the yellow section in the periphery (forearm) of the long arm ( in Chimp) swiched yo the inner part of the long arm in the human (next to the centromere-center of the chromosome). that is an impossibility, especially to know that the yellow section is always in the periphery in the long arm in all apes????. during miosis the parts close to the centromer-center) is the least likely to experience change or crossover, so how the forearm became the arm???
or vise versa how could the arm become the forearm???
obviously they were differently configured and no evolution happened between apes and humans!!!

reply to post by adnanmuf


There will, of course, be similarities between Humans, Chimps, and All animals as we've all a common ancestor way back starting in the Cambrian.

In fact, after the great Permian extinction event moving into the Triassic, we have
Lystrosaurus,
one of the very few survivors of the event, which is the common ancestor of pretty much everything, including dinosaurs, mammals, marsupials, birds, amphibians, and even reptiles.

reply to post by AliceBleachWhite


that is the hypothesis, but not necessarily the truth. these different colors could had been put by the creater like that not necessarily evolved between animals.
the y chromsome supposedly started 400 million years ago, and the yellow part is the oldest part found in insects 400 million years ago (supposedly), but how could it move to the center while it is always on the periphery in other animals and all of the apes (gorillas, chimps, macac, babon, bonono, orangotan...)
the yellow section could not possibly move to the center of the chromosome if humans and chimps are related or descendent from same ancestor. because the center of the chromosome near the centromere is immune to crossover or recombination!
look at the picture again. it is weird.

reply to post by adnanmuf


So what is your hypothesis for why the creator would make humans and also a species as similar to humans as chimpanzees? Was he running out of ideas?

reply to post by adnanmuf


The first link is not working, at least not from the UK but I see your point and can only answer by saying we are not Primate's (though there are a few in the Anglican church ), I would love to see a Y chromosone comparison to the resynthesised DNA of the StarChild skull as I believe there was an entire age of evolution before 2.25 billion years ago (from about 2.25 billion years ago to about 740 million years ago the earth underwent a series of super ice ages collectively know as the snow ball earth theory and it is hypothesised by the theorists the the ice cap reached to the equator so the earth would have looked like Hoth from star wars the empire strikes back but no life except near the thermal vents deep under the oceans and subterranean life forms that we are only now cataloguing (not cave species but actual living organisms some multi cellular that live as much as over 2km down in the bedrock) survived), My own belief is that even if the human race is relatively young it did not come from monkeys ALONE but may be a hybrid genetic model perhaps an attempt by a now uncompatible species to recolonise there origin world, there is no evidence but much conjecture and the Anthropologists have the upper hand until it arrises.

My own belief in this does not challenge my faith as a christian but some would find it radically incompatible.

reply to post by theantediluvian


there is no similarities other than the outside morphology. if humans were descendents from apes you will find medical scientists scrambling to study apes to make use of the similarities to better medical diseases of humans . if indeed our genes descend from genes then all our diseases will solved. however there are no similarities. and that should give you a smoking gun, if you have not figured out yet.
the y chromosome shows you that neither the human y could evolve in the chimp y or not the chimp y could had evolved into human y chromosome. simply because the yellow section on the outside of the long arm of chimp chromosome can not evolute to the inner side near the centromere, nor vise versa can happen.
an indication they never evolved from each other.
shape similarities are not indication of evolving.
you know now scientists make genetically modified corn by implanting pig dna in the corn dna.
( an act of intelligent design by humans), wonder if then corn is evolved from pigs??
just like humans (intelligent) do intelligent desigh on corn, also the other intelligent designer did something to us, creating us from bits and pieces of prefabricated dna segments, segments that did not belong to any animal in the first place. it is like cut and paste.
just corn having pig dna does not make the corn declare that that dna piece in it is its property and that who ever got it (such as pigs, etc0 is thanx to the corn benevalence to the other species because they evolved (evolution) from the corn!!
you have to wisen up and think for yourself, not swallow everything they give to you.
Evolution is a lie.
evolution by difinition means change towerds better, however all Y chromosome are (designed ) to expire, once males are gone in a species the species is gone. the Y chromsome is designed to degrade slowly in time . it is probably why so many species went extinct because they lost the y chromsome. humans are expected to lose it in 5 million years. I don't know how evolution is gonna help you then.
obviously evolution (a not intelligent design) want you dead not better.
screw Darwin.
only pigs are the best candidates for medical studies, obviously not similar to humans.

LABTECH767
reply to post by adnanmuf

 

The first like is not working, at least not from the UK but I see your point and can only answer by saying we are not Primate's (though there are a few in the Anglican church

), I would love to see a Y chromosone comparison to the resynthesised DNA of the StarChild skull as I believe there was an entire age of evolution before 2.25 billion years ago (from about 2.25 billion years ago to about 740 million years ago the earth underwent a series of super ice ages collectively know as the snow ball earth theory and it is hypothesised by the theorists the the ice cap reached to the equator so the earth would have looked like Hoth from star wars the empire strikes back but no life except near the thermal vents deep under the oceans and subterranean life forms that we are only now cataloguing (not cave species but actual living organisms some multi cellular that live as much as over 2km down in the bedrock) survived), My own belief is that even if the human race is relatively young it did not come from monkeys ALONE but may be a hybrid genetic model perhaps an attempt by a now uncompatible species to recolonise there origin world, there is no evidence but much conjecture and the Anthropologists have the upper hand until it arrises.

My own belief in this does not challenge my faith as a christian but some would find it radically incompatible.

Why? Why would it be necessary for an alien civilization to travel interstellar distances to genetically engineer organisms from our planet to recolonize their own? If they possessed the technology to pull that off, wouldn't it make more sense for them to just modify themselves? For the record, a conjecture is an opinion formed when one has information that is incomplete not nonexistent. Can you explain what is wrong with the hypotheses put forth by anthropologists that necessitates alternatives like alien intervention?

adnanmuf
evolution by difinition means change towerds better

Do you work for DHS? I only ask because you too seem to think that by repeating the same untrue statement over and over it will become true.

reply to post by adnanmuf


You need to stop basing your opinions on your imagination. Allow me to point out some inconsistencies in your thinking as well as some outright false assumptions:

- Stating that the validity of evolutionary theory is predicated on a belief that humans evolved from chimpanzees or vice versa is both creating a false dilemma and a wholly inaccurate representation of commonly accepted theories of primate evolution which in fact holds that these species have a common ancestor.

- Chimpanzees are and have been used in medical experimentation. It was only last year that the NIH announced that they would end most use of chimpanzees as test subjects. Pigs are used because they are FAR more abundant (and a common livestock) and it's viewed by many to be ethically favorable to use anything else (including pigs) because of how closely related humans and chimpanzees (or other apes) are. Pigs share physiological characteristics, particularly in terms of organs, sufficiently similar to humans to be more useful than other species.

- As for the degeneration of the Y chromosome. Current research seems to dispute some older assumptions. Please refer to this source.

- You also managed to be completely wrong in your assertion that evolution is a progression toward "better" organisms. Evolution is simply a change in inherited genes over successive generations. The essence of evolutionary theory is that the changes conferring advantage against various pressures lead to more successful reproduction thereby resulting in more copies.

- I think it's ironic that you don't trust scientists when it comes to evolution but you cite a scientific source as "proof" of your misguided claims. How do you decide which parts of what to believe?

Accusing somebody of being close minded or easily led for failing to accept your misbegotten speculations does nothing to substantiate your claims but rather points to an apparent bias on your part.

reply to post by peter vlar


why dont you enlighten us about what is evolution.
if there is evolution it is by intelligent design.
evolution is the incremental changes that lead to something better.

that is not what we see onearth, hundreds of species have gone extinct on daily basis.
and hundred of species appear daily out of thin air.
and y chromosome has only one way towards extinction.
if humans can do intelligent design why nobody else can?
obviously intelligent design exists already why deny it.

anybody who made it to high school knows that dna segemts near the centromere can not move . and things on the periphery can only cross over to another place on the periphery.
even though this does not happen to y chromosome because it is too small. . not only the yellow segment moved to the center but the grey segment around the centromere went away. the whole red segment on the long arm of the human chromosome completey vanished even though it is two thirds of the chromosome, making the chimp Y third the size of the human y. obviosly we think we know that red segment might not be needed but then how did the chimp dna know that, was it intelligent and used intelligent design to shed it?
why the yellow segment always on the periphery of all different apes Y? but only human why the yellow in the middle.

why the human y have a big segment pink not found in other apes ys?
they say it was transposed after human split from the apes, yeh, right! so why it has so many useful jumping genes and Alu, may be the intelligent dna found about the usefulness of that segment on the x chromosome and took it , kind of intelligent design?

reply to post by adnanmuf


Thanks for showing you read NOTHING I wrote in the other thread. I'm not going to repeat it for a 5th time.

reply to post by theantediluvian


And there you have a point, but if they were an extraplanetary species (not from so far away) whom simply wanted a sub species but not too smart for some reason and remember the whole method of genetic engineering a new sub species (which is the same as modifying themselves) may have been a new science to them, how many of them were there, were they techno savages whom no longer understood there own technology, the number of possabilitys are too high as anything beyond this is hypothesis pure and simple, I never said though that they came from interstellar space - what I suggested was that they are from here and lived in the solar system - possible mars as I truly believe the face is artificial regardless of the double image sampling done by the sub contracting photographic enhancement company that removed all image detail and reduced it to nothing more than an image of rubble, indeed when the technique is reversed a voyager like image reappears and the question was asked by the photographic specialist why the company responsible for the image used a lossy technique that stripped information from the image.

My belief was some time in the first quarter of the solar system's existance, ie prior to the snow ball earth period so over 2 billion years ago and remember our own evolutionary tree is only believed to be 650 million years old (100 million after the earth warmed up again) from single celled organisms to multicelled YOU so that means there was enough time not counting inter glacial periods during the 1.5 billion year snow ball earth period for life to have evolved into complex organisms several times, the lack of oxides and other chemical traces is often quoted but remember the entire surface of the earth recycles over a 650 million year period SO the survival of fossil and even microbial fossil as well as the chemical compounds quoted would be only in the few areas that were untouched by techtonic geological activity but then those areas were not exposed back then as they have had to weather out for us to sample today, the star child skull is interesting in that though a large number of people believe it to be a deformed child when a technique for making ancient (700 years or so so not that ancient) DNA replicate so it could be read was used they found a number of very significant differences, the endrons (UNUSED, supposedly DNA called Junk DNA) were almost identical to most life on earth but the main sequence would rule out any link to known life forms and it did share human structure but for instance the cartilage for the eyes was completely different (assuming that the DNA strand identified as that in comparison to a human was for the eyes in this other species), the Bone of the skull is more like the hard enamal of your teeth than bone and is reinforced with fibrouse structures, it is one seventh as thick as a human skull but far harder,.
The endron similarity (But not identical) could be caused by bacterial contamination but this is not definite and it could indicate this species evolved from a seperate evolutionary tree that branched with ours at the single celled organisms level so before our evolutionary tree began.

So given the Endron information and the different main sequence that shares only general similarity to human and is obviously a different species this means that is could only come from another species with a brain bigger than us and a skeletal structure unlike ours, with significant tissue differences so different in fact a lion has more similarity to a finch, a remnant of an earlier evolutionary epoch perhaps before the snowball earth.

You know I'd refute your OP, just like your last one, with links and a well thought out response; but I feel like you'd do the same thing as you did in my last one. Ignore it and pretend like it never existed. So I'm just going to settle with this. You're wrong.

adnanmuf

and hundred of species appear daily out of thin air.

£1,000 to a charity of your choice if you can name one species that has 'appeared out of thin air' in the past 1,000 years.

Will you kindly give £10 to a charity of my choice if you fail?

Just because we didn't know it existed doesn't mean it didn't exist

reply to post by AndyMayhew


Don't hold your breath. In another thread by this author I offered my first born and a herd of goats in blood tribute to his god if he could verify claims. FYI my kid is here doing homework and the goats are still waiting at the farm!

AliceBleachWhite
reply to post by adnanmuf

 

There will, of course, be similarities between Humans, Chimps, and All animals as we've all a common ancestor way back starting in the Cambrian.

In fact, after the great Permian extinction event moving into the Triassic, we have
Lystrosaurus,
one of the very few survivors of the event, which is the common ancestor of pretty much everything, including dinosaurs, mammals, marsupials, birds, amphibians, and even reptiles.

edit on 11/6/2013 by AliceBleachWhite because: (no reason given)

Everything descended from this one creature? And you have proof of your statement how? Maybe a fossil record of a bird and dinosaur combined? Oh that right that find was proven to be a hoax.

guitarplayer
Maybe a fossil record of a bird and dinosaur combined? Oh that right that find was proven to be a hoax.

Do you mean Archaeoraptor? If so it wasnt a hoax perpetrated by scientists. It began in Gina where a farmer digging in a shale out where many fossils are found came across a fairly unique find. It was dropped and broken. He thought he could get more money for it by making the fossil look more complete so when cementing the original fragments together and added some other pieces that he thought fit. It was smuggled out to a private collector. Word got out and a Museum won it at auction. National geographic got involved and overexcited about something that hasn't received more than a cursory inspection but even at that early stage there were serious doubts of the specimens authenticity. A second examination indicated that the specimen was surely a composite of at least 3 species. Everything was sent for peer review to Nature. National Geographic was on a deadline and Nature rejected it for review. In a rush they then sent it to Science. 2 reviewers at science also determined that the specimen was illegally smuggled and doctored in china to increase its value. Science too rejected the paper. The 2 people who ran the Dinosaur Museum in Utah,
Stephen A. Czerkas and his wife, Sylvia Czerkas who had bought the fossil at auction neglected to inform National Geographic because the story was already on its way to the presses and would attract visitors to their museum. Nat Geo ran the story and a few months were furious and issued and apology and retraction. It's a giant cluster f**k for sure but not quite a hoax. Despite this huge stain, there have been several verified, feathered dinosaurs discovered showing a distinct link between theropods and birds.

peter vlar

guitarplayer
Maybe a fossil record of a bird and dinosaur combined? Oh that right that find was proven to be a hoax.

Do you mean Archaeoraptor? If so it wasnt a hoax perpetrated by scientists. It began in Gina where a farmer digging in a shale out where many fossils are found came across a fairly unique find. It was dropped and broken. He thought he could get more money for it by making the fossil look more complete so when cementing the original fragments together and added some other pieces that he thought fit. It was smuggled out to a private collector. Word got out and a Museum won it at auction. National geographic got involved and overexcited about something that hasn't received more than a cursory inspection but even at that early stage there were serious doubts of the specimens authenticity. A second examination indicated that the specimen was surely a composite of at least 3 species. Everything was sent for peer review to Nature. National Geographic was on a deadline and Nature rejected it for review. In a rush they then sent it to Science. 2 reviewers at science also determined that the specimen was illegally smuggled and doctored in china to increase its value. Science too rejected the paper. The 2 people who ran the Dinosaur Museum in Utah,
Stephen A. Czerkas and his wife, Sylvia Czerkas who had bought the fossil at auction neglected to inform National Geographic because the story was already on its way to the presses and would attract visitors to their museum. Nat Geo ran the story and a few months were furious and issued and apology and retraction. It's a giant cluster f**k for sure but not quite a hoax. Despite this huge stain, there have been several verified, feathered dinosaurs discovered showing a distinct link between theropods and birds.

edit on 6-11-2013 by peter vlar because: (no reason given)

Do you have a link for all this evidence of feathered dinosaurs?

reply to post by guitarplayer




news.nationalgeographic.com...


72.30.186.176...://cc.bingj.com/cache.aspx?q=dinos aur+fossils+with+feather&d=4986977857568811&mkt=en-US&setlang=en-US&w=XJ9bBMrJVpfb0IHePLKno-asO94jiSJW&icp=1&.intl=us&sig=7SgGmvOnymnwTae6ATdsoA--

www.wired.com...

news.nationalgeographic.com...

news.nationalgeographic.com...[/url]

westerndigs.org...

I can't get the 2nd link to work right. It's a cached version of an article you'd normally have to pay for so it should work by copy and pasting it.

reply to post by guitarplayer


it is been proven 10 years ago beyond doubt that all dinosaurs are chicken, by dna and by microscopic visualization of fossilized soft tissue in the bone that sppecific only to chicken family ( birds) of animals.
feathures were not designed for flying . it just the feathered animals started flying, but non feathered animals can fly like bats(mammals) or better yey the intelligent designer cresated feathured animals that don't fly and feathured animals that can fly, same for non feathered animals. actually feasthures are the original hair. some diseases a mutaion of hair gene cause people to grow feathers instead of hair. feathers are much better than hair to preserve internal heat!