Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Chimps Now to be Considered Humans
National Geographic ^ | 5/19/2003 | kkindt

Posted on 05/20/2003 2:05:10 PM PDT by kkindt

A new report argues that chimpanzees are so closely related to humans that they should be included in our branch of the tree of life. Chimpanzees and other apes have historically been separated from humans in classification schemes, with humans deemed the only living members of the hominid family of species

(Excerpt) Read more at news.nationalgeographic.com ...


TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Culture/Society; Philosophy; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: badscience; chimps; evolunacy; evolution; humannature; imageofgod; soul
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 151-200201-250251-300 ... 451-454 next last
To: tame
Beware the apes in black!!!
201 posted on 05/20/2003 8:21:02 PM PDT by plusone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]

To: TheCrusader; All

202 posted on 05/20/2003 8:22:32 PM PDT by tame (I think that mouse is evolving!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies]

To: Aric2000
"Is that why when I ask for ONE piece of scientifically verifiable evidence that proves that evolution is false, the creationists become VERY quiet, or do their best to misrepresent it to fit their silly notions?"

You've got the cart before the horse, sir. Theories don't have to be proven false, theories by definition are unproven suppositions. Until a theory is proven true, it remains an hypothesis, a guess. The onus is on you to prove your conjecture. Indeed, your very question is a ruse.

203 posted on 05/20/2003 8:22:35 PM PDT by TheCrusader
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: TheCrusader; All

204 posted on 05/20/2003 8:26:02 PM PDT by tame (I keep growing and evolving. Mankind will soon be my pet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 203 | View Replies]

To: HairOfTheDog
"I would guess that is most helpful getting around here... the only relevant motion is the motion relative to us. If we left the earth, I would guess that would be less helpful to us".

Thank you for so eloquently proving my point. Last time I checked, NASA makes those little ship thingies that leave the earth. :o)

205 posted on 05/20/2003 8:28:55 PM PDT by TheCrusader
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: tame
LOL, damn that's funny, CUT IT OUT. hahahaha
206 posted on 05/20/2003 8:29:51 PM PDT by TheCrusader
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 204 | View Replies]

To: Guillermo
Um, equating Chimps with Humans is not about scientific research, it's about a political and social agenda.

Heh.... Some of us just think it is pretty fascinating... You on the other hand, only worry about whether or not you are going to have to share something with a monkey.

If you guys would have read the article, it clearly does not say "Chimps Now to be Considered Humans". It just means that somewhere 5 million years back on the tree, there are branches close enough to consider them on the same Genus.... not the same species. We can't breed, let alone marry.... don't worry yourself about it.

207 posted on 05/20/2003 8:30:22 PM PDT by HairOfTheDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: TheCrusader
Thank you for so eloquently proving my point. Last time I checked, NASA makes those little ship thingies that leave the earth. :o)

Oh brother. Yes, we do leave the earth.... Relatively speaking, our space flights have brought us great leaps, but relative to how big a place the universe really is, not much higher than a pole vaulter.

208 posted on 05/20/2003 8:38:14 PM PDT by HairOfTheDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 205 | View Replies]

To: dagoofyfoot
The thing that scare's the hell out of me is that some loser from "Dem Underground" will read this thread and lump me in with the likes of you, and the next thing I know they'll be saying that all conservatives are "nuts" and here's the proof!

Funny, we share the same fear. That and my additional fear that they will think we don't know that "scares" is not possessive.

209 posted on 05/20/2003 8:42:42 PM PDT by HairOfTheDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies]

To: tame
ROTFLMAO OK, you got me...I'm losing it now.


(singing)...and the monkey wrapped his @$$ around the flag pole...to see the grass grow...what an @$$hole...(men in white coats walking towards me now)
210 posted on 05/20/2003 8:43:11 PM PDT by dagoofyfoot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: kkindt
To err is human, but to order pizza over the internet...


211 posted on 05/20/2003 8:44:37 PM PDT by Slyfox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HairOfTheDog
"That is what science is, the study of things.... "

And as we all know, there is what we call "exact science", hypotheses that can be proved, or reproduced through experiment, etc. There are different forms of science. The people who try to present these ape/man/origin-of-man theories as exact science need to be exposed. And judging by the rage of some these pseudo scientists, I can see they don't like to have their misrepresentations torn apart by logic and reason. They present their findings, but festoon them in a fashion that attempts to confuse the reader into thinking their theory has been proven by exact science, it's all smoke and mirrors. That chimps have a 99% similar DNA to humans means nothing to the origin of man, especially when you consider that cats have a 90% similar DNA to humans. And even more so when you consider the fact that science itself has never held DNA to be the indicator of human origin. There are so many presumptions, presppositions and holes in this "scientific" argument that it's like Swiss cheese. As for me, science itself proves the existence of God, just as the Masterpiece proves the existence of an artist. Pax Chrisi.

212 posted on 05/20/2003 8:52:47 PM PDT by TheCrusader
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: honeygrl
Not if you moved to Texas. I remember reading in some propaganda about the sodomy case (Lawrence v. Texas, currently pending decision by the Supreme Court) that while homosexual sodomy was illegal in Texas, bestiality was not.

Then again, that makes sense, since, as I learned from Full Metal Jacket, only steers and queers come from Texas. You can only expect to get away with outlawing one of the two.
213 posted on 05/20/2003 8:56:16 PM PDT by TheAngryClam (This space for rent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 196 | View Replies]

To: TheCrusader
That chimps have a 99% similar DNA to humans means nothing to the origin of man, especially when you consider that cats have a 90% similar DNA to humans.

Uh huh.... doesn't surprise me, cats and humans are both mammals. The distinctions become smaller the closer you get.... kindof like taking a distance and with each step cutting it in half.

They present their findings, but festoon them in a fashion that attempts to confuse the reader into thinking their theory has been proven by exact science...

That is bull. No one educated at all believes that theories about things as massive and unrepeatable as creation or evolution are fully known, proven, or that there will be no more mysteries or surprises or future better theories.

As for me, science itself proves the existence of God, just as the Masterpiece proves the existence of an artist.

Uh huh.... OK - Some still make a life out of finding out a couple more details. For some, just knowing more about it is cool.

214 posted on 05/20/2003 9:03:30 PM PDT by HairOfTheDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 212 | View Replies]

To: OREALLY
When science can disprove the existence of God I'll think about !

So where did He disprove the existance of science?

You don't think it can be true both that a deity exists and that life evolves?
215 posted on 05/20/2003 9:10:12 PM PDT by adam_az
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Wilhelm Tell
I don't think dogs understand grammar or anything like that, but they are smart enough to associate certain noises we make with certain behavior we expect of them

Doesn't sound too terribly different to me.
216 posted on 05/20/2003 9:16:28 PM PDT by adam_az
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: HairOfTheDog
We can't breed,

I would bet on that, have you ever taken a close look at CARVEL.

217 posted on 05/20/2003 9:21:32 PM PDT by org.whodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 207 | View Replies]

To: HairOfTheDog
We can't breed,

I would not bet on that, have you ever taken a close look at CARVEL.

218 posted on 05/20/2003 9:22:22 PM PDT by org.whodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 207 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat
LOL!
219 posted on 05/20/2003 9:28:38 PM PDT by HairOfTheDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 218 | View Replies]

To: F.J. Mitchell
LOL! Thanks for the comment...
220 posted on 05/20/2003 9:37:24 PM PDT by Major_Risktaker (same old problems, different day...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: TheCrusader
Oh PUH lease....

Now it is on you to prove your supposition.

You talk a lot, but I have yet to see a fact come out of you.

I hear a creationist loon spouting off about something that he knows next to nothing about.

Keep going, your rants are rather amusing.
221 posted on 05/20/2003 9:38:50 PM PDT by Aric2000 (Are you on Grampa Dave's team? I am!! $5 a month is all it takes, come join!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 212 | View Replies]

To: TheCrusader

"Is that why when I ask for ONE piece of scientifically verifiable evidence that proves that evolution is false, the creationists become VERY quiet, or do their best to misrepresent it to fit their silly notions?"

You've got the cart before the horse, sir. Theories don't have to be proven false, theories by definition are unproven suppositions. Until a theory is proven true, it remains an hypothesis, a guess. The onus is on you to prove your conjecture. Indeed, your very question is a ruse.

Nope. Theories get proven false all the time. What you cannot do is prove a theory true in a strict sense; the best you can do is 1) build a circumstantial case for it via several lines of evidence, and 2) prove all the serious competing theories false.
222 posted on 05/20/2003 10:21:03 PM PDT by jennyp (http://crevo.bestmessageboard.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 203 | View Replies]

To: kkindt
Bye-Buy Darwin
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3b2952e10307.htm
Refuting Darwinism
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/821189/posts
The Dini-gration of Darwin
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/902550/posts
The Threat of Creationism
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/844288/posts
223 posted on 05/20/2003 10:26:03 PM PDT by Coleus (God is Pro Life and Straight)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TheCrusader; Kenny Bunk
[Kenny Bunk:] Yo Junior, we share 90% of our DNA with watermelons. So does that mean we must invite chimps to our 4th of July picnic?
[TheCrusader:] That chimps have a 99% similar DNA to humans means nothing to the origin of man, especially when you consider that cats have a 90% similar DNA to humans.

LOL! OK you two, your homework for tonite is to read post 149. There'll be a quiz on this in the morning. :-)

224 posted on 05/20/2003 10:27:47 PM PDT by jennyp (http://crevo.bestmessageboard.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 212 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
When do you think the leftist world of academia will declare unborn babies humans? After all, they share 100% of our genetic code.

They'll declare unborn babies as nothing but part of the mother's "tissue" even though it can be proven the baby has it's own DNA. DNA evidence is useful when you want to say humans are nothing more than some kind of animal that should have certain rights because of it ---but DNA cannot be used when it comes to the unborn humans.

225 posted on 05/20/2003 10:51:06 PM PDT by FITZ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: Aric2000
And we did not evolve from chimps, and science has NEVER claimed that to be the case. At some point in the past, the chimpanzees and we humans had a common ancestor, we evolved separately FROM that COMMON ANCESTOR.

Humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes ---chimps and gorillas have 24 pairs. How many pairs of chromosomes did the "common ancestor" have? Was it 23 or 24 pairs? How do you "evolve" missing or added chromosomes ---that would happen all at one time. If a chimpanzee gives birth to a creature with 23 chromosomes, that offspring isn't going to be a well-formed chimpanzee able to survive well. Evolve would imply the genetic material changes little by little --not some big loss of two chromosomes at once but I don't see how they'd go away gene by gene.

226 posted on 05/20/2003 11:02:01 PM PDT by FITZ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: Aric2000
And I know all about gene translocations also --and I don't see that as any kind of explanation ---because the deformities causes by anything more than a small part are usually incompatible with life. Trisomies usually die before born, if they live they aren't likely to do well ---and to keep up a different number of chromosomes, the chimp with the missing set of chromosomes would have to breed with other chimps with 23 pairs ---to form humans. That seems like far too much chance that another exact kind of chromosome translocation happened at the same time.
227 posted on 05/20/2003 11:09:24 PM PDT by FITZ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 221 | View Replies]

To: Ichneumon
"Furthermore, they can follow complex commands like, "go out into the hall, open the box, take out the red ball, and put it in the freezer."

My dog Silas understands complex commands,for example I can say in a very normal voice "Baby don't you think it's time for you to go to bed" and he turns around and goes into the bedroom, up on the bed and goes to sleep. Also he really enjoys counting up to 10. He takes deep pride in the fact that he is in charge of the kitties and makes sure they tow the line. I can talk to him in a normal voice about many things that he responds to in a way that says he understood me. Don't you think he should qaulify too?
228 posted on 05/20/2003 11:57:43 PM PDT by Bellflower
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: The Old Hoosier
Yeh, Where do sheep fit in??
229 posted on 05/21/2003 12:11:08 AM PDT by U S Army EOD (Served in Korea, Vietnam and still fighting America's enemies on Home Front)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Major_Risktaker
Now that you mention it, he does monkey around a lot doesn't he??
230 posted on 05/21/2003 12:18:11 AM PDT by U S Army EOD (Served in Korea, Vietnam and still fighting America's enemies on Home Front)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Wilhelm Tell
My cat could talk to me. He had this sound that meant, "give me some of your beer".
231 posted on 05/21/2003 12:23:31 AM PDT by U S Army EOD (Served in Korea, Vietnam and still fighting America's enemies on Home Front)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: Bigg Red
In the new scientific name, "Homo" (the genus name) means "man".

It's the definition of "genus" that's important here.

232 posted on 05/21/2003 12:24:19 AM PDT by MattAMiller (Iraq was liberated in my name, how about yours?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: TheCrusader
Remember chimps beat man into space.
233 posted on 05/21/2003 12:33:43 AM PDT by U S Army EOD (Served in Korea, Vietnam and still fighting America's enemies on Home Front)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 205 | View Replies]

To: A. Pole
<< This is a nonsense. >>

Is this a nonsense?

Is the Pope Polish?

'Course its a nonsense!

Not the slightest doubt in my mind.

But then maybe we should let the Pantheists entertain themselves on their way to Hell? Let them have their puny fun?

After all we have watched and laughed for years as the entire KKKli'toon criminal gang struggled to KKKon-Vince itself -- and the world beyond Hot Springs and Peking -- that you could make strawberry jam oudda pigshit.

And that one never worked either.

And our recovery proceeds apace.
234 posted on 05/21/2003 1:14:14 AM PDT by Brian Allen ( Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God - Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: TheCrusader; Aric2000
To: Aric2000

"Is that why when I ask for ONE piece of scientifically verifiable evidence that proves that evolution is false, the creationists become VERY quiet, or do their best to misrepresent it to fit their silly notions?"

You've got the cart before the horse, sir. Theories don't have to be proven false, theories by definition are unproven suppositions. Until a theory is proven true, it remains an hypothesis, a guess. The onus is on you to prove your conjecture. Indeed, your very question is a ruse.


203 posted on 05/20/2003 10:22 PM CDT by TheCrusader


Ha! Boy you nailed that guy right on the head!
Unfortunately, you aren't the first on FR to do so. :)
235 posted on 05/21/2003 1:45:07 AM PDT by ALS (ConservaBabes.com - Home of ConservaBot™)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 203 | View Replies]

To: Kenny Bunk
Yo Junior, we share 90% of our DNA with watermelons.

And you can cite a source for this statement? I doubt it seriously because it ain't true.

236 posted on 05/21/2003 2:06:59 AM PDT by Junior (Computers make very fast, very accurate mistakes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 199 | View Replies]

To: tbpiper
If the chimps get union jobs, the unions will make them members and demand that jobless chimps get benefits. The unions will also demand that the chimps get special education, since they are linguistically challenged.
237 posted on 05/21/2003 2:08:56 AM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March (LIBERTY or DEATH!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: TheCrusader
The date of the Earth is derived from several radiological dating methods on the rocks which make it up; when those methods agree on a date (i.e., the date is double checked using other methods), then researchers can be confident they have a low-end reference point for the age of the Earth. The upper end can be determined from using the same methods on meteorites, which coalesced (and thus reset their isotopic clocks) from the debris that makes up the planets and moons. These dates are most definitely "scientifically determined."

Many of the folks on these threads would be really suprised by the methods researchers have developed over the decades to work out sticky problems such as dating objects. And they'd also be surprised at the lengths researchers go to to double check any findings they might get. Sometimes I get the impression the less scientifically literate on these threads think scientists get their information from divine revelation, or from pulling numbers out of thin air. The LSL fail to understand the checks and balances used by scientists.

238 posted on 05/21/2003 2:17:41 AM PDT by Junior (Computers make very fast, very accurate mistakes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: HairOfTheDog
I wonder if the genetic codes of homosexuals is similar to that of chimps? Homo-troglodyte-stinky-winkus-sappoen. Homosexuals brag that they have a different genetic makeup. Chimps are not human because they do not produce humans. Homosexual activity also does not produce humans. [I know. I know. If a woman were to rape them....]
239 posted on 05/21/2003 2:18:55 AM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March (LIBERTY or DEATH!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: eeriegeno
A chimp is to be included in the human species...

Genus, not species.

240 posted on 05/21/2003 2:31:55 AM PDT by Junior (Computers make very fast, very accurate mistakes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: plusone
Chimps using vacuums and microwaves is not the point. How many of these appliances did they invent? (Al Gore excluded).

How many have you invented?

By your criterion, most humans don't "count" either.

241 posted on 05/21/2003 3:16:41 AM PDT by Ichneumon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: FITZ; Aric2000; longshadow; RadioAstronomer; Nakatu X
Humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes ---chimps and gorillas have 24 pairs. How many pairs of chromosomes did the "common ancestor" have? Was it 23 or 24 pairs? How do you "evolve" missing or added chromosomes ---that would happen all at one time.

The common ancestor had 24 chromosomes.

If you look at the gene sequences, you'll find that Chromosome 2 in humans is pretty much just 2 shorter chimpanzee chromosomes pasted end-to-end, with perhaps a slight bit of lost overlap:

(H=Human, C=Chimpanzee, G=Gorilla, O=Orangutan)

Somewhere along the line, after humans split off from the other great apes, or during the split itself, there was an accidental fusion of two chromosomes, end-to-end. Where there used to be 24 chromosomes, now there were 23, but containing the same total genes, so other than a "repackaging", the DNA "instructions" remained the same.

If a chimpanzee gives birth to a creature with 23 chromosomes, that offspring isn't going to be a well-formed chimpanzee able to survive well.

It is if the same genes are present, which they would be in the case of a chromosome fusion.

Evolve would imply the genetic material changes little by little --not some big loss of two chromosomes at once but I don't see how they'd go away gene by gene.

Tacking two chromosomes together end-to-end is not a "big loss" of genes, and it really is a "little by little" change in the total genetic code. It's just been "regrouped" a bit. Instead of coming in 24 "packages", it's now contained in 23, but the contents are the same.

So how, you might ask, would the chromosomes from the first 23-chromosome "fused" individual match up with the 24 chromosomes from its mate when it tried to produce offspring? Very well, thanks for asking. The "top half" of the new extra-long Chromosome 2 would adhere to the original chromosome (call it "2p") from which it was formed, and likewise for the "bottom half" which would adhere to the other original shorter chromosome (call it "2q"). In the picture above, imagine the two chimp chromosomes sliding over to "match up" against the human chromosome. The chimp chromosomes would end up butting ends with each other, or slightly overlapping in a "kink", but chromosomes have overcome worse mismatches (just consider the XY pair in every human male -- the X and the Y chromosome are *very* different in shape, length, and structure, but they still pair up).

In fact, the "rubbing ends" of the matched-up chimp chromosomes, adhering to the double-long human-type chromosome, would be more likely to become fused together themselves.

For studies in which recent chromosome fusions have been discovered and found not to cause infertility, see:

Chromosomal heterozygosity and fertility in house mice (Mus musculus domesticus) from Northern Italy. Hauffe HC, Searle JB Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3PS, United Kingdom. hauffe@novanet.it

An observed chromosome fusion: Hereditas 1998;129(2):177-80 A new centric fusion translocation in cattle: rob (13;19). Molteni L, De Giovanni-Macchi A, Succi G, Cremonesi F, Stacchezzini S, Di Meo GP, Iannuzzi L Institute of Animal Husbandry, Faculty of Agricultural Science, Milan, Italy.

J Reprod Fertil 1979 Nov;57(2):363-75 Cytogenetics and reproduction of sheep with multiple centric fusions (Robertsonian translocations). Bruere AN, Ellis PM

J Reprod Fertil Suppl 1975 Oct;(23):356-70 Cytogenetic studies of three equine hybrids. Chandley AC, Short RV, Allen WR.

In that last reference, the Przewalski horse, which has 33 chromosomes, and the domestic horse, with 32 chromosomes (due to a fusion), are able to mate and produce fertile offspring.

Meanwhile, the question may be asked, how do we know that the human Chromosome 2 is actually the result of a chromsome fusion at/since a common ancestor, and not simply a matter of "different design"?

Well, if two chromsomes accidentally merged, there should be molecular remnants of the original chromosomal structures (while a chromosome designed from scratch would have no need for such leftover "train-wreck" pieces).

Ends of chromosomes have characteristic DNA base-pair sequences called "telomeres". And there are indeed remnants of telomeres at the point of presumed fusion on human Chromosome 2 (i.e., where the two ancestral ape chromosomes merged end-to-end). If I may crib from a web page:

Telomeres in humans have been shown to consist of head to tail repeats of the bases 5'TTAGGG running toward the end of the chromosome. Furthermore, there is a characteristic pattern of the base pairs in what is called the pre-telomeric region, the region just before the telomere. When the vicinity of chromosome 2 where the fusion is expected to occur (based on comparison to chimp chromosomes 2p and 2q) is examined, we see first sequences that are characteristic of the pre-telomeric region, then a section of telomeric sequences, and then another section of pre-telomeric sequences. Furthermore, in the telomeric section, it is observed that there is a point where instead of being arranged head to tail, the telomeric repeats suddenly reverse direction - becoming (CCCTAA)3' instead of 5'(TTAGGG), and the second pre-telomeric section is also the reverse of the first telomeric section. This pattern is precisely as predicted by a telomere to telomere fusion of the chimpanzee (ancestor) 2p and 2q chromosomes, and in precisely the expected location. Note that the CCCTAA sequence is the reversed complement of TTAGGG (C pairs with G, and T pairs with A).
Another piece of evidence is that if human Chromosome 2 had formed by chromosome fusion in an ancestor instead of being designed "as is", it should have evidence of 2 centromeres (the "pinched waist" in the picture above -- chromosomes have centromeres to aid in cell division). A "designed" chromosome would need only 1 centromere. An accidentally "merged" chromosome would show evidence of the 2 centromeres from the two chromosomes it merged from (one from each). And indeed, as documented in (Avarello R, Pedicini A, Caiulo A, Zuffardi O, Fraccaro M, Evidence for an ancestral alphoid domain on the long arm of human chromosome 2. Hum Genet 1992 May;89(2):247-9), the functional centromere found on human Chromosome 2 lines up with the centromere of the chimp 2p chromosome, while there are non-functional remnants of the chimp 2q centromere at the expected location on the human chromosome.

As an aside, the next time some creationist claims that there is "no evidence" for common ancestry or evolution, keep in mind that the sort of detailed "detective story" discussed above is repeated literally COUNTLESS times in the ordinary pursuit of scientific research and examination of biological and other types of evidence. Common ancestry and evolution is confirmed in bit and little ways over and over and over again. It's not just something that a couple of whacky anti-religionists dream up out of thin air and promulgate for no reason, as the creationists would have you believe.

242 posted on 05/21/2003 4:20:52 AM PDT by Ichneumon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 226 | View Replies]

To: Ichneumon
That's very interesting ---thanks. I've always leaned toward the "intelligent design" theory because the example of birds' wings --- I can see how they could evolve wings but until a wing is evolved enough to let the bird get off the ground, the wings would just be an evolving useless appendage. Mutations that did nothing to enhance survival ---hollowing out bones, loss of digits, growth of feathers, everything else needed for flight wouldn't take place at once or fast enough. A lizard losing it's front legs to become wings doesn't really have a survival advantage.
243 posted on 05/21/2003 5:47:08 AM PDT by FITZ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 242 | View Replies]

To: fat city
they tell us that
we lost our tails
evolving up
from little snails
i say it's all
just wind in sails
are we not men?
we are DEVO!
we're pinheads now
we are not whole
we're pinheads all
jocko homo
are we not men?
D-E-V-O
monkey men all
in business suit
teachers and critics
all dance the poot
are we not men?
we are DEVO!
are we not men?
D-E-V-O
god made man
but he used the monkey to do it
apes in the plan
we're all here to prove it
i can walk like an ape
talk like an ape
do what a monkey do
god made man
but a monkey supplied the glue
we must repeat
o.k. let's go!
244 posted on 05/21/2003 6:00:34 AM PDT by KoestlersRedFiat (Oscar Kiss Maerth was right!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: jennyp; TheCrusader; Junior
Wait a minute, here. My scientific mind has just clicked in.
If watermelons AND cats share 90% of our DNA, does this mean that government scientists could cross cats with watermelons?

Think of that! A fruity snack that treats you badly at the 4th of July picnic! It could change the world as we know it. But, my scientific colleagues, you have avoided my question about inviting the chimp to that 4th of July Picnic.

I maintain that if the chimp is a properly registered Democrat (and with Motor Voter there isn't a damn thing to prevent that), then he/she should be invited. But no long speeches.

245 posted on 05/21/2003 6:08:30 AM PDT by Kenny Bunk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 224 | View Replies]

To: FITZ
I can see how they could evolve wings but until a wing is evolved enough to let the bird get off the ground, the wings would just be an evolving useless appendage. Mutations that did nothing to enhance survival ---hollowing out bones, loss of digits, growth of feathers, everything else needed for flight wouldn't take place at once or fast enough. A lizard losing it's front legs to become wings doesn't really have a survival advantage.

Well, feathers evidently came first -- and were used as insulation by warm-blooded or semi warm-blooded dinosaurs. There is strong evidence that even semi-formed wings enabled the bearer to escape predation by helping it climb trees (juvenile birds of some species still use this method).

246 posted on 05/21/2003 6:32:09 AM PDT by Junior (Computers make very fast, very accurate mistakes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 243 | View Replies]

To: kkindt
I suppose they will vote Democratic party line.

I thought they already did.

247 posted on 05/21/2003 6:50:12 AM PDT by Publius6961 (Californians are as dumm as a sack of rocks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kkindt

 


248 posted on 05/21/2003 7:05:21 AM PDT by Fintan (I don't like tag lines so I sunbathe nude.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ichneumon
'How many vacuums have you invented?' Well, none actually. But I am under contract to AlGore to invent a Time Machine. He intends to use it to go back in time to the 2000 Presidential Race and give himself better advice. (I predict that he still loses!)
249 posted on 05/21/2003 9:07:56 AM PDT by plusone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 241 | View Replies]

To: ALS
You sure do talk a lot, it's too bad you're full of Sh$t...
250 posted on 05/21/2003 9:20:33 AM PDT by Aric2000 (Are you on Grampa Dave's team? I am!! $5 a month is all it takes, come join!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 235 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 151-200201-250251-300 ... 451-454 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson