Posted on 08/31/2004 6:41:31 AM PDT by Michael_Michaelangelo
What "left turn" do you imagine apes took?
More accurately, the lineage which eventually became humans managed to hit upon some mutation(s) which achieved an evolutionary breakthrough in brain capacity/ability.
The bridge between humans and apes continues to lenghten.
There's no evidence that the gap in mental ability "continues to lengthen". Humans today are no more intelligent than humans of several thousand years ago. Yes, we have continued to accumulate knowledge, but don't mistake culture for biology.
their inability to "evolve" is one of the missing pieces of the puzzle.
You have yet to demonstrate that they actually have any "inability to evolve". In fact, modern apes have certainly evolved beyond their ancestor species of several million years ago.
No it isn't, actually. Camp is an idiot -- he waves around a few straw men, misstates the nature of the evidence, says "maybe God wanted that way, so there", and then runs away from actually dealing with the real evidence. The fact that you would invoke him shows, yet again, that you really don't understand this field -- you're just clinging to the authors who say what you want to hear, without an ability to actually evaluate the evidence and arguments yourself. If you did have a proper background in this field, you'd have been embarassed at Camp's desperate floundering.
Dozens of lines of clear evidence, you say?
Yes, I do indeed say. If you knew what I know, you'd say it too.
Do tell.
I tell you again -- if you lack the background, stop tilting at windmills, Señor Quixote.
It doesn't look as if they demonstrated any mechanism at all; in their conclusion, the point out that they haven't done so. They have demonstrated a different mutation rate for the AluYb28 elements between humans and chimps. The authors claim that this increased rate is not explained by selection, however they do not give any model for selection to say why. (I think this is rather incomplete on their part.) The authors also seem to use "random" to mean "uniform" which is a bit of a concept conflation. Later they point out that even knowing the structure around the AluYb8 patterns, one cannot predict where the next transposition will occur; I don't see how this is different from "random."
Well, physically perhaps.
The apes had the same environmental factors, influences they breath air drink water, The same amount of time. yet there is a mysterious cause that effected the human line. IMO there's no solid cause and effect hard evidence. missing link?
You could say that cars evolved (using one of the several definitions of the term, anyway):
One definition of "evolution" is:
"a process of continuous change from a lower, simpler, or worse to a higher, more complex, or better state"
Car designs over the years have been a process of continuous change from a simpler to a more complex state.
Of course nobody would say that cars evolved and mean this definition of the word:
"a theory that the various types of animals and plants have their origin in other preexisting types and that the distinguishable differences are due to modifications in successive generations"
I see no reason, by the way, that evolution and creationism couldn't both be responsible for the life on earth. Perhaps the first lifeforms on earth were indeed created, and evolution is part of the design?
Formerly known as Prince?
Oh, wait...
That's SYMBOLs I was thinking of...........
On your MARK;
Get SET;
God is all-knowing and would know the outcome of that race before it even started :)
That would explain why Michael Moore hates the President so much. I never checked, does he have opposable thumbs?
Discovery of Vast Tail on Dying Star Promises Clues to Solar Birth
The Washington Post via Drudge Report | August 16, 2007 | Marc Kaufman
Posted on 08/15/2007 10:42:32 PM EDT by RDTF
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1881836/posts
An invalid statement, or at least a misleading one. The source of the "chemical process" must be identified and shown to not be a product of natural selection to make the statement valid.
Which only goes to show that scientists are only human and prey to illogic just like everyone else. It's the scientific process that, for the most part, keeps them on the straight and narrow.
|
|
|||
Gods |
Just updating the GGG info, not sending a general distribution. |
||
|
· Discover · Nat Geographic · Texas AM Anthro News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · Google · · The Archaeology Channel · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists · |
|||
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.