EPTThe missing link found. - Page 4
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
sexsexpussyhair
Canada133 Posts
| ||
|
seppolevne
Canada1681 Posts
a breakthrough that could finally confirm Charles Darwin's theory of evolution. This sentence is retarded. Neat find though. | ||
|
aqui
Germany1023 Posts
On May 20 2009 20:00 Aegraen wrote: [..] PS: Let's not forget the Hydroncollider (sp?). so it collides hydrons?  its true that it mainly collides protons, i still assume that you are not like the smartest troll ever but meant the large hadron collider. | ||
Liquid`Drone
Norway28812 Posts
 | ||
|
QuanticHawk
United States32148 Posts
On May 21 2009 05:08 Liquid`Drone wrote: I think it's hilarious, also a little sad though, how the theory of evolution is actually a debated issue in usa. To be fair, those people are generally found between in the bumblefuck lands between the two coasts, which have a much larger and much more educated population. Not all of us are dumb, I swear! | ||
|
Aegraen
United States1225 Posts
On May 21 2009 04:38 Diomedes wrote: The fact that we have 46 chromosomes while all the other great apes have 48 that means one pair has fused. And it can happen in one generation while we had like 5 million years to do it. Then we looked and compared and tried to find which pair of chromosomes was fused. If we couldn't figure out which chromosome it was, evolution would be wrong. We know that with telomeres we can figure out which chromosome has fused. Our chromosome no.2 is the fused one. We know it fused at base pair 114,450,823 to 114,455,838. It has both centromere no.2 and the centromere no.13 in chimps/bonobos. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromosome_2_(human) The DNA is almost exactly the same. It's just in chromosome no.2 in humans and in two, namely no.2 and no.13 in the other great apes. This can only mean two things. Either chromosome no.2 fused out of great ape chromosomes, meaning we share a common ancestor with them. Or we were designed to look like chromosome no.2 fused out of great ape chromosomes. You think that chromosome no.2 was re-evolved step by step while the other chromosome disappeared step by step, one gene at a time? I don't get it. This is one of the most appealing arguments for evolution that can be made to convince a layman. And you somehow think it's the strongest argument against it? Claiming it is impossible? I don't get it at all. How the hell did you learn about this whole thing anyway? The fact that there is some deal about this chromosome no.2? Which you got right? And 13 you apparently changed into 3. So you must have read about this but you turned it on its head. Or your source did. I don't get how you think it's impossible for a chromosome to fuse. We know these kinds of mutations can happen in one generation. And it's not strange to even imagine how it could happen if you just know how chromosomes are copied. Read up on all those Chromosome abnormality syndromes. Fused chromosomes are not an uncommon anomaly in nature. I bet you have some cells in your body where chromosomes are fused and there's only 22 pair left. First off, the math doesn't add up. If two chromosomes fused that means that there would be one left, which would mean we would need 47, not 46. (48, one fuses with another, creates one, thus you deduct one = 47). Explain how it is a fused chromosome can make both chromosomes disappear completely. Secondly, what is the purpose of the mutation to necessitate its proliferation. Evolution isn't random mutations being propagated throughout species. It is direct selection by natural processes (usually occuring by death of the less efficient, or inefficient previous designs (Use the bird beak example here)). There are many holes in evolution, in the evolution tree, and what we theorize. It is far from being a fact. I know to religious science folks, this is blasphemy, but most scientists know that there are very few hard facts in science. Most things we take for general knowledge today are still theories, and we strive to find holes, to update, to fill the gaps at all times, strengthening and changing the theory. This has happened since the inception of 'science'. Anyways, what is more interesting to me is trying to re-engineer dinosaur features from unused chicken genes/DNA (Genes/DNA that serve no purpose anymore) (sorry, forget the terminology for the genes/DNA off the top of my head). I wants my dinosaurs back!  Lastly, we know it can happen, and does happen, but why did that mutation not die out. What purpose did it serve. Those are the questions, merely saying it can happen, doesn't mean the species as a whole suddenly incorporates every mutation. | ||
|
Aegraen
United States1225 Posts
On May 21 2009 04:59 aqui wrote: so it collides hydrons? its true that it mainly collides protons, i still assume that you are not like the smartest troll ever but meant the large hadron collider. I'm not a troll, and yes I meant Hadron. My bad I had 'hydron' in my head this morning for some reason. Lord knows you can't make one simple omission/mistake around these here parts. | ||
|
Liquid`Drone
Norway28812 Posts
biblical creationism was regarded favourably by 45% of the public, 37% believed in god-guided evolution and only 12% accepted evolution without the guidance of god I can certainly understand those 37%, thats basically stating that evolution happened but god made it happen but the largest group being believers of biblical creationism :'( | ||
|
Diomedes
464 Posts
On May 21 2009 05:22 Aegraen wrote: First off, the math doesn't add up. If two chromosomes fused that means that there would be one left, which would mean we would need 47, not 46. (48, one fuses with another, creates one, thus you deduct one = 47). Explain how it is a fused chromosome can make both chromosomes disappear completely. This shows your complete lack of knowledge about this subject. You think people can publish in Nature with an obvious calculation error of 48-1=46? You think that would slip past a peer review? If you don't, why didn't you make this comment with a certain amount of hesitation? Anyway, why does this even matter. We know it fused. Even if it was really extremely puzzling how that could have happened, that doesn't discredit the hypothesis that it did. Because in this case there is no alternative explanation. Secondly, what is the purpose of the mutation to necessitate its proliferation. What? First of all, why would there be one? Secondly, why does it even matter? We don't know the function of every gene in your genome. Doesn't mean we can't know we have DNA. Evolution isn't random mutations being propagated throughout species. All mutations are random. And are you implying a chromosome fusion wouldn't be able to be propagated? A deletion of a chromosome can't be propagated. That's why it has to be a fusion, which was confirmed. Actually the fusion of a chromosome would be a good step towards speciation, which of course needs to happen. There are many holes in evolution, in the evolution tree, and what we theorize. It is far from being a fact. No. Just because we don't have a totally complete evolution tree that has nothing to do with how valid evolution is. Imagine fossilization is impossible. Would that mean evolution is impossible? We don't even know what creates gravity. Yet that doesn't make anyone doubt the force of gravity. I would say that gravity is a bigger hole than the theory of evolution. For one the mechanisms are almost totally unknown where the other they are completely known. I know to religious science folks, this is blasphemy, Why would it be blasphemy to religious scientists? I don't get it. Do you know anything about science, at all? Like high school biology and physics? | ||
|
zizou21
United States3683 Posts
On May 21 2009 05:08 Liquid`Drone wrote: I think it's hilarious, also a little sad though, how the theory of evolution is actually a debated issue in usa. it's really sad, we know | ||
|
Dazed.
Canada3301 Posts
On May 20 2009 20:16 Meta wrote: No, no it does not. It just goes against the religious fundamentalists interpretation of how we came about. There are literally thousands of interpretations for every single line said in the bible, torah, Quran, etc.Sure, it doesn't disprove God, but it does disprove a lot of what those books that tell us God exists also tell us about how we came to be. | ||
|
Aegraen
United States1225 Posts
On May 21 2009 05:31 Diomedes wrote: This shows your complete lack of knowledge about this subject. You think people can publish in Nature with an obvious calculation error of 48-1=46? You think that would slip past a peer review? If you don't, why didn't you make this comment with a certain amount of hesitation? What? First of all, why would there be one? Secondly, why does it even matter? We don't know the function of every gene in your genome. Doesn't mean we can't know we have DNA. All mutations are random. And are you implying a chromosome fusion wouldn't be able to be propagated? A deletion of a chromosome can't be propagated. That's why it has to be a fusion, which was confirmed. Actually the fusion of a chromosome would be a good step towards speciation, which of course needs to happen. No. Just because we don't have a totally complete evolution tree that has nothing to do with how valid evolution is. Imagine fossilization is impossible. Would that mean evolution is impossible? We don't even know what creates gravity. Yet that doesn't make anyone doubt the force of gravity. I would say that gravity is a bigger hole than the theory of evolution. For one the mechanisms are almost totally unknown where the other they are completely known. Why would it be blasphemy to religious scientists? I don't get it. Do you know anything about science, at all? Like high school biology and physics? You accept on faith that everything scientists do is infallible as referenced with your first rebuttal. This is the same as religion. Evolution is based on environmental changes necessitating / making use of mutations that are beneficial in the current environment. It matters because that is what evolution hinges on. The mutation has to have a purpose for it to proliferate throughout the species changing the previous DNA throughout the entirety of the population. What function does the fused chromosome serve that created the need to change what was previously usable? Evolution answers these questions. If you can't answer that simple question, how do you expect us to accept it? That is to say; if mutations that serve no beneficial use, or indiscernable, then how does the genome, DNA, species and evolution in general pick and choose what to keep and what not to. We have all ready answered that question, yet you balk at the question asked about the function of evolution with this particular scenario. If it smells fishy, it usually is. Yes, all mutations are random, the context within the sentence, meant it was a random (That meaning, directly serving no purpose) mutation, just so happened to be incorporated throughout the entirety of the species. How come, the previous gene was useless and facilitated the need for the new DNA? You once again prove my 'religious zealotry of science' by saying how evolution is a fact, despite its many holes and unanswered questions. In fact evolution is a theory. I guess you don't get what religious science is; that is the blind faith in science akin to religion. It just means people use science as their religion. Blind faith in something with no philosophy is worse than blind faith in recognized religions that at least teach you morals, way of life, meaning, etc. Edit: Yes, I'm quite knowledgable in Biology, astrophysics, and quantum string theory etc. I do enjoy the occasional Dr. Michao Kaku (I know I butchered his name) reading. Continue on however, ad hominem attacks progress the conversation immensely. | ||
|
Aegraen
United States1225 Posts
Science is a continuous debate. When we stop questioning, is when we lose 'science'; that is, the definition of science and its functions is lost. It would be akin to alchemy at that point. | ||
|
Diomedes
464 Posts
Who cares about facts? No one. Facts themselves are irrelevant. Theories are interesting. Theories are useful. Theories are constructive. Theories give you a deeper understanding. If evolution was just a fact Darwin never would have published his book. Religious people wouldn't have cared. It wouldn't be taught in schools. Facts aren't taught. Theories are. As for the guy claiming the theory of evolution doesn't disprove god. Nothing does because god is not a falsifiable concept. But all creationists would lose their faith if they had to accept the theory of evolution. Therefore, they reject it. Creationists freely admit this. And they aren't wrong. The moment people become educated and start to accept the theory of evolution they start to slowly lose their faith. It's a slippery slope. The more educated people in the US are, the less likely they are to be creationists. And scientists accept evolution more than other educated people. And the more successful a scientists, the less likely he is to support creationism. Religious people understand this better than non-religious ones. Only the very smart can cling to their faith without denying (scientific) reality. It takes a lot of double think. It's like that muslim friend of Steven Weinberg who tried to popularize science in the middle east. "I have a friend — or had a friend, now dead — Abdus Salam, a very devout Muslim, who was trying to bring science into the universities in the Gulf states and he told me that he had a terrible time because, although they were very receptive to technology, they felt that science would be a corrosive to religious belief, and they were worried about it... and damn it, I think they were right. It is corrosive of religious belief, and it's a good thing too." | ||
|
Kentor
United States5784 Posts
On May 21 2009 05:08 Liquid`Drone wrote: I think it's hilarious, also a little sad though, how the theory of evolution is actually a debated issue in usa. i wish usa was like you guys | ||
|
fanatacist
10319 Posts
| ||
|
Motiva
United States1774 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + a breakthrough that could finally confirm Charles Darwin's theory of evolution. LOL OK and Genetics and all the rest of the evidence don't mean anything... LOL ignorant people writing silly article. | ||
|
SaveYourSavior
United States1071 Posts
On May 20 2009 21:18 hymn wrote: That's a nice discovery. I am very interested in the human anthropological order. Only to add - the evolution is not a theory. It is nowadays regarded as a scientifically proven fact. The christian churches deny that but they are retards anyway. I mean they believe the Earth was made in 6 days like 6000 years ago. It's an extremely well supported theory but still not a fact, that's just the way science works. | ||
|
fanatacist
10319 Posts
On May 21 2009 05:47 Aegraen wrote: Science is a continuous debate. When we stop questioning, is when we lose 'science'; that is, the definition of science and its functions is lost. It would be akin to alchemy at that point. What the fuck are you even talking about? You're saying that if we stop questioning things like gravity, for example, then science would become alchemy? Wow. When we stop questioning evolution the world will be a better place. It's okay to question and have a good logical alternative. If the alternative is "GOD DID IT," then might as well not question at all. | ||
|
Motiva
United States1774 Posts
On May 21 2009 05:08 Liquid`Drone wrote: I think it's hilarious, also a little sad though, how the theory of evolution is actually a debated issue in usa. Tell me about it. I've lived all over the U.S.A . (living in Texas now) and man fuck i despise the people that live in my country. For me it's not funny at all. Just mind blowing depressing. | ||
| ||
