This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Cont. These are Correlation Does Not Imply Causation & Incomplete Comparison. However, evoutionary defense sites, & evo lit in general, show many other logical fallacies as well. Continuing on at Vid 6.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Cont. Shubin is making the claim that Darwin's predictions have been verified. Same ol' bait & switch. Talk about one simlarity, placement of certain genes, and ignore (like you are to ignore that his replica of Tiktaalik has long, muscular, frontal fins for "emerging" onto land when the actual fossil shows very short fins with no musculature) the fact that the content of the genes is human only, not that of an ape. Again, evolution is based most on these 2 logical fallacies... Cont.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
5:15 "We've got the genes too." What kind of science is this? Well, pseudo science as usual. Human beings and primates do NOT have the same genes. They have some simlarities, as one would expect.. But the genes are not identiical, any more than we are identical to them. At 5:40 Neil Shubin again, the same one who presented the phony replica of Tiktaalik alongside the actual fossil, trusting, correctly, that folk would not see the bait & switch. Cont.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
TO ANY INTERESTED: If you note I do not reply to the posters below, those Miller guard dogs & others know they are on ignore for: following me for months from vid to vid with personal insults, name calling, hiding my posts gross obscenities,, false accusations of lying, and in the case of foxlake, sexual harrassment & telling a poster who sent me a 0 science porno post "Good job." Such behaviors inhibit the true purposes of science. I will debate with those who are civil and objective.
TO ANY INTERESTED: If you note I do no reply to some posters, they know they are on ignore. It's not possilbe to "debate" with Miller guard dogs & others who follow me around for months from vid to vid using personal insults, name calling, gross obscenities, false accusations of lying and, in the case of foxlake, sexual harrassment and telling a poster who left me a 0 science porno post, "Good job." I am happy to debate, for the purposes of true science, with those who are civil & objective.
FOR ANYONE: If you notice a no-reply to some posters, those Miller guard dogs, & others who follow me from 1 vid series to another, know they are on ignore for these behaviors: personal insults, name calling, gross obscenities, hiding my posts, falsely accusing me of lying and, as with the case of FL, sexual harrassment & telling someone who sent me a 0 science porno post, Good job! I will gladly debate with those who are civil, objective and science grounded.
TO ANY INTERESTED: If you notice I don't reply to some posters, those MIller guard dogs, & others, know they are on ignore for the following behaviors: name calling, personal insults, hiding my posts, gross obscenities, falsely accusing me of lying and, as with FL, sexual harrassment and telling someone who sent me a 0 science porno post, "Good job." Such actions don't say, "Gee, let's be objective and logical for the true purposes of science". I will debate with those who are civil.
Without element to support your... I don't know what you want to show with your comment... But anyway, if you don't explain your thesis and give the evidence to support the simple evidence that the relationship is so obvious in the genes, that we can't miss the conclusion that we share a common ancestor.
You have to know that if you accept one specie of fish to another, you have to accept primate to another primate!
We all use our mind, and you still avoid to reply to the fondamental question, What is your "Scientific" Theory for the origin of Man????
Of course you can't reply to this simple question, because you have nothing, you can't reply to this simpe question, because you have just the word "creation" on your side which means nothing.
So even if I am on your ignore list because you are too narrow minding to understand the basic, you need to provide a good thesis! And not just your ignorance!
@LoricaLady I do use my mind. The fact that robertsonian translocations occur has nothing to do with the fact that one has to be there in human chromosomes in order for evolution to be true. Quite simple. I still don´t see any argument in your comment.
Is it or is it not true, that if common ancesty was right, there has to be a fusion site in human chromosomes? Or in other words would it be as irrelevant if there was none like it is now?
Why is there a telomere and two centormeres? Explain
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@HeavyweightThinker Who says the translocation "has" to be there? Evoutionists. Only after they saw the translocation of course! You won't find any mentioni of it in the evo lit before then. You explain. You explain why a translocation of one kind for humans means we have ape "ancestry" but the other kind of fuson doesn't even get mentioned. Ditto why aren't animal fusions being called examples of evoltuionary ancestry? Of course any kind of fusions has a "glue." So what?
@LoricaLady "only after they saw the translocation of course!"
No. Miller says in the video that it was found 2 weeks before the trial. Common ancestry is over 100 years old. So it was of course not after they saw it. I don´t see why you don´t understand this.
"You explain why a translocation of one kind for humans means we have common ancestry but the other kind of fusion doesn´t even get mentioned"
Simple. In case of humans and the great apes its a comparison, not the case with cattle
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@HeavyweightThinker "It was found 2 weeks before the trial", yes. But they were not saying, as they do now, that it HAD to be there, in the period before that, in the evo lit. Now that they found this superficial correlation, it HAD to be there! You have no way explained why some humans have an additional chromosome fusion & no one is saying it is the result of ape ancestry. What is it the result of HT? Ditto the animals who have that same kind of fusion?
If common ancestry was right, we must have had 48 chromsomes. Which we had and two fused in our lineage. The point is inheritance, it has to be inherited and it has been as the fusion site shows.
Now in case of other animals having a translocaiton of addition of chromsomes it just proves that such changes of the genome occur. A fusion is not in itself evidence of common ancestry, its just that it had to be there if humans share common ancestry.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@HeavyweightThinker "It has to be inherited." Indeed it does. But there is no ev-i-dence it has to be, or was, inherited from apes. "It had to be there if humans share a common ancestry." Again, answer why it shows purely human chromosomes fused, not a fusion of ape chromosomes? Much is made of the fact that there are similarities between human & ape chromosomes. Evolutionists ignore the obvious anyone can see at the zoo. There are vast, unbridgeable differences, also.
It is not from apes! it is from a common ancestor! Don't make the mistake all the time! This fused chromosome is the evidence that Ape and human are linked in the past!
The fused chromosome that you have in human genome sometimes is certainly not similar! two centromeres as well...
Go back in the time! at the origin there was one specie, Australopithecus and after there were two Apes and humans!
"why it shows purely human chromosomes fused, not a fusion of ape chromosomes?" Pfff
What does that mean? What do you want as an answer? This is ridicule! human chromosome fused equal two chromosomes from "kind of ape" or australopitehcus ancestor"! So partially you have fusion of ape chromosome....
As you said, your own idea is far away from science, nevertheless u want to debate evolution just with "science"!!!
How do you want to be competent in this debate if on ur side no science support your thesis!!!
@LoricaLady "But theres is no evidence it has to be, or was, inherited from apes."
Of course it has to be from apes, we are apes and the common ancestor was an ape. In the same sense that we are mammals and our ancestors had to be. Your grandpar. have to be your grandpar. or are you saying that if i would compare the genes of your grandparents with yours, similarity wouldn´t mean relatedness? Or that there is no evidence that the same genes you have from your parents are actually from them?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@HeavyweightThinker "Your grandpa had to be your grandpa." Guess what my grandpa was a human being. We shared the same kind of genes so it is appropriate to compare them. DNA testing is not the simple thing you make it seem to be. It is based on true science. It is testable, repeatable, and observable. "Well, we MUST have come from apes because we found these certain similarities" ain't. The similarities are there but the evo deductions are based purely on conjecture & zero science.
@LoricaLady "DNA testing is not the simple thing you make it seem to be. It is based on true science. It is testable, repeatable and observable."
I fully agree. DNA testing is comparing similarities between organisms and the amount of similarities shows degree of relatedness. Thats why i can prove genetically that your grandfa. is your grandfa. and your father is your father. Comparison of similarities works for crops, vegetable, all life. It proves we share common decent with the great apes.
@LoricaLady You should know that the color of your eyes is a gene, the color of your hair, your skin, etc... So do you really think that saying same kind of genes is really an answer!
You don't understand that point! your grand grand grand parent is maybe more similar to your neighbour than yourself! Because the DNA transmission is random! And if you go back in the time, your ancestor was in Africa! Mintochondrial info from the mother!
Read more science text book if you really want to debate!
@MattleSystem What HT is telling you is that no matter what you have for the result in phenotype, the genotype is pratically similar to the human! And if we look just at the structure, then DNA is the same for all on earth!
DNA is just a serie of element randomly transmit from of generation to another! The change with the time gives different phenotype etc. etc. At one stage, the difference in the genotype is large enough to be considered as a new specie!
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@HeavyweightThinker Cont. Also explain why the chromosomes that are fused, according to evoutionists, "just where they are supposed to be" are strictly human chromosomes. Shouldn't they show a fusion of ape chromosomes? The whole argument is bogus, and oh yeal, there is another logical fallacy (at least) being used here, the Fallacy of the Incomplete Comparison.
No its not according to evolutionists. Its a fact. Anybody can sequence his genome and find the fusion site. You have it in every body cell. Its a fact.
I asked you why there are telomeres and two centromeres in chromosome number two. Please answer.
"Shouldn´t they show a fusion of ape chromosomes"
There is no difference between ape and human chromosomes, there are just chromosomes. Whats your point? Please also answer my questions.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@HeavyweightThinker A fact, and deductions, or fantasies ,built around a fact, does not change the fact that Correlation Does NOT Imply Causation. The fact that there are telomeres & cehromeres at chrmosome number 2 is just another example of evoutionists trying to push that same fallacy on you. My friend, if you can make a comment like "There is no differnce between ape and human chromosomes" you need to do some serious research. How can you understand my points until you learn the basics?
@LoricaLady So you agree its a fact that we have fused chromosome, good.
"Correlation does not imply causation"
No, of course not in every case. But you haven´t explained why that is the case in that case.
"just another example of evolutionists trying to push..."
You still haven´t annswered why there is the fusion site on which you agree its a fact. Now i ask you the 3rd time why are there 2 centromeres and telomeres on human chromsome number 2?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@HeavyweightThinker You are big on asking Qs, & on avoiding them. Why are there 2 cetromere & telemores on chrom. #2? Because they work there. Why are there 10 fingers & 10 toes instead of 20 each? Why are all the cranial nerves starting out at the base of the brain? In a sense you are asking me to answer Qs on origins. I don't go there because I avoid what would become a red herring of religion as you probably know. Yes, humans have some similarities with apes. Everyone knows that. Cont.
Thats the best you can do? After i asked 4 times? Anyway, looking at your channel i don´t see science videos, i only see religion and faith all over the place. So what can i expect. Certainly not science in your response.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@HeavyweightThinker You only see religion and faith in my vids? Guess what? Some scientists, many of them every bit as degreed and experienced as Ken Miller, Dawkins, et al are in those vids. To you if someone has any faith, or believes in intelligent design, that means they are biased. But you trust in the evoutionists in spite of their frauds, logical fallacies & psuedo science, to be the souls of objectivity. I have studied both sides at great length. You, I'm sure, have not.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@HeavyweightThinker Now I ask you once more, why is that evoutionists are saying that fused chromosome #2 is proof positive for "evoutionary ancestry", yet some humans have fused chromosomes & they aren't linked to any kind of "ancestry" whatsoever? Ditto many fusions seen in animals, sometimes consistently & sometimes not w/in the same species? Again, we already know there are similarities between apes & humans. Again, correlation does NOT imply causation. Worms have similarities to snakes.
@LoricaLady "why is that evolutionists are saying that fused chromosome #2 is proof positive for evolutionary ancestry, yet some humans have fused chrom. and aren´t linked"
I already answered that. By the way there is no "evolutionary ancestry", there is just ancestry. A fusion is in itself no evidence for common ancestry but if you want to prove common ancestry for particular organisms, then the genes have to match, otherwise you would have disproved common ancestry.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@HeavyweightThinker I didn't see you answering my Q about why some humans have an extra chromosome. Frankly, not trying to be unkind or anything, but how much of a meaningful answer can I expect to get from someone who has said there is no difference between human & chimp chromosomes? "The genes have to match, otherwise you have disproved common ancestry." Believe yourself. The genes don't match. The chromosomes that are fused don't match. Plz do some research & become more analytical.
@LoricaLady "What about some humans have an extra chromosome" Its called trisomy 21. I don´t know what that has to do with a fusion of chromosomes. LL seriously you start to get on my nerves with such questions. Its ok if you don´t understand genetics, which is no shame since it takes years of study but why this constant nonsense? Whats the point?
"The genes don´t match"
They do match, we have the exact fusion site with multiple subtelomere duplications and 2 centromeres, one inactive.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@HeavyweightThinker As expected, you've gone into your verbal abuse mode. Again. You tell me I don't understand genetics and yet you said there is no difference between human and chimp chromosomes? You are trying to tell me that the genes and their contents are synonymous with a fusion site? Rolling eyes. Quit posing & start researching. I would explain more for you, but you know I don't waste time with those who use verbal abuse. Plz learn logic AND manners. Back to ignor
@LoricaLady All it would take is for you to do the most basic research to confirm that what HT is telling you is correct. Instead you feign being insulted so that you can avoid having to admit your failure. The genetic evidence is very powerful and persuasive. More and more is being understood every day that debunks your assertion that we do not share common ancestry with the rest of the apes.
@LoricaLady If you want to proof that your parents are actually your real parents you do compare the genes. If they match it proofs parenthood. Due to the universality of DNA, you can do that with every organism. Common ancestry is extended paternity testing.
If you say that similarity does not mean relatedness, then you say that your genes matching your parents´ does not proof paternity.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@HeavyweightThinker "If they match it proves parenthood." There is no such thing as paternity testing for evo. That is 1 reason why calling fossils "transitional" forms is bogus. You can't test to see if any of them came from any others of them. You can't even tell if they ever had progeny much different from themselves. Typical of evo think, you leap from one thing that is mildly similar, a fused chromosome, and try to equate it to something that is light years more complex.
@LoricaLady "There is no such thing as paternity testing for evo"
Then you should go into some Labs, especially those of the pharmaceutical industry. Farmers are suited for using crops that are descended from patented crop-DNA. Read the news.
"1 Reason why fossils "transitional" forms is bogus"
Sigh. Loricalady fossils don´t have DNA, you cannot test paternity of fossils. And evolution is not equal to common ancestry. Common ancestry/decent is a concept existing despite of evolution.
@LoricaLady "If they had progeny much different from themselves"
No lifeform ever has or had any progeny different from itself. That is completely impossible since offspring is a combination of parental genes or in case of somelizards, worms and bacteria cloning. Organisms do not and cannot be "significantly different" from their parents. Its a gradual change of the traits. And by the way, what does "significantly different" mean? Its certainly not a defined scientific concept.
@LoricaLady "you need to do some serious research"
You could have used that space to explain to me what the difference between ape and human chromosomes is or indeed any other chromsome of any other organism.
"But they were not saying, as they do now, that it HAD to be there"
Thats not true. The number of chromsomes was known long before the whole genome was sequenced. Miller explains that in the video. So whats next, are you going to explain the fusion site or not?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@HeavyweightThinker "You could...explain to me what the difference is..." Hello? The fact that you said human & ape chromosomes are not different means you need to do more reading than I can put in these little boxes! Of course the number of chromosomes was known ages ago. It's not the number of chromosomes that is the big issues here, but the fusion.
@LoricaLady "The fact that you said human & ape chromosomes are not different means you need to do more reading"
The concept of a chromosome is universal in every organism. If by difference you mean content then say so. But there is no difference between an ape chromosome and a human one. Not only because humans are apes, which you still don´t understand, but because chromosomes are universal. Only the genetic content differes; in case of chimpanzees and humans its nearly identical.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@HeavyweightThinker "Nearly identical" is a matter of definition. Look at a chimp in the zoo. Look at yourself. Are you nearly identical? The fused chromosomes of humans are purely human and in not like a chimp's. To say, "Well our chromosomes are nearly identifical" is a cop out. It's a classic case of using the logical fallacy of Incomplete Comparison. Fusing two chimp, or other ape, chromosomes together - will it get you a human? The idea is laughable. It should be tes-ted in a ...lab!
@LoricaLady "Look at a chimp in the zoo. Look at yourself. Are you nearly identical?"
Yes. Same body structure, same intestines, same brain structure, same family structure, identical lifespan, similar diet on and on...
But its even more compelling if you look at the genes. They are 95-98% identical, depending on whether you compare base per base, or actual genes and or exons/introns.
No, the genetic content is whats human not the chromosome itself because every organism, even salad has chromosomes. You inherited chromosomes from your father; not the chrom. are specific from your father but the content is. And that is true for every organism.
You try to establish the same nonsene again; similarity equals relatedness thats why you can do a paternity test. You can do a paternity test even with cockroaches
@LoricaLady "Fusing two chimp, or other ape, chromosome together -will you get a human? The idea is laughable."
Yes i agree. This idee is horrendously laughable and can only be made up by a person who doesn´t undertand that the number of chrom.s has zero to do with the genetic content. The change of the traits within chrom. is what makes a human a human and salad a salad. The number of chrom. is just the package. If you would fuse your genes to 2 chrom. you would still be yourself.
@LoricaLady silly little child, you still dont understand why no one will accept your lies and bullshit?
Everyone understands your points because you are doing nothing but vomiting your ignorance all over channels with Ken Miller videos because you are obsessed with him. Everyone can see you for the propagandist that you are.
Shut your face, LoricaLady. For many months you have been continually ignoring the refutations posted against you. Do the world a favor and shut up.
@LoricaLady Logical fallacy of scientists or just logical defficiency of your mind???
Because you have to take all the details that is behind the video here to uynderstand that they have different element to support also the evolution and the common ancestor!
First, the fossil records of several transitionnal forms of Human-Ape mixture! You have to think this thing, Australopithecus was maybe more human than ape... So we can also say that Chimp come from human...Phylogenetic
@LoricaLady "Shouldn't they show a fusion of ape chromosomes?" We are apes and it does. The fact is, our genome is 98% identical to chimpanzee's. 96% if you include insertions and deletions. This is less than the difference between horses and zebras. The morphology is almost entirely a matter of proportions. Why is it you have no problem with the speciation of bacteria, fruit flies, bats or other large groups but insist that the apes are somehow different?
@HeavyweightThinker Wow, you are on LoricaLady's ignore list too? What a coincidence. So am I! It's not a very exclusive club but I'm proud to be a member. I earned my ignore/delete status by telling her to get her head out of her ass and calling her on some quote mines and lies she was telling. How did you earn yours?
Cont. Usually only geneticists know about the oddity of some humans having an extra fused chromosome, or know that animals have an odd assortment of chromsome fusions.. So when someone like Miller, a scientist (gasp!) gets up and starts using words like telomeres and centomeres and shows only the kind of fusion that superficially matches a number with apes, it all looks so good, so real...like when a magician pulls a rabbit out of a previously "empty" hat. Same trick. Cont.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@HeavyweightThinker Tho you're on the ignore list - re MIller being a cell biologist: Darwin only had a degree in theology, yet is an icon in evolutionary circles. A degree in science is a neutral thing. It can be used to do true science, or it can be used to obfuscate & obscure it, to misrepresent it. Scientists are just kids you went to school with who took courses for their field in college. They have no more or no less integrity, or resistance to party line doctrine than others. Cont.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@HeavyweightThinker You don't have to have a degree in science to learn how to think analytically & critically & recognize logical fallacies. Why is the "glue" holding our common fusions together an indication of evolutionary descent while the "glue" holding fusions together in cattle etc., or in folk with an extra fusion, is not? Our "glued" chromosomes are vastly different from the chromosomes of apes. Correlation Does NOT Imply Causation. Learn logical fallcies & believe them. Use YOUR mind.
Cont. For ex., some cattle have the Robertsonian Translocation that Miller speaks of for humans. So, let's see, does the "glue" that holds the fusion together for cows indicate evoutionary "common ancestry"? Isn't that "glue" being touted as scientific proof positive that we came from apes? But no one is even suggesting that about the cows. How could they, since some cattle have it and some, of the same species, do not - just as only some humans have an extra fusion. Cont.
Cont. 2:57 "We ought to be able to find the scotch tape that is holding these 2 chormosomes together, and if we don't find it then the evolutionary hyppothesis of common ancestry is refuted." What nonsense. Finding the "glue" that holds fused chromosomes together shows 0 common ancestry. Not only does the "glue" that holds the forementioned, other, rarer, fusion not even get mentioned here as a cause of "ancestry", neither is that of other animals who also have chromosomal fusions. Cont.
@LoricaLady "What nonsense... shows 0 common ancestry"
You would be the first to say that common ancestry is wrong if it hadn´t been found. Or would you also have said that it is irrelevant? Of course not. The fusion site has to be there if evolution is true period.
"some cattle have Robertsonian translocation"
Not only cattle but many more. But whats your point? You are not comparing cattle to cousins or their ancestry, so what exactly do you wanna say? Its hardly any argument.
TO ANY INTERESTED: If you see no replies to posters below, they know they are on ignore. It's impossible to "debate" science with Miller guard dogs & others who follow me from 1 vid series to another, with personal insults, name calling, gross obscenities, hiding/Expelling my posts, and in the case of FL, sexual harrassment & telling a poster who wrote me a 0 science porno post, "Good job." Such behaviors block the true purposes of science. I debate with the civil, objective & science based.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Cont. The mention of the other kind of fusion that humans have is conspicuous by its absence. The mention of the vast, unbridgeable differences between what's IN
the chimp chromosomes & what's IN our chromosomes is conspicuous by its absence too since evolutionists rarely acknowledge the Correlation Does NOT Imply Causation logical fallacy. To them, if there ia correlation, of any kind, then evolution "must have" been the causation. End of story for them. End of real science, too. Cont.
@LoricaLady Again you want a scientific debate! But you have to provide a better theory for the origin of man! If evolution is not true and if the analogy in the genome between ape and human is not enough, therefore I suppose that you have a better explanation with full scientific evidences....
No? Yes?
If you have nothing to provide unless your comment without taking into account all details, just shut up!
Because you don't debate here, you criticise! that's ALL!
Cont... And again, you are talking about the comparison between Chimp and human! So the difference you have today in the genome make us difference! But the analogy with the position of the centromere and the genes similarity prove that we share a common ancestor and not that we come from chimp! Get it?
Furthermore the cross over of chromosome is quite common.
But again, what is your scientific theory about the origin of man?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Cont. 2:14 Having shown that humans have 46 chromosome & apes have 48, Miller now uses another logical fallacy, The Fallacy of The Single Cause, & says, "There is only one possibility...they must have accidentally gotten stuck together." Must have? Accidentally? There are calling this science? What is testable, observable or repeatable about it? Again, about 1 in 1000 humans have an additional fused chromosome. If there is a single cause for fusion, evoultion only, did apes cause it? Cont
@LoricaLady "If there is a single cause for fusion, evolution only, did apes cause it?" We are apes and we didn't cause the fused chromosome any more than we cause ourselves to be taller or shorter than our parents. It's a genetic mutation that is probably neutral but will often cause a speciation event. It's well documented in other mammals like mice. Nobody is making this up. There is a lot of evidence for it. Why would our species be any different?
TO ANY INTERESTED: If you see me ignoring posters, they know they are on ignore. One cannot fullfill the true purposes of science & "debate" with Miller watchdogs & others who follow one from 1 vid series to another with name calling, personal insults, hiding one's posts, sometimes sexual harrassment, and as with FL, telling someone who sent a 0 science porno post, "Good job."
I am happy to debate with the (very few seen) evo-ites who can do so with dignity, civility & objectivity.
TO ANY INTERESTED: If you see me bypassing posters, they know they're on ignore. It's not possible to "debate" with Miller watchdogs & others who follow me from 1 video series to another, hiding my posts, pouring out personal insults, gross obscenities, name calling & sometimes sexual harrassment & cheering on of someone who wrote a 0 science porno post. Such behaviors defeat the purposes of true science. I'll gladly debate the very few YT evo-ites who are civil, objective & science based
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Cont. There is no evidence. There is nothing testable, observable or repeatable, as in true science, to lead to the conclusion that one kind of human chromosome fusion came from apes. Why does evo lit keep claiming "Evidence! Evidence!" when there is none? Because they have no true evidence, of course! :-) Cont.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Cont. There is a superficial number comparison. Big deal. We already knew that humans & apes have similarities. But the differnces between the content of their chromosomes & ours is vast & cannot be bridged. And, so what if humans have fused chromosomes? Where is the ev-i-dence this fusion came from apes, anyway? No mention is made of that! It so happens about 1 in 1,000 people have an EXTRA chromosome fusion! It is usually benign & not even noticed. Did it come from apes, too? Cont.
@LoricaLady "Where is the ev-i-dence this fusion came from apes" Hi hun, spreading your silly creationist crap here now hey? The evidence that the fusion is from ancestral apes is the fact that the fusion point is exactly where two modern ape chromosomes terminate. The fused chromosome also correspond to the separate ones and it has two centeromeres. Didn't you pay attention to the video? It explains all that.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Cont. Here is a typical example of evo lit with its outrageous claim of "evidence", even "decisive evidence" that is based purely on logical fallacies. The 1st logical fallacy, the 1 they seem to use the most, is Correlation Does NOT Imply Causation. Ok chimps have 48 chromosomes. Tobacco does too! The 2nd logical fallacy being used is Incomplete Comparison. Much is made of the Chromosome 2 fusion. Nothing is said about what is inside of the chimp chromosomes vs our own. Cont.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
0:44 Here is a great example of evo lit making outrageous claims based only on logical fallacies & not on science. More about the logical fallacies coming up. For now Miller mentions that if he had spoken with very technical terms the judge's "eyes would have glazed over." Here is actually a great example of how this politcally appointed judge no way understands complex scientific issues, but is reliant on someone else to feed him what is, essentially, their spin on the data. Cont.
Maybe i don't have my science correct, but recent events have shown that Chromosome 2 is tied to physical characteristics of a Monkey's and human. So, wouldn't they be similar anyway? (there Homoebox genes)
P.S. One more question, assuming that our 46 chromosomes are 100 percent similar to our primate relatives 46/48 equals 95% similar not 98% which i was taught in school, right? (something does not add up)
@vivaramones They are comparing the DNA sequence of the Chimpanzee and Human genome. It doesn't matter that there is a chromosome fusion. It's 96 percent of our DNA sequence when insertions and deletions are taken into account. The information agrees with the fossil record that indicate chimps and humans diverged from a common ancestor about 6 million years ago.
@foxlake02 For the 11th time, for the benefit of any others, I do not "debate" with those who use personal insults, name calling, gross obscenities, sexual harrassment, false accusations of lying, & who tell someone who sent me a porno post, w/0 science, "Good job."
@foxlake02 "It doesn't matter that there is a chromosome fusion". It matters to MIller, and other evolutionists, greatly. They claim that fusion comes from so called ape ancestry. The fossil record does not show humans came from apes. There are a paltry few skeletons & fragments which they CLAIM are transitional fossils. This is bogus to start since there is 0 way to know if those fossilized animals ever produced any significantly different progeny. Pseduo evidence = pseudo science.
@LoricaLady and facial reconstruction for the police investigation do you call this also pure imagination! Of course no! Because as all scientist they have elements on the skull to develop enough combination to retranscript the face of the person... Of course the reality is maybe not perfectly matching but the 75% are perfectly correct based on science of anatomy!
And for the fossils, this is the same, with few bones you can see exactly the leg shape etc...
You want to see a dinosaur giving birth of a bird, and fish giving birth of a amphibian, and an ape giving birth of a human!
This is not possible, sorry to repeat again and again, but the evidences are in the genetic, the stratigraphy, dating, geology, fossil records, tool fossil... In brief you want to see impossible, that is why you believe in god....
Naturalistic science such as paleontolgy are linked by several elements, but not as you want to see! this is ur dream, but not science!
@LoricaLady You're not reading in context again. I was explaining how professionals in the field arrive at the percentage that humans differ from chimp DNA. In that respect, it does not matter how many chromosomes have fused. Miller is right though. The fusion in the right location with extra telomeres and an extra centeromere confirms that our number 2 chromosome has fused from a common ancestor. You still don't understand what a transitional fossil is. Try looking it up. Are we debating now?
@LoricaLady " The fossil record does not show humans came from apes" Really, so what are you scientific conclusion for the origin of man???
Because if you take into account your own statement that fish can become fish but in another specie is possible. let me explain this! Fish is a group represented by several characteristic of anatomy and biology... Based on these elements, sorry to tell you the THRUTH, but apes and human are the same! They are primate!
Actually, that wouldn't make sense, since gorillas and other great apes also have 48 chromosomes. This would imply that all other species of ape somehow developed the exact same mutation (an addition of an entire base pair!) by chance. No. The only sensible answer is that our common ancestor had 48 chromosomes and our genome modified after the split. And what do you know? Confirmed by DNA analysis.
@HandledTrivia: The trouble with that one is that there are 48 chromosomes not only in chimps, but also in gorillas and orangutans. In the currently supposed derivation, that would have required the same development of a new chromosome happen in each of the three great ape families independently.
Hylobates (gibbons), the next closest extent relatives up the tree, have four groups which are distinguish
So who did the first 46 chromosome primate mate with to produce fertile offspring? Every one else had 48 chromosomes, and 24+23= 47 chromosomes, which I'd think means the offspring would be infertile.
[Fr. p. 2032 of Webster's Unabridged Dictionary (1967): science / L scientia knowledge, fr. scient-, sciens (pres. part. of scire to know) 1 a : possession of knowledge as distinguished from ignorance or misunderstanding : knowledge as a personal attribute] That's science. It means "to know." There are innumerable means by which to learn. The derivation of the word "science" doesn't mention tenured "professors"; "peer review" nor "consensus."
- A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.
Look up the word "Religion". There's more than one definition of that word too!
You are not being honest with people by only giving them one context of a word, but mainly you are not being honest with yourself.
@procommenter If there are moral absolutes, is drugging a person, cutting them open and removing parts of their body immoral?
Oh, did I mention the person doing it is a doctor. Since she's doing it, it's surgery, if anyone else were to do the exact same thing, it would be assault with a deadly weapon at the very least.. Morals VERY MUCH depend on the situation.
No, it's because they don't usually watch videos like this. All the info they get are off of creationist rumor mill sites such as Answers in Genesis. Of course, since religions are found on censorship of knowledge (Galileo, for example) it's no surprise that you can't even comment on videos from the Discovery Institute and Creation Science Evangelism, unless someone else uploads them. Peace.
I don't have to be on someone's account to find out if 'creationists' as a whole don't usually watch science videos. For example, go to Zuke696's channel and you'll see what I mean. Thanks.
I maybe misunderstanding something about the fusing of the 2 chromosomes so maybe someone can help me out. We have 2 less chromosomes than the chimp, gorilla and orangutan and we are being told that that our # 2 chromo is a fusions of 2 chromo and that is why we have 2 less than the others.
What doesn't make sense to me is that if you take 48 chromo and fuse 2 together to make 1 chromo, you get 47 chromo not 46.
Okay, the apes get 24 from one parent and 24 from another. I think that the Robertsonian translocation occurs inside the germ cell (egg and/or sperm) rather than inside the fertilized egg. So you get a germ cell with 23 chromosomes rather than the normal 24. I imagine that at some point, two individuals with this mutation came together to form an embryo with 23+23=46, rather than 24+24=48.
Thanks for the reply. 2 individuals coming together with the same mutation is possible but not to probable it would seem. I wonder if this type of mutation is more common between species than we know. I wonder when did the fusion first take place. It's weird to me...did an ape with a mutation pop out a human? And if that ape had the mutation wouldn't that be detrimental to the ape? Were they even apes? Maybe the mutation happened during meiosis. That would seem more probable to me.
I think it has a lot to do with isolated groups of primates. Any group separated from its peers will no longer contribute to the gene pool of the bigger society. So this means mutations in group A stay in group A. Over thousands of years of interbreeding and mutation both groups will have become so dissimilar that crossbreeding becomes impossible and a new species is born. This is why humans arent evolving anymore, cheap air travel and one night stands mixing up the gene pool!
Wo, there is a lot to this stuff. I just read about Robertsonian translocation and this happens frequently. There are people walking around with 45 chromosomes that are perfectly normal. Some people that have fusions turn out to have down syndrome or patau syndrome. Guess this is more probable than I thought.
it's been three weeks, so i dunno if anyone told you yet, but when people talk about chromosomes; its referred to in pairs. Therefore when the chromosomes fused, they mean a pair of chromosomes fused together, not a single chromosome. That's why 48 changed to 46.
hmmm a christian with the intellect and reasoning of an atheist. Interesting mix XD
Ok, nuff jokin.
Miller does a marvellous job at exposing creationism and its "evidence" and scientists like him should get really promoted by the american mainstream media, so that Mr. and Mrs. Itsonlyatheory can be enlightent too.
But I dislike the word "accident" he used in this vid. Its terminology like this, on which upon IDiots build their strawmans to emotianally deceive the public.
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Cont. These are Correlation Does Not Imply Causation & Incomplete Comparison. However, evoutionary defense sites, & evo lit in general, show many other logical fallacies as well. Continuing on at Vid 6.
LoricaLady 1 year ago
@LoricaLady And the MAIN LOGICAL FALLACY you do is pretending that if Evolution is wrong, you are necessary right!!!
And all of this with full of science debate product of "GOD DID IT"!!!
MattleSystem 1 year ago
Comment removed
LoricaLady 1 year ago
Comment removed
LoricaLady 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Cont. Shubin is making the claim that Darwin's predictions have been verified. Same ol' bait & switch. Talk about one simlarity, placement of certain genes, and ignore (like you are to ignore that his replica of Tiktaalik has long, muscular, frontal fins for "emerging" onto land when the actual fossil shows very short fins with no musculature) the fact that the content of the genes is human only, not that of an ape. Again, evolution is based most on these 2 logical fallacies... Cont.
LoricaLady 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
5:15 "We've got the genes too." What kind of science is this? Well, pseudo science as usual. Human beings and primates do NOT have the same genes. They have some simlarities, as one would expect.. But the genes are not identiical, any more than we are identical to them. At 5:40 Neil Shubin again, the same one who presented the phony replica of Tiktaalik alongside the actual fossil, trusting, correctly, that folk would not see the bait & switch. Cont.
LoricaLady 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
TO ANY INTERESTED: If you note I do not reply to the posters below, those Miller guard dogs & others know they are on ignore for: following me for months from vid to vid with personal insults, name calling, hiding my posts gross obscenities,, false accusations of lying, and in the case of foxlake, sexual harrassment & telling a poster who sent me a 0 science porno post "Good job." Such behaviors inhibit the true purposes of science. I will debate with those who are civil and objective.
LoricaLady 1 year ago
@LoricaLady Copy and paste, maybe the only thing that you really well do here!
Genes similarity, instead of reading "answeringeneis" you should have a look to "talkorigins"...It is far most usefull.
MattleSystem 1 year ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
TO ANY INTERESTED: If you note I do no reply to some posters, they know they are on ignore. It's not possilbe to "debate" with Miller guard dogs & others who follow me around for months from vid to vid using personal insults, name calling, gross obscenities, false accusations of lying and, in the case of foxlake, sexual harrassment and telling a poster who left me a 0 science porno post, "Good job." I am happy to debate, for the purposes of true science, with those who are civil & objective.
LoricaLady 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
FOR ANYONE: If you notice a no-reply to some posters, those Miller guard dogs, & others who follow me from 1 vid series to another, know they are on ignore for these behaviors: personal insults, name calling, gross obscenities, hiding my posts, falsely accusing me of lying and, as with the case of FL, sexual harrassment & telling someone who sent me a 0 science porno post, Good job! I will gladly debate with those who are civil, objective and science grounded.
LoricaLady 1 year ago
Comment removed
LoricaLady 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
TO ANY INTERESTED: If you notice I don't reply to some posters, those MIller guard dogs, & others, know they are on ignore for the following behaviors: name calling, personal insults, hiding my posts, gross obscenities, falsely accusing me of lying and, as with FL, sexual harrassment and telling someone who sent me a 0 science porno post, "Good job." Such actions don't say, "Gee, let's be objective and logical for the true purposes of science". I will debate with those who are civil.
LoricaLady 1 year ago
Without element to support your... I don't know what you want to show with your comment... But anyway, if you don't explain your thesis and give the evidence to support the simple evidence that the relationship is so obvious in the genes, that we can't miss the conclusion that we share a common ancestor.
You have to know that if you accept one specie of fish to another, you have to accept primate to another primate!
Use your mirror and see how you look like Monkey!
MattleSystem 1 year ago
We all use our mind, and you still avoid to reply to the fondamental question, What is your "Scientific" Theory for the origin of Man????
Of course you can't reply to this simple question, because you have nothing, you can't reply to this simpe question, because you have just the word "creation" on your side which means nothing.
So even if I am on your ignore list because you are too narrow minding to understand the basic, you need to provide a good thesis! And not just your ignorance!
MattleSystem 1 year ago
Comment removed
LoricaLady 1 year ago
@LoricaLady I do use my mind. The fact that robertsonian translocations occur has nothing to do with the fact that one has to be there in human chromosomes in order for evolution to be true. Quite simple. I still don´t see any argument in your comment.
Is it or is it not true, that if common ancesty was right, there has to be a fusion site in human chromosomes? Or in other words would it be as irrelevant if there was none like it is now?
Why is there a telomere and two centormeres? Explain
HeavyweightThinker 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@HeavyweightThinker Who says the translocation "has" to be there? Evoutionists. Only after they saw the translocation of course! You won't find any mentioni of it in the evo lit before then. You explain. You explain why a translocation of one kind for humans means we have ape "ancestry" but the other kind of fuson doesn't even get mentioned. Ditto why aren't animal fusions being called examples of evoltuionary ancestry? Of course any kind of fusions has a "glue." So what?
LoricaLady 1 year ago
@LoricaLady "only after they saw the translocation of course!"
No. Miller says in the video that it was found 2 weeks before the trial. Common ancestry is over 100 years old. So it was of course not after they saw it. I don´t see why you don´t understand this.
"You explain why a translocation of one kind for humans means we have common ancestry but the other kind of fusion doesn´t even get mentioned"
Simple. In case of humans and the great apes its a comparison, not the case with cattle
HeavyweightThinker 1 year ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@HeavyweightThinker "It was found 2 weeks before the trial", yes. But they were not saying, as they do now, that it HAD to be there, in the period before that, in the evo lit. Now that they found this superficial correlation, it HAD to be there! You have no way explained why some humans have an additional chromosome fusion & no one is saying it is the result of ape ancestry. What is it the result of HT? Ditto the animals who have that same kind of fusion?
LoricaLady 1 year ago
Comment removed
HeavyweightThinker 1 year ago
@LoricaLady "What is it the result of HT"
If common ancestry was right, we must have had 48 chromsomes. Which we had and two fused in our lineage. The point is inheritance, it has to be inherited and it has been as the fusion site shows.
Now in case of other animals having a translocaiton of addition of chromsomes it just proves that such changes of the genome occur. A fusion is not in itself evidence of common ancestry, its just that it had to be there if humans share common ancestry.
HeavyweightThinker 1 year ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@HeavyweightThinker "It has to be inherited." Indeed it does. But there is no ev-i-dence it has to be, or was, inherited from apes. "It had to be there if humans share a common ancestry." Again, answer why it shows purely human chromosomes fused, not a fusion of ape chromosomes? Much is made of the fact that there are similarities between human & ape chromosomes. Evolutionists ignore the obvious anyone can see at the zoo. There are vast, unbridgeable differences, also.
LoricaLady 1 year ago
It is not from apes! it is from a common ancestor! Don't make the mistake all the time! This fused chromosome is the evidence that Ape and human are linked in the past!
The fused chromosome that you have in human genome sometimes is certainly not similar! two centromeres as well...
Go back in the time! at the origin there was one specie, Australopithecus and after there were two Apes and humans!
"why it shows purely human chromosomes fused, not a fusion of ape chromosomes?" Pfff
MattleSystem 1 year ago 2
What does that mean? What do you want as an answer? This is ridicule! human chromosome fused equal two chromosomes from "kind of ape" or australopitehcus ancestor"! So partially you have fusion of ape chromosome....
As you said, your own idea is far away from science, nevertheless u want to debate evolution just with "science"!!!
How do you want to be competent in this debate if on ur side no science support your thesis!!!
U are so FUNNY!
MattleSystem 1 year ago 3
@LoricaLady "But theres is no evidence it has to be, or was, inherited from apes."
Of course it has to be from apes, we are apes and the common ancestor was an ape. In the same sense that we are mammals and our ancestors had to be. Your grandpar. have to be your grandpar. or are you saying that if i would compare the genes of your grandparents with yours, similarity wouldn´t mean relatedness? Or that there is no evidence that the same genes you have from your parents are actually from them?
HeavyweightThinker 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@HeavyweightThinker "Your grandpa had to be your grandpa." Guess what my grandpa was a human being. We shared the same kind of genes so it is appropriate to compare them. DNA testing is not the simple thing you make it seem to be. It is based on true science. It is testable, repeatable, and observable. "Well, we MUST have come from apes because we found these certain similarities" ain't. The similarities are there but the evo deductions are based purely on conjecture & zero science.
LoricaLady 1 year ago
@LoricaLady "DNA testing is not the simple thing you make it seem to be. It is based on true science. It is testable, repeatable and observable."
I fully agree. DNA testing is comparing similarities between organisms and the amount of similarities shows degree of relatedness. Thats why i can prove genetically that your grandfa. is your grandfa. and your father is your father. Comparison of similarities works for crops, vegetable, all life. It proves we share common decent with the great apes.
HeavyweightThinker 1 year ago 3
@LoricaLady You should know that the color of your eyes is a gene, the color of your hair, your skin, etc... So do you really think that saying same kind of genes is really an answer!
You don't understand that point! your grand grand grand parent is maybe more similar to your neighbour than yourself! Because the DNA transmission is random! And if you go back in the time, your ancestor was in Africa! Mintochondrial info from the mother!
Read more science text book if you really want to debate!
MattleSystem 1 year ago
@MattleSystem What HT is telling you is that no matter what you have for the result in phenotype, the genotype is pratically similar to the human! And if we look just at the structure, then DNA is the same for all on earth!
DNA is just a serie of element randomly transmit from of generation to another! The change with the time gives different phenotype etc. etc. At one stage, the difference in the genotype is large enough to be considered as a new specie!
This is evolution...DNA evidence!
MattleSystem 1 year ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@HeavyweightThinker Cont. Also explain why the chromosomes that are fused, according to evoutionists, "just where they are supposed to be" are strictly human chromosomes. Shouldn't they show a fusion of ape chromosomes? The whole argument is bogus, and oh yeal, there is another logical fallacy (at least) being used here, the Fallacy of the Incomplete Comparison.
LoricaLady 1 year ago
@LoricaLady "according to evolutionists"
No its not according to evolutionists. Its a fact. Anybody can sequence his genome and find the fusion site. You have it in every body cell. Its a fact.
I asked you why there are telomeres and two centromeres in chromosome number two. Please answer.
"Shouldn´t they show a fusion of ape chromosomes"
There is no difference between ape and human chromosomes, there are just chromosomes. Whats your point? Please also answer my questions.
HeavyweightThinker 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@HeavyweightThinker A fact, and deductions, or fantasies ,built around a fact, does not change the fact that Correlation Does NOT Imply Causation. The fact that there are telomeres & cehromeres at chrmosome number 2 is just another example of evoutionists trying to push that same fallacy on you. My friend, if you can make a comment like "There is no differnce between ape and human chromosomes" you need to do some serious research. How can you understand my points until you learn the basics?
LoricaLady 1 year ago
@LoricaLady So you agree its a fact that we have fused chromosome, good.
"Correlation does not imply causation"
No, of course not in every case. But you haven´t explained why that is the case in that case.
"just another example of evolutionists trying to push..."
You still haven´t annswered why there is the fusion site on which you agree its a fact. Now i ask you the 3rd time why are there 2 centromeres and telomeres on human chromsome number 2?
HeavyweightThinker 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@HeavyweightThinker You are big on asking Qs, & on avoiding them. Why are there 2 cetromere & telemores on chrom. #2? Because they work there. Why are there 10 fingers & 10 toes instead of 20 each? Why are all the cranial nerves starting out at the base of the brain? In a sense you are asking me to answer Qs on origins. I don't go there because I avoid what would become a red herring of religion as you probably know. Yes, humans have some similarities with apes. Everyone knows that. Cont.
LoricaLady 1 year ago
@LoricaLady "Because they work there."
Thats the best you can do? After i asked 4 times? Anyway, looking at your channel i don´t see science videos, i only see religion and faith all over the place. So what can i expect. Certainly not science in your response.
HeavyweightThinker 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@HeavyweightThinker You only see religion and faith in my vids? Guess what? Some scientists, many of them every bit as degreed and experienced as Ken Miller, Dawkins, et al are in those vids. To you if someone has any faith, or believes in intelligent design, that means they are biased. But you trust in the evoutionists in spite of their frauds, logical fallacies & psuedo science, to be the souls of objectivity. I have studied both sides at great length. You, I'm sure, have not.
LoricaLady 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@HeavyweightThinker Now I ask you once more, why is that evoutionists are saying that fused chromosome #2 is proof positive for "evoutionary ancestry", yet some humans have fused chromosomes & they aren't linked to any kind of "ancestry" whatsoever? Ditto many fusions seen in animals, sometimes consistently & sometimes not w/in the same species? Again, we already know there are similarities between apes & humans. Again, correlation does NOT imply causation. Worms have similarities to snakes.
LoricaLady 1 year ago
@LoricaLady "why is that evolutionists are saying that fused chromosome #2 is proof positive for evolutionary ancestry, yet some humans have fused chrom. and aren´t linked"
I already answered that. By the way there is no "evolutionary ancestry", there is just ancestry. A fusion is in itself no evidence for common ancestry but if you want to prove common ancestry for particular organisms, then the genes have to match, otherwise you would have disproved common ancestry.
HeavyweightThinker 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@HeavyweightThinker I didn't see you answering my Q about why some humans have an extra chromosome. Frankly, not trying to be unkind or anything, but how much of a meaningful answer can I expect to get from someone who has said there is no difference between human & chimp chromosomes? "The genes have to match, otherwise you have disproved common ancestry." Believe yourself. The genes don't match. The chromosomes that are fused don't match. Plz do some research & become more analytical.
LoricaLady 1 year ago
@LoricaLady "What about some humans have an extra chromosome" Its called trisomy 21. I don´t know what that has to do with a fusion of chromosomes. LL seriously you start to get on my nerves with such questions. Its ok if you don´t understand genetics, which is no shame since it takes years of study but why this constant nonsense? Whats the point?
"The genes don´t match"
They do match, we have the exact fusion site with multiple subtelomere duplications and 2 centromeres, one inactive.
HeavyweightThinker 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@HeavyweightThinker As expected, you've gone into your verbal abuse mode. Again. You tell me I don't understand genetics and yet you said there is no difference between human and chimp chromosomes? You are trying to tell me that the genes and their contents are synonymous with a fusion site? Rolling eyes. Quit posing & start researching. I would explain more for you, but you know I don't waste time with those who use verbal abuse. Plz learn logic AND manners. Back to ignor
LoricaLady 1 year ago
@LoricaLady All it would take is for you to do the most basic research to confirm that what HT is telling you is correct. Instead you feign being insulted so that you can avoid having to admit your failure. The genetic evidence is very powerful and persuasive. More and more is being understood every day that debunks your assertion that we do not share common ancestry with the rest of the apes.
foxlake02 1 year ago 3
@LoricaLady If you want to proof that your parents are actually your real parents you do compare the genes. If they match it proofs parenthood. Due to the universality of DNA, you can do that with every organism. Common ancestry is extended paternity testing.
If you say that similarity does not mean relatedness, then you say that your genes matching your parents´ does not proof paternity.
HeavyweightThinker 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@HeavyweightThinker "If they match it proves parenthood." There is no such thing as paternity testing for evo. That is 1 reason why calling fossils "transitional" forms is bogus. You can't test to see if any of them came from any others of them. You can't even tell if they ever had progeny much different from themselves. Typical of evo think, you leap from one thing that is mildly similar, a fused chromosome, and try to equate it to something that is light years more complex.
LoricaLady 1 year ago
@LoricaLady "There is no such thing as paternity testing for evo"
Then you should go into some Labs, especially those of the pharmaceutical industry. Farmers are suited for using crops that are descended from patented crop-DNA. Read the news.
"1 Reason why fossils "transitional" forms is bogus"
Sigh. Loricalady fossils don´t have DNA, you cannot test paternity of fossils. And evolution is not equal to common ancestry. Common ancestry/decent is a concept existing despite of evolution.
HeavyweightThinker 1 year ago
@LoricaLady "If they had progeny much different from themselves"
No lifeform ever has or had any progeny different from itself. That is completely impossible since offspring is a combination of parental genes or in case of somelizards, worms and bacteria cloning. Organisms do not and cannot be "significantly different" from their parents. Its a gradual change of the traits. And by the way, what does "significantly different" mean? Its certainly not a defined scientific concept.
HeavyweightThinker 1 year ago
@LoricaLady "you need to do some serious research"
You could have used that space to explain to me what the difference between ape and human chromosomes is or indeed any other chromsome of any other organism.
"But they were not saying, as they do now, that it HAD to be there"
Thats not true. The number of chromsomes was known long before the whole genome was sequenced. Miller explains that in the video. So whats next, are you going to explain the fusion site or not?
HeavyweightThinker 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@HeavyweightThinker "You could...explain to me what the difference is..." Hello? The fact that you said human & ape chromosomes are not different means you need to do more reading than I can put in these little boxes! Of course the number of chromosomes was known ages ago. It's not the number of chromosomes that is the big issues here, but the fusion.
LoricaLady 1 year ago
@LoricaLady "The fact that you said human & ape chromosomes are not different means you need to do more reading"
The concept of a chromosome is universal in every organism. If by difference you mean content then say so. But there is no difference between an ape chromosome and a human one. Not only because humans are apes, which you still don´t understand, but because chromosomes are universal. Only the genetic content differes; in case of chimpanzees and humans its nearly identical.
HeavyweightThinker 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@HeavyweightThinker "Nearly identical" is a matter of definition. Look at a chimp in the zoo. Look at yourself. Are you nearly identical? The fused chromosomes of humans are purely human and in not like a chimp's. To say, "Well our chromosomes are nearly identifical" is a cop out. It's a classic case of using the logical fallacy of Incomplete Comparison. Fusing two chimp, or other ape, chromosomes together - will it get you a human? The idea is laughable. It should be tes-ted in a ...lab!
LoricaLady 1 year ago
@LoricaLady "Look at a chimp in the zoo. Look at yourself. Are you nearly identical?"
Yes. Same body structure, same intestines, same brain structure, same family structure, identical lifespan, similar diet on and on...
But its even more compelling if you look at the genes. They are 95-98% identical, depending on whether you compare base per base, or actual genes and or exons/introns.
HeavyweightThinker 1 year ago
@LoricaLady @LoricaLady "are purely human and not like a chimp´s."
No, the genetic content is whats human not the chromosome itself because every organism, even salad has chromosomes. You inherited chromosomes from your father; not the chrom. are specific from your father but the content is. And that is true for every organism.
You try to establish the same nonsene again; similarity equals relatedness thats why you can do a paternity test. You can do a paternity test even with cockroaches
HeavyweightThinker 1 year ago
@LoricaLady "Fusing two chimp, or other ape, chromosome together -will you get a human? The idea is laughable."
Yes i agree. This idee is horrendously laughable and can only be made up by a person who doesn´t undertand that the number of chrom.s has zero to do with the genetic content. The change of the traits within chrom. is what makes a human a human and salad a salad. The number of chrom. is just the package. If you would fuse your genes to 2 chrom. you would still be yourself.
HeavyweightThinker 1 year ago 2
@LoricaLady silly little child, you still dont understand why no one will accept your lies and bullshit?
Everyone understands your points because you are doing nothing but vomiting your ignorance all over channels with Ken Miller videos because you are obsessed with him. Everyone can see you for the propagandist that you are.
Shut your face, LoricaLady. For many months you have been continually ignoring the refutations posted against you. Do the world a favor and shut up.
ThatOneQuestion 1 year ago 8
@LoricaLady Logical fallacy of scientists or just logical defficiency of your mind???
Because you have to take all the details that is behind the video here to uynderstand that they have different element to support also the evolution and the common ancestor!
First, the fossil records of several transitionnal forms of Human-Ape mixture! You have to think this thing, Australopithecus was maybe more human than ape... So we can also say that Chimp come from human...Phylogenetic
MattleSystem 1 year ago
@LoricaLady "Shouldn't they show a fusion of ape chromosomes?" We are apes and it does. The fact is, our genome is 98% identical to chimpanzee's. 96% if you include insertions and deletions. This is less than the difference between horses and zebras. The morphology is almost entirely a matter of proportions. Why is it you have no problem with the speciation of bacteria, fruit flies, bats or other large groups but insist that the apes are somehow different?
foxlake02 1 year ago 5
@HeavyweightThinker Wow, you are on LoricaLady's ignore list too? What a coincidence. So am I! It's not a very exclusive club but I'm proud to be a member. I earned my ignore/delete status by telling her to get her head out of her ass and calling her on some quote mines and lies she was telling. How did you earn yours?
foxlake02 1 year ago 2
Cont. Usually only geneticists know about the oddity of some humans having an extra fused chromosome, or know that animals have an odd assortment of chromsome fusions.. So when someone like Miller, a scientist (gasp!) gets up and starts using words like telomeres and centomeres and shows only the kind of fusion that superficially matches a number with apes, it all looks so good, so real...like when a magician pulls a rabbit out of a previously "empty" hat. Same trick. Cont.
LoricaLady 1 year ago
@LoricaLady "superifcially matches the number with apes"
It does not superficially match the number it exactly matches it.
Secondly its not "apes" its the other great apes since humans are apes too.
If you want to critizise something you have to get at least the basic facts straight.
Miller is a Professor and a cell biologist who works in labs, what do you do?
HeavyweightThinker 1 year ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@HeavyweightThinker Tho you're on the ignore list - re MIller being a cell biologist: Darwin only had a degree in theology, yet is an icon in evolutionary circles. A degree in science is a neutral thing. It can be used to do true science, or it can be used to obfuscate & obscure it, to misrepresent it. Scientists are just kids you went to school with who took courses for their field in college. They have no more or no less integrity, or resistance to party line doctrine than others. Cont.
LoricaLady 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@HeavyweightThinker You don't have to have a degree in science to learn how to think analytically & critically & recognize logical fallacies. Why is the "glue" holding our common fusions together an indication of evolutionary descent while the "glue" holding fusions together in cattle etc., or in folk with an extra fusion, is not? Our "glued" chromosomes are vastly different from the chromosomes of apes. Correlation Does NOT Imply Causation. Learn logical fallcies & believe them. Use YOUR mind.
LoricaLady 1 year ago
Comment removed
LoricaLady 1 year ago
Cont. For ex., some cattle have the Robertsonian Translocation that Miller speaks of for humans. So, let's see, does the "glue" that holds the fusion together for cows indicate evoutionary "common ancestry"? Isn't that "glue" being touted as scientific proof positive that we came from apes? But no one is even suggesting that about the cows. How could they, since some cattle have it and some, of the same species, do not - just as only some humans have an extra fusion. Cont.
LoricaLady 1 year ago
Cont. 2:57 "We ought to be able to find the scotch tape that is holding these 2 chormosomes together, and if we don't find it then the evolutionary hyppothesis of common ancestry is refuted." What nonsense. Finding the "glue" that holds fused chromosomes together shows 0 common ancestry. Not only does the "glue" that holds the forementioned, other, rarer, fusion not even get mentioned here as a cause of "ancestry", neither is that of other animals who also have chromosomal fusions. Cont.
LoricaLady 1 year ago
@LoricaLady "What nonsense... shows 0 common ancestry"
You would be the first to say that common ancestry is wrong if it hadn´t been found. Or would you also have said that it is irrelevant? Of course not. The fusion site has to be there if evolution is true period.
"some cattle have Robertsonian translocation"
Not only cattle but many more. But whats your point? You are not comparing cattle to cousins or their ancestry, so what exactly do you wanna say? Its hardly any argument.
HeavyweightThinker 1 year ago 2
TO ANY INTERESTED: If you see no replies to posters below, they know they are on ignore. It's impossible to "debate" science with Miller guard dogs & others who follow me from 1 vid series to another, with personal insults, name calling, gross obscenities, hiding/Expelling my posts, and in the case of FL, sexual harrassment & telling a poster who wrote me a 0 science porno post, "Good job." Such behaviors block the true purposes of science. I debate with the civil, objective & science based.
LoricaLady 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Cont. The mention of the other kind of fusion that humans have is conspicuous by its absence. The mention of the vast, unbridgeable differences between what's IN
the chimp chromosomes & what's IN our chromosomes is conspicuous by its absence too since evolutionists rarely acknowledge the Correlation Does NOT Imply Causation logical fallacy. To them, if there ia correlation, of any kind, then evolution "must have" been the causation. End of story for them. End of real science, too. Cont.
LoricaLady 1 year ago
@LoricaLady Again you want a scientific debate! But you have to provide a better theory for the origin of man! If evolution is not true and if the analogy in the genome between ape and human is not enough, therefore I suppose that you have a better explanation with full scientific evidences....
No? Yes?
If you have nothing to provide unless your comment without taking into account all details, just shut up!
Because you don't debate here, you criticise! that's ALL!
MattleSystem 1 year ago 2
Cont... And again, you are talking about the comparison between Chimp and human! So the difference you have today in the genome make us difference! But the analogy with the position of the centromere and the genes similarity prove that we share a common ancestor and not that we come from chimp! Get it?
Furthermore the cross over of chromosome is quite common.
But again, what is your scientific theory about the origin of man?
No religion, just scientific debate!
MattleSystem 1 year ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Cont. 2:14 Having shown that humans have 46 chromosome & apes have 48, Miller now uses another logical fallacy, The Fallacy of The Single Cause, & says, "There is only one possibility...they must have accidentally gotten stuck together." Must have? Accidentally? There are calling this science? What is testable, observable or repeatable about it? Again, about 1 in 1000 humans have an additional fused chromosome. If there is a single cause for fusion, evoultion only, did apes cause it? Cont
LoricaLady 1 year ago
@LoricaLady "If there is a single cause for fusion, evolution only, did apes cause it?" We are apes and we didn't cause the fused chromosome any more than we cause ourselves to be taller or shorter than our parents. It's a genetic mutation that is probably neutral but will often cause a speciation event. It's well documented in other mammals like mice. Nobody is making this up. There is a lot of evidence for it. Why would our species be any different?
foxlake02 1 year ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
TO ANY INTERESTED: If you see me ignoring posters, they know they are on ignore. One cannot fullfill the true purposes of science & "debate" with Miller watchdogs & others who follow one from 1 vid series to another with name calling, personal insults, hiding one's posts, sometimes sexual harrassment, and as with FL, telling someone who sent a 0 science porno post, "Good job."
I am happy to debate with the (very few seen) evo-ites who can do so with dignity, civility & objectivity.
LoricaLady 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
TO ANY INTERESTED: If you see me bypassing posters, they know they're on ignore. It's not possible to "debate" with Miller watchdogs & others who follow me from 1 video series to another, hiding my posts, pouring out personal insults, gross obscenities, name calling & sometimes sexual harrassment & cheering on of someone who wrote a 0 science porno post. Such behaviors defeat the purposes of true science. I'll gladly debate the very few YT evo-ites who are civil, objective & science based
LoricaLady 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Cont. There is no evidence. There is nothing testable, observable or repeatable, as in true science, to lead to the conclusion that one kind of human chromosome fusion came from apes. Why does evo lit keep claiming "Evidence! Evidence!" when there is none? Because they have no true evidence, of course! :-) Cont.
LoricaLady 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Cont. There is a superficial number comparison. Big deal. We already knew that humans & apes have similarities. But the differnces between the content of their chromosomes & ours is vast & cannot be bridged. And, so what if humans have fused chromosomes? Where is the ev-i-dence this fusion came from apes, anyway? No mention is made of that! It so happens about 1 in 1,000 people have an EXTRA chromosome fusion! It is usually benign & not even noticed. Did it come from apes, too? Cont.
LoricaLady 1 year ago
@LoricaLady "Where is the ev-i-dence this fusion came from apes" Hi hun, spreading your silly creationist crap here now hey? The evidence that the fusion is from ancestral apes is the fact that the fusion point is exactly where two modern ape chromosomes terminate. The fused chromosome also correspond to the separate ones and it has two centeromeres. Didn't you pay attention to the video? It explains all that.
foxlake02 1 year ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Cont. Here is a typical example of evo lit with its outrageous claim of "evidence", even "decisive evidence" that is based purely on logical fallacies. The 1st logical fallacy, the 1 they seem to use the most, is Correlation Does NOT Imply Causation. Ok chimps have 48 chromosomes. Tobacco does too! The 2nd logical fallacy being used is Incomplete Comparison. Much is made of the Chromosome 2 fusion. Nothing is said about what is inside of the chimp chromosomes vs our own. Cont.
LoricaLady 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
0:44 Here is a great example of evo lit making outrageous claims based only on logical fallacies & not on science. More about the logical fallacies coming up. For now Miller mentions that if he had spoken with very technical terms the judge's "eyes would have glazed over." Here is actually a great example of how this politcally appointed judge no way understands complex scientific issues, but is reliant on someone else to feed him what is, essentially, their spin on the data. Cont.
LoricaLady 1 year ago
Maybe i don't have my science correct, but recent events have shown that Chromosome 2 is tied to physical characteristics of a Monkey's and human. So, wouldn't they be similar anyway? (there Homoebox genes)
P.S. One more question, assuming that our 46 chromosomes are 100 percent similar to our primate relatives 46/48 equals 95% similar not 98% which i was taught in school, right? (something does not add up)
vivaramones 1 year ago
@vivaramones They are comparing the DNA sequence of the Chimpanzee and Human genome. It doesn't matter that there is a chromosome fusion. It's 96 percent of our DNA sequence when insertions and deletions are taken into account. The information agrees with the fossil record that indicate chimps and humans diverged from a common ancestor about 6 million years ago.
foxlake02 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@foxlake02 For the 11th time, for the benefit of any others, I do not "debate" with those who use personal insults, name calling, gross obscenities, sexual harrassment, false accusations of lying, & who tell someone who sent me a porno post, w/0 science, "Good job."
LoricaLady 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@foxlake02 "It doesn't matter that there is a chromosome fusion". It matters to MIller, and other evolutionists, greatly. They claim that fusion comes from so called ape ancestry. The fossil record does not show humans came from apes. There are a paltry few skeletons & fragments which they CLAIM are transitional fossils. This is bogus to start since there is 0 way to know if those fossilized animals ever produced any significantly different progeny. Pseduo evidence = pseudo science.
LoricaLady 1 year ago
@LoricaLady and facial reconstruction for the police investigation do you call this also pure imagination! Of course no! Because as all scientist they have elements on the skull to develop enough combination to retranscript the face of the person... Of course the reality is maybe not perfectly matching but the 75% are perfectly correct based on science of anatomy!
And for the fossils, this is the same, with few bones you can see exactly the leg shape etc...
Of course you want a time machine!
MattleSystem 1 year ago
You want to see a dinosaur giving birth of a bird, and fish giving birth of a amphibian, and an ape giving birth of a human!
This is not possible, sorry to repeat again and again, but the evidences are in the genetic, the stratigraphy, dating, geology, fossil records, tool fossil... In brief you want to see impossible, that is why you believe in god....
Naturalistic science such as paleontolgy are linked by several elements, but not as you want to see! this is ur dream, but not science!
MattleSystem 1 year ago
@LoricaLady You're not reading in context again. I was explaining how professionals in the field arrive at the percentage that humans differ from chimp DNA. In that respect, it does not matter how many chromosomes have fused. Miller is right though. The fusion in the right location with extra telomeres and an extra centeromere confirms that our number 2 chromosome has fused from a common ancestor. You still don't understand what a transitional fossil is. Try looking it up. Are we debating now?
foxlake02 1 year ago
@LoricaLady " The fossil record does not show humans came from apes" Really, so what are you scientific conclusion for the origin of man???
Because if you take into account your own statement that fish can become fish but in another specie is possible. let me explain this! Fish is a group represented by several characteristic of anatomy and biology... Based on these elements, sorry to tell you the THRUTH, but apes and human are the same! They are primate!
You are so close of them you know.
MattleSystem 1 year ago 2
I know he is right, and you are right. Im not arguing that. I was trying to say there was another hypothesis before the actual DNA sequencing.
HandledTrivia 2 years ago
Ken Miller is truly awesome.
cornflakeclusters 2 years ago 15
He misses one other possibility. The chimps could have had a new chromosome develop after they split from us.
Obviously the DNA sequence agrees with him now, but he keeps saying there was only one possibility. There was two.
HandledTrivia 2 years ago
Actually, that wouldn't make sense, since gorillas and other great apes also have 48 chromosomes. This would imply that all other species of ape somehow developed the exact same mutation (an addition of an entire base pair!) by chance. No. The only sensible answer is that our common ancestor had 48 chromosomes and our genome modified after the split. And what do you know? Confirmed by DNA analysis.
Ibis333 2 years ago
@HandledTrivia: The trouble with that one is that there are 48 chromosomes not only in chimps, but also in gorillas and orangutans. In the currently supposed derivation, that would have required the same development of a new chromosome happen in each of the three great ape families independently.
Hylobates (gibbons), the next closest extent relatives up the tree, have four groups which are distinguish
puncheex 1 year ago
there were 2 possibilities but since the other great apes all have 24pair and we have 23, its much more likely that we were the outliars
Neeboopsh 2 years ago
i love this, thank you!
mt3oms 2 years ago
God Bless you Procommenter. May the
Lord bestow upon you His fair blessing.
procommenter 2 years ago
We got the genes too. lol.
NathanWubs 2 years ago
So who did the first 46 chromosome primate mate with to produce fertile offspring? Every one else had 48 chromosomes, and 24+23= 47 chromosomes, which I'd think means the offspring would be infertile.
szara 3 years ago
wrong. people with downs syndrome have an extra pair of chromosome and they can't mate with regular humans just fine.
LaingGod 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
HERE'S SOMETHING THAT'S NEW TO YOU:
[Fr. p. 2032 of Webster's Unabridged Dictionary (1967): science / L scientia knowledge, fr. scient-, sciens (pres. part. of scire to know) 1 a : possession of knowledge as distinguished from ignorance or misunderstanding : knowledge as a personal attribute] That's science. It means "to know." There are innumerable means by which to learn. The derivation of the word "science" doesn't mention tenured "professors"; "peer review" nor "consensus."
procommenter 3 years ago
whats the point in this again?
adafuns 2 years ago
With no moral absolutes: Is killing an "atheist" immoral? It's a question that belongs to the ages. There are no easy answers.
Ken Miller protects monkeys from harm.
procommenter 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
THEORY : conjecture, speculation, supposition
{"Webster's Unabridged Dictionary," p. 2371}
procommenter 3 years ago
Any other definitions of theory?
Oh Ya this one!
- A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.
Look up the word "Religion". There's more than one definition of that word too!
You are not being honest with people by only giving them one context of a word, but mainly you are not being honest with yourself.
Jesus *facepalm
reliableNference 3 years ago 6
Now look up SCIENTIFIC THEORY fool.
Munro1Man 2 years ago
Granny?
procommenter 2 years ago
? ?
Munro1Man 2 years ago
@procommenter If there are moral absolutes, is drugging a person, cutting them open and removing parts of their body immoral?
Oh, did I mention the person doing it is a doctor. Since she's doing it, it's surgery, if anyone else were to do the exact same thing, it would be assault with a deadly weapon at the very least.. Morals VERY MUCH depend on the situation.
KPhysicsGeek 2 years ago
Hmm. I wonder why Creationists aren't 'watching' and trying to 'debunk' these videos. They can't because evolution is the only explanation for this.
Cyraside 3 years ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Hmm, maybe because people like you would be pissy and say how come Creationists are always trying to 'debunk' videos like this.
w3stc0astgam3r 3 years ago
No, it's because they don't usually watch videos like this. All the info they get are off of creationist rumor mill sites such as Answers in Genesis. Of course, since religions are found on censorship of knowledge (Galileo, for example) it's no surprise that you can't even comment on videos from the Discovery Institute and Creation Science Evangelism, unless someone else uploads them. Peace.
Cyraside 3 years ago 4
ok then peace to you to although since you apparently know that i don't comment on those videos and you happened to be on my account fine then.
w3stc0astgam3r 3 years ago
I don't have to be on someone's account to find out if 'creationists' as a whole don't usually watch science videos. For example, go to Zuke696's channel and you'll see what I mean. Thanks.
Cyraside 3 years ago 2
I maybe misunderstanding something about the fusing of the 2 chromosomes so maybe someone can help me out. We have 2 less chromosomes than the chimp, gorilla and orangutan and we are being told that that our # 2 chromo is a fusions of 2 chromo and that is why we have 2 less than the others.
What doesn't make sense to me is that if you take 48 chromo and fuse 2 together to make 1 chromo, you get 47 chromo not 46.
Can someone help me out with this.
atheistmind 3 years ago
Okay, the apes get 24 from one parent and 24 from another. I think that the Robertsonian translocation occurs inside the germ cell (egg and/or sperm) rather than inside the fertilized egg. So you get a germ cell with 23 chromosomes rather than the normal 24. I imagine that at some point, two individuals with this mutation came together to form an embryo with 23+23=46, rather than 24+24=48.
I am not a scientist; this is just my conjecture.
deathweaselx86 3 years ago 3
Thanks for the reply. 2 individuals coming together with the same mutation is possible but not to probable it would seem. I wonder if this type of mutation is more common between species than we know. I wonder when did the fusion first take place. It's weird to me...did an ape with a mutation pop out a human? And if that ape had the mutation wouldn't that be detrimental to the ape? Were they even apes? Maybe the mutation happened during meiosis. That would seem more probable to me.
atheistmind 3 years ago 2
I think it has a lot to do with isolated groups of primates. Any group separated from its peers will no longer contribute to the gene pool of the bigger society. So this means mutations in group A stay in group A. Over thousands of years of interbreeding and mutation both groups will have become so dissimilar that crossbreeding becomes impossible and a new species is born. This is why humans arent evolving anymore, cheap air travel and one night stands mixing up the gene pool!
manchester26m 3 years ago
Wo, there is a lot to this stuff. I just read about Robertsonian translocation and this happens frequently. There are people walking around with 45 chromosomes that are perfectly normal. Some people that have fusions turn out to have down syndrome or patau syndrome. Guess this is more probable than I thought.
atheistmind 3 years ago 4
2 pair
DonExodus2 3 years ago 2
Actually, to be very anal retentive, it's 1 pair... or 2. 2 pair implies 4, which in turn applies 44. =D
Yes, I'm an ass. I made a similar comment about Alien^3 not being Alien 3 one time. :P
bersaba 3 years ago
it's been three weeks, so i dunno if anyone told you yet, but when people talk about chromosomes; its referred to in pairs. Therefore when the chromosomes fused, they mean a pair of chromosomes fused together, not a single chromosome. That's why 48 changed to 46.
tipamis167 3 years ago 4
hmmm a christian with the intellect and reasoning of an atheist. Interesting mix XD
Ok, nuff jokin.
Miller does a marvellous job at exposing creationism and its "evidence" and scientists like him should get really promoted by the american mainstream media, so that Mr. and Mrs. Itsonlyatheory can be enlightent too.
But I dislike the word "accident" he used in this vid. Its terminology like this, on which upon IDiots build their strawmans to emotianally deceive the public.
Vorlos 3 years ago 12
Casey Luskin says Miller's argument is flawed so............god did it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Casey has a law degree so he would know
CleveDan 3 years ago 5
Im actually blasting him in my next video.
DonExodus2 3 years ago
Casey luskin = nasal smugness
I don't know why i punish myself by listening to his podcast
CleveDan 3 years ago
Oh, no! Where's number 6?
CadicusTheDamned 3 years ago