• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Evolutions Smoking Gun

Fade

The Great Master Bates
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/05/18/chimps_love_humans/

DNA reveals human-chimp crossbreeding

Romeo and Ju-oo-oo-oo-liet

By Chris Williams

A new study of chimpanzee and human genomes has revealed that the two lineages leading to the modern species interbred after they split. According to the report to be published in Nature today, the story of how we left our hirsute cousins behind is more complicated than previously thought.

Researchers at MIT's Broad Institute used powerful statistical techniques to fit our DNA sequences against chimps', giving some surprising results.

Senior author David Reich explained: “The study gave unexpected results about how we separated from our closest relatives. Something very unusual happened at the time of speciation.”

Investigations of the X chromosome revealed it's around 1.2m years “younger” than the rest of the genome. Co-author Eric Lander said: “The young age of chromosome X is an evolutionary smoking gun.”

Because the X chromosome is one of the two sex chromosomes, controlling traits important to breeding, selection acts most strongly to change it after hybridisation.
This is interpreted to mean after the apes that would evolve into chimps and humans first separated, two got it together and mixed things up again. The star-crossed pair's kid became our ancestor.

The timing of the initial separation was later than expected too. Fossil evidence had put the split at between 6.5m and 7.4m years ago, but the new genetic comparison brings the event forward probably less than 5.4m years ago. Past genetic studies had shown that different regions of the genome diverged at different times, but the new work is the first to put dates on the splits.

Lead author Nick Patterson said: “If the dating is correct, the fossil would precede the human-chimp split. The fact that it has human-like features suggest that human-chimp speciation may have occurred over a long period with episodes of hybridisation.”

The team say that their discovery could mean that the way animal species form has to be reconsidered. Reich said: "That [hybridisation] events have not been seen more often may simply mean that we have not been looking for them."

The plan now is to butress these important findings with DNA from gorillas and other primates.®
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
There are so many smoking guns for evolution that it is more than a little difficult to believe it didn't happen. One would need to believe that tens of thousands of scientists have been duped or are in a conspiracy to missinterpret the evidence. There is no more rationality in that than it is rational to believe tens of thousands of plumbers have been duped or are in a conspiracy to deny that water readily flows through a completely clogged pipe.

Alas! We live in an age when people are such good consumers they think they can even shop for truth. They think truth is anything that entertains them or fits with their preconceptions or makes them feel good. So, some of these good consumers shop the internet for sites that "confirm" their ignorance of the evidence for evolution. This most recent evidence for evolution will be ignored, distorted, or unreasonably dismissed by them, just as all previous evidence has been. Fade, you cannot convert the willfully ignorant to truth.
 

gnostic

The Lost One
Sunstone said:
Alas! We live in an age when people are such good consumers they think they can even shop for truth. They think truth is anything that entertains them or fits with their preconceptions or makes them feel good.
I am afraid that I see the mainstream religions, such as Christianity and Islam. Flinging the Bibles or the Qur'an in our face. Trying to force issues in regarding to abortion, euthanasia, etc, which should be the decision of individuals with medical doctors, even if that person don't belong to any religion, seemed to infringe people's right to make the decision. Trying to push your preconception of heaven/hell, miracles upon others is not my idea of free will and free thinking. It is simply your version of "what make you feel good" that I don't entertain, and only reinforce my view that creationists are only here to force people to accept ignorance as gospel truth.

I find your post offensive when you call other people to think for themselves as "ignorant". People have the right to question everything, whether they be the scriptures, creation, evolution or the big bang.

Who said that the most recent evidences are ignored? To me, Creationists seemed to ignore all evidences whatsoever, so who is really ignorant?
 

Booko

Deviled Hen
gnostic said:
I am afraid that I see the mainstream religions, such as Christianity and Islam. Flinging the Bibles or the Qur'an in our face. Trying to force issues in regarding to abortion, euthanasia, etc, which should be the decision of individuals with medical doctors, even if that person don't belong to any religion, seemed to infringe people's right to make the decision. Trying to push your preconception of heaven/hell, miracles upon others is not my idea of free will and free thinking. It is simply your version of "what make you feel good" that I don't entertain, and only reinforce my view that creationists are only here to force people to accept ignorance as gospel truth.

I find your post offensive when you call other people to think for themselves as "ignorant". People have the right to question everything, whether they be the scriptures, creation, evolution or the big bang.

You do realize that there are people who believe in the Bible and the Qu'ran and do not try to force these issues on others, regard miracles are not relevant to faith, and don't much believe in eternal damnation, yes?
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
Gnostic said:
I find your post offensive when you call other people to think for themselves as "ignorant". People have the right to question everything, whether they be the scriptures, creation, evolution or the big bang.

Who said that the most recent evidences are ignored? To me, Creationists seemed to ignore all evidences whatsoever, so who is really ignorant?
Perhaps it would help you to understand my position if you were to read my post more carefully than you appear to have done.
 

gnostic

The Lost One
Then why must Creationists push their Creationism in our face?

If Christians keep calling other people ignorants, then the very same could be said about them blinding ignoring evidences, when it staring glaringly back at their face. They want us to accept the supernaturals, the Earth and human were created in 6 days, and that the Earth is no more 5700 years, and yet provide no evidences whatsoever for their preconceptions, except a book that seemed more than likely, based from an older religion/mythology than Judaism - the Sumerian civilisation.

The Sumerian myths were written long before Abraham and Moses, which also contain their versions of creation of man from earth, the flood and ark, and men living longer than 120 years. Similarities are too striking to be called coincidence.

If what it say is true about Abraham leaving Babylonia (formerly Sumer) in mid-18th century BC, then he would have know of the Sumerian/Akkadian/Babylonian creation myth. Then somewhere along the line, between Abraham and Moses, the original myth of creation/flood was transformed to suit the Hebrew monotheistic religion, sort of like propaganda. The Torah (which includes the Genesis) wasn't written until, at the earliest - in Moses' time (flourish around 13th-12th century BC) - or at the latest - in David's time (flourish around 1000 BC).

The Sumerian extant literature dates back to 2300-2100 BC. By the time 2000 BC, Sumerian literature had all but become extinct, being replaced by Semitic language of Akkadian, which Babylonian dialect was derived from.

If we are to believe in the Bible, and the calculation of the years, then the biblical Flood happened around precisely 2104 BC. No Sumerian extant historical reports such devastating Flood in this period. The Sumerian legend place the Flood centuries before 2104 BC. According to Sumerian list of kings, Gilgamesh is calculated to live in the 26th century BC, and it is believed that the Flood had happened centuries before Gilgamesh's time.

The Sumerian and the Bible reports a Flood, but they seemed to disagree when it happened.
 

Mathematician

Reason, and reason again
I wonder if humans and chimps could still cross-breed.

Any volunteers?

__

On a more serious note, this might put an end to "why do monkies :)shrug: ) still exist"? Perhaps under certain instances macro-evolution produces a new type of species that is capable of reproducing with its former "face", thus being able to keep both species separate in existance. I look forward to this.
 

Opethian

Active Member
On a more serious note, this might put an end to "why do monkies :)shrug: ) still exist"? Perhaps under certain instances macro-evolution produces a new type of species that is capable of reproducing with its former "face", thus being able to keep both species separate in existance. I look forward to this.

It won't put an end to "why do monkeys still exist" because there has never been a problem with this among people who know how evolution works. It's just another piece of evidence to add to the pile which a lot of people will still ignore because they think evolution doesn't fit with their faith.
 

Fade

The Great Master Bates
gnostic said:
Then why must Creationists push their Creationism in our face?

If Christians keep calling other people ignorants, then the very same could be said about them blinding ignoring evidences, when it staring glaringly back at their face. They want us to accept the supernaturals, the Earth and human were created in 6 days, and that the Earth is no more 5700 years, and yet provide no evidences whatsoever for their preconceptions, except a book that seemed more than likely, based from an older religion/mythology than Judaism - the Sumerian civilisation.

I think you may be preaching to the converted on this thread. Re-read Sunstones posts and try to understand that he wasn't attacking your beliefs but rather trying to explain the futility of trying to convince those who do not want to be convinced.
 

gnostic

The Lost One
My apologies to you, Sunstone. It seemed that I've jumped the gun and misread and misunderstood your post. I hoped that you will accept my apologies.

Thank you for being patience, Fade, and pointing out my errors :eek: .
 

Fade

The Great Master Bates
gnostic said:
My apologies to you, Sunstone. It seemed that I've jumped the gun and misread and misunderstood your post. I hoped that you will accept my apologies.

Thank you for being patience, Fade, and pointing out my errors :eek: .

No worries :).

Quick question for you though...I see you specify your religion as Humanist Agnostic yet you choose to call yourself Gnostic. Isn't that a contradiction? :confused:
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
gnostic said:
My apologies to you, Sunstone. It seemed that I've jumped the gun and misread and misunderstood your post. I hoped that you will accept my apologies.

Thank you for being patience, Fade, and pointing out my errors :eek: .

No problem, Gnostic. 'Twas an honest mistake and honest mistakes happen to all of us.

Phil
 

gnostic

The Lost One
fade said:
I see you specify your religion as Humanist Agnostic yet you choose to call yourself Gnostic. Isn't that a contradiction?
Before I joined RF, I had joined islam dot com. I had wanted to use "agnostic", but someone else beat me to that name, even I have never come this person. So I tried to think of another name. So I picked "gnostic". When I joined RF, I saw know reason to change my id, since I had so much fun using the name. :p

Agnostic, I may be, I do have some knowledge on Gnosticism. Second, I'm very sympathetic to Gnosticism. I'm actually sympathetic to most heretical religions, which were persecuted by the orthodox-mainstream Christians.

Lastly, it is also fun to play my persona as a gnostic-agnostic, which tends to confuse people. One moment I am usual agnostic self, and the next moment I displayed gnostic affinity of the divine feminine. In effect, I'm a paradox, who displayed a split personality. :yes: :no:

My multiple personality disorder is more noticable in another forum that I frequents, in Free2Code, where I am known as the storyteller.
 

ΩRôghênΩ

Disciple of Light
Then why must Creationists push their Creationism in our face?

If Christians keep calling other people ignorants, then the very same could be said about them blinding ignoring evidences, when it staring glaringly back at their face. They want us to accept the supernaturals, the Earth and human were created in 6 days, and that the Earth is no more 5700 years, and yet provide no evidences whatsoever for their preconceptions, except a book that seemed more than likely, based from an older religion/mythology than Judaism - the Sumerian civilisation.

  1. Most Christians believe in evolution
  2. You dont have a clue about what your saying
  3. Why cant God take his ides for his own religion, from other religions, like the sumerian mythology? Maybe your not conceiving the flexibility of God.
 

Fade

The Great Master Bates
gnostic said:
Lastly, it is also fun to play my persona as a gnostic-agnostic, which tends to confuse people. One moment I am usual agnostic self, and the next moment I displayed gnostic affinity of the divine feminine. In effect, I'm a paradox, who displayed a split personality. :yes: :no:

My multiple personality disorder is more noticable in another forum that I frequents, in Free2Code, where I am known as the storyteller.

lol, okay fair enough :D
 

gnostic

The Lost One
Lord Roghan said:
Why cant God take his ides for his own religion, from other religions, like the sumerian mythology? Maybe your not conceiving the flexibility of God.
If you take into the account of when the Sumerian and Akkadian literature, and then compare it with the Genesis, it make you realise that the root of the Genesis have a pagan sources.

The Hebrew Yahweh have all the tradesmarks and attributes of the 3 supreme Sumerian gods - An, Enlil and Enki (or their Akkadian counterparts - Anu, Ellil and Ea). All three are creator gods.

An/Anu as the god of heaven.

Enlil/Ellil as the ruler on Earth.

Enki/Ea as the god of wisdom.

Enlil destroyed mankind with the Flood, Ea saved on family. The 2 gods bear remarkable resemblance to the duality of Yahweh, as both destroyer and saviour of mankind.

Trinity is not confined to Christianity (ie Father, Son and Holy Spirit). There is triangle of God, (Virgin) Mary and Jesus. Gnosticism see the trinity as Father, Mother and Son. Even earlier than that is the triad - Osiris, Isis and Horus.

The common images/symbols of Madonna and Child, can also be derived from Isis and Horus.
 

ΩRôghênΩ

Disciple of Light
If you take into the account of when the Sumerian and Akkadian literature, and then compare it with the Genesis, it make you realise that the root of the Genesis have a pagan sources.

The Hebrew Yahweh have all the tradesmarks and attributes of the 3 supreme Sumerian gods - An, Enlil and Enki (or their Akkadian counterparts - Anu, Ellil and Ea). All three are creator gods.

An/Anu as the god of heaven.

Enlil/Ellil as the ruler on Earth.

Enki/Ea as the god of wisdom.

Enlil destroyed mankind with the Flood, Ea saved on family. The 2 gods bear remarkable resemblance to the duality of Yahweh, as both destroyer and saviour of mankind.

Trinity is not confined to Christianity (ie Father, Son and Holy Spirit). There is triangle of God, (Virgin) Mary and Jesus. Gnosticism see the trinity as Father, Mother and Son. Even earlier than that is the triad - Osiris, Isis and Horus.

The common images/symbols of Madonna and Child, can also be derived from Isis and Horus.

aparently you didnt read my post correctly. lets talk in first person to make it easier, i will be God:

HEY LOOK, THERES SOME SUMMERIAN MYTHOLOGY (WHATEVER), I THINK ILL TAKE SOME OF THOSE IDEAS AND UT IT INTO MY RELIGION

corporate companies are always taking ideas from each other and profiting, why cant God do the same with religion
 

gnostic

The Lost One
Lord Roghan said:
why cant God do the same with religion
But who said it was God who created religion? And who said it was God who copying the practices or customs from another religion? Or steal another person's idea? :eek:

Religion is a man-made institution or organisation. No divine being created a religion, although Christians and Muslims seemed not to see the connection. You should see distinguish between people composing the scriptures from God composing the scriptures. I believe that former, but not the later.

Do you serious believe that God would do such thing? Spend time on plagiarism?
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
*MOD POST*

Let's return this thread to the OP. If you want to discuss the right and wrong of borrowing ideas from other religions for your own, please start a thread on the subject, or go to an existing thread on the subject.

This thread is about evidence for a human/chimp link in evolution and the possible impact of evidence for that link on the doctrine of Creationism.
 
Top