Evolution: Do you see the resemblence

[roli]

Is there a link between these 2 species ?

BEFORE​

AFTER

 

[roli]

Is there a link between these 2 species ?

BEFORE​

AFTER

One seems to disagree!!!!!

 

[Smoke]

One seems to disagree!!!!!

Not the brighter one of the two, though.

 

[Fluffy]

What do you want to debate, roli? Whether there is a link between humans and chimpanzees?

 

[roli]

What do you want to debate, roli? Whether there is a link between humans and chimpanzees?

I'd like to hear some brief evolutiionary theories that link these 2 together.

I mean we should be studying or somewhat knowledgable on our ancestry, is he my long lost brother I have'nt seen in years, is he the missing link.

 

[McBell]

I'd like to hear some brief evolutiionary theories that link these 2 together.

I mean we should be studying or somewhat knowledgable on our ancestry, is he my long lost brother I have'nt seen in years, is he the missing link.

What would really help is for you to actually gain an understanding as to what evolution is.
Not the Kent Hovind version, but the real McCoy.

 

[roli]

What would really help is for you to actually gain an understanding as to what evolution is.
Not the Kent Hovind version, but the real McCoy.

And your going to explain it to me without bias
Is this monkey turned man,not the basis and origin of the evolution theory.
Is he your source of information..

Who or what is the real Mcoy? enlighten me.

 

[nutshell]

And your going to explain it to me without bias
Is this monkey turned man,not the basis and origin of the evolution theory.
Is he your source of information..

Who or what is the real Mcoy? enlighten me.

No. That monkey turned man is NOT the basis and origin of the evolution theory. The question isn't whether the monkey became man, but whether the monkey and the man have a common ancestor.

 

[McBell]

And your going to explain it to me without bias
Is this monkey turned man,not the basis and origin of the evolution theory.
Is he your source of information..

Who or what is the real Mcoy? enlighten me.

No, I am not even going to try.
Many others have tried and you have refused to listen or learn.
Until such time as you at least know the basics about evolution, any discussion on evolution with you is futile and merely a test of patience.

 

[Willamena]

Who or what is the real Mcoy? enlighten me.

"The Real McCoy" is a figure of speech that means a geniuine article.

 

[Willamena]

I'd like to hear some brief evolutiionary theories that link these 2 together.

I mean we should be studying or somewhat knowledgable on our ancestry, is he my long lost brother I have'nt seen in years, is he the missing link.

The monkey is not ancestor to human by any theory. The idea is that we share like 90-something percent of genes in common, so we're closely connected to a similar ancestor.

Is that brief enough?

 

[s2a]

The monkey is not ancestor to human by any theory. The idea is that we share like 90-something percent of genes in common, so we're closely connected to a similar ancestor.

Is that brief enough?

Just for fun...

"The complete mapping of the chimp genome in the summer of 2005 showed the genetic difference with humans to be 1.23% (ie 98.77% similarity). Nature (journal) of September published the seminal paper on this comparison studies by 67 prominent scientists. Almost half of that 1.23% change belongs to the human at 0.53%, whose genetic variance is slower than a chimp, and just over half to the chimp at 0.7%. If we also take into account that 'random genetic drift' takes up the bulk of the 0.54% difference, then that percentage difference where genes have a potential positive impact on human abilities, is between 0.01% and 0.02%"
Source


Dear roli...

If you're only interested in promoting the Biblical creation myth...fine. Your OP "challenge" belongs here, within the sub-heading of "Religious Debates".

If you want to establish straw-man fallacies that suggest that Evolution theory promotes some "man from monkey" conclusion of scientific fact...then you're certainly in the right place (but in the wrong century).

If you really want to seriously debate the merits of Evolution theory and it's conclusions with people that know what they're talking about; and may be willing and patient enough to explain what the science says about biological evolution and the genetics evidence that proves it's conclusions as fact...then you're definitely in the WRONG place.

Theology plays NO relevant part in any scientific endeavor, prediction, test, methodology, inquiry, study, or discovery. None.

 

[Fluffy]

I'd like to hear some brief evolutiionary theories that link these 2 together.

I mean we should be studying or somewhat knowledgable on our ancestry, is he my long lost brother I have'nt seen in years, is he the missing link.

There are no "evolutionary theories", brief or otherwise, that claim that the modern chimpanzee, or for that matter any modern animal, is our ancestor.

 

[Mr. Peanut]

Hi!

A tail would be sooo useful!

Cheers!

 

[s2a]

If a "thud" could echo...that would be the sound made by roli's absent rebuttals...

 

[lunamoth]

Is there a link between these 2 species ?

BEFORE​

AFTER

Here ya go!

 

[Fluffy]

If a "thud" could echo...that would be the sound made by roli's absent rebuttals...

It does make it quite frustrating...

 

[nutshell]

We're waiting.

 

[Zeno]

Just for fun...

"The complete mapping of the chimp genome in the summer of 2005 showed the genetic difference with humans to be 1.23% (ie 98.77% similarity). Nature (journal) of September published the seminal paper on this comparison studies by 67 prominent scientists. Almost half of that 1.23% change belongs to the human at 0.53%, whose genetic variance is slower than a chimp, and just over half to the chimp at 0.7%. If we also take into account that 'random genetic drift' takes up the bulk of the 0.54% difference, then that percentage difference where genes have a potential positive impact on human abilities, is between 0.01% and 0.02%"
Source

More fun...

99% of mouse genes have analogues in humans.

And...

Synteny between species means not only that orthologous (functionally and ancestrally identical) genes are present but that they are present in the same order on the genome, thus indicating common ancestry.

The sequencing of the mouse genome and its comparison with the previously sequenced human genome reveals that 90.2% of the human genome and 93.3% of the mouse genome lie in conserved syntenic segments. These segments consist of 217 conserved syntenic blocks with an average length of 23.2Mb (23.2 million bases) So not only do we find homologous sequences between the two genomes; the genes actually lie on the chromosome in the same order. This is powerful evidence for common ancestry. It is possible to dismiss homology as arising from similar function, but it is not possible to dismiss synteny this way.
Source

 

[Mr. Peanut]

The monkey is not ancestor to human by any theory. The idea is that we share like 90-something percent of genes in common, so we're closely connected to a similar ancestor.

Is that brief enough?

Hi!

Or perhaps closely connected by a Creator who designed us both to live on this planet?

Cheers!