Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Common Ancestor?
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 3820 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 232 of 341 (693521)
03-16-2013 5:30 PM
Reply to: Message 230 by Coyote
03-16-2013 5:21 PM


Re: ...making up half truths is actually telling lies...
How about Chad, (????), as requested on the other thread you are proposing?
You are equating that to a biblical character.
Problem is, you are off in your timing by about 7 million years. Care to provide evidence, as opposed to assertion, for that claim?
Be more spcific, I don't recall any issue about "chad."
You are very foolish to assume that people disagreeing with me makes me wrong and them correct.
I have been REQUIRED in every case to produce the surces for what I say, whereas your own posts time and again repaet your opinion that I am wrong.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 230 by Coyote, posted 03-16-2013 5:21 PM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 233 by Coyote, posted 03-16-2013 6:46 PM kofh2u has not replied

  
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 3820 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 259 of 341 (693577)
03-18-2013 11:35 AM
Reply to: Message 244 by Tangle
03-17-2013 1:47 PM


... both agree, then...?
Creationists do not explain anything,... they simply assert that god made things the way they are. That is not an explanation, it's a belief - or if you prefer - an opinion).
Science offers an explanation... (supported by evidence).
This has consistently been my position ona common ancestor between lower Apes and Apeman.
Genesis DOES NOT "offer explanations," but merely STATES the Spontaneous generation of a new species which scripture refers to as "adam,' and present paleontologists call "Sahelanthropus tchadensis."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 244 by Tangle, posted 03-17-2013 1:47 PM Tangle has not replied

  
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 3820 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 260 of 341 (693578)
03-18-2013 11:43 AM
Reply to: Message 231 by Admin
03-16-2013 5:29 PM


Re: Topic Reminder
Hi Kofh2u,
This is a science thread inquiring about the common ancestor of man and ape. Please keep your discussion based upon evidence and focused on the topic. Correspondences between science and the Bible are not the topic of this thread, nor is anything else from the Bible.
Hey...
How about "reminding" this guy that his negative comments about me, what he purportedly claims I have said, absence any reference to such statements is Ad Homo crap?????
NOTE:
I am SURE you did not notice that everyone of my posts in the thread IS on topic.
Let me reiterate my input.
1) The Common Ancestor to man was a surrogate mother Ape within whose womb two of the normal 24 Ape Chromosomes fused together by some Act-of-God.
(Evidence submited by reference to genetic sy-tudies that found the two fused chromosomes.)
2) The result was the evolution of a new creature, a species with only 23 chromosomes, which over 7 million years underwent 22 more evolutionary changes into species evermore like us.
(Evidence submited by reference to latest book enumerating the list of the 22 now extinct humans in that ascent.)
Edited by kofh2u, : No reason given.
Edited by kofh2u, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 231 by Admin, posted 03-16-2013 5:29 PM Admin has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 262 by Eli, posted 03-18-2013 7:57 PM kofh2u has not replied

  
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 3820 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 261 of 341 (693579)
03-18-2013 11:52 AM
Reply to: Message 256 by Tangle
03-18-2013 4:02 AM


Re: Chimpanzee-human last common ancestor
The creator could also have make people quite different from all other creation, because we are apparently special and made in his image. But he didn't, he made us look exactly like we evolved over millions of years from ape ancestors.
Can you explain why he would do that?
YOU are off topic with this baiting.
YOU ignore that all this fellow has been saying is that, by an ACT of God, man was spontaneously generated from the atomic dust of the chromosomes which fused together and evolved a new species that had no parents of its own kind.
Because to him that is equivalent to saying the same force behind the Cosmic Creation did this, you oppose him absent any source of the fusing together except noting that mutations are fundamental to evolution inherent in the theory itself.
Edited by kofh2u, : typo

This message is a reply to:
 Message 256 by Tangle, posted 03-18-2013 4:02 AM Tangle has not replied

  
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 3820 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 263 of 341 (693631)
03-19-2013 12:51 AM


... is there an honest person in the room...?
... is there an honest person in the room... and ONLY I have the easy to find science report on these things this Eli person says without presenting any source for his attempt to denigrate my claims?
I assume this is what EvC willing condones since he never posts anything of substance, fails to contradict any post, especially mine, with a reference or link to support his objections, and has had the nerve with Percy's acquiesence to insist that it is I who am spamming by answering back time and again with the links, grapic correspondences, books, science reports, etc.
Is there anyone here who will tell this jerk that the two fused chromosomes appeared 6 million years ago, and certainly suggest one particular mutation in one individual from who all humans today are related?
Does anyone here believe that the Book is misleading in supporting that 22 now extinct humans were species linked to the ascent of modern man?
Come on,... someone MUST be honest or this forum is a pack of liars.
Why post here?

Replies to this message:
 Message 264 by Eli, posted 03-19-2013 1:49 AM kofh2u has not replied
 Message 270 by Admin, posted 03-19-2013 7:31 AM kofh2u has not replied

  
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 3820 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 276 of 341 (693686)
03-19-2013 12:44 PM
Reply to: Message 275 by Just being real
03-19-2013 11:56 AM


11 science subforums on Evol Vs Creationism
There are 11 science forums and 5 religious forums,
On the 5 Religion Forums, the science atheists people have a field day attacking the bible, while they retreat to their censorship into the much read more than double supposed Science discussions that really are subtle attacks on various subjects wherein they have eliminated any defense against the obvious claims that attack Genesis.
They are cowards who censor any comment where the facts they present as science is clearly in opposition to the church point of view.
It is like they have twice as many doors for visitors to enter and hear them bash God, the Bible, the Christians, the traditional teachings of the churches, etc.
They illogically have set aside double the space for JUST SCIENCE, no Evolution Verses Creationism.
Obviously, this IS NOT a EvC Site, but and attack group which is heavily weighted to Science Only, and how to undermine Genesis.
An excellent example was when Percy rejected my thread based on his demand that I produce evidence that Adam could be understood as equivalent to Sahelanthropus tchadensis.
Sahelanthropus tchadensis is suspected to be the oldest and therefore first in the line of our ascent, i.e., the first "man."
Hence, the first man, Adam, in Genesis corresponds directly with what Science now suggests was Sahelanthropus tchadensis who lived seven million years ago.
That is ALSO the approximated date when by an Act-of-God, a surrogate mother Ape with 24 chromosomes experienced the chemical fusion of two chromosomes, hence evolving the new creature in God's world with only 23 chromosomes, i.e.the first man, again.
Percy would not acknowledge that as sufficient concrete scientific evidence for my point.
go figure.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 275 by Just being real, posted 03-19-2013 11:56 AM Just being real has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 279 by Coyote, posted 03-19-2013 1:27 PM kofh2u has replied
 Message 284 by Taq, posted 03-19-2013 6:19 PM kofh2u has not replied

  
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 3820 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 277 of 341 (693690)
03-19-2013 12:52 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Tram law
08-17-2010 2:42 PM


If there is a common ancestor to both humans and apes, has it been found?
YES...
A common ancestor to modern man HAS been found, one which is supported in two ways by our scientists:
1) Sahelanthropus tchadensis is suspected to be the oldest and therefore first in the line of our ascent, i.e., the first "man."
Hence, the first man, Adam, in Genesis corresponds directly with what Science now suggests was Sahelanthropus tchadensis who lived seven million years ago.
2) "Seven millon years ago" is ALSO the approximated date when, by an Act-of-God, a surrogate mother Ape with 24 chromosomes experienced the chemical fusion of two chromosomes inside her womb, hence, evolving the new creature in God's world with only 23 chromosomes, i.e.the first man, again.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Tram law, posted 08-17-2010 2:42 PM Tram law has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 278 by NoNukes, posted 03-19-2013 1:25 PM kofh2u has replied
 Message 280 by Eli, posted 03-19-2013 3:40 PM kofh2u has not replied

  
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 3820 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 286 of 341 (693738)
03-19-2013 6:50 PM
Reply to: Message 278 by NoNukes
03-19-2013 1:25 PM


...of course we have scienc evidence...
1) Sahelanthropus tchadensis was not a human of any persuasion.
2) And this is way past stupid and completely fabricated. You have absolutely no clue as to how many chromosomes the direct descendants of Sahelanthropus tchadensis had, but we do know that no human being was birthed or sired directly by Sahelanthropus tchadensis. The estimated time of fusion I've seen are about a factor of 10 less than you are claiming here.
1) It is speculation in every case, but paleontologists are asserting that in their scheme of things this would be the oresent candidate for the earliest appearance of our branch off from the Apes,...
2) It is you who are opposing the scienc of genetics which supports the claim that the fused two chromosomes in humans may well be dated back... SCIENTIFICALLY, THRU GENETICS... to as far back as 6 million years ago.
"Chromosome 2 presents very strong evidence in favour of the common descent of humans and other apes.
According to researcher J. W. IJdo, "We conclude that the locus cloned in cosmids c8.1 and c29B is the relic of an ancient telomere-telomere fusion and marks the point at which two ancestral ape chromosomes fused to give rise to human chromosome 2.
Because the fused chromosome is unique to humans and is fixed, the fusion must have occurred ... \[B\]between 6 million\[B\] and ~1 million years ago (Mya; Chen and Li 2001; Yu et al. 2001) (Fig.5).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 278 by NoNukes, posted 03-19-2013 1:25 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 296 by NoNukes, posted 03-19-2013 8:30 PM kofh2u has not replied
 Message 300 by Eli, posted 03-19-2013 9:34 PM kofh2u has not replied

  
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 3820 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 287 of 341 (693740)
03-19-2013 7:03 PM
Reply to: Message 279 by Coyote
03-19-2013 1:27 PM


Re: 11 science subforums on Evol Vs Creationism
KOFH2U:
The approximated date was 6 million years ago...
... when, by an Act-of-God, a surrogate mother Ape with 24 chromosomes experienced the chemical fusion of two chromosomes, hence evolving the new creature in God's world with only 23 chromosomes, i.e.; the first man, based upon the lineage all the way back to that fusion.
Coyote:
It has been pointed out by several posters how incorrect this is, but you keep repeating it. You seem to be preaching, more than debating, as you refuse to accept any evidence that shows you are wrong. (Again, see signature block.)
... and, I have time and again informed these posters you refer to that they are wrong.
You apparently are under the misconceptin that you and the others in your gang compose a majority and hence, by democracy, assert that even your errors can be maintained.
"Chromosome 2 presents very strong evidence in favour of the common descent of humans and other apes.
According to researcher J. W. IJdo, "We conclude that the locus cloned in cosmids c8.1 and c29B is the relic of an ancient telomere-telomere fusion and marks the point at which two ancestral ape chromosomes fused to give rise to human chromosome 2.
Because the fused chromosome is unique to humans and is fixed, the fusion must have occurred after the human—chimpanzee split, but before modern humans spread around the world, that is, between 6 million and ~1 million years ago (Mya; Chen and Li 2001; Yu et al. 2001) (Fig.5).
This suggests that if CHAD was the first in our line of ascent, it was he that experienced that FUSION of two chromosomes we all, in this line of 22 species, MUST have ever since had.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 279 by Coyote, posted 03-19-2013 1:27 PM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 295 by Coyote, posted 03-19-2013 8:28 PM kofh2u has replied

  
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 3820 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 288 of 341 (693741)
03-19-2013 7:12 PM
Reply to: Message 281 by foreveryoung
03-19-2013 5:21 PM


Re: Chimpanzee-human last common ancestor
How do you know there was no adam? Just because there wasn't a talking snake doesn't mean there wasn't something there speaking to adam. There was no literal 7 day creation but this again is a literary device that is trying to make a point. There was a creation and the writer of Genesis divided it up into 7 periods.
You are more than correct.
Every scientists admits that there was an "Adam," of some missing link between us and the Apes from which we branched off and have become humans, distinct from our Ape forefathers.
And, the symbolism and necessary metaphorical report in Gnesis 2 and 3 is clearly about our conscious awakening, as the first thinking apes with an ever increasing degree of Free Will.
The snake is reference to our Superego, as is this Eve a symbolic reference o the "rib" of our seven fold psyche called the Anima, or the feminine principle found in us all.
The man is the Libido, and the Tree that had grown in all the species that lead to us, man, was the Self, the regulator inside our psyche which judges good from bad.
The seven "days" are as you say, long geological durations we now now call the seven eras that record the History of the Earth.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 281 by foreveryoung, posted 03-19-2013 5:21 PM foreveryoung has not replied

  
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 3820 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 290 of 341 (693743)
03-19-2013 7:27 PM
Reply to: Message 273 by Just being real
03-19-2013 10:16 AM


Re: Topic Reminder
I appreciate your position on the matter and am very glad to see that this forum has a medium in place to keep discussions from running down all sorts of "bunny trails." Perhaps though I was misinformed on the bigger picture here. I was operating under the impression that special creation versus evolution, was the over all intended back drop to all discussions? If that is incorrect I will immediately adjust, and I have already resisted the temptation to respond to baited comments in this thread that I can see lead off topic. However I did think that the topic of creation would come up from time to time in all the discussion threads.
I, too, was very very surprised to have discovered that the atheistic science-literati here had somehow perverted what seem to me to have been a division of science people from bible people into a censored Science Area that could occupy most all the space, (more than double the qualifying accepted proposed new threatds),... and that muc benigned pitance of 5 threads for people who apparently wanted to mumble on bythemselves.
Pick ANY of the supposed forums on the Science ONLY side of the site here and clearly, it is a veiled and subtle place where people can deride one aspect or another of what Bible people always hold at as their side of the discussion.
As Coyote said above, We science literati "have so much to say," as if that is a legitimate argument against fencing off what we have to say.
It censorship and arrogance that assumes the wolf pack has won the matter under discussion, aka EvC.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 273 by Just being real, posted 03-19-2013 10:16 AM Just being real has not replied

  
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 3820 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 292 of 341 (693746)
03-19-2013 7:37 PM
Reply to: Message 289 by foreveryoung
03-19-2013 7:16 PM


Re: Chimpanzee-human last common ancestor
Well, we know that H. Sapiens evolved over hundreds of thousands of years from ape-like ancestors. Homo was not formed out of clay in an act of creation, so there was obviously no Adam.
I am sorry. I do not follow you at all. I know good and well the evolution of homo. Whether adam was actually formed out of clay or not is irrelevant. This says absolutely nothing as to whether or not adam existed.
I have told these supposedly cience literate people that Modern Hom sapiens is merely the last of 22 Ape-men with 23 Chromosomes all of whom link back to that SCIENTIFICALLY hypthesized first missing link that split off from the Apes.
Everyone agrees that a first man appeared around 7 million years ago, in the form of the first bud on the new branch off from our Ape relatives.
We Bible people call this Adam.
They call him the missing link, and recently suggest that he may not be missing any longer, i.e.; Sahelanthropus tchadensis.
AND... amazingly, this fusion of two chromosomes supports the Bible in the claim the evolution was by a chemical mutation, not by some evolutionary process of slowly transforming into human-like animals from apes that had gotten smarter.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 289 by foreveryoung, posted 03-19-2013 7:16 PM foreveryoung has not replied

  
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 3820 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 294 of 341 (693748)
03-19-2013 7:42 PM
Reply to: Message 291 by Rahvin
03-19-2013 7:30 PM


...of course not,... the facts do though...
The verification of some historical and geographical context does not lend support to the remaining claims of a text, however.
Of course you are correct, but we are presenting FACTS that support this text of Genesis.
The fusion of those two Ape chromosomes means that the first human branch-off from Apes was a chemical process in which one initial ape-man, (a mutation that created apes with only 23 chromosomes thereafter).
These next 22 species of this Ape-man developed from the chemical dust of this earth into Modern homo sapiens thru the 22 genealogical series of names given to them by the Jewish Bible writers, and they are comparable to our own list of 22 today.
Edited by kofh2u, : No reason given.
Edited by kofh2u, : No reason given.
Edited by kofh2u, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 291 by Rahvin, posted 03-19-2013 7:30 PM Rahvin has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 297 by Coyote, posted 03-19-2013 8:40 PM kofh2u has replied
 Message 298 by Admin, posted 03-19-2013 8:46 PM kofh2u has not replied

  
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 3820 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 304 of 341 (693813)
03-20-2013 8:48 AM
Reply to: Message 295 by Coyote
03-19-2013 8:28 PM


Re: Wrong again?
1) Opinions are still divided:
2) Once again, you are taking liberties with the data.
3) paleoanthropologists place Chad in a different genus entirely
1) No kidding, DicK Tracy?
So when I state the opinions that support my view, why discard them and insist they MUST be the wrong ones??
2) LOL
That IS my point... taking the liberty to show the correspondence between what science says and Genesis.
Of course I am "taking the liberty" to show the correspondence between the 22 species enumerated in the latest book of the subject of the ascent of man Out-of-Africa WITH the 22 links to Noah's sons as found in the genealogy of Genesis.
3) Scientists place more than half the 22 now extinct species in other genus also, but they insist these are most probably the line of our evolution.
My CHART has consistently shown the names of these different genus for each of the SUSPECTED members in our ascent, and YOU know that.
My observationis that you are unwilling to acceot the truth in what i say and even distrort the facts.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 295 by Coyote, posted 03-19-2013 8:28 PM Coyote has not replied

  
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 3820 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 305 of 341 (693814)
03-20-2013 9:02 AM
Reply to: Message 295 by Coyote
03-19-2013 8:28 PM


Re: Wrong again?
1)Your dates do not match those cited on Wiki.
You are correct, that the fused chromosome occurred after the human-chimpanzee split. However, Wiki seems to place the Chad specimen 1 to 6 million years earlier...
WRONG...
The fused chromosomes daate back to EXACTLY THE SAME 6 million year old Chad and DOVE TAIL with my assumption that this was "Adam:"
"The fossils have been tentatively classified as members of three distinct genera--Sahelanthropus , Orrorin , and Ardipithecus . Sahelanthropus was the earliest, dating 7-6 million years ago. Orrorin lived about 6 million years ago, while Ardipithecus remains have been dated to 5.8-4.4 million years ago."
http://anthro.palomar.edu/hominid/australo_1.htm

This message is a reply to:
 Message 295 by Coyote, posted 03-19-2013 8:28 PM Coyote has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024