Any practical use for Universal Common Ancestor?

What I would expect you to have trouble with is an idea that completely contradicts yours.

Well, that's false expectation.I do not have any problem with hare-brained, unsupported ideas that contradict my own. They are feeble and will die a natural death.On the other hand, I do not have a problem with valid ideas that contradict mine either. I can accept progress and do not live in a permanent intellectual box defined by religious myth. Edited by edge, : No reason given.

So let me see if I can be clearer:What I would expect you to have trouble with is an idea that proves the ToE is false and completely contradicts the notion of time periods in Geology.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

If it were well supported by evidence, no problem.Your ideas don't fit that classification, no matter how often you claim to have evidence. The devil is in the details.

That's false.

After all this time, you still don't get it.If something was discovered that completely contradicted the ToE and/or geological time periods it would be enormously exciting to all scientists. Scientists *want* to prove stuff wrong, it would make their careers. It would open up massive new areas of research.Unfortunately though the evidence supporting the theories is now so overwhelming that it is vanishingly unlikely that anything material will be found to change the core theories - though they will almost certainly be modified.Science is not immutable, it's not a religious belief. That seems difficult for you guys to understand no matter what we say.

Nonsense. If there were a better explanation of all the evidence I would have no problem accepting a contradictory idea.Your telling me that something is better does not meet that requirement.

Content-free as usual.

Curiously, ideas are spectacularly inadequate at disproving scientific theories.What you need (and are lacking) are facts or conclusions based on objective empirical evidence.Preordaining that trilobites are one kind, for instance, ignores the facts and objective empirical evidence.A "practical use for Universal Common Ancestor" is that it shows that "kinds" are completely inadequate in explaining the full diversity of life, and that people shouldn't waste their (and other people's) time on making them up. Time better spent learning actual science.Such fun.Enjoy

You haven't answeted my question: How is it even possible for there to be a "barrier" in the genome when the DNA of every species is made from the same building blocks. What is it exactly that prevents exchanging one block for another? What prevents editing "cat" to "dog"?

I've defined it functionally many times as exemplified by how breeds of, say, dogs, run out of variability the closer they get to being purebred. But you also can't find alleles/genes in the genome of a species for features outside the species: Is there an allele for a flat black chimp nose in the human genome?Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

That doesn't answer the question. What is the barrier?

Yes.They are expressed differently in humans and chimps, but they are the same genes.

quote:

---

In particular, the researchers found that two genes, PAX3 and PAX7, known to affect snout length and shape in laboratory mice, as well as skin pigmentation, were expressed at higher levels in chimpanzees than in humans. Humans with less than the normal amount of PAX3 have a condition called Waardenburg syndrome, which includes craniofacial, auditory and pigmentation defects. Genomewide association studies in humans have identified PAX3 as a region involved in normal facial variation.

​

If we want to understand what makes human and chimp faces different, we have to look to the source ” to the cell types responsible for making these early patterning decisions.
In contrast, another gene known to be involved in determining the shape of the beaks of finches and the jaw of a fish called a cichlid was expressed at higher levels in humans than in chimpanzees. In mice, overexpression of this gene, BMP4, in cranial neural crest cells causes a marked change in face shape, including a rounding of the skull and eyes that are more near the front of the face.

---

Scientists home in on origin of human, chimpanzee facial differences | News Center | Stanford Medicine

Sincerely, M'Lady, a gentle suggestion.This "Inactive Member" stuff is your emotional flag of disapproval at the way you perceive your treatment in this community. It is not a fact, or true, or whatever term you care to use. It is blatantly false.Everyone here knows you are not inactive. Hell, even the lurkers know you are not inactive. Why persist in this falsehood? Is reality so foreign to you even this status designation needs to be a lie?If it makes you emotionally comfortable I suppose I have to accept that, but, given your penchant to believe and voice ... um ... contrary opinions, false/incomplete info, bogus processes ... this "Inactive Member" stuff is not doing your reputation any favors. It is just another lie.You don't need that.I suggest you come back to the fold officially, publicly, which in reality you never left, and stop with this most obvious falsehood.

Let me get this straight.You're saying you "don't have to accept that life comes from a common ancestor" by breeding a sheep dog from a wolf - proving that the sheep dog has a wolf as a common ancestor?Sure, buddy - whatever you say.
Keep plugging those ears and screaming you don't believe.
No, really - it's working. Keep it up.