The Theory of Evolution

[☭proletarian☭]

Chromosome fusion

Human and Ape Chromosomes

 

[antagon]

Chromosome fusion

Human and Ape Chromosomes

pair 2!

**pats self on back**

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Chromosome fusion

Human and Ape Chromosomes

pair 2!

**pats self on back**

I thought it was 1 until I checked

 

[geauxtohell]

all fetuses start out as women.

Not quite. They all start out as pretty much asexual prior to the masculinazation or feminization of the fetus.

I was over-simplifying for clarity. I suppose I could have gone into the whole urogenital ridge and mesonephric and mullerian ducts, but didn't think anyone cared to get into that much detail.

Thank God the smartest guy in the room is here to keep us all straight.

 

[geauxtohell]

thats just a bite of the similarites which have compelled biologists to class us together with chimps. there are more considerations that makes us quite different from an orangutan.....

And looking at outside similarities as a form of classification is deceptive anyways i.e. a bat's wing is closer in structure to a human hand than it is to a bird's wing.

Different species stumbled upon different structures (i.e. the wing) in different manners that conferred an advantage to them.

Imagine that.

Now why wouldn't the "designer" make all wings and thumbs the same?

 

[edthecynic]

Ok, you got me on that one.... It seems a bit more ridiculous seeing it in writing, where 3 different types of apes came from this hominid and only one human, in the evolution of things..... why not 3 different humans with one ape form coming out of the great ape? Too strange to be true imho and we will see once again that science will REVISE its theories on this...

Which assumes evolution is directional and occurs with a distinct end in mind. It is not. In fact, mutations that are not immediately deleterious are neither good nor bad on their own. They become good or bad based on the environment in which the species evolves and if they confer an advantage to the species.

For example, penguins have evolved a complex retrograde blood circulation system that allows them to stay warm in the artic.

If you took a penguin and placed them in the equator, they'd be screwed.

Within humans, you can find a jillion design flaws and other genetic flaws that can occur. They confer no real advantage, and the age old question is; why would an intelligent designer create a design with so many flaws?

PENGUINS - Habitat & Distribution

Different species thrive in varying climates, ranging from Galápagos penguins on tropical islands at the equator to emperor penguins restricted to the pack ice of Antarctica.

GALÁPAGOS PENGUIN

 

[antagon]

why not 3 different humans with one ape form coming out of the great ape? Too strange to be true imho and we will see once again that science will REVISE its theories on this...

but, Care, there's homo erectus and australopithicus [sp?] on the more human side of things. neanderthal, perhaps. we'll need to wait for your future revisions to call that one human or not. ever-revising - wait and see or join in the research.

 

[RadiomanATL]

USMB poster evolution:

 

[Care4all]

why not 3 different humans with one ape form coming out of the great ape? Too strange to be true imho and we will see once again that science will REVISE its theories on this...

but, Care, there's homo erectus and australopithicus [sp?] on the more human side of things. neanderthal, perhaps. we'll need to wait for your future revisions to call that one human or not. ever-revising - wait and see or join in the research.

yes humans have changed but there is still just ONE GENERA of humans that scientists state came from this ancient hominid yet there are THREE different genera of ape like animals that come from this same hominid, the chimp the orangutan and the gorilla according to scientists speculation or hypothesis....it has NOT BEEN SEALED that this is the real deal yet and for GOOD reason....just in some of the links ya'll have linked up, scientists just a few years ago thought that the XY chromosome began 170 million years ago and NOW they are saying 300 million years ago....they were OFF by nearly 50% on their first assumption or hypothesis....science is ever changing AS IT SHOULD BE.... when newer and more revelations come forward.

We DO NOT know all yet, we are far from it in the scientific realm....and to say that we have concluded or science has concluded is far from the truth....and I am not denying evolution in any manner, just saying that in this particular case....this is not explained or proven in any manner that could lead one to believe it is FACT or even THEORY, but is just hypothesis at this point imho....

Can you show any other multiple genera coming from the same ancestor whose chromosome count is different among them besides humans vs the gorilla, chimp and orangutan? Maybe there is evidence of such and I just missed it? It would help me in believing this hypothesis of human ancestry from a great ape

 

[Care4all]

hmmm, when i was a child we WERE TAUGHT that we came from apes and apes were directly related to us, but NOW THEY SAY this is incorrect...there was no ape closely related to us as once thought...

The word "hominid" in this website refers to members of the family of humans, Hominidae, which consists of all species on our side of the last common ancestor of humans and living apes. Hominids are included in the superfamily of all apes, the Hominoidea, the members of which are called hominoids. Although the hominid fossil record is far from complete, and the evidence is often fragmentary, there is enough to give a good outline of the evolutionary history of humans.

The time of the split between humans and living apes used to be thought to have occurred 15 to 20 million years ago, or even up to 30 or 40 million years ago. Some apes occurring within that time period, such as Ramapithecus, used to be considered as hominids, and possible ancestors of humans. Later fossil finds indicated that Ramapithecus was more closely related to the orang-utan, and new biochemical evidence indicated that the last common ancestor of hominids and apes occurred between 5 and 10 million years ago, and probably in the lower end of that range (Lewin 1987). Ramapithecus therefore is no longer considered a hominid.

The field of science which studies the human fossil record is known as paleoanthropology. It is the intersection of the disciplines of paleontology (the study of ancient lifeforms) and anthropology (the study of humans). Hominid Species

 

[☭proletarian☭]

why not 3 different humans with one ape form coming out of the great ape? Too strange to be true imho and we will see once again that science will REVISE its theories on this...

but, Care, there's homo erectus and australopithicus [sp?] on the more human side of things. neanderthal, perhaps. we'll need to wait for your future revisions to call that one human or not. ever-revising - wait and see or join in the research.

yes humans have changed but there is still just ONE GENERA of humans that scientists state came from this ancient hominid yet there are THREE different genera of ape like animals that come from this same hominid, the chimp the orangutan and the gorilla according to scientists speculation or hypothesis...

The more you say, the less it seems you understand.

Can you show any other multiple genera coming from the same ancestor whose chromosome count is different among them ...

You're right, it's an unusual and improbable occurrence. There's your answer to why it seems to have only happened once thusfar- kinda like how the highly improbable occurrence of life itself seems to have only occurred on one known planet. It's funny, the way improbable events rarely happen. it's as if improbable events were less likely to happen than more probable events and therefore were less likely to be seen occurring multiple times in close proximity in the universe in a short span of time... or something...

 

[☭proletarian☭]

hmmm, when i was a child we WERE TAUGHT that we came from apes and apes were directly related to us

related to =/= came from. It's kinda like how your sister and your cousin aren't your parents but you're still related. I know, it's complicated and hard to grasp.

Hominids are included in the superfamily of all apes

So if I follow your claims in this thread... we're not apes, we're hominids, which are apes...

?!

 

[antagon]

why not 3 different humans with one ape form coming out of the great ape? Too strange to be true imho and we will see once again that science will REVISE its theories on this...

but, Care, there's homo erectus and australopithicus [sp?] on the more human side of things. neanderthal, perhaps. we'll need to wait for your future revisions to call that one human or not. ever-revising - wait and see or join in the research.

yes humans have changed but there is still just ONE GENERA of humans that scientists state came from this ancient hominid yet there are THREE different genera of ape like animals that come from this same hominid, the chimp the orangutan and the gorilla according to scientists speculation or hypothesis....it has NOT BEEN SEALED that this is the real deal yet and for GOOD reason....just in some of the links ya'll have linked up, scientists just a few years ago thought that the XY chromosome began 170 million years ago and NOW they are saying 300 million years ago....they were OFF by nearly 50% on their first assumption or hypothesis....science is ever changing AS IT SHOULD BE.... when newer and more revelations come forward.

We DO NOT know all yet, we are far from it in the scientific realm....and to say that we have concluded or science has concluded is far from the truth....and I am not denying evolution in any manner, just saying that in this particular case....this is not explained or proven in any manner that could lead one to believe it is FACT or even THEORY, but is just hypothesis at this point imho....

Can you show any other multiple genera coming from the same ancestor whose chromosome count is different among them besides humans vs the gorilla, chimp and orangutan? Maybe there is evidence of such and I just missed it? It would help me in believing this hypothesis of human ancestry from a great ape

thatll take research and im on vacation.

either way, taxonomy is fuzzy. it is used to help organize everything, but shouldnt obstruct genetics or the evolution arguement.

the common ancestor concept comes from a digression of common genes. your later post states that thats changed, but im 31y/o and theres been 'the missing link' since i could remember. fill me in.

it would take a map of h.erectus' genes or australopithicine genes to determine which side of the ape-line distinction they are. important to note that this is a distinction which youre putting forward yourself. if its just because of the chromasome count, consider that there's all sorts of trisomy/gene defects to include downs syndrome, and where the result is still human, often fertile.

chromasomes in an orangutan might be flipped twisted or 'read' differently to make them different than humans, notwithstanding that they have the same amount of chromasomes as a human with downs syndrome.

reading through the history of this thread, ive made the point that science keeps things open and the foot-down-fact is not a scientific product. dont let yourself be caught in a fact not-fact struggle. i digress to my swimming on land analogy. science fans are just as guilty, and further aim to walk on water hoping to scientifically dispell god.

a theory and a hypothesis are the same thing, if that helps. nothing like a fact as some would venture to say, but not taking anything from its plausibility through the semantics at the same time.

scientifically speaking, it will always be a theory that "fires are hot". beyond running around looking for cold fire, the scientific community looks into why and how, goes about applying this presumption to future research, or boiling shit in applied sciences. information trickles back to the theory, sometimes sufficient to disprove it or change it.

*yawn* sleepytime folks. jetlag. 6am.

 

[pladecalvo]

the ethics of some religious leaders who choose to promote, well, stupidity as a virtue of christianity is a concern ive got