Dr. Ben Carson is an Idiot Savant

[Asclepias]

Carson claims to not believe in evolution. Since he is a doctor I have a serious problem with that. Either he is psychotic or he is lying. Every time he operates on someones brain he has to be reminded of how that brain developed.

It's disturbing to me how people in the 21st century cling to the conjectures of an 1859 naturalist as some kind of valid science. Tell me... do you believe in Spontaneous Generation as well?

DNA research has long overtaken and proven what the 1859 naturalist discovered as a theory. Evolution is a fact. You should keep up with current events like the Genome project so you dont sound so behind the current science.

Actually, it is the opposite. DNA and the genome contradict Darwinian theory. Evolution, as defined by Darwin, is NOT a fact. It is a debunked theory that has no basis in scientific fact.

But just so you are aware of this, Darwinian theory was used for over 100 years as a basis to discriminate against black people. The Darwinian argument was, blacks were "less evolved" members of the species and some even argued they were a different species.

No its not the opposite. DNA has debunked many aspects of Darwins theory but it is the resounding proof evolution is a fact. Your claim was that evolution was based on Darwins Theory but its not. He just happened to be the one that came to that conclusion first.

I've long been aware of Darwins theory. I suggest you read "On the Origins of the Species". Also what he used his findings for are not relevant to the point. The point is DNA is the proof of evolution not Darwins theory. Carson should know this being a doctor.

 

[Asclepias]

If Darwin was alive now he would be having multiple orgasms over the science that proves without a doubt evolution is a fact.

I think he would be the first to admit his theory must be wrong, given the discovery of DNA.

He really wouldnt have a choice. He worked on theory and guesstimates. DNA is a proven fact that shows the evolution of humans.

Whats even more intriguing is that it may also show proof of god. The finger prints of an engineer is all over DNA.

 

[Davros]

Okay... you go with "Ben Carson is Dumb!" We'll see how far that gets you! Ya think you can keep Hillary out of prison before she can get elected?

It's not "Carson is dumb". Props were paid for his surgical chops. But, so far as Presidential politics go, he is out of his depth. He is a sterling neurosurgeon. But he appearantly seems to be precisely what he is, an inexperienced party in the most competitive public excerises that is not a sporting event, a race for the Presidency.

Dr. Carson would serve his nation better by keeping at his doctor gig, study up a bit, collect some sweet speaker's fees and try running for governor of Maryland.

Just like 2008's Sarah Palin, a rookie can make some really stupid statements. Gov. Palin should have become the night manager at the Wassilla Wendy's, taken a few civics courses at Wassilla Community College, and made a reality TVshow.

Barack Obama flung some zingers in 2007. Even in his re election he showed little grasp of foreign policy. Romney was correct in identifying Russia as a major threat, while Obama snarked about it. Even today Obama shows little understanding of foreign affairs.
Obama would have been better off bringing Bill and Hillary coffee.

Racist.

 

[Boss]

No its not the opposite. DNA has debunked many aspects of Darwins theory but it is the resounding proof evolution is a fact.

Well... all I can do is keep telling you that you are incorrect. There is NO scientific proof for cross-genus evolution of ANY KIND! We've never found a single example of one genus becoming another. Species emerging within a genus... yes! We have that happening all the time... we breed horses, dogs and cattle that way. We can't turn a cat into a dog... we can't turn a cow into a horse. We can't create a new genus of life from any existing life... it doesn't work.. the DNA doesn't allow it.

DNA is remarkable stuff. It's a molecule that contains, literally, 4-bit digital coding (computers only use 2-bit binary coding). It defines everything that species is or can become. There is no way to get around that and Darwin had no idea of this... in his time, a cell was as complicated as a ping pong ball. People literally believed that "life" could spontaneously generate from inorganic material. We now know that is simply not true. Louis Pasteur... Biogenesis... Life only comes from life.

I've read Origin of the Species. I know what Darwin argued and there are MANY things he was completely wrong about and admitted that if certain things could be proved his theory would be invalid... well, we've proven those things! Yet morons like you want to cling to his theory like it's some kind of Holy Grail! It's certainly NOT scientific fact or even valid scientific theory anymore. It amounts to a bunch of debunked nonsense.

 

[Boss]

DNA is a proven fact that shows the evolution of humans.

It simply contradicts that we could have evolved from anything other than our own Homo genus.

 

[Asclepias]

DNA is a proven fact that shows the evolution of humans.

It simply contradicts that we could have evolved from anything other than our own Homo genus.

Nope. You need to spend about a year in a deep immersion in the science. You obviously have no clue what you are talking about. For example we share 85% of our DNA with turtles.

 

[Boss]

DNA is a proven fact that shows the evolution of humans.

It simply contradicts that we could have evolved from anything other than our own Homo genus.

Nope. You need to spend about a year in a deep immersion in the science. You obviously have no clue what you are talking about. For example we share 85% of our DNA with turtles.

We share 50% of our DNA with bananas too... are we half banana?

 

[Asclepias]

DNA is a proven fact that shows the evolution of humans.

It simply contradicts that we could have evolved from anything other than our own Homo genus.

Nope. You need to spend about a year in a deep immersion in the science. You obviously have no clue what you are talking about. For example we share 85% of our DNA with turtles.

We share 50% of our DNA with bananas too... are we half banana?

Thats not how it works. Thats why I told you to go study since you are not well versed on the subject.

 

[Boss]

DNA is a proven fact that shows the evolution of humans.

It simply contradicts that we could have evolved from anything other than our own Homo genus.

Nope. You need to spend about a year in a deep immersion in the science. You obviously have no clue what you are talking about. For example we share 85% of our DNA with turtles.

We share 50% of our DNA with bananas too... are we half banana?

Thats not how it works. Thats why I told you to go study since you are not well versed on the subject.

I HAVE studied this subject. That's why I am arguing about it. YOU need to study the subject. I can look at the program code for Internet Explorer and find that it's 85% similar to the program code for Google Chrome... does that mean it came from the same "common developer" or is that just the nature of program code?

If I go into the source code for my OS and remove 4~5% of it, do you think my OS will still function as it did before? OR does it just become a dysfunctional program? "Close enough" does not work when it comes to DNA... it has to be precise. Just one strand of the DNA code can be corrupt and the species is in trouble.

 

[Kosh]

There's just no other explanation.

Apparently his Dr. credentials check out, and he's a brain surgeon after all. And we always make the brain surgery / rocket science comparison when we mean to imply something is or is not really hard to master.

So, he's a terrific brain surgeon, except for a couple of sponges left behind. Okay... but what about everything else...

Outside of the hospital, outside of that specific arena, he's a blithering idiot. He comes off as borderline retarded when talking about public policy, the constitution, or foreign affairs.

Have you read his book on the constitution? It makes for some very entertaining reading. Like a 9th grader trying to convince the teacher he did his homework.

Anyways, there just no other way to slice it -- there's NO OTHER WORD for what Ben Carson is.

Idiot Savant.

This from a racist far left drone that follows the far left religious dogma without question or hesitation..

 

[Asclepias]

DNA is a proven fact that shows the evolution of humans.

It simply contradicts that we could have evolved from anything other than our own Homo genus.

Nope. You need to spend about a year in a deep immersion in the science. You obviously have no clue what you are talking about. For example we share 85% of our DNA with turtles.

We share 50% of our DNA with bananas too... are we half banana?

Thats not how it works. Thats why I told you to go study since you are not well versed on the subject.

I HAVE studied this subject. That's why I am arguing about it. YOU need to study the subject. I can look at the program code for Internet Explorer and find that it's 85% similar to the program code for Google Chrome... does that mean it came from the same "common developer" or is that just the nature of program code?

If I go into the source code for my OS and remove 4~5% of it, do you think my OS will still function as it did before? OR does it just become a dysfunctional program? "Close enough" does not work when it comes to DNA... it has to be precise. Just one strand of the DNA code can be corrupt and the species is in trouble.

You need to go back and study it with someone to help you. Anytime you say we share 50% of our DNA with a banana and thinks that means we are half banana you prove your studies of the subject were not assisted by someone with a knowledge of the subject.

Thanks for displaying your lack of comprehension of the subject by providing an excellent example. Program code has no nature. It was all derived from the same base (binary code) and evolved into different forms of software. See? I knew you were confused.

 

[Boss]

It simply contradicts that we could have evolved from anything other than our own Homo genus.

Nope. You need to spend about a year in a deep immersion in the science. You obviously have no clue what you are talking about. For example we share 85% of our DNA with turtles.

We share 50% of our DNA with bananas too... are we half banana?

Thats not how it works. Thats why I told you to go study since you are not well versed on the subject.

I HAVE studied this subject. That's why I am arguing about it. YOU need to study the subject. I can look at the program code for Internet Explorer and find that it's 85% similar to the program code for Google Chrome... does that mean it came from the same "common developer" or is that just the nature of program code?

If I go into the source code for my OS and remove 4~5% of it, do you think my OS will still function as it did before? OR does it just become a dysfunctional program? "Close enough" does not work when it comes to DNA... it has to be precise. Just one strand of the DNA code can be corrupt and the species is in trouble.

You need to go back and study it with someone to help you. Anytime you say we share 50% of our DNA with a banana and thinks that means we are half banana you prove your studies of the subject were not assisted by someone with a knowledge of the subject.

Thanks for displaying your lack of comprehension of the subject by providing an excellent example. Program code has no nature. It was all derived from the same base (binary code) and evolved into different forms of software. See? I knew you were confused.

Oh, I don't think we're half banana... I was using YOUR point about sharing aspects of our DNA with turtles and asking YOU a question. DNA code is similar to program code except it is 4-bit instead of binary 2-bit. (exponentially more complex) And yes, there is a "nature" to computer code or it would be useless. Of course, we are using the 2nd definition context of the word 'nature' ...the basic or inherent features of something, especially when seen as characteristic of it.

But as we've already seen you exhibit with "racist", you are totally ignorant of language. Maybe if you'd have spent more time studying in school instead of victimizing yourself and plotting to "get ******" you'd know more and not get embarrassed here?

 

[Asclepias]

Nope. You need to spend about a year in a deep immersion in the science. You obviously have no clue what you are talking about. For example we share 85% of our DNA with turtles.

We share 50% of our DNA with bananas too... are we half banana?

Thats not how it works. Thats why I told you to go study since you are not well versed on the subject.

I HAVE studied this subject. That's why I am arguing about it. YOU need to study the subject. I can look at the program code for Internet Explorer and find that it's 85% similar to the program code for Google Chrome... does that mean it came from the same "common developer" or is that just the nature of program code?

If I go into the source code for my OS and remove 4~5% of it, do you think my OS will still function as it did before? OR does it just become a dysfunctional program? "Close enough" does not work when it comes to DNA... it has to be precise. Just one strand of the DNA code can be corrupt and the species is in trouble.

You need to go back and study it with someone to help you. Anytime you say we share 50% of our DNA with a banana and thinks that means we are half banana you prove your studies of the subject were not assisted by someone with a knowledge of the subject.

Thanks for displaying your lack of comprehension of the subject by providing an excellent example. Program code has no nature. It was all derived from the same base (binary code) and evolved into different forms of software. See? I knew you were confused.

Oh, I don't think we're half banana... I was using YOUR point about sharing aspects of our DNA with turtles and asking YOU a question. DNA code is similar to program code except it is 4-bit instead of binary 2-bit. (exponentially more complex) And yes, there is a "nature" to computer code or it would be useless. Of course, we are using the 2nd definition context of the word 'nature' ...the basic or inherent features of something, especially when seen as characteristic of it.

But as we've already seen you exhibit with "racist", you are totally ignorant of language. Maybe if you'd have spent more time studying in school instead of victimizing yourself and plotting to "get ******" you'd know more and not get embarrassed here?

Dont try to pretend you didnt think that. I never said that meant we were 85% turtle. That was your train of thought. The fact you asked that question lets me know how ignorant you are on the subject of DNA. Now that I have had to school you using your own example of software code and also proving evolution you are trying to deflect. Its ok but just understand I know.

 

[Boss]

We share 50% of our DNA with bananas too... are we half banana?

Thats not how it works. Thats why I told you to go study since you are not well versed on the subject.

I HAVE studied this subject. That's why I am arguing about it. YOU need to study the subject. I can look at the program code for Internet Explorer and find that it's 85% similar to the program code for Google Chrome... does that mean it came from the same "common developer" or is that just the nature of program code?

If I go into the source code for my OS and remove 4~5% of it, do you think my OS will still function as it did before? OR does it just become a dysfunctional program? "Close enough" does not work when it comes to DNA... it has to be precise. Just one strand of the DNA code can be corrupt and the species is in trouble.

You need to go back and study it with someone to help you. Anytime you say we share 50% of our DNA with a banana and thinks that means we are half banana you prove your studies of the subject were not assisted by someone with a knowledge of the subject.

Thanks for displaying your lack of comprehension of the subject by providing an excellent example. Program code has no nature. It was all derived from the same base (binary code) and evolved into different forms of software. See? I knew you were confused.

Oh, I don't think we're half banana... I was using YOUR point about sharing aspects of our DNA with turtles and asking YOU a question. DNA code is similar to program code except it is 4-bit instead of binary 2-bit. (exponentially more complex) And yes, there is a "nature" to computer code or it would be useless. Of course, we are using the 2nd definition context of the word 'nature' ...the basic or inherent features of something, especially when seen as characteristic of it.

But as we've already seen you exhibit with "racist", you are totally ignorant of language. Maybe if you'd have spent more time studying in school instead of victimizing yourself and plotting to "get ******" you'd know more and not get embarrassed here?

Dont try to pretend you didnt think that. I never said that meant we were 85% turtle. That was your train of thought. The fact you asked that question lets me know how ignorant you are on the subject of DNA. Now that I have had to school you using your own example of software code and also proving evolution you are trying to deflect. Its ok but just understand I know.

Well I don't think that, I asked you a sarcastic question because you popped off something about us sharing 85% of our DNA with turtles. Apparently, you thought that was relevant for some reason, you brought it up! You're not proving anything except what an absolute moron you are.

 

[Asclepias]

Thats not how it works. Thats why I told you to go study since you are not well versed on the subject.

I HAVE studied this subject. That's why I am arguing about it. YOU need to study the subject. I can look at the program code for Internet Explorer and find that it's 85% similar to the program code for Google Chrome... does that mean it came from the same "common developer" or is that just the nature of program code?

If I go into the source code for my OS and remove 4~5% of it, do you think my OS will still function as it did before? OR does it just become a dysfunctional program? "Close enough" does not work when it comes to DNA... it has to be precise. Just one strand of the DNA code can be corrupt and the species is in trouble.

You need to go back and study it with someone to help you. Anytime you say we share 50% of our DNA with a banana and thinks that means we are half banana you prove your studies of the subject were not assisted by someone with a knowledge of the subject.

Thanks for displaying your lack of comprehension of the subject by providing an excellent example. Program code has no nature. It was all derived from the same base (binary code) and evolved into different forms of software. See? I knew you were confused.

Oh, I don't think we're half banana... I was using YOUR point about sharing aspects of our DNA with turtles and asking YOU a question. DNA code is similar to program code except it is 4-bit instead of binary 2-bit. (exponentially more complex) And yes, there is a "nature" to computer code or it would be useless. Of course, we are using the 2nd definition context of the word 'nature' ...the basic or inherent features of something, especially when seen as characteristic of it.

But as we've already seen you exhibit with "racist", you are totally ignorant of language. Maybe if you'd have spent more time studying in school instead of victimizing yourself and plotting to "get ******" you'd know more and not get embarrassed here?

Dont try to pretend you didnt think that. I never said that meant we were 85% turtle. That was your train of thought. The fact you asked that question lets me know how ignorant you are on the subject of DNA. Now that I have had to school you using your own example of software code and also proving evolution you are trying to deflect. Its ok but just understand I know.

Well I don't think that, I asked you a sarcastic question because you popped off something about us sharing 85% of our DNA with turtles. Apparently, you thought that was relevant for some reason, you brought it up! You're not proving anything except what an absolute moron you are.

Of course you dont think that now. I had to teach you. Obviously it was relevant to proving that DNA is the proof of evolution. I see you still havent grasped the most important lesson about my example. The fact that turtles share 85% of our DNA is proof that at some point we evolved from the same creatures. Its ironic that you have regressed to calling me a moron but you cant comprehend this simple fact. Its obvious you arent educated enough to discuss the subject coherently. Too bad you have let your pride cause you to make a fool of yourself.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"Dr. Ben Carson is an Idiot Savant"

Carson is ignorant of sound, responsible governance, the law, and facts concerning American politics and history.

He's not alone – millions of Americans can be described as such, including most conservatives and libertarians on this forum; but those Americans aren't running for president.

Carson illustrates well that although one may be brilliant in his field, exhibiting great technical skill, such a background in no way prepares him to serve in elected office, and certainly not to be president.

Carson will not be the GOP nominee, Carson will not be president – unfortunately this won't convince many libertarians and others on the wrongheaded right that the inane, sophomoric, naïve notion of the 'citizen politician' is completely devoid of merit.

 

[Mac1958]

They just hate Carson 'cuz he's black.

 

[Boss]

I HAVE studied this subject. That's why I am arguing about it. YOU need to study the subject. I can look at the program code for Internet Explorer and find that it's 85% similar to the program code for Google Chrome... does that mean it came from the same "common developer" or is that just the nature of program code?

If I go into the source code for my OS and remove 4~5% of it, do you think my OS will still function as it did before? OR does it just become a dysfunctional program? "Close enough" does not work when it comes to DNA... it has to be precise. Just one strand of the DNA code can be corrupt and the species is in trouble.

You need to go back and study it with someone to help you. Anytime you say we share 50% of our DNA with a banana and thinks that means we are half banana you prove your studies of the subject were not assisted by someone with a knowledge of the subject.

Thanks for displaying your lack of comprehension of the subject by providing an excellent example. Program code has no nature. It was all derived from the same base (binary code) and evolved into different forms of software. See? I knew you were confused.

Oh, I don't think we're half banana... I was using YOUR point about sharing aspects of our DNA with turtles and asking YOU a question. DNA code is similar to program code except it is 4-bit instead of binary 2-bit. (exponentially more complex) And yes, there is a "nature" to computer code or it would be useless. Of course, we are using the 2nd definition context of the word 'nature' ...the basic or inherent features of something, especially when seen as characteristic of it.

But as we've already seen you exhibit with "racist", you are totally ignorant of language. Maybe if you'd have spent more time studying in school instead of victimizing yourself and plotting to "get ******" you'd know more and not get embarrassed here?

Dont try to pretend you didnt think that. I never said that meant we were 85% turtle. That was your train of thought. The fact you asked that question lets me know how ignorant you are on the subject of DNA. Now that I have had to school you using your own example of software code and also proving evolution you are trying to deflect. Its ok but just understand I know.

Well I don't think that, I asked you a sarcastic question because you popped off something about us sharing 85% of our DNA with turtles. Apparently, you thought that was relevant for some reason, you brought it up! You're not proving anything except what an absolute moron you are.

Of course you dont think that now. I had to teach you. Obviously it was relevant to proving that DNA is the proof of evolution. I see you still havent grasped the most important lesson about my example. The fact that turtles share 85% of our DNA is proof that at some point we evolved from the same creature. Its ironic that you have regressed to calling me a moron but you cant comprehend this simple fact. Its obvious you arent educated enough to discuss the subject coherently. Too bad you have let your pride cause you to make a fool of yourself.

It's NOT proof of anything other than DNA is a building block of life. The fact that humans and turtles share 85% of their DNA is no more relevant than humans and bananas sharing 50% of their DNA. We obviously didn't evolve from the same creature as a banana... or, maybe that's what YOU think?

You're not "teaching" anyone a thing other than, some people are idiotic fools who believe sharing similar DNA attributes means we came from the same creature. We share 96% of our DNA with chimps but the 4% we don't share is very important. If the DNA mutates it doesn't result in a better creature. It has to be tit-for-tat, precise down the line, or the species is in trouble and could possibly die.

Although DNA is much more complex, we can compare it with computer program code. You can't take the software code from one program, remove 4% and replace it with code from another program and have a better program. What you end up with is a program that no longer functions or functions improperly.

After over 100 years of study, we find absolutely NO evidence of cross-genus evolution of any kind. EVER! The discovery of mitochondrial DNA pretty much seals the deal with regard to this theory. It's simply not feasible for one genus of life to evolve into another. The only "evolution" that has ever happened is microevolution, which is adaptive changes within a genus to create new species within the parameters of it's genus DNA. Homo erectus can evolve into homo sapien... and that's all. We couldn't even interbreed with homo neanderthalis... that's why they became extinct.

 

[Asclepias]

You need to go back and study it with someone to help you. Anytime you say we share 50% of our DNA with a banana and thinks that means we are half banana you prove your studies of the subject were not assisted by someone with a knowledge of the subject.

Thanks for displaying your lack of comprehension of the subject by providing an excellent example. Program code has no nature. It was all derived from the same base (binary code) and evolved into different forms of software. See? I knew you were confused.

Oh, I don't think we're half banana... I was using YOUR point about sharing aspects of our DNA with turtles and asking YOU a question. DNA code is similar to program code except it is 4-bit instead of binary 2-bit. (exponentially more complex) And yes, there is a "nature" to computer code or it would be useless. Of course, we are using the 2nd definition context of the word 'nature' ...the basic or inherent features of something, especially when seen as characteristic of it.

But as we've already seen you exhibit with "racist", you are totally ignorant of language. Maybe if you'd have spent more time studying in school instead of victimizing yourself and plotting to "get ******" you'd know more and not get embarrassed here?

Dont try to pretend you didnt think that. I never said that meant we were 85% turtle. That was your train of thought. The fact you asked that question lets me know how ignorant you are on the subject of DNA. Now that I have had to school you using your own example of software code and also proving evolution you are trying to deflect. Its ok but just understand I know.

Well I don't think that, I asked you a sarcastic question because you popped off something about us sharing 85% of our DNA with turtles. Apparently, you thought that was relevant for some reason, you brought it up! You're not proving anything except what an absolute moron you are.

Of course you dont think that now. I had to teach you. Obviously it was relevant to proving that DNA is the proof of evolution. I see you still havent grasped the most important lesson about my example. The fact that turtles share 85% of our DNA is proof that at some point we evolved from the same creature. Its ironic that you have regressed to calling me a moron but you cant comprehend this simple fact. Its obvious you arent educated enough to discuss the subject coherently. Too bad you have let your pride cause you to make a fool of yourself.

It's NOT proof of anything other than DNA is a building block of life. The fact that humans and turtles share 85% of their DNA is no more relevant than humans and bananas sharing 50% of their DNA. We obviously didn't evolve from the same creature as a banana... or, maybe that's what YOU think?

You're not "teaching" anyone a thing other than, some people are idiotic fools who believe sharing similar DNA attributes means we came from the same creature. We share 96% of our DNA with chimps but the 4% we don't share is very important. If the DNA mutates it doesn't result in a better creature. It has to be tit-for-tat, precise down the line, or the species is in trouble and could possibly die.

Although DNA is much more complex, we can compare it with computer program code. You can't take the software code from one program, remove 4% and replace it with code from another program and have a better program. What you end up with is a program that no longer functions or functions improperly.

After over 100 years of study, we find absolutely NO evidence of cross-genus evolution of any kind. EVER! The discovery of mitochondrial DNA pretty much seals the deal with regard to this theory. It's simply not feasible for one genus of life to evolve into another. The only "evolution" that has ever happened is microevolution, which is adaptive changes within a genus to create new species within the parameters of it's genus DNA. Homo erectus can evolve into homo sapien... and that's all. We couldn't even interbreed with homo neanderthalis... that's why they became extinct.

You do realize a banana comes from a plant dont you? Never mind. I dont know why I keep expecting you to be able to conceptualize the facts when you are ignorant of them.

I know its coming along slowly but yes I am teaching you. You do realize that 4% we dont share with chimps is the proof of evolution right? Do you even know how DNA works? Do you know what a mutation of DNA implies and how we can tell if a persons ancestors have come from a certain area of the world?

Your last statement is very amusing. You keep sticking your foot in your mouth. So you think neanderthals became extinct because homo sapiens couldnt interbreed with them? How does that even make sense to you? If thats the case how did neanderthals come about without homo sapiens? Fun fact alert. Some humans have neanderthal DNA like white europeans and asians. Sorry son. I cant do this with you anymore. Do as I instructed and go learn something about DNA with someone intelligent instructing you.


Scientists Identify Neanderthal Genes in Modern Human DNA | Anthropology | Sci-News.com

 

[Boss]

Oh, I don't think we're half banana... I was using YOUR point about sharing aspects of our DNA with turtles and asking YOU a question. DNA code is similar to program code except it is 4-bit instead of binary 2-bit. (exponentially more complex) And yes, there is a "nature" to computer code or it would be useless. Of course, we are using the 2nd definition context of the word 'nature' ...the basic or inherent features of something, especially when seen as characteristic of it.

But as we've already seen you exhibit with "racist", you are totally ignorant of language. Maybe if you'd have spent more time studying in school instead of victimizing yourself and plotting to "get ******" you'd know more and not get embarrassed here?

Dont try to pretend you didnt think that. I never said that meant we were 85% turtle. That was your train of thought. The fact you asked that question lets me know how ignorant you are on the subject of DNA. Now that I have had to school you using your own example of software code and also proving evolution you are trying to deflect. Its ok but just understand I know.

Well I don't think that, I asked you a sarcastic question because you popped off something about us sharing 85% of our DNA with turtles. Apparently, you thought that was relevant for some reason, you brought it up! You're not proving anything except what an absolute moron you are.

Of course you dont think that now. I had to teach you. Obviously it was relevant to proving that DNA is the proof of evolution. I see you still havent grasped the most important lesson about my example. The fact that turtles share 85% of our DNA is proof that at some point we evolved from the same creature. Its ironic that you have regressed to calling me a moron but you cant comprehend this simple fact. Its obvious you arent educated enough to discuss the subject coherently. Too bad you have let your pride cause you to make a fool of yourself.

It's NOT proof of anything other than DNA is a building block of life. The fact that humans and turtles share 85% of their DNA is no more relevant than humans and bananas sharing 50% of their DNA. We obviously didn't evolve from the same creature as a banana... or, maybe that's what YOU think?

You're not "teaching" anyone a thing other than, some people are idiotic fools who believe sharing similar DNA attributes means we came from the same creature. We share 96% of our DNA with chimps but the 4% we don't share is very important. If the DNA mutates it doesn't result in a better creature. It has to be tit-for-tat, precise down the line, or the species is in trouble and could possibly die.

Although DNA is much more complex, we can compare it with computer program code. You can't take the software code from one program, remove 4% and replace it with code from another program and have a better program. What you end up with is a program that no longer functions or functions improperly.

After over 100 years of study, we find absolutely NO evidence of cross-genus evolution of any kind. EVER! The discovery of mitochondrial DNA pretty much seals the deal with regard to this theory. It's simply not feasible for one genus of life to evolve into another. The only "evolution" that has ever happened is microevolution, which is adaptive changes within a genus to create new species within the parameters of it's genus DNA. Homo erectus can evolve into homo sapien... and that's all. We couldn't even interbreed with homo neanderthalis... that's why they became extinct.

You do realize a banana comes from a plant dont you? Never mind. I dont know why I keep expecting you to be able to conceptualize the facts when you are ignorant of them.

I know its coming along slowly but yes I am teaching you. You do realize that 4% we dont share with chimps is the proof of evolution right? Do you even know how DNA works? Do you know what a mutation of DNA implies and how we can tell if a persons ancestors have come from a certain area of the world?

Your last statement is very amusing. You keep sticking your foot in your mouth. So you think neanderthals became extinct because homo sapiens couldnt interbreed with them? How does that even make sense to you? If thats the case how did neanderthals come about without homo sapiens? Fun fact alert. Some humans have neanderthal DNA like white europeans and asians. Sorry son. I cant do this with you anymore. Do as I instructed and go learn something about DNA with someone intelligent instructing you.


Scientists Identify Neanderthal Genes in Modern Human DNA | Anthropology | Sci-News.com

You are so clueless it's not even funny. Yes, a banana is a plant. We obviously didn't evolve from a plant but we share 50% of a plant's DNA. It doesn't "prove" anything. So no.. I don't realize that the 4% difference between a human and chimp "proves" anything.

From YOUR link:
They showed that nine previously identified human genetic variants known to be associated with specific traits likely came from Neanderthals.

They SPECULATE that humans and neanderthals might have interbred EARLY ON.

Later in the article, they admit this:

“this suggests that when ancient humans met and mixed with Neanderthals, the two species were at the edge of biological incompatibility.”

"...ancient human and Neanderthal populations apparently faced interbreeding challenges after 500,000 years of evolutionary separation."

Both homo sapien and homo neanderthalis as well as homo erectus are in the same genera taxon. It is POSSIBLE they could have interbred but as this study and every study has shown, if they did it was early on... they could not interbreed later and homo neanderthalis became extinct. Whether or not they did, the evidence shows cross-genus evolution is not likely possible or even remotely possible.

So you have a LOT of questions to answer here and they haven't been answered by any valid science.

Do you even know how DNA works? Do you know what a mutation of DNA implies and how we can tell if a persons ancestors have come from a certain area of the world?

I very much know how DNA works but you don't seem to know. A mutation does not create a better organism. They can tell what area because of similarities in regional 'signatures' found within the genome. It has nothing to do with a mutation of the DNA.

Yes... I do need someone "intelligent" to instruct me because that sure as **** ain't YOU!