Human(s) Chromosome 2 resulted from the Fusion of two Ape Chromosomes: Easily seen.

[Stryder50]

So one major question would be how did this fusion happen?

And related might be why?

Both excellent questions. As of now, we only know for sure that it DID happen. Though we think Neanderthals and Denisovans had only 23 pairs.

True, we only "know for sure" with regards to we humans. As I pointed out, so far no complete map of the genome (total chromosome and genes within same) for the Neanderthals or Denisovans to PROVE they were the 23 pattern and not still carrying the 24 pattern common to chimps, gorillas, and orangs.

One interesting item that comes from this 23 pattern in humans pops out of the Old Testament and Genesis, chapter 6, verses 1-4, EXCERPT:
Genesis Chapter 6

1 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,
2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
3 And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also [is] flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.
4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare [children] to them, the same [became] mighty men which [were] of old, men of renown.
...

Genesis 6:1 - 6:22

Genesis 6:1 - 6:22 from the King James Bible Online

www.kingjamesbibleonline.org

Of course KGV is a bit altered in some words from the original Hebrew, but the essence remains the same.

In order for those "sons of the Gods"(it's a plural in the original Hebrew) to mate with human females and have offspring the DNA of those 'sons of the gawds' would also have to be of the same 23 chromosome pattern.

Did the "sons of the Gawds" alter their DNA to make this possible or did they alter (intervene with evolution) the DNA of a pre-human species to make we homo-sapiens ??? !!!

An additional implication here is that of the @20 amino acids, four of which are used to make our DNA (and that of all life on this planet) there may be some form of "natural law" that makes DNA (and RNA) the same for carbon based life on other worlds/planets such as where those "sons of the gods" came from.

Hmmmm ??? !!!

I don't see any place for this goofy religious numerology in the science section.

If you have an alternate explanation as to the "how" and/or "why", please present.

As for "goofy religious numerology", my bad for omitting to say "If one accepts the Old Testament/Bible as true and accurate ..." then the Genesis account becomes of interest. Understand that until the Hebrews/Jews spent time in captivity in Babylon, what we know of as the 'Old Testament' was largely oral tradition and not as defined as it would be after their time in Mesopotamia. Much of Genesis' first books on creation are lifted from the Sumerian-Akkadian-Babylonian records and culture they were exposed to. And it was after leaving that "bondage" that much of the Torah~Old Testament (first Books) were place in writing.

The Sumerians were one of the first civilizations (post the last Ice Age) and also one of the first to keep written records. So first question would be how much were their earliest images and writings "truth" as they knew it versus some form of fiction~imagination~'myth'. The Sumerians have extensive records regarding the "Anunnaki" ~ "Those Whom from Heaven to Earth Came" and these accounts also relate to how such Beings created humans (or more correctly, intervened in Nature's evolutionary process.)

If we assume that imagination needs some form of experience and/or fact to build upon, then one has to wonder what theirs was as well as how they might have tried to express such in the limits of an early and limited language. Consider that if there were no flying creatures, insects and birds, would humans have ever aspired to also fly? Note how the earliest devices had wings patterned much the same as those of birds as a clue regards how much the experience of seeing something fly would lead to emulation.

This all rolls back to the classic intellectual divide between religion and science, or creation and evolution. One relies on "Gawd made it happen" - don't ask for details or how, other than a "snap of his/her/it's fingers"; the other relies on "Nature made it happen" - don't ask how or details, since it is, "it must of been done by Nature".

Both these polarities run on Faith more than some would like to admit.

It fits into the science section the same way many other aspects of exobiology would.

Recall that a bit over a century ago "science" denied the possibility of 'continents moving, drifting', now we accept plate tectonics. Science is often a matter of change to fit new data and perspectives.

 

[LittleNipper]

Very interesting.

The science that proves a child's life begins at and by the moment of conception can not possibly be that far behind.

Huh.

A childs life? Don't you mean zygote?

Are you a Zygote?

 

[LittleNipper]

Did we evolve from a banana? How Genetically Related Are We to Bananas? | Breakthroughs

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

If you have an alternate explanation as to the "how" and/or "why", please present.

I have only what scientists have taught us. I have no divine insight otherwise. And neither do you.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Did we evolve from a banana? How Genetically Related Are We to Bananas? | Breakthroughs

So, get this. Have you heard of the Coelecanth? You know...the ancient marine species of fish that we thought went extinct 66 million years ago, but which turned up again recently?

Have you heard of lungfish, as well?

Did you know all of these coelecanth and lungfish species are more closely related to humans than they are to any fish you see at a pet store or in the ocean?

Cool, don't you think? I mean that honestly.

 

[Anomalism]

Did we evolve from a banana?

You might have.

 

[Chuz Life]

Very interesting.

The science that proves a child's life begins at and by the moment of conception can not possibly be that far behind.

Huh.

A childs life? Don't you mean zygote?

Are you a Zygote?

I have that tard on ignore but I would enjoy seeing them trying to explain how or why a CHILD in the zygote stage of their development is not a child WHEN they are in the zygote stage of THEIR development.

Some tardz just cant accept the fact that human beings do not MORPH out of something that is less than a human being / child and suddenly turn into one.

 

[abu afak]

...The Sumerians were one of the first civilizations (post the last Ice Age) and also one of the first to keep written records. So first question would be how much were their earliest images and writings "truth" as they knew it versus some form of fiction~imagination~'myth'. The Sumerians have extensive records regarding the "Anunnaki" ~ "Those Whom from Heaven to Earth Came" and these accounts also relate to how such Beings created humans (or more correctly, intervened in Nature's evolutionary process.)

The Sumerians don't have "extensive records" they have Myths like other early civilizations
Just one of your many attempts/Spins at intellectual equivalence.
......

This all rolls back to the classic intellectual divide between religion and science, or creation and evolution. One relies on "Gawd made it happen" - don't ask for details or how, other than a "snap of his/her/it's fingers"; the other relies on "Nature made it happen" - don't ask how or details, since it is, "it must of been done by Nature".

Both these polarities run on Faith more than some would like to admit.

Absolute Trash.
Religions/gods rely on Faith/Belief withOut evidence.
Science is all about Evidence. In most cases repeatable experiments, and repeated consistent and/or predictable observations.

Recall that a bit over a century ago "science" denied the possibility of 'continents moving, drifting', now we accept plate tectonics. Science is often a matter of change to fit new data and perspectives.

Recall that we know about (found and confirmed with ongoing EVIDENCE) Plate Tectonics from Science, not a religious book.
Same was we observed/discerned/know about the other facts like gravity and evolution.
NOT 'faith.'

Your post was an idiotic and Disingenuous attempt at some kind of equivalence between religions/gods/faiths and science/hard evidence/facts.

`

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Recall that a bit over a century ago "science" denied the possibility of 'continents moving, drifting', now we accept plate tectonics. Science is often a matter of change to fit new data and perspectives.

That's a general canard to squeeze in any unsubstantiated claim. It doesn't lend any more support, specifically, to those ideas than it does to the idea of unicorns making ice cream in the 6th dimension. It's conman language. So be careful.

the other relies on "Nature made it happen" - don't ask how or details, since it is, "it must of been done by Nature".

"It must have been done by nature, let's figure it out." is much more correct. And substituting this more correct statement highlights the contrast and why these two sets of ideas will never overlap.

One relies on "Gawd made it happen" - don't ask for details or how, other than a "snap of his/her/it's fingers"; the other relies on "Nature made it happen" - "let's figure it out".

 

[emilynghiem]

Similarity in DNA does not necessarily imply linear derivation. Twins born and developed at the same time merely split off separately. Same ancestors. But we don't say one twin "evolved from the other."

 

[Stryder50]

If you have an alternate explanation as to the "how" and/or "why", please present.

I have only what scientists have taught us. I have no divine insight otherwise. And neither do you.

That remains disputable.
Seems I may have delved into this topic/concept deeper than you have and might have rejected the surface and current social paradigms and prejudices; going instead for a more literal take on the ancient, historical accounts/records.

Keep your own theological beliefs if you wish, I'll cast a wider net on the real probabilites.

 

[james bond]

Contrary to what you might read from some IDIOT KWEATIOIST Website...
(Like ICR/Institute for Creation Research recently posted here.)
this is a SIMPLE one and a BIGGIE.
Easy to understand/SEE.
We have 23 pairs of Chromos, ALL GREAT Apes 24.
Their 2 a/b fused into our #2 as can be easily seen when put next to one another.

​

Introduction​

​

All great apes apart from man have 24 pairs of chromosomes. There is therefore a hypothesis that the common ancestor of all great apes had 24 pairs of chromosomes and that the fusion of two of the ancestor's chromosomes created chromosome 2 in humans. The evidence for this hypothesis is very strong.​

​

The Evidence​

​

Evidence for fusing of two ancestral chromosomes to create human chromosome 2 and where there has been no fusion in other Great Apes is:​

​

1) The analogous chromosomes (2p and 2q) in the non-human great apes can be shown, when laid end to end, to create an identical banding structure to the human chromosome 2. (1)​

​

2) The remains of the sequence that the chromosome has on its ends (the telomere) is found in the middle of human chromosome 2 where the ancestral chromosomes fused. (2)​

​

3) the detail of this region (pre-telomeric sequence, telomeric sequence, reversed telomeric sequence, pre-telomeric sequence) is exactly what we would expect from a fusion. (3)[/B]​

​

4) this telomeric region is Exactly where one would expect to find it if a fusion had occurred in the middle of human chromosome 2.​

​

5) the centromere of human chromosome 2 Lines up with the chimp chromosome 2p chromosomal centromere.​

​

6) At the place where we would expect it on the human chromosome we find the Remnants of the chimp 2q centromere (4).​

​

Not only is this Strong evidence for a fusion event, but it is also strong evidence for Common ancestry; in fact, it is hard to explain by any other mechanism.​

​

​

​

Explanations​

​

Telomere evidence​

​

The telomere is a sequence of DNA at the end of the chromosome. The function of the telomere is to protect the ends of the chromosomal DNA strands during replication. The ends of the strands are very vulnerable to mutations or deletions. Telomeres consist of, or contain long stretches of simple DNA sequences that are repeated many times. The telomeres tend to be shortened over time and are restored by an enzyme called telomerase which lengthens the sequence. If the telomere becomes too short in somatic cells, errors in duplication can occur leading to cancers.​

​

The telomere sequence is highly conserved in different groups of organisms. For example vertebrates have the sequence TTAGGG repeated many times. (In primates the sequence is repeated 500 to 3500 times). Adjacent to the telomere, are regions with other DNA repeats (known as Telomere Associated Repeats) but these regions, rather than being highly conserved, are highly polymorphic - that is they have many variations even within the same species. Nevertheless the pretelomeric region can be easily recognised in closely related species. Occasionally genes are found in the pretelomeric region.​

​

Now these telomeric and pretelomeric sequences are normally found only on chromosome ends. However, in human chromosome 2, there is strong evidence for chromosome fusing in that there is a pretelomeric sequence, a telomeric sequence, an inverted telomeric sequence and an inverted pretelomeric sequence in that order in the middle of the chromosome.​

​

​

Centromere evidence​

​

Turning now to the centromere. The process of somatic cell division (mitosis) is as follows (this is a very brief and simplified summary to explain the centromere):​

[.............]​

​

[.............]​

​

​

Chromosome fusion

Demonstration that human chromosome 2 is the fusion of two ancestral chromosomes

www.evolutionpages.com

This is too stupid. You need to take a chill pill.

 

[james bond]

The truth is humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes (which we all learned in school). Great apes have 24.

The OP is calling himself an ape.

 

[themirrorthief]

Contrary to what you might read from some IDIOT KWEATIOIST Website...
(Like ICR/Institute for Creation Research recently posted here.)
this is a SIMPLE one and a BIGGIE.
Easy to understand/SEE.
We have 23 pairs of Chromos, ALL GREAT Apes 24.
Their 2 a/b fused into our #2 as can be easily seen when put next to one another.

​

Introduction​

​

All great apes apart from man have 24 pairs of chromosomes. There is therefore a hypothesis that the common ancestor of all great apes had 24 pairs of chromosomes and that the fusion of two of the ancestor's chromosomes created chromosome 2 in humans. The evidence for this hypothesis is very strong.​

​

The Evidence​

​

Evidence for fusing of two ancestral chromosomes to create human chromosome 2 and where there has been no fusion in other Great Apes is:​

​

1) The analogous chromosomes (2p and 2q) in the non-human great apes can be shown, when laid end to end, to create an identical banding structure to the human chromosome 2. (1)​

​

2) The remains of the sequence that the chromosome has on its ends (the telomere) is found in the middle of human chromosome 2 where the ancestral chromosomes fused. (2)​

​

3) the detail of this region (pre-telomeric sequence, telomeric sequence, reversed telomeric sequence, pre-telomeric sequence) is exactly what we would expect from a fusion. (3)[/B]​

​

4) this telomeric region is Exactly where one would expect to find it if a fusion had occurred in the middle of human chromosome 2.​

​

5) the centromere of human chromosome 2 Lines up with the chimp chromosome 2p chromosomal centromere.​

​

6) At the place where we would expect it on the human chromosome we find the Remnants of the chimp 2q centromere (4).​

​

Not only is this Strong evidence for a fusion event, but it is also strong evidence for Common ancestry; in fact, it is hard to explain by any other mechanism.​

​

​

​

Explanations​

​

Telomere evidence​

​

The telomere is a sequence of DNA at the end of the chromosome. The function of the telomere is to protect the ends of the chromosomal DNA strands during replication. The ends of the strands are very vulnerable to mutations or deletions. Telomeres consist of, or contain long stretches of simple DNA sequences that are repeated many times. The telomeres tend to be shortened over time and are restored by an enzyme called telomerase which lengthens the sequence. If the telomere becomes too short in somatic cells, errors in duplication can occur leading to cancers.​

​

The telomere sequence is highly conserved in different groups of organisms. For example vertebrates have the sequence TTAGGG repeated many times. (In primates the sequence is repeated 500 to 3500 times). Adjacent to the telomere, are regions with other DNA repeats (known as Telomere Associated Repeats) but these regions, rather than being highly conserved, are highly polymorphic - that is they have many variations even within the same species. Nevertheless the pretelomeric region can be easily recognised in closely related species. Occasionally genes are found in the pretelomeric region.​

​

Now these telomeric and pretelomeric sequences are normally found only on chromosome ends. However, in human chromosome 2, there is strong evidence for chromosome fusing in that there is a pretelomeric sequence, a telomeric sequence, an inverted telomeric sequence and an inverted pretelomeric sequence in that order in the middle of the chromosome.​

​

​

Centromere evidence​

​

Turning now to the centromere. The process of somatic cell division (mitosis) is as follows (this is a very brief and simplified summary to explain the centromere):​

[.............]​

​

[.............]​

​

​

Chromosome fusion

Demonstration that human chromosome 2 is the fusion of two ancestral chromosomes

www.evolutionpages.com

I totally agree, your dna obviously came from monkeys...good job

 

[Stryder50]

...The Sumerians were one of the
k, post: 26562267, member: 3073"]
first civilizations (post the last Ice Age) and also one of the first to keep written records. So first question would be how much were their earliest images and writings "truth" as they knew it versus some form of fiction~imagination~'myth'. The Sumerians have extensive records regarding the "Anunnaki" ~ "Those Whom from Heaven to Earth Came" and these accounts also relate to how such Beings created humans (or more correctly, intervened in Nature's evolutionary process.)

The Sumerians don't have "extensive records" they have Myths like other early civilizations
Just one of your many attempts/Spins at intellectual equivalence.

First off, which of these;
"Just one of your many attempts/Spins at intellectual equivalence."
Are you referring to???
I'm not aware of having made such prior, so if you can provide links/sources/documentations would be appreciated to show you aren't blowing smoke up our collective arses.

Meanwhile, it is classic hubris of our times to assume those in the distant past were so ignorate that much of what they said and presented that doesn't gel with our current and limited perspectives had to be "myths". What part of expressing experiences and concepts beyond their language expressions did you fail to grasp or understand. ???

Just because the Ancients failed to use words/terms of our current vernacular doesn't mean that what and how they said things are "fictional" or "myths". Such is the bias of our later ages/millennium perspective denying their own perspective.

Which part of this conflicts with your own ideological~theological~religious beliefs that puts your knickers in such an knot ???
......

This all rolls back to the classic intellectual divide between religion and science, or creation and evolution. One relies on "Gawd made it happen" - don't ask for details or how, other than a "snap of his/her/it's fingers"; the other relies on "Nature made it happen" - don't ask how or details, since it is, "it must of been done by Nature".

Both these polarities run on Faith more than some would like to admit.

Absolute Trash.
Religions/gods rely on Faith/Belief withOut evidence.

Obviously you have limited experience with "true believers", many of whom will cite their takes on "evidence" that supports their beliefs.

I won't begin to dispute such here, but only return to the issue that what was said, and believed, by these ancient cultures is what we are working with and assuming most is "truth" as they thought/believed; where does that leave us on regards a literal take versus your more subjective and biased take ~~~ ???

Science is all about Evidence. In most cases repeatable experiments, and repeated consistent and/or predictable observations.

In which case present such "repeatable experiments" you think invalidate the records of the earliest "ancients".

Recall that a bit over a century ago "science" denied the possibility of 'continents moving, drifting', now we accept plate tectonics. Science is often a matter of change to fit new data and perspectives.

Recall that we know about (found and confirmed with ongoing EVIDENCE) Plate Tectonics from Science, not a religious book.

Note I did not suggest that plate tectonics was confirmed by some "religious book", but rather from data acquired decades after the initial hypothesis, about the 1940s onward with deep sea/ocean surveys of the crustal floor.

Same was we observed/discerned/know about the other facts like gravity and evolution.

NOT 'faith.' You're rambling on here along with some pissing into the wind ...

Your post was an idiotic and Disingenuous attempt at some kind of equivalence between religions/gods/faiths and science/hard evidence/facts.

NOPE!!!

But your garbled response is such ...

`

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

That remains disputable.

Then dispute it. With evidence. All are welcome.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Similarity in DNA does not necessarily imply linear derivation. Twins born and developed at the same time merely split off separately. Same ancestors. But we don't say one twin "evolved from the other."

It shows common ancestry. More DNA in common? More closely related.

 

[justinacolmena]

They're "longevity" researchers. There's a "long-lived" balding older man living happily ever after with a "long" haired young woman.

Oh, that's right, there's real life. People are full of shit in a court of law collecting alimony and child support, and going in for abortions after Valentine's Day.

It all sounds very feminist and one sided to the advantage of women only, but that's not the truth because certain men have a protectionist role, of which they generally take full advantage, in law enforcement or other positions of authority.

 

[Stryder50]

That remains disputable.

Then dispute it. With evidence. All are welcome.

After you present, with evidence, the natural process by which the two chromosmes of ape ancestors was fused into the single chromosome we humans have.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

That remains disputable.

Then dispute it. With evidence. All are welcome.

After you present, with evidence, the natural process by which the two chromosmes of ape ancestors was fused into the single chromosome we humans have.

That is presented in the OP. You opened the thread. Did you not read the OP?