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

[Cougarbear]

What didn't I answer?

Is weather forecasting really laughable? It's not perfect but weather is very dynamic so there are errors.

Science actually does answer questions about the natural world. If you want to know the time and date for every lunar and solar eclipse for the next 500 years you could ask an astronomer or you could consult the all-knowing, all-seeing Bible. I think we both know where the correct answer will come from.

What do solar and lunar eclipses have to do with the topic? Science isn't settled.

 

[Hollie]

What do solar and lunar eclipses have to do with the topic? Science isn't settled.

Did you forget what you wrote?

"...But, rarely does it answer questions that it doesn't bring up even more questions"

Odd you would claim science doesn't answer questions when science unquestionably does. Does science answer questions about disease? Of course. If you have a serious illness are you going to rattle bones, pray, or seek competent medical care?

 

[Cougarbear]

Did you forget what you wrote?

"...But, rarely does it answer questions that it doesn't bring up even more questions"

Odd you would claim science doesn't answer questions when science unquestionably does. Does science answer questions about disease? Of course. If you have a serious illness are you going to rattle bones, pray, or seek competent medical care?

But, it doesn't answer the question where did I come from as in the universe and earth questions. It's made monumental mistakes with this Chromosome Ape stuff with trying to claim we have a 99% connection with Chimps. Not so. And, the mutation clock is way off as the video explains. When I read things in studies and magazines, I look for "fuzzy words" that ask us to believe them but without it being settled: May be, could be.....

 

[abu afak]

But, it doesn't answer the question where did I come from as in the universe and earth questions.

Not yet, but it's our only real hope to find out.
Like 10,000 other phenomenon that USED to have gods (fire, Lightning, Fertility, etc) before they found out what it actually was.
You've slid into 'God of the Gaps'

It's made monumental mistakes with this Chromosome Ape stuff with trying to claim we have a 99% connection with Chimps. Not so.

You of course have a real link for this Idiotic claim besides ICR, AIG, etc
Because 98-99% DNA similar is True

You really are not even debatable as you have no basic facts.

`

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

No need since I have science on my side.

Oh look, a video you never watched and don't understand.

No, you don't have any science on the side of your childish denial, and you would get laughed out of a college biology class. You are embarrassing yourself.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Are you guys all enjoying the wave of brand new sockpuppet troll accounts? Fascinating. I wonder how many actual humans are behind them? 1? More?

 

[Cougarbear]

Oh look, a video you never watched and don't understand.

No, you don't have any science on the side of your childish denial, and you would get laughed out of a college biology class. You are embarrassing yourself.

That's what happens when ignorant persons such as yourself try to defend the indefensible. The science in the video is accurate. But, you will just throw insults and never try to correct any of it because you know you can't. Just jump up and down, throw out insults and behave badly like a good little liberal Democrat.

 

[Hollie]

But, it doesn't answer the question where did I come from as in the universe and earth questions. It's made monumental mistakes with this Chromosome Ape stuff with trying to claim we have a 99% connection with Chimps. Not so. And, the mutation clock is way off as the video explains. When I read things in studies and magazines, I look for "fuzzy words" that ask us to believe them but without it being settled: May be, could be.....

The question of where did all of existence come from is unanswered. The science disciplines are seeking the answers. There is nothing in any of the religions that seeks those answers. Religions are literally dead ends when it comes to exploring the universe for answers.

I’m not clear what you mean about monumental mistakes about “chromosome ape stuff”. It’s just a fact that humans and apes share very similar DNA sequences. I think it’s a mistake to accept science data from Christian fundamentalists. They have an obvious agenda to press. The creation ministries announce their dishonesty with the standard “statement of faith” that precludes objectivity.

 

[Indeependent]

The question of where did all of existence come from is unanswered. The science disciplines are seeking the answers. There is nothing in any of the religions that seeks those answers. Religions are literally dead ends when it comes to exploring the universe for answers.

I’m not clear what you mean about monumental mistakes about “chromosome ape stuff”. It’s just a fact that humans and apes share very similar DNA sequences. I think it’s a mistake to accept science data from Christian fundamentalists. They have an obvious agenda to press. The creation ministries announce their dishonesty with the standard “statement of faith” that precludes objectivity.

I'm sure Yeshivah University doesn't have a science department.
Are you on drugs?

 

[Hollie]

I'm sure Yeshivah University doesn't have a science department.
Are you on drugs?

The creation ministries are full of clowns who attended diploma mills which announce science departments.

Lay off the drugs. You’ve had horrible experiences, obviously.

 

[Indeependent]

The creation ministries are full of clowns who attended diploma mills which announce science departments.

Lay off the drugs. You’ve had horrible experiences, obviously.

When it comes to this topic, you are one dumb piece of shit.
It's so cool when the head of John's Hopkins Physics Department was an bearded Orthodox Jew who was a creationist.
You wish you invented a fraction of what they have invented.

 

[abu afak]

When it comes to this topic, you are one dumb piece of shit.
It's so cool when the head of John's Hopkins Physics Department was an bearded Orthodox Jew who was a creationist.
You wish you invented a fraction of what they have invented.

You need to stop bragging about Ashkenazi (and orthodox or Islamist) intelligence.
Holy book literalists are a plague on the planet.
The vast majority of Jewish Nobel winners were not orthodox they were just about all Ashkenazi/Euro-mixes though.
They did not have a peyos.

Einstein's letter to Gutkind - 1954 (auctioned at Christies)

‘The word God is for me nothing but the expression and product of human weaknesses,’ Einstein wrote to Gutkind, ‘the Bible a collection of venerable but still rather primitive legends. No interpretation, no matter how subtle, can (for me) change anything about this.’​

​

Despite Einstein’s open identification with Judaism, his feelings on it were the same:​

‘For me the unadulterated Jewish religion is, like all other religions, an incarnation of primitive superstition. And the Jewish people to whom I gladly belong, and in whose mentality I feel profoundly anchored, still for me does not have any different kind of dignity from all other peoples. As far as my experience goes, they are in fact no better than other human groups, even if they are protected from the worst excesses by a lack of power. Otherwise I cannot perceive anything “chosen” about them.’​

YOU believe, alas, in the "unadulterated Jewish religion"/"primitive superstitious" orthodox world.

`

 

[Hollie]

When it comes to this topic, you are one dumb piece of shit.
It's so cool when the head of John's Hopkins Physics Department was an bearded Orthodox Jew who was a creationist.
You wish you invented a fraction of what they have invented.

Are you referring to this loon?

Angry religious extremists. Funny.

Encyclopedia of American Loons

It’s … The Encyclopedia of American loons! Our new and exciting series presenting a representative sample of American loons from A-Z.

americanloons.blogspot.com

By virtue of being a physicist, one would think that creationist Lee Spetner would have some aptitude for aligning his beliefs on science to the evidence. No such luck. Spetner spent years in Israel attempting to search for evidence which “contradicted evolution” and favored his religious views. His conclusion was, remarkable, the one he had from the beginning: there was 365 originally created species of “beasts” and 365 birds, as detailed in his book Not by Chance, Shattering the Modern Theory of Evolution, which even by its title reveals a profound lack of understanding of evolution. In the book he also says that mutations do not create new information, which is needed to drive evolution, and that mutations are not beneficial as they lead to a loss of information. He also rejects archaeopteryx as a fraud – indeed, Spetner and Fred Hoyle were the creationist critics that really set the stage for later creationist dismissals of the fossil. Of course, Spetner and Hoyle based their objections on complete misunderstandings of an unfamiliarity with the data and relevant processes, tactfully concluding that the real scientists were not only mistaken, but frauds. The incidence, described here, should really have undermined all aspirations of credibility Spetner might once have entertained, but the creationists apparently never noticed.

In short, Spetner’s book is a collection of creationist PRATTs. Do you think Spetner deals with the scientific responses to those PRATTs? Nope. Not a chance – the point was, familiarly, never to do science, but to win the public, and actually dealing with thorny scientific issues would presumably be too much. The purpose of the book is to replace the modern synthesis with a mixture of divine creation and a non-random evolution theory which he believes explains microevolution. His book has been endorsed by creationists and intelligent design advocates who presents it as a the work of a non-creationist presenting evidence against central tenets of evolution, even though Spetner is, in fact, an outspoken, ardent creationist (as discussed here). Indeed, when the 2013 Ball State kerfuffle – erupted due to creationist Eric Hedin wanting to disguise fundamentalist evangelicism as a biology course at Ball State University, Spetner’s work was on the reading list – despite Spetner’s obvious lack of understanding of even the basic tenets of biology or, for that matter, probability theory; there is a wonderful takedown of Spetner’s attempt to use mathematical modeling to undermine evolution here.

He is also a signatory to the Discovery Institute petition A Scientific Dissent from Darwinism.
Diagnosis: Nothing more than your standard fundamentalist denialist creationist, really, though Spetner has somehow, occasionally, managed to pass as something else to those who don’t already understand what he is talking about. Disgraceful, really.

 

[abu afak]

Are you referring to this loon?

Angry religious extremists. Funny.

Encyclopedia of American Loons

It’s … The Encyclopedia of American loons! Our new and exciting series presenting a representative sample of American loons from A-Z.

americanloons.blogspot.com

By virtue of being a physicist, one would think that creationist Lee Spetner would have some aptitude for aligning his beliefs on science to the evidence. No such luck. Spetner spent years in Israel attempting to search for evidence which “contradicted evolution” and favored his religious views. His conclusion was, remarkable, the one he had from the beginning: there was 365 originally created species of “beasts” and 365 birds, as detailed in his book Not by Chance, Shattering the Modern Theory of Evolution, which even by its title reveals a profound lack of understanding of evolution. In the book he also says that mutations do not create new information, which is needed to drive evolution, and that mutations are not beneficial as they lead to a loss of information. He also rejects archaeopteryx as a fraud – indeed, Spetner and Fred Hoyle were the creationist critics that really set the stage for later creationist dismissals of the fossil. Of course, Spetner and Hoyle based their objections on complete misunderstandings of an unfamiliarity with the data and relevant processes, tactfully concluding that the real scientists were not only mistaken, but frauds. The incidence, described here, should really have undermined all aspirations of credibility Spetner might once have entertained, but the creationists apparently never noticed.

In short, Spetner’s book is a collection of creationist PRATTs. Do you think Spetner deals with the scientific responses to those PRATTs? Nope. Not a chance – the point was, familiarly, never to do science, but to win the public, and actually dealing with thorny scientific issues would presumably be too much. The purpose of the book is to replace the modern synthesis with a mixture of divine creation and a non-random evolution theory which he believes explains microevolution. His book has been endorsed by creationists and intelligent design advocates who presents it as a the work of a non-creationist presenting evidence against central tenets of evolution, even though Spetner is, in fact, an outspoken, ardent creationist (as discussed here). Indeed, when the 2013 Ball State kerfuffle – erupted due to creationist Eric Hedin wanting to disguise fundamentalist evangelicism as a biology course at Ball State University, Spetner’s work was on the reading list – despite Spetner’s obvious lack of understanding of even the basic tenets of biology or, for that matter, probability theory; there is a wonderful takedown of Spetner’s attempt to use mathematical modeling to undermine evolution here.

He is also a signatory to the Discovery Institute petition A Scientific Dissent from Darwinism.
Diagnosis: Nothing more than your standard fundamentalist denialist creationist, really, though Spetner has somehow, occasionally, managed to pass as something else to those who don’t already understand what he is talking about. Disgraceful, really.

Nice find/outing of indeependent and his BS cult.
`

 

[Indeependent]

You need to stop bragging about Ashkenazi (and orthodox or Islamist) intelligence.
Holy book literalists are a plague on the planet.
The vast majority of Jewish Nobel winners were not orthodox they were just about all Ashkenazi/Euro-mixes though.
They did not have a peyos.

Einstein's letter to Gutkind - 1954 (auctioned at Christies)

‘The word God is for me nothing but the expression and product of human weaknesses,’ Einstein wrote to Gutkind, ‘the Bible a collection of venerable but still rather primitive legends. No interpretation, no matter how subtle, can (for me) change anything about this.’​

​

Despite Einstein’s open identification with Judaism, his feelings on it were the same:​

‘For me the unadulterated Jewish religion is, like all other religions, an incarnation of primitive superstition. And the Jewish people to whom I gladly belong, and in whose mentality I feel profoundly anchored, still for me does not have any different kind of dignity from all other peoples. As far as my experience goes, they are in fact no better than other human groups, even if they are protected from the worst excesses by a lack of power. Otherwise I cannot perceive anything “chosen” about them.’​

YOU believe, alas, in the "unadulterated Jewish religion"/"primitive superstitious" orthodox world.

`

You posted a run on ad hominem.
You did not respond to the impossibility of evolution.

 

[Indeependent]

Nice find/outing of indeependent and his BS cult.
`

Let me know when you have at least one PhD in a hard science.

 

[abu afak]

You posted a run on ad hominem.
You did not respond to the impossibility of evolution.

I've written a BOOK compared to what you have Burped here you one-line Clown.
Answered you elaborately, as well as having many high end threads LIKE THIS ONE.
Way over your Non-yiddishe kop.
You got PORKED.

`

 

[Cougarbear]

The question of where did all of existence come from is unanswered. The science disciplines are seeking the answers. There is nothing in any of the religions that seeks those answers. Religions are literally dead ends when it comes to exploring the universe for answers.

I’m not clear what you mean about monumental mistakes about “chromosome ape stuff”. It’s just a fact that humans and apes share very similar DNA sequences. I think it’s a mistake to accept science data from Christian fundamentalists. They have an obvious agenda to press. The creation ministries announce their dishonesty with the standard “statement of faith” that precludes objectivity.

You have the same dishonest standard to meet your faith in science, even though you admit science has not answered the question where did we come from, how did we get here, why are we here and where are we going next? Yet, you are unwilling to look at other possibilities. Your comments about humans and apes are not true. The way the so-called scientists came up with 99% the same DNA was disingenuous and false. When you don't take out those DNA links that do not line up, it's more like 85% and I've seen lower. That's a huge difference. Not only that, the 6 million years from our supposedly common ancestor mutation doesn't work either. Science keeps stretching out the time period now to 13.5 million. But, that's way off as well. I invite you to watch the video and at least know what you are talking about and/or trying to say is wrong. You remind me of my grandson who will not eat some food, not even taste it to see if he'd like it or not. He's 17. Watch the video so we can have an intelligent conversation.

Your statement about religions are dead ends when exploring the universe is also false. You might want to educate yourself with the studies at many of the religious schools around the world before making such an ignorant statement like this. I remember when I was at BYU back in the late 1970's being introduced to Steven Hawkins in the science building. You might like to know that the father of the TV was a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

 

[Hollie]

You have the same dishonest standard to meet your faith in science, even though you admit science has not answered the question where did we come from, how did we get here, why are we here and where are we going next? Yet, you are unwilling to look at other possibilities. Your comments about humans and apes are not true. The way the so-called scientists came up with 99% the same DNA was disingenuous and false. When you don't take out those DNA links that do not line up, it's more like 85% and I've seen lower. That's a huge difference. Not only that, the 6 million years from our supposedly common ancestor mutation doesn't work either. Science keeps stretching out the time period now to 13.5 million. But, that's way off as well. I invite you to watch the video and at least know what you are talking about and/or trying to say is wrong. You remind me of my grandson who will not eat some food, not even taste it to see if he'd like it or not. He's 17. Watch the video so we can have an intelligent conversation.

Your statement about religions are dead ends when exploring the universe is also false. You might want to educate yourself with the studies at many of the religious schools around the world before making such an ignorant statement like this. I remember when I was at BYU back in the late 1970's being introduced to Steven Hawkins in the science building. You might like to know that the father of the TV was a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

What dishonest standard is there for science to meet? There certainly is no faith required in science. That's a standard creationist claim. There is no faith required in the study of medicine, paleontology, biology or any of the other physical sciences. If something is known, there is no faith required.

My comments about humans and primates certainly were true. The data is available on most any science based website. You can deny the facts but that doesn't make the facts do away. The youtube video you cut and pasted was supposed to be a joke? As with all the extremist Christian ministries, they are bound by a ''statement of faith'', that requires all evidence to conform to extremist Christian dogma. It' both dishonest and presumptuous to expect others to accept the bias and predetermined positions of religious extremists.

If my comments about religions being dead ends when exploring the universe are false, make your case for an alternate position. Tell us what the religious institutions are doing to advance our understanding of the natural world. What research papers prepared by the religious institutions have been submitted to the National Science Foundation, for example? Identify one.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

That's what happens when ignorant persons such as yourself try to defend the indefensible. The science in the video is accurate. But, you will just throw insults and never try to correct any of it because you know you can't. Just jump up and down, throw out insults and behave badly like a good little liberal Democrat.

Oh look, more self-soothing babble from a religious dumbfuck who is on the wrong side of science. The best part is when you said you had science on your side and googled for a video you never watched as "proof". Pathetic. You simply don't have what it takes to post in this section, sorry.