View Single Post
Old 10-31-2001, 12:55 AM   #30
John D Harris
Ninja Storm Shadow
 

Join Date: March 27, 2001
Location: Northport,Alabama, USA
Age: 62
Posts: 3,577
Quote:
Originally posted by Prime2U:

Ok, the genetic difference between a human and an ape is between 1 and 2%. This is a fact. Does that mean a chimpanze is a prehistoric form of man? doesn't make much sense does it? I'm not sure why you keep mentioning this 1.5%, as it really doesn't have any significance at all. We are that close genetically to many primates.

I don't remember right now how similar we are to a cow, but we are very close genetically to mammals in general. I do know that we are 90% similar to dogs, and 88-89% similar to horses. So, 10% different from dogs, 11% different from horses, 1-2% different from the apes. Knowing this, how is 1.5% (which is the same with many apes) significant in any way? I'm interested to know.

As far as your link, it sheds no light whatsoever. It says right on that page that cladistics, which is what the page is all about, is based on assumptions. Now I may believe in creation, but I am also a scientist, and assumptions are anathema in science. One cannot assume anything, as that invalidates the whole hypothesis. You must have concrete, repeatable evidence.

I also feel I should state here that Darwin's definition of evolution is " Descent with modification." Natural selection, which is modifications to increase survival rates through the generations, is in deed a proven fact. All of the other stuff that is now being called evolution is not in any way proven, and scientists just love associating it with natural selection in order to give it credibility that it does not deserve. Sir Real, it even states this on that link you gave me, in the glossary.

Prime2U, Interesting points, personally I don't have a problem with evolution, I don't know how God did it all I know is that He did. IMHO the Genesis story is writen in a way that nomadic shepards could understand (grasp the concept of creation). Take the use of the terms "there was evening and there was morning" it strikes me as odd to assume that an infinite God (not bound by time) would use those types of terms for anything other than to show that there was a passage of time. Rememeber since God is not bound by time what is a day to Him? A billion years? or even a few trillion years? Even now with all of our combined intellect and computing power we still can not get any closer to the time after the big bang than 1 to the 43 power of a second. (National Geographic October 1999). IMHO I find it hard to believe that God would reveal to a bunch of shepards exactly how He did it. Do we even need to know exactly how God created everthing? You start talking about sub-atomic particals (sp?)
and quatum phsyics and my head starts to hurt .
Since you are a scientist I got one for you, who knows maybe it'll get you the Nobel prize for phsyics .(if it does I want a small cut of the prize money) "Time" is the unifying force that the Quatum Phsyicsist have been looking for, not "time/space" but rather "Time". With out time you have no space, distance, movement, velocity, no orbit of atomic particals, or vibrations of sub-atomic particals. We see it as time/space because from our finite point of view we see speed as "time to travel a distance" or amount of distance traveled in a set amount of time. We don't see that it is time that limits us not speed, distance, or any of the other "3" dimensions.
How's that for a monkey wrench?



------------------
Crustiest of the OLD COOTS
Airline ticket to Afghanistan $800
High powered rifle with scope $1000
Hotel room with roof access $100
A clean Head shot on that sack of Horse Manure Usuma Bin Laden PRICELESS!
John D Harris is offline