Quote:
Originally posted by Sir Real:
[qoute]
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.
|
Well humans and Apes are two branches from the same tree, wew when on way they when another of course were going to be slimmer.
Evolution is " Descent with modification." so it going down with modification huh? that doesn't make even sense, I love to see that comment in some sort of context.
Evolution is the developing of a creature and so is Natural selection.
1.5% difference is the amount of gentic difference between any HUMAN from any part of the world!!! AND of course diffence is small between the mammel groups as we all are from the same gentic templete.
Oh and the link is just something I pucked out of the air.
But enougth of this, You give me some evidence of something other then Evolution.[/QUOTE]
I am sorry you cannot understand what descent with modification means. I have no idea how I can debate the various views on evolution with you until you at least understand what natural selection is all about. If you want context, then very well I will oblige:
I'll even use your own example. Gorilla goes into desert and dies. Another less hairy one goes into the desert and survives. The offspring have less hair. This descendant has been modified to increase survivability.
Why did you pluck a link from the air and then tell me it would shed light on the topic?
If humans vary 1.5% from each other, and apes and humans vary around 1.5% from each other, and yet there are many very obvious differences between humans and apes, then how does fossil record DNA similarity between us and any primate have any value at all whatsoever?
I do not need to give you evidence supporting something besides what you call evolution. All I need to do if point out that that hypothesis is obviously unproven, and shows some flaws, and look to the alternative. Creation was never put forward by a scientist, it's been around as long as humans have. I have never seen one iota of evidence to disprove it. I am confident that I never will. I will accept it based on faith, as it was meant to be accepted.
------------------
"Life is what happens while you are busy making other plans." - Lennon