|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Chimpanzees and humans share a common ancestry? - 8/10/2008 5:43:54 PM
|
|
|
Veritas
Posts: 519
Joined: 4/19/2005
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: protopath
Hackers hate rewriting code, and in fact call a good hacker lazy because he reuses the same code over and over. Why redo work that has already been done?
God, being the greatest hacker ever, reused the same code over and over, look at how much genetic similarity there is between us and mice. Not that I'm calling God lazy, but economy, preservation, and not wasting are certainly attributes of Him.
A good programmer knows that it is often the case that code from one program can be applied to an unrelated program. Computer programs do not fall into nested hierarcies.
The pattern we see with the reuse of code is not consistent with the observed nested hierarchies we observe in genetic material.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Chimpanzees and humans share a common ancestry? - 8/10/2008 5:46:10 PM
|
|
|
swan42
Posts: 347
Joined: 5/3/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
Also it is possible that God wanted hominids to eat fruit, so he commented out the portion of code that reduced dependence on fruit.
It is a much more conclusive than that. By disabling 'vitamin C synthase', God says to Hominids, eat fruit or die.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Chimpanzees and humans share a common ancestry? - 8/10/2008 5:54:06 PM
|
|
|
protopath
Posts: 7
Joined: 8/3/2008
Status: offline
|
Another interpretation is that viri were analogous to garbage collection and repair subprograms pre-fall and degenerated into harmful viri post-fall. This would rapidly cause small changes and damage to larger organisms as there would be no natural resistance to them as they were helpful before.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Chimpanzees and humans share a common ancestry? - 8/10/2008 6:14:20 PM
|
|
|
swan42
Posts: 347
Joined: 5/3/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: protopath
Another interpretation is that viri were analogous to garbage collection and repair subprograms pre-fall and degenerated into harmful viri post-fall. This would rapidly cause small changes and damage to larger organisms as there would be no natural resistance to them as they were helpful before.
Genomic analysis does not support this interpretation.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Chimpanzees and humans share a common ancestry? - 8/10/2008 7:33:12 PM
|
|
|
gluadys
Posts: 1000
Joined: 4/26/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: protopath
Furthermore, after the fall it is quite possible that viri became destructive and since we share so much genetic similarity are susceptible to the same infections. And I know with mice you can see pieces of virus in the code. Also it is possible that God wanted hominids to eat fruit, so he commented out the portion of code that reduced dependence on fruit.
In that case, why not excise the whole gene rather than disable it?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Chimpanzees and humans share a common ancestry? - 8/10/2008 7:58:11 PM
|
|
|
protopath
Posts: 7
Joined: 8/3/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: gluadys
In that case, why not excise the whole gene rather than disable it?
I don't know, I'm not up on a lot of biology, nor can I speak with much authority on the subject as I'm a machinist and not any sort of scientist or computer programmer. These are just some vague theories that I've had. This is quickly getting out of my depth of knowledge and possibly OT.
It just seems to me that some of the intricate "tricks" that are involved in biology are a powerful argument for intelligent design.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Chimpanzees and humans share a common ancestry? - 8/10/2008 8:19:55 PM
|
|
|
swan42
Posts: 347
Joined: 5/3/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
It just seems to me that some of the intricate "tricks" that are involved in biology are a powerful argument for intelligent design.
Indeed, some are. However, intelligent design isn't a good enough explanation for all of biology.
Newton's laws were good explanatiosn for parts of physics, but they weren't good enough to cover all of physics.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Chimpanzees and humans share a common ancestry? - 8/10/2008 10:02:10 PM
|
|
|
Zhi
Posts: 1428
Joined: 7/31/2007
Status: online
|
Out of curiosity, given that humans and primates are genetically highly similar, would it be possible that the genetic mutation for the vitamin C issue might also be the work of a virus capable of infecting the general genotype, thereby affecting basically all primates and humans without ancestry being indicated?
_____________________________
The optimist says the glass is half full. The pessimist says the glass is half empty. The engineer says the glass is twice as large as it needs to be.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Chimpanzees and humans share a common ancestry? - 8/10/2008 11:21:58 PM
|
|
|
Veritas
Posts: 519
Joined: 4/19/2005
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Zhi
Out of curiosity, given that humans and primates are genetically highly similar, would it be possible that the genetic mutation for the vitamin C issue might also be the work of a virus capable of infecting the general genotype, thereby affecting basically all primates and humans without ancestry being indicated?
I doubt it. But even if that were the case, you are still left with the fact that humans primates are genetically very similar to the other primates, which is consistent with common ancestry.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Chimpanzees and humans share a common ancestry? - 8/10/2008 11:38:17 PM
|
|
|
Zhi
Posts: 1428
Joined: 7/31/2007
Status: online
|
quote:
I doubt it. But even if that were the case, you are still left with the fact that humans primates are genetically very similar to the other primates, which is consistent with common ancestry.
But it's also consistent with the fact that our physiology is highly similar, so by necessity the gene sequences forming that physiology would have to be more similar than, say, a human and a fish.
_____________________________
The optimist says the glass is half full. The pessimist says the glass is half empty. The engineer says the glass is twice as large as it needs to be.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Chimpanzees and humans share a common ancestry? - 8/10/2008 11:48:50 PM
|
|
|
swan42
Posts: 347
Joined: 5/3/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Zhi
Out of curiosity, given that humans and primates are genetically highly similar, would it be possible that the genetic mutation for the vitamin C issue might also be the work of a virus capable of infecting the general genotype, thereby affecting basically all primates and humans without ancestry being indicated?
I'll allow room for a very very small chance for this to have occurred on a gene by gene basis, however, the requirements for your hypothesis are as follows.
1. A single virus (or other causal agent) is capable of causing the same specific vitamin C mutation among 100% of all primate species (625 of them).
2. All normal individuals with working vitamin C genes died off in each of the 625 populations (625 such collective events).
So, either vitamin C was disabled among all known living primates with a vague probability computed by 1 / (625 * 625) = 0.000256%
or, vitamin C was disabled once in the common ancestor of all primates with a vague probability of 100%
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Chimpanzees and humans share a common ancestry? - 8/11/2008 12:08:10 AM
|
|
|
gluadys
Posts: 1000
Joined: 4/26/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Zhi
Out of curiosity, given that humans and primates are genetically highly similar, would it be possible that the genetic mutation for the vitamin C issue might also be the work of a virus capable of infecting the general genotype, thereby affecting basically all primates and humans without ancestry being indicated?
Well this looks like the cue to explain ERVs, which are remnants of viral infections. No the Vitamin C pseudogene is not the work of a virus, as viral DNA can be identified. Retroviruses work by transcribing their DNA into the DNA of the cell they are invading. When successful, this then instructs the cell's reproduction machinery to produce more retroviruses instead of new healthy cells.
But not every attack on a cell by a retrovirus is successful. When the cell successfully resists the virus, there may still be short bits of viral DNA inserted into the DNA of the cell, but it is inert. It can be inherited though.
Now here comes the part where one needs to pay very close attention.
1. There are a huge number of places in the genome (about 6 billion in the human genome) where this viral DNA can be inserted. This means that it is very improbable that any two viruses will happen to insert themselves into the same place in the genome.
2. Obviously, the vast majority of cells invaded by a virus are ordinary body cells. No viral invasion of an ordinary body cell will have any effect on the organisms descendants. But very occasionally, a virus will invade a germ line cell. When this occurs, and some viral DNA is left in the cell we have the possibility that it will be inherited.
3. Not all germline cells actually participate in the reproductive process. Millions of sperm never get to fertilize an egg. But there is a small chance that a germ-line cell with some viral DNA in its genome will become part of a zygote. When this happens we now have an "endogenous retroviral insertion" an ERV. Note that an ERV is not the original viral insertion, but the inherited insertion. And ERV is always inherited. Very important.
4. Most ERVs just become part of the variation that is found in all species. But again, once in a while, an ERV (though neutral in itself) may find itself caught up in a natural selection that spreads it through the whole species. It is probably some other feature on the same chromosome that is actually being selected, but the ERV gets a free ride as it were. Now our ERV is a standard part of the species genome and will be found in all descendants of the original host of the viral insertion.
5. Some of these standardized ERVs are shared among several species. When the pattern of such ERVS is analysed, they form a phylogenic tree identical to those inferred from other inherited traits.
6. Hominids, including humans, share ERVs in this way that corresponds to the common ancestry of the family i.e. humans share a number of ERVS with chimpanzees and only chimpanzees, a smaller number with chimpanzees and gorillas and a still smaller number with all the great apes.
7. Given that each ERV is uniquely identified both by its viral nature and its particular insertion point in the genome and that ERVs are always inherited, and that shared ERVs match the pattern expected of inheritance from a common ancestor, this is very difficult to explain in any other way.
I would really like to see drmark attempt to provide an alternate interpretation based on creationist assumptions. A good challenge for his proposition that the meaning of evidence is all a matter of worldview.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Chimpanzees and humans share a common ancestry? - 8/11/2008 8:16:45 AM
|
|
|
Consecrated2God
Posts: 4919
Joined: 4/4/2005
From: Formerly Jesus Land
Status: online
|
Glaudys, I started a new thread about the fall in order to keep this one on topic.
The Fall
_____________________________
<--Plantation house in Louisiana
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Chimpanzees and humans share a common ancestry? - 8/13/2008 3:15:29 AM
|
|
|
DreadPirateRandy
Posts: 7933
Joined: 6/5/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: cih92
the evidence that they use is the fact that humans and chimps are 98% genetically identical.
I did have the urge to eat a banana today. Hmm.
_____________________________
The lunatic, the lover, and the poet, are of imagination all compact.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Chimpanzees and humans share a common ancestry? - 8/13/2008 11:06:09 AM
|
|
|
wreid77
Posts: 26
Joined: 4/25/2007
Status: offline
|
Try this,
The same creator made both humans and other hominids in a very similar way. They remain in fact very similar today to the way they were at creation. Certain changes have occured over time (environmental adaptations and minor mutations). Mutations and degeneration are both possible only post fall.
GOD created these much as an artist working over a painting each stroke unique, but similar because it is made by the same hand, with the same conviction and same level of passion about the work.
The genes and sequences of genes are similar with some being enabled and some disabled in the same way amongst similar parts of the art work. If these genes were created this way they are not a mutation because they are as they were. Why are they disabled? Why is it done in the same way? Maybe it is done for a purpose we will discover, maybe not. Maybe it is an eccentricity of the Artist.
Don't presume to say we know all there is to know about the way this gene works in hominids so we know it is a mutation. If you follow science of any discipline long enough you know that you will find that those things we once 'knew' are so much different than what we believed them to be. There is yet more to know, I suspect that we will oneday find that this "mutation" is not without much more far reaching purpose.
I cannot prove that evolution does not exist. You cannot prove that intelligent creation exists without any evolution.
I do allow for adaptation within a species, but not for the evolution of one species over to another. Simply the one thing you must have for evolution is time, and there is nothing in science that can prove age beyond history. The reason for this is you must make assumptions that conditions in the past (pre-history) existed in a certain manor for any dating technique to be valid, but those assumptions place you outside of science and into the realm of speculation.
Therefore, both creationists and evolutionists depend on faith for their point of view. Not many evolutionists will ever admit to it, but faith is the sole basis for the theory.
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
