Aborted Sheep with human face ???

[Skeptic Ginger]

What Pup said. It hadn't occurred to me that Skeptigirl was making a serious suggestion of hybridisation, but if she was, well....



Rolfe.

But I was serious.

Do I think the most likely explanation here is a hybrid? Of course not!!!!!!!!

But are we supposed to completely rule it out because it is so unlikely?

There are other hybrids known in nature. I don't believe it is a myth humans have ever got their jollies off in a sheep.

All I'm saying is, maybe it is worth looking at the DNA in this case.

 

[Cynic]

But I was serious.

Do I think the most likely explanation here is a hybrid? Of course not!!!!!!!!

But are we supposed to completely rule it out because it is so unlikely?

There are other hybrids known in nature. I don't believe it is a myth humans have ever got their jollies off in a sheep.

All I'm saying is, maybe it is worth looking at the DNA in this case.

Human and sheep DNA is hardly compatible in that way. Similar sure. Compatible, no. But in this age of relatively cheap and easy whole genome sequencing, sure, why not? It wouldn't be difficult to find enough crazy cryptophiles to put up the money.

ETA: Hell, a simple karyotype would probably put the matter to rest.

 

[ElMondoHummus]

Yikes, there's a third photo of this poor little lamb.

God how I feel for it.


NSFW - Very disturbing image, you have been warned!

But I was serious.

Do I think the most likely explanation here is a hybrid? Of course not!!!!!!!!

But are we supposed to completely rule it out because it is so unlikely?

There are other hybrids known in nature. I don't believe it is a myth humans have ever got their jollies off in a sheep.

All I'm saying is, maybe it is worth looking at the DNA in this case.

Whoops... I'm sorry. I misread you.

 

[plindboe]

But I was serious.

Do I think the most likely explanation here is a hybrid? Of course not!!!!!!!!

But are we supposed to completely rule it out because it is so unlikely?

There are other hybrids known in nature. I don't believe it is a myth humans have ever got their jollies off in a sheep.

All I'm saying is, maybe it is worth looking at the DNA in this case.

Have you never heard of paraedolia before? Just because something resembles a human face doesn't make it part human. When you see a human face in the bark of a tree, it doesn't mean the tree is a tree-human hybrid. When you see a face on Mars, it doesn't mean that aliens made a huge sculpture in our honour. When you see a face on a piece of toast it doesn't mean an invisible superbeing put it there to prove his own esistance. When you see a face in the clouds it doesn't mean your dead relatives are trying to communicate with you. When you see a face on an aborted sheep, it doesn't mean it has human DNA. It doesn't even remotely suggest that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareidolia

 

[Rolfe]

Have you never heard of paraedolia before? Just because something resembles a human face doesn't make it part human. When you see a human face in the bark of a tree, it doesn't mean the tree is a tree-human hybrid. When you see a face on Mars, it doesn't mean that aliens made a huge sculpture in our honour. When you see a face on a piece of toast it doesn't mean an invisible superbeing put it there to prove his own esistance. When you see a face in the clouds it doesn't mean your dead relatives are trying to communicate with you. When you see a face on an aborted sheep, it doesn't mean it has human DNA. It doesn't even remotely suggest that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareidolia

What he said. I'm sorry, Skeptigirl, but I've lost all respect for you, after that.

Does having a couple of vets here saying that it's nothing unusual, including one who does a dozen examinations of aborted/stillborn ovine foetuses a day during lambing season, not register at all?

I have to learn to spell it, but this is nothing but pareidolia, especially easy this time because a sheep does have a face to start with.

Rolfe.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Have you never heard of paraedolia before? ....

For those having trouble with reading comprehension:

"Do I think the most likely explanation here is a hybrid? Of course not!!!!!!!!"

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

What he said. I'm sorry, Skeptigirl, but I've lost all respect for you, after that.....

See the above post.


I do understand the unlikely possibility (perhaps impossibility) that human and sheep DNA are compatible enough to produce offspring.


I've had pages and pages of discussion on this board with skeptics who argue I cannot make the claim, "there is overwhelming evidence all gods are mythical beings", because of the scientific (and therefore skeptical) position that even things which appear impossible should be considered before being dismissed.


That is all my comments were intended to say here.

 

[Skeptic Guy]

Yikes, there's a third photo of this poor little lamb.

God how I feel for it.


NSFW - Very disturbing image, you have been warned!

http://i284.photobucket.com/albums/ll38/Gnurl/2b2.jpg

That's soooo disturbing, yet explains so much.

 

[plindboe]

See the above post.


I do understand the unlikely possibility (perhaps impossibility) that human and sheep DNA are compatible enough to produce offspring.


I've had pages and pages of discussion on this board with skeptics who argue I cannot make the claim, "there is overwhelming evidence all gods are mythical beings", because of the scientific (and therefore skeptical) position that even things which appear impossible should be considered before being dismissed.


That is all my comments were intended to say here.

Good to hear you were misunderstood.

I'd like to make the point though that there's a big difference between saying that there's a theoretical possibility of something being true and saying that something is worth looking into. In the real world we'll have to weigh the effort an investigation would take against the probability of getting useful results. As soon as you say that a possibility is worth investigating, you've implicitly said that the probability of getting results is so high that it outweighs the efforts an investigation would take.

In this case we have a perfectly good explanation already, and we know that the hybrid-explanation is ridiculously unlikely, if not impossible. Saying that it's worth looking into is comparable to saying that the Moon being made of cheese is worth looking into.

 

[Uncayimmy]

But I was serious.

Do I think the most likely explanation here is a hybrid? Of course not!!!!!!!!

But are we supposed to completely rule it out because it is so unlikely?

There are other hybrids known in nature. I don't believe it is a myth humans have ever got their jollies off in a sheep.

All I'm saying is, maybe it is worth looking at the DNA in this case.

I've seen your explanations of this post, but I chose to respond to it anyway. You spend a lot of time beating down people who who have crazy notions in the fields in which you claim to have expertise. In this thread we have a picture of an aborted animal. The species has a head, two ears, two eyes, a nose with two nostrils, and a mouth. So do humans and an arkload of other species on the planet. The photo shows a malformed head while everything else looks pretty much like it belongs. That's meaningless on its face, pardon the pun.

We have the known issue of pareidolia coupled with the fact that humans have evolved to be especially good at recognizing faces. Of course we're going to see some meaning where none belongs.

Then you have experts in the field (pardon this second pun) saying that what is shown is not at all unusual.

As someone with medical experience I would expect you to take the two seconds to find out that sheep have 54 chromosomes and already know that humans have 46. I'm no expert in the field, but I'm thinking that presents a wee bit of a problem.

Yet despite all this, you felt the evidence was strong enough to say "maybe it is worth looking at the DNA in this case." I find that simply amazing considering how you deal with anti-vaxxers trying to find meaning in somebody falling ill a week after a flu shot. And considering the reputation you try to build for yourself as a skeptic and medical expert, it's even more disheartening.

 

[Xephyr]

Is this official proof that the Scotsman/sheep relations myth is, rather, a fact instead ?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I've seen your explanations of this post, but I chose to respond to it anyway. You spend a lot of time beating down people who who have crazy notions in the fields in which you claim to have expertise. In this thread we have a picture of an aborted animal. The species has a head, two ears, two eyes, a nose with two nostrils, and a mouth. So do humans and an arkload of other species on the planet. The photo shows a malformed head while everything else looks pretty much like it belongs. That's meaningless on its face, pardon the pun.

We have the known issue of pareidolia coupled with the fact that humans have evolved to be especially good at recognizing faces. Of course we're going to see some meaning where none belongs.

Then you have experts in the field (pardon this second pun) saying that what is shown is not at all unusual.

As someone with medical experience I would expect you to take the two seconds to find out that sheep have 54 chromosomes and already know that humans have 46. I'm no expert in the field, but I'm thinking that presents a wee bit of a problem.

Yet despite all this, you felt the evidence was strong enough to say "maybe it is worth looking at the DNA in this case." I find that simply amazing considering how you deal with anti-vaxxers trying to find meaning in somebody falling ill a week after a flu shot. And considering the reputation you try to build for yourself as a skeptic and medical expert, it's even more disheartening.

So the issue is personal here, not substance?


While there is ZERO evidence gods exist, there is scientific evidence hybrids are possible and men have copulated with sheep. I'll grant that genetics probably makes a human sheep hybrid via sex impossible, but inserting human genes into animal ova is a reality. So I'm still keeping my mind open to realistic possibilities, even if not realistically likely.

Whatever the point of your search results was intended is irrelevant as far as I can see.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Is this official proof that the Scotsman/sheep relations myth is, rather, a fact instead ?

Perhaps the myth caused various beliefs or perhaps malformed animals caused various beliefs:

Centaurs appeared after copulation between humans and animals

There have been convictions, however, including one recently where a man had sex with a horse, so while it may be more rare than people believe, it is not a complete myth (not referring to the Scotsman part).

 

[Rasmus]

Why would one even assume that a hybrid would end up looking half-human/half-sheep in the first place much like a centaur or the god pan or some other mystical creature?

Are there any real hybrids that turn out that way?

http://www.messybeast.com/genetics/hybrid-equines.htm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/1408717.stm

Zebra-Horse hybrids - it's not like only the rear half would have the black and white stripe design, is it?

The 2nd link talks about the different numbers of chromosomes, 64 for horses vs 44 for zebras, respectively: "The smaller number of chromosomes has to be on the male side,"

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Animal-Human Hybrids Spark Controversy

Transgenic Animals: Their Benefits To Human Welfare


So what is the reason here for berating me and calling me some kind of disappointment as if my 19,000 posts count for nothing and one far fetched but still within the possible in a rational Universe somehow changes everything anyone knows about me? Either you people know me by now or you don't. And if you don't like me, I don't care. But I'd appreciate sticking to the thread topic and dropping all the self righteous personal attacks.

Thank you.

 

[Uncayimmy]

So the issue is personal here, not substance?

Well, yes, since you personally wrote something that was rather stupid and hypocritical considering your body of work. You're all hot and bothered about the press saying that dead bodies could cause epidemics. Personally, I find that belief not to be all that outrageous. After all, we have a natural aversion to rotting corpses. Our bodies react in such a way to tell us to keep away from them. We find the smell and appearance offensive, so much so that some get nauseous and even vomit. We embalm and bury our dead. We pay workers to remove roadkill and burn/bury it. If we find a dead animal in the yard, we bury it. So, really, I don't think it's outrageous that the average layperson wouldn't question the notion that corpses could spread disease, and journalists are pretty much laypeople.

On the other hand you are in a thread being told by experts that the picture isn't unusual. You're on a board where pareidolia has been discussed before and was presented as an explanation. And, given your own medical background, you should now how extremely unlikely or even impossible it is to have a sheep-person hybrid because of the difference in chromosomes.

And it's not like we saw a thumb or any other major changes in body parts. It's not like it had hands or feet like humans - it was still a cloven-hooved beast that looked like a sheep. All we saw was a malformed head that had the same features as countless other species.

And yet you suggested that a DNA analysis would be appropriate. I'm simply cutting you as much slack as you cut others. Get over it.

 

[Rolfe]

I'm dropping in here to echo everything that UncaYimmy has said.

The idea that this unremarkable aborted lamb, which some people think has a face that looks a bit human (actually, like an adult human, which is also odd) - if you photograph it at just the right angle and screw up your eyes a bit - has anything at all abnormal about its DNA, is just ridiculous. Posters will little medical or genetic knowledge who enquired about it, all seemed to understand when it was explained to them.

But then Skeptigirl posted:

But I was serious. [....]

There are other hybrids known in nature. I don't believe it is a myth humans have ever got their jollies off in a sheep.

All I'm saying is, maybe it is worth looking at the DNA in this case.

It's one thing when someone with no medical expertise posts in this vein, but when someone who takes pride in her medical knowledge, and indeed posts very aggressively towards people espousing medical views she disagrees with, comes out with this, well, what are we supposed to think?

It's ridiculous. It is indeed, as plindboe said, on a par with suggesting that, even though it is very unlikely, we ought to look into the possibility that moon rocks are actually composed of green cheese.

Nobody is disputing that human beings indulge in bestiality (there was a whole thread on that recently in this very forum). Having been a vet student, I must have heard every bestiality joke known to mankind. However, the possibility of offspring, even non-viable offspring, resulting from such a union is nonexistent. It shouldn't be necessary to explain that to anyone with basic medical or biological knowledge.

And, as has also been pointed out, hybrid offspring which do occur, don't have the body of one species and the head of the other. Centaurs are MYTHICAL.

But then, to cite work on transgenic animals as if that supports the position? What level of utter, basic and complete lack of understanding has to be present for that link to be pursued? I dread to think. Lots of things can be done in the laboratory, by painstaking manipulation with tiny pipettes.

Read that second link carefully.
http://www.actionbioscience.org/biotech/margawati.html
It explains how this is done. Note that in no case does it involve the combination of haploid chromosomes from males and females of different species. For the very simple reason that outside very closely related species (such as horses and donkeys), this is IMPOSSIBLE.

I wouldn't expect every poster on JREF to know this, and I'd cut a genuine enquirer some slack. However, when someone who aggressively promotes herself as a medical expert not only seems not to understand this at all, but continues to insist that it's possible (even if unlikely), yes, I do lose respect for that person.

Rolfe.

 

[Eddie Dane]

Isn't this the same paper that publishes UFO stories with pictures of 'actual crashed spaceships'? I believe that this is a made-up story.

Still, I think that Pravda's article about the Jews secretly running the world was a fine piece of investigative journalism.

That, and their series on Elvis sightings.

 

[Rasmus]

as if my 19,000 posts count for nothing

What should they count for?

Does the number of posts on a board somehow make a poster more or less right on a given subject?

It would be okay, really. As of my writing this, Rolfe just needs another 13 posts and she will be more correcter on anything than you. (T'ai Chi* is only a few thousand posts behind the both of you - let's hope he doesn't chat up ...)


(* I seem to rmemeber him as a troll, but I might be mistaken. It doesn't make much of a difference who name I slot in here, though.)

 

[Skwinty]

Question for the experts.
Would a human sperm cell even find and attempt to fertilise a sheep egg? Or sheep sperm cell and human egg?

Is there some mechanism that allows a human sperm cell to find and fertilise a human egg, and if so would this mechanism be compatible across species?

Or is the sperm cell finding an egg just chance?

I don't believe that this cross species thing working in any event because if it did, there would be lots of living proof .