Evolution a hoax?

[DC]

Also, keep in mind there are only 7 known shared ERVs with chimps among about 30,000 in human beings. That's a context that should be explained whenever evos trump ERVs as strong evidence for common ancestry.

Note as well:



http://www.detectingdesign.com/pseudogenes.html#Signs

as long no other theory besides Evolution theory can account for the HUman Chromosoem 2, it is clear other hypothesis (brainfarts) are lacking something essential.

once your fairytale can account for it ill take a look at it.

 

[randman]

randman, i'ts considered polite to repost instead of edit when someone has already answered.
Anyway I went around to your link and really, is this the best you can come up with?

here is a reply (scroll down) by Brand in a published journal....does not address the idea of desert streams however

http://resweb.llu.edu/lbrand/pdf/co...rn_arizona_evidence_for_underwater_origin.pdf

 

[randman]

as long no other theory besides Evolution theory can account for the HUman Chromosoem 2, it is clear other hypothesis (brainfarts) are lacking something essential.

once your fairytale can account for it ill take a look at it.

How does Chromosome 2 make a case for evolution?

The idea that there was fusion of chromosomes in human ancestry but not with chimps is not some earth-shattering concept that proves evolution.

If you disagree, why wouldn't the lack of a fusion be considered even stronger evidence for evolution in your world? The fact there is a difference suggests that this occurred strictly within human lineage, right? That it was not passed down from the proposed common ancestor of all primates, right?

 

[DC]

How does Chromosome 2 make a case for evolution?

The idea that there was fusion of chromosomes in human ancestry but not with chimps is not some earth-shattering concept that proves evolution.

If you disagree, why wouldn't the lack of a fusion be considered even stronger evidence for evolution in your world? The fact there is a difference suggests that this occurred strictly within human lineage, right? That it was not passed down from the proposed common ancestor of all primates, right?

the theory of evolution was able to predict the fusion and is able to explain it.
and that is the goal of theories, they are able to explain the observed facts.
your fairytale is not able to do any such predictions nor is it able to explain discovered facts.

 

[randman]

the theory of evolution was able to predict the fusion and is able to explain it.
and that is the goal of theories, they are able to explain the observed facts.
your fairytale is not able to do any such predictions nor is it able to explain discovered facts.

Ok, so explain how the theory of evolution "was able to predict the fusion." Show me anywhere that an evolutionist predicted the fusion prior to it's discovery.

Or show me how the theory itself predicts the fusion in some other way.

And no, evo theory does not explain it. It's not surprising there are chromosome fusions. The only interesting thing about it is that there is a common HUMAN ancestor to us all that had this feature. But even from an evo perspective, bottlenecks are a known phenomenon.

 

[pakeha]

here is a reply (scroll down) by Brand in a published journal....does not address the idea of desert streams however

http://resweb.llu.edu/lbrand/pdf/co...rn_arizona_evidence_for_underwater_origin.pdf

randman, desert streams were the point of what I posted.
They're the reason why the newts mean naught.

 

[randman]

randman, desert streams were the point of what I posted.
They're the reason why the newts mean naught.

A suggestion is not a full rebuttal. We are going to have see more work to see if the desert streams hypothesis is a valid alternative. For example, why would all such tracks appear to only be formed in desert streams and not in desert winds as originally proposed. I don't know enough about how such fossil tracks are formed but the alternative hypothesis has to be explored a little more than just someone commenting.

 

[DC]

Ok, so explain how the theory of evolution "was able to predict the fusion." Show me anywhere that an evolutionist predicted the fusion prior to it's discovery.

Or show me how the theory itself predicts the fusion in some other way.

And no, evo theory does not explain it. It's not surprising there are chromosome fusions. The only interesting thing about it is that there is a common HUMAN ancestor to us all that had this feature. But even from an evo perspective, bottlenecks are a known phenomenon.

it was known that humans only have 46 Chromosomes while Monkey's have 48. and with the theory of evolution it was clear there must be a fusion or the theory is wrong. and now we know which chromosome fusioned.

ID fairytales are of no use in such things. it is a powerless fairytale and not accpeted as a hypothesis.

 

[randman]

accidental double post

 

[randman]

it was known that humans only have 46 Chromosomes while Monkey's have 48. and with the theory of evolution it was clear there must be a fusion or the theory is wrong. and now we know which chromosome fusioned.

ID fairytales are of no use in such things. it is a powerless fairytale and not accpeted as a hypothesis.

Really? That's the best you can come up with. The fact human beings may have once had 48 chromosomes and there was a fusion means evolution is true, eh?

I also seriously doubt if the idea there was no fusion, you guys would say the theory was wrong. You'd just say people evolved to have 46, but regardless, the fact some human being that is ancestral to us all experienced a chromosomal fusion in no way, shape or form says anything about evolution from a common primate ancestor. There are living breathing people right now with chromosomal fusions. Should there be a severe human bottleneck, we could see another fusion and it would, of course, simply be human beings experiencing it.

Would it be particular evidence for common ancestry with chimps?

Nope.

 

[DC]

Really? That's the best you can come up with. The fact human beings may have once had 48 chromosomes and there was a fusion means evolution is true, eh?

I also seriously doubt if the idea there was no fusion, you guys would say the theory was wrong. You'd just say people evolved to have 46, but regardless, the fact some human being that is ancestral to us all experienced a chromosomal fusion in no way, shape or form says anything about evolution from a common primate ancestor. There are living breathing people right now with chromosomal fusions. Should there be a severe human bottleneck, we could see another fusion and it would, of course, simply be human beings experiencing it.

Would it be particular evidence for common ancestry with chimps?

Nope.

what? you are clearly clueless about the theory of evolution, totally clueless.

you have an example of someone that has a fused chromosome today?

 

[randman]

what? you are clearly clueless about the theory of evolution, totally clueless.

you have an example of someone that has a fused chromosome today?

Here ya go.

Human beings can live and some may even reproduce when they have dicentric chromosomes – two fused chromosomes with two central hubs called centromeres.

Dicentric chromosomes in model organisms are rarely tolerated and are either lost or kill the organism. But people with dicentric chromosomes can continue to function in a way that does not threaten their overall health.

Read more: http://www.disabled-world.com/news/research/fused-chromosomes.php#ixzz1RtoLG1hD

 

[randman]

also note from same link:

For example, in experiments, a chromosome 13 would attach to a chromosome 14, to make a 13-14 Robertsonian combination, which also occurs naturally in 1 in 1000 humans.

Read more: http://www.disabled-world.com/news/research/fused-chromosomes.php#ixzz1RtqR0uQO

People with Robertsonian translocations have only 45 chromosomes in each of their cells, yet all essential genetic material is present, and they appear normal.

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

Clearly someone is clueless about the facts here, but it's not me.

 

[DC]

also note from same link:



Read more: http://www.disabled-world.com/news/research/fused-chromosomes.php#ixzz1RtqR0uQO



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

Clearly someone is clueless about the facts here, but it's not me.

so we have down syndrom and Turner Syndrom, you also have healty people?

 

[Reality Check]

So guess it's amazing this ERV would still be in the same place from the common ancestor of all primates?

We have no DNA from the common ancestor of all primates. so whatever you mean is wrong.

Biologists seem to have no problem with the missing ERVs, e.g.
40 .Barbulescu M, Turner G, Su M, Kim R, Jensen-Seaman MI, Deinard AS, Kidd KK, Lenz J., A HERV-K provirus in chimpanzees, bonobos and gorillas, but not humans. Curr Biol. 2001 May 15;11(10):779-83.
that supports evolution

Evidence from DNA sequencing studies strongly indicated that humans and chimpanzees are more closely related to each other than either is to gorillas [1-4]. However, precise details of the nature of the evolutionary separation of the lineage leading to humans from those leading to the African great apes have remained uncertain. The unique insertion sites of endogenous retroviruses, like those of other transposable genetic elements, should be useful for resolving phylogenetic relationships among closely related species. We identified a human endogenous retrovirus K (HERV-K) provirus that is present at the orthologous position in the gorilla and chimpanzee genomes, but not in the human genome. Humans contain an intact preintegration site at this locus. These observations provide very strong evidence that, for some fraction of the genome, chimpanzees, bonobos, and gorillas are more closely related to each other than they are to humans. They also show that HERV-K replicated as a virus and reinfected the germline of the common ancestor of the four modern species during the period of time when the lineages were separating and demonstrate the utility of using HERV-K to trace human evolution

The reason is easy to find: Three Layers of Endogenous Retroviral Evidence for the Evolutionary Model

There is only one, solitary known deviation of the distributional nested hierarchy; a relatively recently endogenized/fixed ERV called HERV-K-GC1. Since this is an unrepresentative deviation from a pattern, all that needs to be done is identify mechanisms that can account for that deviation. There are at least two known mechanisms to account for it (Barbulescu et al., 2001):

 

[randman]

so we have down syndrom and Turner Syndrom, you also have healty people?

Says right there you have healthy people. Reread it. It raised the risks of Downs and Turner. Just read the links I provided.

1 in every 1000 people, vast majority very healthy, have 45 chromosomes with no negative health effects for them whatsoever.

Should there be an extreme bottleneck with humans, we could see down the road people having just 45 chromosomes but that change would have happened all during human lineages just as the reduction to 46 has.

 

[randman]

We have no DNA from the common ancestor of all primates. so whatever you mean is wrong.

Biologists seem to have no problem with the missing ERVs, e.g.
40 .Barbulescu M, Turner G, Su M, Kim R, Jensen-Seaman MI, Deinard AS, Kidd KK, Lenz J., A HERV-K provirus in chimpanzees, bonobos and gorillas, but not humans. Curr Biol. 2001 May 15;11(10):779-83.
that supports evolution


The reason is easy to find: Three Layers of Endogenous Retroviral Evidence for the Evolutionary Model

Went over your head I suppose. How is it that the same ERV occurs in chimps and gorillas but not humans. The assumption is that shared ERVs in the same place came from the common ancestor for all primates. Of course, evos just say it was lost, eh? in people?

The point is ERV evidence doesn't really match up with evo phylogenies.

 

[Wowbagger]

Since I will be doing a lot of work today, and travelling this week, I'm afraid I won't be as active in this discussion (nor anything else on this forum) as I usually am.

I have one request for randman:

Please take some of your examples of so-called "Creationist Research" and please... point to where the Creator or Designer was invoked!!

Can you do that?

 

[randman]

well, biblical creationists are testing whether events in the Bible match up with the data.....they are not testing how God did things, nor claiming to, but that doesn't mean showing a young earth (and I am not even a young earther but more and more impressed with some of their arguments) is not real science. It is even if you think they are wrong. Testing such concepts and so forth is real science.

IDers fall into a broader spectrum. As you know and I have stated before, I consider aspects of QM to be a demonstration of ID in action, specifically the biblical concept the Logos. But that's a much larger topic to get into since this thread is really about evolution, not ID per se.

My references to creationist or ID research and papers is in response to the false claim such work does not occur.

 

[Reality Check]

Also, keep in mind there are only 7 known shared ERVs with chimps among about 30,000 in human beings. That's a context that should be explained whenever evos trump ERVs as strong evidence for common ancestry.

Also, keep in mind your ignorance: There are 16 K class ERVs alone that are shared with chimps.

It is obvious though that you are just parroting creationist lies:
Three Layers of Endogenous Retroviral Evidence for the Evolutionary Model

With so many claiming that it's only around 7 or 14, an important question is; just how many ERVs do humans share with chimpanzees? The answer is that humans and chimpanzees share virtually all of them. We know this is the case for two reasons; examination of indel variation, and whole-genome analysis.
...
In 2005, the available sequence of the Chimpanzee genome was aligned with that of the human genome, and an extensive comparison analysis was performed. As part of this analysis, the researchers looked at every available solo LTR and full-length ERV in the chimpanzee genome, and checked to see if there was also one at each corresponding locus. Just as with the examination of indels, the results were that less than 100 ERVs are human-specific and less than 300 ERVs are chimpanzee-specific (Chimpanzee Sequencing and Analysis Consortium, 2005; R. Waterston, personal communication, April 22, 2010).

There are "~200 thousand ERVs in the human genome" - more than 99.9% are shared.