I was invited by email like everyone. And Everyone should be who they are and not pretend to agree with what others believe… Everyone thinks they have the answer… so why shouldn’t I.
And you are right. those 500 pages are just a generalization. I agree there are bits here and there through the genome… Now, I have no link to prove that, but I assume that to be true.
My point was we are from an Adam and Eve of sorts. one truncated line. Beyond that, getting into apes and such is another topic really.
And in general are there not 5 different people groups, Ethiopian, American, Caucasian, Mongolian and Esquimaux or something like that… There is 5 personality types as well. And when googling I found 5 religions, 5 types of political groupings, 5 types of human teeth and 5 types of people you need to get out of your life. LoL. People group things and because there is a similarity they put meaning to it.
Just because we are genetically like antelope or Apes doesn’t mean we are from a common ancestor. This is where all the arguing has come from over the last few hundred
years. 2% difference out of a hundred seems like we are almost the same but that is from 3 billion letters. I do not have the skill set to lets say have a draft of what the common Genome would be and the path one would take from there to get the two different modern day species. Between Human and Ape or Ape and orangutan etc. So there is no basis other than speculation to suggest we related. What is known is that 7 billion people have the same basic DNA.
I did not know we had the DNA from a “Neanderthal”
You know, I don’t want to be ungracious here, but if that’s the case and you really did not know this very commonly-known and well-publicized fact, you really need to go and do a bit of basic reading on the ancestry of humanity (and the common ancestry of larger groups to which we belong) before you arrive at opinions which are held so strongly as yours are.
Your point is incorrect based on the genetic evidence.
You’re right. There are not.
Correct. It’s the nested hierarchy that means we’re from a common ancestor.
Many people, on the other hand, do have that skill set, and you should pay attention to them.
What, because you don’t know how to do it, therefore nobody does? Arrogance indeed.
You should realize by now that there are a great many things you don’t know. There are in fact several. Here is one, just the first one that came up in a google search:
https://www.nature.com/articles/nature12886
And in fact there are genome sequences for more than one extinct Homo species:
https://www.eva.mpg.de/genetics/genome-projects/denisova/
Excuse me. get off the high horse. they didn’t even have a fully sequenced Genome before 2003… And one would question the results from bones supposedly hundreds of thousands of years Old. And while they may have similar skeletons of these so-called Neanderthals the conclusions people come to may be totally wrong. And since the Piltdown man and Haeckels Embryo drawing are hoaxes, forgive me for being scientifically skeptical. It is that wonderful skepticism that challenges the Haeckels in the world. Those lies, those forgeries not bend the minds of thinking. You should see guys like me as hero’s not dummies that should go and play with their childish toys. As far as we know, which we know very little those things they are looking at are chimps or worse, some interbred perversion caused by humans with a proclivity. If a chimp ends up with a broken Chromosone everyone can speculate but me… Nonsense. Its more likely that rather than it joining together to create a human… Its more likely some bad thing happened to some child of a human and created a chimp than a chimp like species became a human. The fact is, we don’t know, DNA is really new to this generation of people and the jury is out and all there is, is a lot of speculation some want to call facts so they can spit on those who disagree with them on their belief of how things came to be.
But you’re on a high horse in a deep hole, and you keep digging. All you’re saying here is that if we don’t know everything (in fact if you don’t know everything), then we know nothing. That’s a fairly common creationist trope. But in fact we do know some things, even though you don’t. For example, we know that humans have a fused chromosome rather than chimps having a broken one because all apes and most monkeys have the condition found in chmpanzees. It’s much more parsimonious to postulate a fusion than many separate breaks. Further, the human chromosome has features of a fusion: telomeres in the middle, a degenerate extra centrosome. Your various other proposals are similarly nonsensical, if only you knew enough to tell.
You may have been invited here, but what is your purpose in staying? It clearly isn’t to ask questions about evolution, as you haven’t actually asked any, and you pay no attention to answers. So what is it?
No high horse here. I’m trying to be kind to you but it is not easy with the sorts of bizarre things you’ve been saying.
So, you think that being eighteen years out of date on a basic fact which was extensively covered in all major news media is just fine? That’s not problematic for a person who is content to sit on his porch with his shotgun and a pint of corn whiskey, but I have to say that it IS problematic for a person who wants to confidently stomp about and insist that the biologists have got it wrong.
As for the reliability of those results, well, you know, you could read. There’s a book by Svante Paabo for the non-specialist, and then of course there are all of the papers on the subject if you want a deeper dive. Since you didn’t even know it had happened, it’s fair to say that your skepticism about method and about the value of the results isn’t well grounded. Come back after making yourself literate in the relevant work, and then let us know how skeptical you are. Until then, who can care?
You’re not being scientifically skeptical. And if you did know anything about Piltdown you’d know that the fossil wasn’t accepted by a lot of paleontologists at the time but had a few loyal proponents in the UK. Haeckel’s drawings get a lot more press than they merit – Jonathan Wells has blown a rather minor matter up into quite the legend. Yes, some aspects of the depiction of the embryos were not fully accurate. But the underlying point of using embryology to trace homologies and to support and explain common ancestry remains alive, well, and robust, especially now that we better understand the developmental mechanisms (see “evo-devo” books like those by Sean Carroll for more) and the underlying genetic basis.
Well, you know, that Deep Face Nine post by @Rumraket does seem appropriate. Especially after you follow that with:
That’s some spectacular and wide-ranging ignorance, and there’s no mincing words about it. I am sure you have not the foggiest idea why we do know your speculations to be incorrect, but we do.
I would think you guys would be outraged with guys like Haeckel. And when I looked into it I found no reason or Science to suggest or actual visual relationship to what was actually happening in the womb. Not a bit. zero. the Idea that a fetus would look like lets say a turtle and then a mouse etc… as some tie to past genetic history is total nonsense. I cant believe you would not be angry about such a thing.
And My problem with defining Neanderthal as some pre-human or possibly a brother species is that they find these bones in caves and in ground that cant be considered Old world or pre - ice age. It reminds me of the Dinosaurs found in Alberta, Inches from the surface or found in a bog or mud slide. Its perfectly normal for me to question if the conclusions and the finds are legit. that there is even such a thing as a Neanderthal or what I really am saying is the off definition of it as a Neanderthal rather than just a variation of the Humans of the time because of some event or genetic problem. For example, did the Ice age cause most people to die and did those people with a genetic issue all die, which you would call Neanderthal. And then after the fact just a few “humans” surviving carried a very specific line of DNA forward. In a hundred years of trouble, a whole list of genetic defects could have affected the whole human race. lets say for example from the sky gold flecks and nuggets rained down on portions of the earth with mercury and lead. And a swath of people ended up dying or having funny looking children and that was it. they couldn’t reproduce etc…
The point is… its pretty easy for people to throw stones while themselves being convinced they know stuff they don’t know. I don’t know if there is such a thing as a Neanderthal. And I am not convinced that they whatever they are were living before modern day humans.
but all I said from the beginning was that the Idea of a Adam and Eve a narrow single narrow source of All humans is Scientific and 7 billion copies of DNA prove that.
The guy’s been dead for over one hundred years. At some point, you have to let it go.
LoL. Let it go… Lol. Its one thing to speculate or be wrong, its another thing to invent lies and push them out. And isn’t that what a Atheists would say was done concerning Adam and Eve. Could it be that I am not the one who needs to let it go but those who are gritting their teeth about the Idea of Adam and Eve?
YEC organizations bear false witness the better part of their daily output, in the here and now. That is the problem, not some dude who has been in the grave since folks were driving model T Fords.
You would think wrongly, and for wrong reasons.
Then you haven’t understood Haeckel’s views, which were not that. Haeckel’s biogenic law, often restated as “ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny,” would have the embryo recapitulate its OWN evolutionary history, not the evolutionary histories of other lineages. Now, the biogenic law was wrong as a general principle, but we actually DO show some characters of ancestral states in embryonic development – so he made a claim which went beyond the real import of what he’d observed, but that happens in science: people develop a view based upon data, and then others critique and revise it.
Since what you understand is, as I have pointed out, completely false, yeah, I’m not angry at Haeckel for views he did not hold and which you quite implausibly attribute to him. Imagine that.
That’s not even a coherent objection. We don’t date all Neanderthal remains by the same method and they’re not all found in the same place. If you want to point to a particular example and explain what your critique of the actual dating methods used is, by all means do. But it really does not sound as though you have ever considered how ANY material is dated by anyone, in any case at all, much less developed a thoroughgoing critique of the practices of dating all of the Neanderthal remains ever found.
Have you been to Alberta and looked for fossils? I have. The terrain’s very interesting: many, many layers of deposits, eroding into fascinating shapes, with the result that many strata are exposed. Yes, most finds are at the surface, at least partially, when identified, but that’s because they’ve quite obviously been buried for a long time and the continual erosion of that land is exposing them. As for bogs and mudslides, I think you are confusing the ancient landscape which left the remains with the modern landscape in which they’re found, where those ancient bogs and mudslides have been preserved. So, for example, the lovely Nodosaur preserved at the Royal Tyrrell is thought to have washed down a river and been deposited in the silt, but they didn’t FIND it in a modern river silt bed.
But questions about whether Neanderthals were deformed moderns were raised and answered decades (in some cases, over a century) ago. Tattersall’s excellent book The Strange Case of the Rickety Cossack references just that sort of old claim in the title. And if there were any holdouts maintaining that position today, they’d have been finally debunked by the genomic evidence.
You think your wild speculations are as good as the last century of work by biologists and paleontologists. They’re not, especially when it’s evident that you don’t have any idea at all of what that work consists of.
So much great stuff. This is my runner alongside an erosion exposed Ceratopsia horn at Dinosaur Provincial Park (under the watchful eye of the guide).
True. Most fossil locations are found in canyons thanks to deep erosion. There is no just digging up the entire province looking for bones.
Alberta has a reputation for leaning right, but when it comes to fossils, whether on public or private land, all finds belong to the people.
I have never been… My son was there last week with his wife. LoL. I am in Ontario. In his childhood, my daughter and I and him would look for fossils in a creek bed along one of our weekly walks. We never saw anything that fantastic. but we did find a few small fossils.
My pictures are on a old laptop… But I believe the ones we found were brachiopods. sea shells from the sea shore. in Ontario.
Could someone explain how this thread got its title, and why? Scott, so far, has asked no questions.
Wow. I haven’t been down to the park – have walked around the area near the Royal Tyrrell a bit, but next time I get up there I’ve got to get to DPP also.
Its called snooty condescension. In other words Moderation thought this was a thread for the stupid scott , you know the dumb people so they should go over and sit at the back of the bus while the smart people continue in normal more educated society. Thankfully cancel culture wasn’t around when Planck made his constant. LoL. But don’t worry, I am able to remember to some degree those condescending people. When my big invention is done, I will ban them from using it. 
I had a pair of those shoes… cheap bugger! the cheapest shoes on the rack!