Gnarly Gnu Posted August 5, 2013 Posted August 5, 2013 Dazza remember how we used to hear a lot about "junk DNA"? And notice you haven't heard that term for a long time now. That's because with further research scientists have since realised that all DNA is actually relevant and important, just initially they had no idea of all of its function and assumed a lot of it was superfluous due to the influence of evolutionary thinking. BTW a watermelon and a rain cloud have more than 90% in common, must be from the same origin perhaps.
coljones Posted August 5, 2013 Posted August 5, 2013 Dazza remember how we used to hear a lot about "junk DNA"? And notice you haven't heard that term for a long time now. That's because with further research scientists have since realised that all DNA is actually relevant and important, just initially they had no idea of all of its function and assumed a lot of it was superfluous due to the influence of evolutionary thinking. BTW a watermelon and a rain cloud have more than 90% in common, must be from the same origin perhaps. I think you will find that both water and water melon are at least 90% water. Water, however, doesn't have any DNA. FT ARE YOU TROLLING AGAIN?
Gnarly Gnu Posted August 5, 2013 Posted August 5, 2013 I think you will find that both water and water melon are at least 90% water. Water, however, doesn't have any DNA. Ha ha, you sure about that? BTW the 98.5% DNA similarity claim figure has since been revised downward by more recent studies, it is now a claimed 95% similarity in one and 86-89% in another. But then they also didn't tell us that chimp genome is still well short of being fully sequenced yet.... in the meantime the original figure makes a good headline. As there are four bases in DNA the starting point is 25% similarity not zero; apparently using the same comparison technique humans are estimated to share 35% similarity to daffodils.
octave Posted August 5, 2013 Posted August 5, 2013 Ha ha, you sure about that? BTW the 98.5% DNA similarity claim figure has since been revised downward by more recent studies, it is now a claimed 95% similarity in one and 86-89% in another. But then they also didn't tell us that chimp genome is still well short of being fully sequenced yet.... in the meantime the original figure makes a good headline. As there are four bases in DNA the starting point is 25% similarity not zero; apparently using the same comparison technique humans are estimated to share 35% similarity to daffodils. GG can you give a source for this information?
Old Koreelah Posted August 5, 2013 Posted August 5, 2013 When I was young, nearly all fairy tales started with "Once Upon A Time ........". With all due respects, M61A1, that clip was an interesting animation but sounded very little different from the 'Once Upon A Time' stories . There was no evidence given for any of the assertions throughout the clip. The biblical stories I was raised on were also a little short on evidence...
Old Koreelah Posted August 5, 2013 Posted August 5, 2013 ?.., more scientists than ever have succumbed to the 'close our minds to other theories' trap. Please supply evidence.
coljones Posted August 5, 2013 Posted August 5, 2013 Ha ha, you sure about that? BTW the 98.5% DNA similarity claim figure has since been revised downward by more recent studies, it is now a claimed 95% similarity in one and 86-89% in another. But then they also didn't tell us that chimp genome is still well short of being fully sequenced yet.... in the meantime the original figure makes a good headline. As there are four bases in DNA the starting point is 25% similarity not zero; apparently using the same comparison technique humans are estimated to share 35% similarity to daffodils. A watermelon contains about 6% sugar and 91% water by weight. ref http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watermelon So at least a 91% correlation with water excluding any OH radicals spread through the sugar. The problem with a lot of these discussions can be typified by the statement "but it is only flat on the bottom!!" or in flying parlance 'it was all going well til we ran out of petrol"
facthunter Posted August 6, 2013 Posted August 6, 2013 If some believe the BIBLE is the "absolute" word of GOD, then it would be a little hard to deal with a lot of subjects for them or with them. The first question is WHICH parts are? There are a lot of pretty grim bits, particularly in the old testament. which might have some anthropological value. but we don't use many of the examples to apply to modern life. Clearly the bible was written by many PEOPLE and modified at times. I don't think this is the place to bring up religion or discuss it exhaustively, but there is a problem perhaps with sources of information, which I have to mention in passing, Here we go... Nev
fly_tornado Posted August 6, 2013 Posted August 6, 2013 the beauty of faith, you choose how much you want to believe.
facthunter Posted August 6, 2013 Posted August 6, 2013 Men wrote the books that tell of god. Murdoch has exclusive rights to print one version. He owns Harper -Collins. He is also a PAPAL KNIGHT. I guess he has friends in high places. Nev
M61A1 Posted August 6, 2013 Posted August 6, 2013 the beauty of faith, you choose how much you want to believe. Isn't that a bit like playing Monopoly, then choosing which rules you play by?
facthunter Posted August 6, 2013 Posted August 6, 2013 I know the golden rule: They who have all the GOLD make all the rules. Another version. Life is like a $#it sandwich. The more bread you have, the less $#it you have to eat. Nev
alf jessup Posted August 6, 2013 Posted August 6, 2013 the beauty of faith, you choose how much you want to believe. Faith is Rotax, and I believe in them . Alf
eightyknots Posted August 6, 2013 Posted August 6, 2013 I would have thought that Humans and Chimpanzees sharing 98.5 percent of their DNA was enough proof that humans (and Chimpanzees) have evolved over time from the same common ancestor. Humans are linked to chimpanzees – by a common designer. I understand that bananas have 90% the same DNA as chimpanzees as well. By the way, humans have 46 chromosomes and the chimpanzeess have 48. Perhaps we are more closely related to the tea tree which also has 46 chromosomes.
eightyknots Posted August 6, 2013 Posted August 6, 2013 Please supply evidence. "The vast majority of the scientific community and academia supports evolutionary theory as the only explanation that can fully account for observations in the fields of biology, paleontology, molecular biology, genetics, anthropology, and others ... There is a notable difference between the opinion of scientists and that of the general public in the United States. A 2009 poll by Pew Research Center found that "Nearly all scientists (97%) say humans and other living things have evolved over time – 87% say evolution is due to natural processes, such as natural selection. The dominant position among scientists – that living things have evolved due to natural processes – is shared by only about third (32%) of the public." Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Level_of_support_for_evolution The stark facts are that many scientists have not looked fairly at all theories. Instead, one theory has been given the status as "the only explanation" for the origins of life. That sounds like a belief system to me.
dazza 38 Posted August 6, 2013 Author Posted August 6, 2013 Humans are linked to chimpanzees – by a common designer. I understand that bananas have 90% the same DNA as chimpanzees as well. By the way, humans have 46 chromosomes and the chimpanzeess have 48. Perhaps we are more closely related to the tea tree which also has 46 chromosomes. Well that settles it then. We all have evolved from the banana.
facthunter Posted August 6, 2013 Posted August 6, 2013 There was a time when everybody "believed" the earth was flat. Later that it was the centre of the universe and all other bodies moved around it. What a percentage of an entire community (anywhere) believe and why they believe it is something that MAY have no basis in fact at all. If a phenomenon like evolution backed up by DNA and fossils and chemistry etc etc provides an EXPLANATION of all you list above THAT fact gives it credibility. Darwins theory of evolution was just that a theory. It is often called "the survival of the fittest which sells it short. Since Darwin many things have been discovered with disease, cancer, behavioural psychology, instincts and such being explained by DNA modification whether by sexual reproduction or by mutation or damage to genes. It's all part of the mix. Darwin was just the beginning and there were others who were close to thinking as he did. The rate of discovery is mind bending. ( Unprecedented in history) We have the opportunity to understand ourselves better than ever thought possible.. Nev
coljones Posted August 6, 2013 Posted August 6, 2013 snip snip snipThe stark facts are that many scientists have not looked fairly at all theories. Instead, one theory has been given the status as "the only explanation" for the origins of life. That sounds like a belief system to me. A rather presumptuous statement
horsefeathers Posted August 6, 2013 Posted August 6, 2013 Humans are linked to chimpanzees – by a common designer. I understand that bananas have 90% the same DNA as chimpanzees as well. By the way, humans have 46 chromosomes and the chimpanzeess have 48. Perhaps we are more closely related to the tea tree which also has 46 chromosomes. But, neglecting to mention that the human chromosone 2 is almost certainly a fused copy of 2 adjacent ape chromosones, is either sloppy thinking, or intellectual dishonesty - you choose.
rgmwa Posted August 6, 2013 Posted August 6, 2013 The rate of discovery is mind bending. ( Unprecedented in history) We have the opportunity to understand ourselves better than ever thought possible.. Nev Yep, I've evolved to understand myself perfectly well. On the other hand, my wife is a mystery. rgmwa
eightyknots Posted August 6, 2013 Posted August 6, 2013 Yep, I've evolved to understand myself perfectly well. On the other hand, my wife is a mystery.rgmwa Give it a few million years of evolution, and all will be clear
rankamateur Posted August 6, 2013 Posted August 6, 2013 I am new to this thread, What has all this got to do with spelling?
eightyknots Posted August 6, 2013 Posted August 6, 2013 Words That Are Misspelled One of them actually is “misspelled” - those who fall afoul of the word usually leave out one of the “S” letters. Should you use the “i” or the “a”? Suffixes (endings on words) in the ‘ble’ category can be confusing. “Acceptable” is only acceptable if it’s spelled with an “A” before the “ble,” not an “I.” Do you know the difference between “conscience” and “conscious”? These are called homophones; that is words that sound alike but have different meanings. A “conscience” is what bothers you when you don’t memorize your spelling words. If you don’t get it, well, maybe you aren’t “conscious”!
Recommended Posts