chromosome 2 and thoughts on human evolution

RolandTD20Kdrummer

How many of you have heard about this?

Connecting the dots between man and ape
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8FGYzZOZxMw

Kann

The subject seems interesting enough but some of us (well at least me) can't or don't have time to watch videos. When you post videos links, would you care to write a short summary after them? It would help.

RolandTD20Kdrummer

Kann wrote:

The subject seems interesting enough but some of us (well at least me) can't or don't have time to watch videos. When you post videos links, would you care to write a short summary after them? It would help.

Its' 3 1/2 mins..

"The phases through which chromosomes replicate, divide, shuffle, and recombine are imperfect, as DNA is subject to random mutations. Mutations do not always produce harmful outcomes. In fact, many mutations are thought to be neutral, and some even give rise to beneficial traits. To corroborate Darwin's theory, scientists would need to find a valid explanation for why a chromosome pair is missing in humans that is present in apes. "

Apes have 24 chromosomes but humans have only 23....somewhere the chromosome had to fuse as it's impossible for a chromosome to disappear. If one were to disappear we would be akin to a puddle of goo... So the theory is it had to combine at some point.

Chromosome 2 is the smoking gun for proof of this fused chromosome linking ape to man.

now get a better internet connection...

Kann

Ok, thanks. And I will not comment a video that I have not seen.

elmer

Charles Darwin's Theory of Evolution is bollocks, that is why it's a theory, instead of a law. Man never evolved from ape. Where are the fossils to prove this progression from monkey to man? Bloody ludicrous, this is all brainwashing.

Kann

elmer wrote:

Charles Darwin's Theory of Evolution is bollocks, that is why it's a theory, instead of a law. Man never evolved from ape. Where are the fossils to prove this progression from monkey to man? Bloody ludicrous, this is all brainwashing.

It may be a theory but it's the best explanation we have right now. If you find this theory stupid and ludicrous please suggest another more plausible one. It's how science works : you have a theory, and someone comes up with a better one which is better suited for observations. Saying "this is fucking stupid" isn't enough.

angelica

elmer wrote:

Charles Darwin's Theory of Evolution is bollocks, that is why it's a theory, instead of a law. Man never evolved from ape. Where are the fossils to prove this progression from monkey to man? Bloody ludicrous, this is all brainwashing.

Basically everything is brainwashing.

Everything we are taught are "stories" and metaphors that we humans can understand, that explain how we perceive the energies that swirl around us. Many people believe the stories to be absolute truths, rather than the approximations they are. The map is not the territory.

The interesting thing is that when one begins to raise one's awareness, one starts to understand that these approximations are just that, rather than absolutes. One comes to understand that it's all relative, and it depends of the framework or mindset we start with, what we end up seeing.

Rhinocerous Surprise

elmer wrote:

Charles Darwin's Theory of Evolution is bollocks, that is why it's a theory, instead of a law. Man never evolved from ape. Where are the fossils to prove this progression from monkey to man? Bloody ludicrous, this is all brainwashing.

Maybe Darwin's theory was bollocks, but the theory of evolution, in more general terms, has been refined over the years, and it pretty much gets more and more irrefutable. The fact that they've found the chromosome that explains our genetic separation from apes is, as Roland said, the smoking gun.

he still stands

Kann wrote:

Ok, thanks. As soon as I can I'll watch it because I don't understand why a fusion between 2 chromosomes doesn't fit in Darwin's theory.

This video shows that Dawin's theory is correct, in that we evolved from another species. The video starts off with the premise used by "creationists" that if we have a different number of chromosomes (24 v 23 in apes) we cannot be evolved from them. This is true, if you accept that only the chromosome could have been "lost" but after research they found that 2 chromosome "fused" together, definitively proving that we evolved from apes.

So it is affirming Darwin's Theory.

searchlightsoul

elmer wrote:

Charles Darwin's Theory of Evolution is bollocks, that is why it's a theory, instead of a law. Man never evolved from ape. Where are the fossils to prove this progression from monkey to man?

A scientific 'theory' is always supported by evidence. Evolution is no different.

Humans didn't evolve directly from monkeys, you are correct. We evolved from apes and share a common ancestor with the great apes alive today.

If you want to see the fossils supporting the human evolution, I suggest you get of your ass and take a walk down to your state natural history museum.

Kann

he still stands wrote:

So it is affirming Darwin's Theory.

Ok thanks too. I guess I should have watched that first!

searchlightsoul

angelica wrote:

Basically everything is brainwashing.

Everything we are taught are "stories" and metaphors that we humans can understand, that explain how we perceive the energies that swirl around us. Many people believe the stories to be absolute truths, rather than the approximations they are. The map is not the territory.

The interesting thing is that when one begins to raise one's awareness, one starts to understand that these approximations are just that, rather than absolutes. One comes to understand that it's all relative, and it depends of the framework or mindset we start with, what we end up seeing.

Angelica, I can appreciate that you have an open mind on things which is great. However we shouldn't leave a minds so open that our brain falls out! Now we can argue about truths all we want but at the end of the day this post is regarding a scientfic truth, that is it. It doesn't mean that anything can go.

The beauty of the scientific method is that it is self correcting and self questioning- the very opposite of brainwashing. When new data presents itself which doesn't fit our understanding, the model, hypothesis, theory is reviewed and if necessary discarded.

I guess maybe it is difficult for some people to deal with the implications of this theory, which I can well appreciate. However, for me it wasn't until I worked in a stream of biological science that I truly realised how unworkable (that is exactly what they are) creationist theories, ID etc are and how eloquent evolution is.

cornnifer

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

Its' 3 1/2 mins..

"The phases through which chromosomes replicate, divide, shuffle, and recombine are imperfect, as DNA is subject to random mutations. Mutations do not always produce harmful outcomes. In fact, many mutations are thought to be neutral, and some even give rise to beneficial traits. To corroborate Darwin's theory, scientists would need to find a valid explanation for why a chromosome pair is missing in humans that is present in apes. "

Apes have 24 chromosomes but humans have only 23....somewhere the chromosome had to fuse as it's impossible for a chromosome to disappear. If one were to disappear we would be akin to a puddle of goo... So the theory is it had to combine at some point.

Chromosome 2 is the smoking gun for proof of this fused chromosome linking ape to man.

now get a better internet connection...

For some it may not have anything to do with length of the video or quality of internet connection. i, for, example, am at work and the school's filtering system denies me access to Youtube (pretty much makes this place useless). Get a grip.
Now, evolution debates around these parts have grown about as stale as abortion, and gay marriage, so i'll only comment to say that chromosome 2 doesn't really appear like a smoking gun to me. There is no smoking gun which is why my great great grandchildren will be listening to my pearl jam bootlegs and debating darwin on the moving train.

angelica

searchlightsoul wrote:

Angelica, I can appreciate that you have an open mind on things which is great. However we shouldn't leave a minds so open that our brain falls out! Now we can argue about truths all we want but at the end of the day this post is regarding a scientfic truth, that is it. It doesn't mean that anything can go.

The beauty of the scientific method is that it is self correcting and self questioning- the very opposite of brainwashing. When new data presents itself which doesn't fit our understanding, the model, hypothesis, theory is reviewed and if necessary discarded.

I guess maybe it is difficult for some people to deal with the implications of this theory, which I can well appreciate. However, for me it wasn't until I worked in a stream of biological science that I truly realised how unworkable (that is exactly what they are) creationist theories, ID etc are and how eloquent evolution is.

Scientific truth is relative as well, which is why all theories are always open for reassessment and improvement in the true scientific method.

searchlightsoul

cornnifer wrote:

Now, evolution debates around these parts have grown about as stale as abortion, and gay marriage, so i'll only comment to say that chromosome 2 doesn't really appear like a smoking gun to me. There is no smoking gun which is why my great great grandchildren will be listening to my pearl jam bootlegs and debating darwin on the moving train.

Did you really even try to understand it? Or had you convinced yourself from the start that no matter what you read or no matter how much sense it made, you were not going to budge from your position?

cornnifer

searchlightsoul wrote:

Did you really even try to understand it? Or had you convinced yourself from the start that no matter what you read or no matter how much sense it made, you were not going to budge from your position?

No more than you have.
*yawn*
What we really need is a rousing abortion thread. *sarcasm*

Rhinocerous Surprise

cornnifer wrote:

No more than you have.
*yawn*
What we really need is a rousing abortion thread. *sarcasm*

Or another Obama thread! Wheeeeee!

searchlightsoul

cornnifer wrote:

No more than you have.
*yawn*
What we really need is a rousing abortion thread. *sarcasm*

Being ignorant never looked so cool.

angelica

ah the human ego.....

searchlightsoul

angelica wrote:

Scientific truth is relative as well, which is why all theories are always open for reassessment and improvement in the true scientific method.

Would you then care to explain how the above video then failed to document use of the 'true scientfic method' to test a theory?

angelica

searchlightsoul wrote:

Would you then care to explain how the above video then failed to document use of the 'true scientfic method' to test a theory?

It sounds like there is a misunderstanding. I didn't say they failed to use the scientific method at all.

I said all the ways we conceptualize what "is" is just that...concepts. It's how we explain things to ourselves, within our ability to understand ourselves. It's independent of what actually exists.

The scientific method is a way to understand reality. So is philosophy. So is religion. One does not invalidate the other even remotely. As a matter of fact, in reality, they all exist interwoven without conflict. The conflict and separation is in the human heart and ego.

Rhinocerous Surprise

angelica wrote:

It sounds like there is a misunderstanding. I didn't say they failed to use the scientific method at all.

I said all the ways we conceptualize what "is" is just that...concepts. It's how we explain things to ourselves, within our ability to understand ourselves. It's independent of what actually exists.

The scientific method is a way to understand reality. So is philosophy. So is religion. One does not invalidate the other even remotely. As a matter of fact, in reality, they all exist interwoven without conflict. The conflict and separation is in the human heart and ego.

I can sort of see your point: everything we comprehend, whether religious or scientific or whatever, is filtered through human consciousness, so it's all relative to humans' capacity for understanding.

Where I'd tend to differ is the concept that science is objective. Man's understanding of religion comes from within himself, but science is based on observations and proofs. I'm not sure I'm expressing myself too clearly here.:o I'm better off in the jokey topics... where's Christie?

Abookamongstthemany

Rhinocerous Surprise wrote:

I can sort of see your point: everything we comprehend, whether religious or scientific or whatever, is filtered through human consciousness, so it's all relative to humans' capacity for understanding.

Where I'd tend to differ is the concept that science is objective. Man's understanding of religion comes from within himself, but science is based on observations and proofs. I'm not sure I'm expressing myself too clearly here.:o I'm better off in the jokey topics... where's Christie?

Staying away from the serious threads. Duh!





Being too serious right now would be next to impossible.

Rhinocerous Surprise

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

Staying away from the serious threads. Duh!





Being too serious right now would be next to impossible.

Everytime I think about evolution, I wonder why we thought we'd be better off without the prehensile tail. Then I watch this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfGRBIZA64w
That's about as scientific as Alan gets.

baraka

I know this link has been posted by myself and others in threads about evolution, but here it is again. The site can answer a lot of questions about the topic (esp the 'it's just a theory' statement). Overall, I think I have to give the theory of evolution two thumbs up, as far as scientific theories are concerned. It's a pretty successful theory. Newer sciences such as genetics & molecular biology have only solidified this theory. http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-evolution.html

angelica

Rhinocerous Surprise wrote:

I can sort of see your point: everything we comprehend, whether religious or scientific or whatever, is filtered through human consciousness, so it's all relative to humans' capacity for understanding.

Where I'd tend to differ is the concept that science is objective. Man's understanding of religion comes from within himself, but science is based on observations and proofs. I'm not sure I'm expressing myself too clearly here.:o I'm better off in the jokey topics... where's Christie?

There are different types of intelligences. Intuitive and emotional intelligences are just as valid and are also ways of uncovering truth. Granted, the western world has prioritized linear/logical forms of intelligence and have decided they are supreme. That shows a preference, not an absolute.

At this point, the most realistic ways of understanding reality are holistic, which includes all forms on intelligences integrated into one whole, which results in an understanding of the whole. This is whole-brain thinking. It goes beyond logic/linearity alone, while also embracing and including it.

Rhinocerous Surprise

angelica wrote:

There are different types of intelligences. Intuitive and emotional intelligences are just as valid and are also ways of uncovering truth. Granted, the western world has prioritized linear/logical forms of intelligence and have decided they are supreme. That shows a preference, not an absolute.

At this point, the most realistic ways of understanding reality are holistic, which includes all forms on intelligences integrated into one whole, which results in an understanding of the whole. This is whole-brain thinking. It goes beyond logic/linearity alone, while also embracing and including it.

And this ^ is far too intelligent for me right now.

*watches monkey-smell-fall video again*

angelica

Rhinocerous Surprise wrote:

And this ^ is far too intelligent for me right now.

*watches monkey-smell-fall video again*

thanks for the laugh!



The bottom line is when we resolve the split in our own psyche and integrate our awareness in a whole-brain fashion, the splits, fragments and conflicts in the outside world disappear. They resolve and we see the world as it is...as unbroken wholeness.

baraka

angelica wrote:

The scientific method is a way to understand reality. So is philosophy. So is religion. One does not invalidate the other even remotely. As a matter of fact, in reality, they all exist interwoven without conflict. The conflict and separation is in the human heart and ego.

Nice post, angelica. This is the area I feel frustration. Sometimes I feel we are given a false choice. On one hand, you have the religious fundamentalist false choice between God or science, then on the other hand, you have some scientists making careers out of what they see as their superior extrapolation on matters that have NOT been proved empirically. Both of these things are tainting this amazing field of science.

Kel Varnsen

elmer wrote:

Charles Darwin's Theory of Evolution is bollocks, that is why it's a theory, instead of a law. Man never evolved from ape. Where are the fossils to prove this progression from monkey to man? Bloody ludicrous, this is all brainwashing.

The theory of gravity and kinetic-molecular theory are also a theories, do you also think it is bollocks that they are taught. Just because they are theories doesn't mean there is a ton of evidence to back them up. I think you have the word theory (at least the scientific definition of it) mixed up with the word hypothesis.

Collin

cornnifer wrote:

Now, evolution debates around these parts have grown about as stale as abortion, and gay marriage, so i'll only comment to say that chromosome 2 doesn't really appear like a smoking gun to me. There is no smoking gun which is why my great great grandchildren will be listening to my pearl jam bootlegs and debating darwin on the moving train.

At least watch the video before you say it isn't a smoking gun.