Intelligent Design vs. Casino Universe

I find that funny! Poor Frank. Doesn't have anything better to do.

Ill bet he has never been accused of being "sufficiently educated"

LMAO

Did you know that homo sapiens are the 'new' species from the primates?

Herald, are you aware that chimpanzees and humans share something more than 97% of their genes in common? Are you aware that some geneticists think that's enough similarity that a chimpanzee-human hybrid would be viable? Which bears out the research which suggests a common ancestor somewhere around 6 million years ago, based on mutation rate of DNA? Which agrees well with the observed fossil record of hominim development?

Are you aware that comparisons of Neanderthal and homo sap sap DNA show that in fact we have around 4% of Neanderthal-specific genes in our genome, i.e., our ancestors and Neanderthals did in fact interbreed, and those hybrids were viable and fertile (or we would have no Neander genes, but we in fact do).

Are you further aware that humans and bananas share about 50% of their genes? (Hint: a mating between a human and a banans would not produce viable offspring

You see, the above is proof that it is all in the mind's eye!

What nonsense. Not in the mind at all. In the DNA. Cold hard fact.

Preconceived Bias will hit us all in the nuts from time to time

Quote:

Preconceived Bias will hit us all in the nuts from time to time

Exactly. But my point is that you don't recognize it when it is happening to you.

There are many scientific proof about DNA and its association between homo sapiens and chimps

A small sample of bone was ground up to extract mtDNA.
... the last common ancestor of Neanderthals and modern humans dates to approximately 550,000 to 690,000 years ago, which is about four times older than the modern human mtDNA pool.

This is consistent with the idea that Neanderthals did not contribute substantially to modern human.

Most human sequences differ from each other by on average 8.0 substitutions, while the human and chimpanzee sequences differ by about 55.0 substitutions. The Neanderthal and modern human sequences differed by approximately 27.2 substitutions.

These results confirmed the earlier findings that showed that Neanderthals were unlikely to have contributed to the modern human genome. As with the previous study of Neanderthal mtDNA, results were consistent with separation between the Neanderthal and modern human  pools or with very low amounts of gene flow between the two groups.

Mitochondrial DNA from the Paglicci specimens as well as other ancient humans fit within the range of modern humans, but the Neanderthals remain consistently genetically distinct. This shows that early anatomically modern Homo sapienswere not very different genetically from current modern humans, but were still different from Neanderthals.

This is from the Smithsonian Institute; a national scientific institution.

Bonobos Join Chimps as Closest Human Relatives



Ann is a contributing correspondent for Science

Email Ann
By Ann Gibbons 13 June 2012 1:30 pm 45 Comments
Chimpanzees now have to share the distinction of being our closest living relative in the animal kingdom. An international team of researchers has sequenced the genome of the bonobo for the first time, confirming that it shares the same percentage of its DNA with us as chimps do. The team also found some small but tantalizing differences in the genomes of the three species—differences that may explain how bonobos and chimpanzees don't look or act like us even though we share about 99% of our DNA.

"We're so closely related genetically, yet our behavior is so different," says team member and computational biologist Janet Kelso of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany. "This will allow us to look for the genetic basis of what makes modern humans different from both bonobos and chimpanzees."

Ever since researchers sequenced the chimp genome in 2005, they have known that humans share about 99% of our DNA with chimpanzees, making them our closest living relatives. But there are actually two species of apes that are this closely related to humans: bonobos (Pan paniscus) and the common chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes). This has prompted researchers to speculate whether the ancestor of humans, chimpanzees, and bonobos looked and acted more like a bonobo, a chimpanzee, or something else—and how all three species have evolved differently since the ancestor of humans split with the common ancestor of bonobos and chimps between 4 million and 7 million years ago in Africa.

Nope, it is no nonsense.
What I mean is that people who believe the evolution nonsense. see all kind of evidence, even were there is none.
It a perception deception.
There are no 'hard cold facts' if you scrutinize up close.
The Emperor has no clothes.
He really, really, really is very very naked. But you can't see that because
of your deeply ingrained belief that the Emperor has clothes.
The rest is up to you.

This is nonsense too. No facts, just rant. And denial of the facts from the people who have actually done the research, and looked at the source DNA, which quahog has not.