|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
 Posted - 10/13/2011 : 13:05:05 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by alienist
By the way, genetic studies have shown there is more genetic diversity among Africans than people who live in other areas of the world. Which is another piece of evidence that humans migrated from one area of the world and not from different areas of the world
|
That observation was made in the video's I posted.
http://www.skepticfriends.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=14456&whichpage=5#196413 |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
 |
|
|
justintime
BANNED
382 Posts |
Posted - 10/14/2011 : 07:28:55 [Permalink]
|
Here is a link which points to a period in Africa where few fossil diversity was found and explains why. Then goes on to show how migration to Africa increased diversity.
What is missing is a study of genetic diversity in India. Africa has always been the hotbed for evolution theorist. But new discoveries in Asia and middle-east is starting to challenge that approach.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/10/101027133144.htm |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 10/14/2011 : 08:19:50 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by justintime
Here is a link which points to a period in Africa where few fossil diversity was found and explains why. Then goes on to show how migration to Africa increased diversity.
What is missing is a study of genetic diversity in India. Africa has always been the hotbed for evolution theorist. But new discoveries in Asia and middle-east is starting to challenge that approach.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/10/101027133144.htm
|
What new discoveries? That early anthropoid primates colonized Africa, which at the time was an island continent, says nothing about the out of Africa theory. What that means is that early primates evolved somewhere else. They were (in Africa) ancestral to apes and other primate species.
Therefore, the paleontologists suggest, it is more likely that several anthropoid species "colonized" Africa from another continent 39 million years ago -- the middle of the Eocene epoch. Since diversification would have occurred over extreme lengths of time, and likely leave fossil evidence, the new fossils combined with previous sampling in North Africa leads the paper's authors to surmise an Asian origin for anthropoids, as proposed by Beard and his colleagues in earlier work, rather than a gap in the fossil record.
"If our ideas are correct, this early colonization of Africa by anthropoids was a truly pivotal event -- one of the key points in our evolutionary history," says Christopher Beard, Curator of Vertebrate Paleontology at Carnegie Museum of Natural History and an author on the paper. "At the time, Africa was an island continent; when these anthropoids appeared, there was nothing on that island that could compete with them. It led to a period of flourishing evolutionary divergence amongst anthropoids, and one of those lineages resulted in humans. If our early anthropoid ancestors had not succeeded in migrating from Asia to Africa, we simply wouldn't exist." |
It's very interesting that early anthropoids evolved in Asia. But it says nothing about the evolution of apes and and humans other than that they have distant common ancestors that evolved in asia, but flourished in Africa.
These primates were nowhere close to being Apes. And there is plenty of evidence that apes evolved in Africa.
Haven't we been through this already? |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
justintime
BANNED
382 Posts |
Posted - 10/14/2011 : 13:08:47 [Permalink]
|
I thought it was clear Orangutans are only found in Asia. Orangutans are also apes.
Kil wrote
These primates were nowhere close to being Apes. And there is plenty of evidence that apes evolved in Africa. |
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 10/14/2011 : 13:21:55 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by justintime
I thought it was clear Orangutans are only found in Asia. Orangutans are also apes. |
The primates that migrated from Asia into Africa were not apes. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 10/14/2011 : 13:29:47 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by justintime
The apes have 24 pairs and humans have 23 pair of chromosomes. I don't know where you got the idea of fusion happened on its way to humans or a missing link that passed on these fused chromosomes.
...
The passing of 23 pairs of chromosomes is from human parents to offspring. Not apes to humans. |
So you think humans didn't evolve from apes at all, now? |
justintime obviously doesn't seem to appreciate the significance of the 24/23 pair chromosome count, and the significance of how the DNA-similarities in the genomes relate to each other.
The difference in the human chromosome #2 and how its telomere and centromere sequences relates to the other great ape's chromosomes provides powerful evidence of our common ancestry as cousins of chimps, and "second cousins" to Gorilla and Pongo.
justintime's failure to recognize this evidence is a sad testament to his ignorance on the subject. |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
justintime
BANNED
382 Posts |
Posted - 10/14/2011 : 14:19:45 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by justintime
I thought it was clear Orangutans are only found in Asia. Orangutans are also apes. |
The primates that migrated from Asia into Africa were not apes.
|
Are you then saying Orangutans did not evolve in Africa. They are not found their nor are any of their fossil remains. You know they are only found in Asia. Which is a strong basis for a parallel evolution theory. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 10/14/2011 : 14:38:04 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by justintime
Are you then saying Orangutans did not evolve in Africa. They are not found their nor are any of their fossil remains. You know they are only found in Asia. |
Yes, their ancestors were found from Turkey to China. They split from the branch which became chimps, gorillas and humans some 12 million years ago.| Which is a strong basis for a parallel evolution theory. |
But not evidence at all for Orangs evolving into some sort of human. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
justintime
BANNED
382 Posts |
Posted - 10/14/2011 : 14:50:15 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by justintime
The apes have 24 pairs and humans have 23 pair of chromosomes. I don't know where you got the idea of fusion happened on its way to humans or a missing link that passed on these fused chromosomes.
...
The passing of 23 pairs of chromosomes is from human parents to offspring. Not apes to humans. |
So you think humans didn't evolve from apes at all, now? |
justintime obviously doesn't seem to appreciate the significance of the 24/23 pair chromosome count, and the significance of how the DNA-similarities in the genomes relate to each other.
The difference in the human chromosome #2 and how its telomere and centromere sequences relates to the other great ape's chromosomes provides powerful evidence of our common ancestry as cousins of chimps, and "second cousins" to Gorilla and Pongo.
justintime's failure to recognize this evidence is a sad testament to his ignorance on the subject.
|
I checked other organism by chromosome count and it appears the Chimpanzees have the same count as several others. So apes are closer to a potato by chromosome count than humans according to the list below.
1. Chimpazees = 48
2. Eurasian beaver = 48
3. Deer mouse = 48
4. Gorilla = 48
5. Hare = 48
6. Potato = 48
7. Tobacco = 48
Humans have 46 and so do others.
1. Humans = 46
2. Reeves muntjac = 46
3. Sable antelope = 46
1. |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 10/14/2011 : 15:19:00 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by justintime
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by justintime
I thought it was clear Orangutans are only found in Asia. Orangutans are also apes. |
The primates that migrated from Asia into Africa were not apes.
|
Are you then saying Orangutans did not evolve in Africa. They are not found their nor are any of their fossil remains. You know they are only found in Asia. Which is a strong basis for a parallel evolution theory.
|
Orangutans ape ancestor evolved in Africa well after those early primates colonized Africa. And Orangutans ape ancestor is likely also a common ancestor of chimps and gorillas and all of the great apes, and us. Do you find it so shocking that an ape would spread out of African and back to Asia and evolve into the modern orangutan?
See. The problem is that the great apes HAD to have a common ancestor. In fact, ALL apes had to have a common ancestor. So the only other solution to the problem is that all the great apes share a common ancestor from Asia, (which I see that Dave is suggesting), and the line that became gorillas, chimps and us migrated BACK to Africa. Does that sound like a solution that makes the least number of assumptions? Or is it more likely that ONE kind of GREAT ape migrated to Asia?
I'll tell you what didn't happen. What didn't happen is that all but one of the great apes share a common ancestor. All the great apes have a common ancestor. Parallel evolution doesn't explane the closeness of the DNA that ALL the great apes share.
What Parallel evolution can explane is some morphological similarities between species. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 10/14/2011 : 15:34:53 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by justintime
I checked other organism by chromosome count and it appears the Chimpanzees have the same count as several others. So apes are closer to a potato by chromosome count than humans according to the list below.
1. Chimpazees = 48
2. Eurasian beaver = 48
3. Deer mouse = 48
4. Gorilla = 48
5. Hare = 48
6. Potato = 48
7. Tobacco = 48
Humans have 46 and so do others.
1. Humans = 46
2. Reeves muntjac = 46
3. Sable antelope = 46
1.
|
Ah! Culling through creationist material now. Okay. The response.
Claim CB141:
Chromosome counts are poor indications of similarity; they can vary widely within a single genus or even a single species. The plant genus Clarkia, for example, has species with chromosome counts of n = 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 12, 14, 17, 18, and 26 (Lewis 1993). Chromosome counts in the house mouse species (Mus domesticus) range from 2n = 22 to 40 (Nachman et al. 1994).
Chromosomes can split or join with little effect on the genes themselves. One human chromosome, for example, is very similar to two chimpanzee chromosomes laid end to end; it likely formed from the joining of two chromosomes (Yunis and Prakash 1982). Because the genes can still align, a change in chromosome number does not prevent reproduction. Chromosome counts can also change through polyploidy, where the entire genome is duplicated. Polyploidy, in fact, is a common mechanism of speciation in plants. |
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 10/14/2011 : 17:31:28 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by justintime
I checked other organism by chromosome count and it appears the Chimpanzees have the same count as several others. So apes are closer to a potato by chromosome count than humans according to the list below.
1. Chimpazees = 48
2. Eurasian beaver = 48
3. Deer mouse = 48
4. Gorilla = 48
5. Hare = 48
6. Potato = 48
7. Tobacco = 48
Humans have 46 and so do others.
1. Humans = 46
2. Reeves muntjac = 46
3. Sable antelope = 46 |
But the question is why humans have 46 while all other modern apes have 48. Just counting them doesn't answer it. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 10/14/2011 : 17:36:16 [Permalink]
|
| Including orangutans, with 48. I know! Humans were created! |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
 Posted - 10/15/2011 : 11:38:13 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by justintime
I checked other organism by chromosome count and it appears the Chimpanzees have the same count as several others. So apes are closer to a potato by chromosome count than humans according to the list below.
|
justintime's failure to recognize this evidence is a sad testament to his ignorance on the subject. |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
justintime
BANNED
382 Posts |
Posted - 10/16/2011 : 10:30:54 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by justintime
I checked other organism by chromosome count and it appears the Chimpanzees have the same count as several others. So apes are closer to a potato by chromosome count than humans according to the list below.
1. Chimpazees = 48
2. Eurasian beaver = 48
3. Deer mouse = 48
4. Gorilla = 48
5. Hare = 48
6. Potato = 48
7. Tobacco = 48
Humans have 46 and so do others.
1. Humans = 46
2. Reeves muntjac = 46
3. Sable antelope = 46 |
But the question is why humans have 46 while all other modern apes have 48. Just counting them doesn't answer it.
|
Using chromosome count was raised initially by you DaveW. All my links pointed to Orangutans being closer to humans than chimpanzees.
DaveW wrote
You have yet to address the chromosomal fusion evidence. Do you think ignoring it will make it go away?
Your theory does not account for the difference in chromosome count.
If more than one type of ape is ancestral to the different human races, then the exact same chromosomal fusion had to have occurred multiple times.
If orangs are ancestral to Asians, and bonobos to white folk, then the "missing links" for both "races" needed to have the same chromosomal fusion happen independently on the way to humans. Why?
|
Having raised the issue of chromosomes by you and Dr Mabuse. How can you say just counting them doesn't answer it. What is it here?
I showed both of you a list of organism with the same and different chromosome counts. So where is you comparison apes versus humans 24/23 pair chromosome and how does it apply to linking common ancestry based on chromosomes. That was your choice to use chromosomes to show some ancestral connection between humans and apes.
|
|
|
 |
|
Evolution Questions
