Here is a wallpaper I just made, enjoy ;)
Posted on 12/18/2004 12:06:46 AM PST by sasherm13
These are apparently the top ten scientific breakthroughs of 2004.
Science magazine's breakthroughs of 2004
* Winner: Water on Mars. Nasa's Mars rovers Spirit and Opportunity discovered compelling evidence for the prolonged existence of salty, acidic water on the surface of the Red Planet. * Runner up: Indonesian "hobbit". A team of archaeologists made the mind-blowing discovery of a new species of human that stood only one metre tall and lived on the Indonesian island of Flores. * Human cloning. South Korean researchers made headlines across the world after announcing they had cloned human embryos, the first published and "peer reviewed" evidence this technique could work with human cells. * Understanding condensates. In 2004, scientists made giant leaps in understanding ultra-cold gases called condensates, shedding light on some key problems in physics. * Hidden DNA treasures. Stretches of "junk DNA" proved to be far more important than previously thought. They turned out to be essential for helping genes turn on at the right time and in the right place. * Pulsar pair. Astrophysicists discovered the first known pair of pulsars, spinning neutron stars that shoot out jets of radiation. * Declining plant and animal diversity. There was disturbing news this year about the decline of species diversity from large studies that surveyed amphibians, butterflies, plants and birds. * Water on tap. New results on the structure and chemical behaviour of water could reshape fields from chemistry to atmospheric science. * Medicines for the World's Poor. "Public-private partnerships" emerged as a force in 2004, according to Science magazine, affecting the way medicines are developed and delivered to emerging nations. * Genes in a Drop of Water. This year, researchers hit on a new way to identify lifeforms too small and too remote to see. They collected water from diverse environments and sequenced the genes floating in it.
>new species of human
If it's a new *species*, then it is not HUMAN.
You have to understand these people really don't know what in heck they're talking about. They find a cave full of crushed monkey skulls and a few dead intact humans, so they report finding a new species by mixing the monkey and human bones.. In the orient - nonetheless - where monkey brains are part of the menu. Lucy, Neanderthal man, etc, one lie after another.
Neanderthal man was found in Neander and was actually a normal human with arthritis in the spine. Scientists are nothing more than good liars selling a religious belief when it comes to this stuff. It's amazing. They should all be in jail for fraud.
* Hidden DNA treasures. Stretches of "junk DNA" proved to be far more important than previously thought. They turned out to be essential for helping genes turn on at the right time and in the right place. *
Now how does this happen at random I wonder? Couldn't be intelligent design. That would give comfort and hope to the creationist rabble.
* Hidden DNA treasures. Stretches of "junk DNA" proved to be far more important than previously thought. They turned out to be essential for helping genes turn on at the right time and in the right place. *
Must be about time for some Quantum evolution or some kind of outbreak of new species being selected to fill the vacuum left by all of this extinction.
It's fair in that context to take "human" broadly. Neanderthal was supposedly a different species of human as well. The key element of the term "human", I suppose, being bipedism, or perhaps evidence of a culture.
Neanderthal has been found in many places. It would be an extreme stretch of intellect and take a rediculous contortion of logic to conclude that they are all "normal human with arthritis in the spine".
Or, you could take the evolutionist's view that it DIDN'T happen at random.
There is a strange mindset out there who seem to misdefine "random" as "not affected by an intelligent force".
I hate to have to say this, but in the case of the scientist I used to work for, it would appear to be true.
How could the Space Plane not have made that list? Or the scRAMjet? Or the Missle Defense progress? Guess that's all "engineering", not really "science."
That really is a good point. This list of scientific achievements doesn't include the items you mentioned. Probably because scientists dont really have to design anything and build it and make it work.
We cant have anything in the list that hints of ID of ANYTHING ... that would have people pondering ... and we cant have that can we?
The human brow ridge never stops growing. All you've found is human skeletons. Neanderthal man originally was a human skeleton found that was hunched over from arthritis and having big brow ridges. Till you find something that can be classified as other than human, you're just playing games and hoping people buy your spin.
Last I looked, none of these things have anything to do with evolution. What you're trying to pull now is like saying "The automotive industry has made great products for years, we therefore should listen to their political views and take them as scripture on the subject. Where do you people learn to pull the wool - you should ask for your money back.
Homo sapiens skeletons today look much the same as they did in the time of Neanderthal. However, the many widespread neanderthal skeletons found have similarites to each other that are not found in modern humans.
Furthermore, Neanderthal skeletons dwindle off in the fossil record. You'd expect to see them persist to the present day if they were just another one of us.
You may be right about a very unusual widespread disease that somehow stopped affecting people millenia ago. But, why would you presume such a Rube Goldberg theory when the simplest answer is that Neanderthal was a different kind of creature than us, now extinct?
What would be an extreme stretch is what has been made of the skeletons due to ignorance and an agenda. How many people out there beyond specialists in the field of biology know that the human brow ridge never stops growing - or that the length of the skull is variable over time with age. Ya'll sure didn't know it when you started spouting off at the mouth in the scientific community about neanderthal man who could most easily be explained by known facts of human biology, they were just really old humans. Period. Nothing more fantastic by way of explanation needed than that. But that is a problem to you guys. If they lived longer than we are living, it throws a real monkey wrench in things for you, doesn't it. Same thing with Giants. The number of 9-13 foot tall human skeletons found around the world can't just be explained away. And evolutionists like making them disappear because they're problematic. The number of disengenuous claims you guys make is monumental. Lucy's skull was smashed beyond recognition and her legs weren't even her legs. They were found 1.5 miles away from the torso and 200 feet lower. But look at all that was extrapolated based on that fraud. And you want to poke fun at arthritis as though everything classified "neander" now must be arthritic because the original one was. It misses the point. Ya'll were on a massive hunt for missing links and grasped at straws to name this as one of them.. presumably because it was haunched over and filled a spot in a pattern toward man walking upright. Now that we've learned more and blown the lid on piltdown and all the others, you need a little more in way of evidence today; but, you haven't stopped lying about the frauds in the textbooks. You're still shilling the same lies you were years ago even though they've been proven frauds. Absent the lies, you have nothing. So, let's not pretend that Neander is just some misunderstanding or somethin. It's a prime example of evolutionist ignorance masquerading for wisdom.
Sorry bub. We have a lot of really old human skeletons today, and none look like Neanderthal. Why don't you just take a look at some Neanderthal skeletons (there are lots of them of various ages) and even you will see that they are not us.
Interesting notion that people lived longer then than now. Do you have any evidence of that unlikely situation other than you wish it were so?
Now that we've learned more and blown the lid on piltdown and all the others, you need a little more in way of evidence today; but, you haven't stopped lying about the frauds in the textbooks. You're still shilling the same lies you were years ago even though they've been proven frauds. Absent the lies, you have nothing.
Sir, you are in need of some serious deprogramming. I can only suggest two things: (1) examine the evidence yourself free of your cult's doctrine, and (2) don't take any brand new Nike's. You may not come to agree with most evolutionary biologists, but you certainly will realize that your sources have spoon fed you a load of horse manure.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.