Posted on 07/13/2009 9:55:26 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Human-Chimp Similarities: Common Ancestry or Flawed Research?
by Jeffrey Tomkins, Ph.D.*
In 2003, the human genome was heralded as a near-complete DNA sequence, except for the repetitive regions that could not be resolved due to the limitations of the prevailing DNA sequencing technologies.[1] The chimpanzee genome was subsequently finished in 2005 with the hope that its completion would provide clear-cut DNA similarity evidence for an ape-human common ancestry.[2] This similarity is frequently cited as proof of man's evolutionary origins, but a more objective explanation tells a different story, one that is more complex than evolutionary scientists seem willing to admit...
(Excerpt) Read more at icr.org ...
You really shouldn't have let him in on the secret yet. He should be allowed to continue making a fool of himself with his ignorant, simplistic assertions.
Not really. It might seem so, but angular momentum figures in. I've written computer simulations which only modify the accelerations of bodies based upon their separation and then recalculate their positions and loop. I've used a coordinate system based upon an absolute center and one based upon one of the bodies. Initial conditions have slight relative motions(2D simulation)and a random separation. They don't meet. They orbit.
My daughter did a similar project for one of her physics classes where she could adjust the different parameters and there are conditions in which the orbit becomes so distorted that it does fail.
Back to our regularly scheduled programming.
Now Andrew, I know that you didn’t mean to convey the idea that gravity could have accelerated the planets into orbit... (black holes are snorting indignantly)
He wrote a treatise on the arbitrary nature of assumed coordinate systems; is that what you’re recalling?
What about their position do you find embarrassing?
This is rich coming from someone that’s too embarassed to admit to a child God created her teeth while claiming to be a Christian.
And speaking of being embarassed, are you embarassed by your fellow liberals like Chrissy Fit Matthews and algore demanding to be apes and saying global warming and evolution are settled science and the debate is over?
OK. Where? The whole conversation started with geocentric creationists- that cute little term that you evos coined. Then you started hounding me about heliocentric creationists.
You at first denied any knowledge that heliocentric creationists posted on these threads. Now you acknowledge them but now claim that it doesn’t really matter to you.
I do? Where?
You should be embarrassed by the heliocentric creationists.
Why?
That you defend them or refuse to refute them tells me that you really care nothing about science.
What? Don't you believe that the earth revolves around the sun?
And whether or not you care to admit it or not, it does have a practical effect on you, unless you want to believe that the Moon landings were staged events and never really happened.
Like what? Tell me how.
Tell me exactly how legitimate scientific research or TOE has resulted in any loss of your freedoms. You are still entitled to believe in what ever you choose to believe in. Heck, there are people who believe in alien crop circles, alien abductions, clairvoyance, Big Foot, the Loch Ness monster and that 9/11 was an inside job. However none of those “beliefs” should be accepted as legitimate science or taught as such in a science class room.
You just answered your own question.
Many climate scientists are skeptical of AGW.
No kidding. I never would have guessed. /roll eyes.....
I don't know what she programmed, so I can't comment on it. But, my program was based upon first principles in a Euclidean space. It was not based on any geometry which would describe a black hole. My program simply modified a pair of variables for two bodies based upon Euclidean position variables. The modified variables were then used to modify the position variables. Based upon that simple relationship the program produced orbiting bodies. I could either watch them both "spin" and "gyre" or watch one orbit the other in an elliptically shaped orbit which changed orientation itself. I used a "rubber band" to tie the bodies together when both were free to move and I also traced the center of the moving body when one was "fixed". Based upon the intial conditions there were cases when the bodies came very close and the moving body was hurled off screen for a long time(I displayed the coords), but in the "Andy Universe" the body always came back(no other "forces"). And of course, no speed limit except for processor and language overflow limits.
Obviously you’re in the dark. Carry on.
I think that you misunderstood the subject where you slipped in here.
A freeper who will remain un-named made an assertion that using a different reference would change the nature of the forces, and that the forces themselves were the result of a particular system of reference.
No. If you look carefully at what I wrote, the bodies orbit no matter what the reference point. The "forces" I programmed did not care what coordinate system was used. The final result was the same(Euclidean universe), orbits.
I see what you’re getting at for the frame of reference you were using.
What kind?
Definitions of Geocentricity on the Web:
Modern geocentrism is the belief by extant groups that Earth is the center of the universe as described by classical geocentric models. . . . en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geocentricity
geocentric - having the earth as the center . . . wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
Geocentric - In astronomy, the geocentric model or the Ptolemaic worldview of the universe is the superseded theory that the Earth is the center of the universe and other objects go around it. Belief in this system was common in ancient Greece. . . . en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geocentric
geocentric - Earth-centered. . . . www.namnmeteors.org/appendixE.html
geocentric - Having the Earth for a center. The geocentric positions of the planets indicating their position. These are now generally calculated from the . . . www.zaytsev.com/Devore/g.html
geocentric - Measured or Observed from the Earth's centre. See also topocentric. . . . uk.geocities.com/crawleyas/dictionary.htm
geocentric - Earth centered astrology. Astrology is geocentric because humans inhabit Earth and astrologers examine the orientation of people to the universe. Astronomers research the solar system from a heliocentric (sun centered) perspective. . . . www.skyviewzone.com/astrology/dictionary.htm
geocentric - adj. Means "as seen or measured from the center of the Earth". Implies that location affects the event's apparent time or angle(s), and that observers at other locations will not see the same event, or will see it at a different time. Compare topocentric. . . . jebrown.us/SolarAlmanac/glossary.html
Geocentric acts as though the planets revolve around the earth. Since we are on the earth, this seems like a reasonable way to figure out how the planets would affect us here. This is the form of astrology that we use. . . . www.starwise.com/glossary.html
geocentric - Relating to, measured from, or with respect to the centre of mass of the earth (source -Survey Services 2003) . . . https://mli2.gov.mb.ca/glossary/e_l.html
I know of no Christian who, as an article of faith, does not believe that God created Mankind and the Universe (heaven and earth). Christians therefore are, by definition, Creationists. Unless they intend to send someone into a moon orbit for the purposes of a lunar landing . . . and that person is an uncle or a cousin or something . . . What do you care of their Geocentric speculations? How do their speculations threaten you? Yet you assume the character of a Master Inquisitor in the service of the Darwinian Mullahs. To what end?
CG: However none of those “beliefs” should be accepted as legitimate science or taught as such in a science class room.
MM: You just answered your own question.
CG: Many climate scientists are skeptical of AGW.
MM: No kidding. I never would have guessed. /roll eyes.....
Isn’t it just wild, the endless projections and misrepresentations?
Yeah, no kidding that many climate scientists are skeptical of AGW, the obvious lesson learned in this case though is liberals demanding that the science is settled or the debate is over as algore demands is exactly why we have AGW in the first place, because debate isn’t allowed or shut down by these liberal tactics and this is the ENTIRE POINT of these discussions!
Scientists are skeptical of evolution too! Thus the dissentfromdarwin.org website! And not just scientists but even 5 year olds! Thus people demanding to teach their children as trhey see fit with their own tax-payer dollars!
The question is why do liberals not understand AGW and evolution are going to be treated with skepticism as ANY scientific theory naturally would be?
Which leads to the obvious observation of normal people: evolution has been hijacked by liberals with an agenda. Otherwise, why do they turn into pretzels when someone dares criticize their beloved cult or questions or asks that evolution be treated as any other scientific endeavor?
I’m more of a live and let live type as opposed to the marxist thought police who think that they have the right to dictate to everyone else what has to be taught in schools cause they think that they’re right because they have a better reason than everyone else.
It doesn’t eat at me that others think differently than I do, but I’m not going to roll over and play dead while we lose our freedoms in the name of “science”.
Exactly, and while liberals are worried sick because of their myriad insecurities with God, that someone might actually help children validate that they see design and intelligence in creation, indeed in science generally; these same liberals like algore are literally stealing their underwear right off of them and they don’t even notice!
And here they are standing in front of everyone naked for the world to see in their pettiness.
I’m not talking about what you wrote, relax!
I just said that you had missed what the issue was.
Based on the ridiculous arguments they’ve been using, I’d say the situation for them is getting pretty desperate.
I think they’re having to resort to recycling the spitwads.
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.