Posted on 07/18/2009 7:17:27 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
The world of human phylogeny has been hit by a bombshell. Although scholars and textbooks are presenting chimpanzees as man's closest relatives, Grehan and Schwartz have revived the case for orangutans. They consider hominoids to be comprised of two sister clades: the human-orangutan clade (dental hominoids) and the chimpanzee-gorilla clade (African apes). They claim that humans and orangutans "share a common ancestor that excludes the extant African apes". Since it is received wisdom that chimps are the nearest relative to humans because we share over 98% of their genes and since humans are referred to as the "third chimpanzee", the ramifications of the new paper are immense!...
(Excerpt) Read more at arn.org ...
==When I read about this in a reputable peer-reviewed scientific report, I’ll believe.
Evolution and reputable do not sit well in the same sentence. However, the Temple of Darwin journal citation is linked in the review:
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/122462698/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0
They do?
See, I learn something new every day. New labels.
Temple of Darwin Evo.
Theistic evolutionist.
YEC'er.
OEC'er.
------------------------------------------
P.S. Every creature on Earth spends most of it's day figuring out how to adapt to the environment.
We're very sorry if our preference to engage in ongoing scientific debate confuses or frightens you. Please know that you remain free to pursue your own contrasting lifestyle choices. The Temple of Darwin wishes you a nice day!
That’s the press release, not the scientific journal reference. Do you happen to have that?
The idea is that until "speciation" happened, the two (or more) subspecies could interbreed.
Now, regarding "intermediate forms", we don't know that a change of "form" is required at the time of "speciation". You got mom and dad of one species, and junior and his sisters are another ~ but they look pretty much alike ~ maybe identical.
More evidence that the Temple of Darwin runs the worst. conspiracy. ever. How could the High Priests in charge of suppressing all dissenting views let this material into not only a peer-reviewed journal but into a popular science magazine where anyone could see it? Heads will roll, I tell you!
So much for you having an explanation for the data or even a rational argument.
Thank you for such an honest answer, in a sea of confusion.
The idea is that until "speciation" happened, the two (or more) subspecies could interbreed.
Which brings up the question, why would the interbreeding of say, a sub-simian and a sub-human produce an advanced (today's) human?
Now, regarding "intermediate forms", we don't know that a change of "form" is required at the time of "speciation".
Conversely, then, a change of form is no proof of speciation.
You got mom and dad of one species, and junior and his sisters are another ~ but they look pretty much alike ~ maybe identical.
You lost me on that one.
P.S. Thank you for the challenging responses.
Well, you gotta read past post #2.
: )
Whatever "advanced" might mean, we need tests, evidence, results, experimentation ~ time for someone to visit the zoo.
‘Advanced’ was not a good choice of words.
Then maybe “forward”? Whatever it might take to make a date, I’m sure there’s some guy out there whose willing to test the hypothesis.
Isn't that how they say AIDS started?
One of the several hypothesis, but it would have had to have been the other way around.
Just thought you would like to know that your fellow Evos are no longer sure about the evidence that supposedly places chimps as humanity’s closes living relative. Do you ever stop and wonder why all your arguments for common descent keep biting the dust??? Didn’t think so.
But interesting how you interpret this GGG, because you think there is no descent allowed you falsely conclude that because this paper came out the entire field now accepts their premise. That is false and a rather idiotic view of what actually happens in science.
This is one of the last gasps of the morphologists picking a rather ridiculous hill to die on. They didn't appreciate the molecular guys running roughshod over their data and telling them where they were right and wrong and pointing out just how arbitrary picking points of morphological comparison is. .
The ICR article that I posted earlier, entitled “Human-Chimp Similarities: Common Ancestry or Flawed Research?”, makes it clear that the supposed 98-99% human-chimp genetic similarity is pure balderdash. As the article points out, there are studies that put that number as low as 86%. Face it, the Evos have got it pretty much all wrong since the time of Darwin. They have lost their “tree of life”, they have lost their fossil/”junk” DNA, they are losing the human-chimp similarity fantasy, they never had the fossil record, they are finding dinos with soft tissue still intact, etc, etc, etc!!! Indeed, I wouldn’t be surprised to find that you have become a biblical creationist in the not too distant future. I know you cringe at the thought now, but someday I think your conscience will compel you to make the switch, no matter what your evo colleagues may think of you.
This is an honest statement by these who published who wrote this report.
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.