Replies

In, a single generation, it is about the same probability as the probability that the sun won't rise in the morning. Please go to another thread and argue about some subject on which you might have some hope of being knowledgeable.

Oh arrogant unwise one, those who are ignorant are the first to apply ad hominem. However small the probability of the discussed birth it is still non-zero. Natural selection cannot function alone. And I did not mention natural selection, you did. You are the one with deficient knowledge of statistical inference. Since you are not the traffic cop here why don't you follow your own advice and bugger off. You posted to me uninvited and have done nothing but insult when asked for any semblance of logical discourse. Here are your pearls of nitwit in order.

No, one shouldn't, unless one is totally ignorant of statistics and the nature of genetic mutations.

The chances of a human giving birth to a chimpanzee are so infinitesimal as to approach zero, and the proposition that it might or might not happen is utterly irrelevant to the theory of natural selection, of which you apparently understand nothing at all.

Many are not aware of that, so I was simply being as clear as possible.

No, it doesn't. It only sounds logical if you're utterly ignorant of genetics in general, the human genome in particular, and the process of natural selection.

There is essentially zero chance of a human having a chimpanzee offspring. Speciation doesn't occur in a single birth, and the subject remains irrelevant to natural selection.