Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →
↑ ↓
CEMB → Forum → Life, The Universe & Everything → Science → Theory of [human] evolution

Welcome

Welcome to CEMB forum.
Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email?

Donations

Help keep the Forum going!
Click on Kitty to donate:

Kitty is lost

Recent Posts

New Britain
Today at 03:10 PM
German nationalist party ...
Today at 01:11 PM
Do humans have needed kno...
Yesterday at 03:13 PM
Lights on the way
by akay
February 05, 2025, 10:04 PM
Gaza assault
February 05, 2025, 10:04 AM
AMRIKAAA Land of Free .....
February 03, 2025, 09:25 AM
The origins of Judaism
by zeca
February 02, 2025, 04:29 PM
Qur'anic studies today
by zeca
February 01, 2025, 11:48 PM
Random Islamic History Po...
by zeca
February 01, 2025, 07:29 PM
اضواء على الطريق ....... ...
by akay
February 01, 2025, 11:55 AM
News From Syria
by zeca
December 28, 2024, 12:29 AM
Mo Salah
December 26, 2024, 05:30 AM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Theory of [human] evolution

 (Read 14409 times)
  • Previous page 1 2 3« Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Theory of [human] evolution
     Reply #60 - April 02, 2014, 07:54 AM
    Yup, and arguably humans were well on their way to being ring species, before we invented jets. We already know early H. sapiens interbred with Neanderthals and Denisovans, and they're technically classified as "different species".
    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Theory of [human] evolution
     Reply #61 - April 02, 2014, 07:55 AM
    Quote from: osmanthus on April 02, 2014, 07:23 AM
    Y'know, I'm bloody sure there are good texts on evolution already written in Finnish. Finland today is not like Terra del Fuego in the 2nd century BC.


    I'm sure they are Smiley Im just really enjoying my read and wish Siunaa could join me in reading it
    "I Knew who I was this morning, but I've changed a few times since then." Alice in wonderland

    "This is the only heaven we have how dare you make it a hell" Dr Marlene Winell
  • Theory of [human] evolution
     Reply #62 - April 02, 2014, 02:44 PM
    Quote from: osmanthus on April 02, 2014, 07:23 AM
    Y'know, I'm bloody sure there are good texts on evolution already written in Finnish. Finland today is not like Terra del Fuego in the 2nd century BC.


    Just yesterday I read this text I found:
    http://www.student.oulu.fi/~ktikkane/macro.html
    Google translate:
    http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=fi&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=fi&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.student.oulu.fi%2F%7Ektikkane%2Fmacro.html&act=url

    Basic points were, sadly without exact sources:
    -4 fuzed tailbones in humans, hipbones with pythons etc.
    -Leftover in our DNA that came when our ancestors ate mainly C-vitamin food and lost ability to create it. (source?)
    -Mark in our DNA that when our far-ancestors with spine came from sea to land they were attacked by viruses and bacteria when our skin and immune system were not very evolved. (source?)
    -Why some animals are found only from some places, such as Homo habilis or austropithecus never found from Siberia or Mexico? (I don't really see how this proofs anything though)
    -No mosaique animals such as winged horse (Muhammad, is there something you want to confess? Cheesy), flying elephants, bees or birds with four legs, dinosaurs with both four legs and wings, locust with 4,8,10 or 12 legs etc. (cannot really see why this proves anything)
    -No humans or flowers in precambrian level, no trilobites or dinosaurs from Egyptian graves, no sealions or Betula Pubescent from ordovician level.


    And you're correct, we're more like Terra del Fuego 2nd century BM (before Moses).
    I ask many stupid questions frequently.
    I am curious, that's why I ask many questions.
    I am overly curious, that's why I ask stupid questions.
    I lack patience, that's why I ask frequently.
    So forgive me and answer me Smiley
  • Theory of [human] evolution
     Reply #63 - April 02, 2014, 03:51 PM
    Quote from: bogart on April 02, 2014, 07:52 AM
    A few breeds already have difficultly cross-breeding.

    Too fucking busy, and vice versa.
  • Theory of [human] evolution
     Reply #64 - April 02, 2014, 04:15 PM
     Cheesy
    `But I don't want to go among mad people,' Alice remarked.
     `Oh, you can't help that,' said the Cat: `we're all mad here. I'm mad.  You're mad.'
     `How do you know I'm mad?' said Alice.
     `You must be,' said the Cat, `or you wouldn't have come here.'
  • Theory of [human] evolution
     Reply #65 - April 02, 2014, 06:25 PM
    Quote from: osmanthus on April 02, 2014, 07:54 AM
    We already know early H. sapiens interbred with Neanderthals and Denisovans, and they're technically classified as "different species".

    *Uses this as justification for having sex with non–human animals*

    Oops、did I say that out loud?!
  • Theory of [human] evolution
     Reply #66 - April 02, 2014, 06:46 PM
    Sorry to ask this weird question which may sound silly, but please do answer me. More and more women are actively participating in works that requires the use of strength. Is it possible that women can become physically strong like men in the future if things go on like this?
  • Theory of [human] evolution
     Reply #67 - April 02, 2014, 07:27 PM
    Quote from: Kodanshi on April 02, 2014, 06:25 PM
    *Uses this as justification for having sex with non–human animals*
    Oops、did I say that out loud?!


    But they are humans...
  • Theory of [human] evolution
     Reply #68 - April 02, 2014, 07:28 PM
    Quote from: Rubaya on April 02, 2014, 06:46 PM
    Sorry to ask this weird question which may sound silly, but please do answer me. More and more women are actively participating in works that requires the use of strength. Is it possible that women can become physically strong like men in the future if things go on like this?

    If there is a selection pressure for it, yes. In other words, if extra physical strength becomes a matter of life or death (literally) for women over a long enough period of time.

    Given that humans haven't relied only on physical strength, and will probably rely on it less in future, it's probably not likely.
    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Theory of [human] evolution
     Reply #69 - April 02, 2014, 07:49 PM
    That's the thing, there is no real selection pressure on humans. In the developed world at least, environmental factors are pretty much irrelevant. Any kind of behavioural trend is usually too short-lived to have any lasting influence in successive generations. Even the 'unfit' can go on to reproduce. Those with Asthma, for example, would have died young naturally. Now it's a manageable irritation for most sufferers and they go on to live full lives, have children, pass on their genes, die of old age. Our selection process has pretty much been reduced to what amounts to artificial selection.
    Too fucking busy, and vice versa.
  • Theory of [human] evolution
     Reply #70 - April 02, 2014, 07:53 PM
    Or in other words, we changed the world, the world no longer changes us.
    `But I don't want to go among mad people,' Alice remarked.
     `Oh, you can't help that,' said the Cat: `we're all mad here. I'm mad.  You're mad.'
     `How do you know I'm mad?' said Alice.
     `You must be,' said the Cat, `or you wouldn't have come here.'
  • Theory of [human] evolution
     Reply #71 - April 02, 2014, 08:22 PM
    Quote from: Siunaa Maailmaa on April 02, 2014, 02:44 PM
    Just yesterday I read this text I found:
    http://www.student.oulu.fi/~ktikkane/macro.html
    Google translate:
    http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=fi&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=fi&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.student.oulu.fi%2F%7Ektikkane%2Fmacro.html&act=url

    Basic points were, sadly without exact sources:
    -4 fuzed tailbones in humans, hipbones with pythons etc.
    -Leftover in our DNA that came when our ancestors ate mainly C-vitamin food and lost ability to create it. (source?)

    I told you about this already. Like I said, look up GULO if you want to know more (that's the usual term for the gene in question). It's well known in biology.


    Quote
    -Mark in our DNA that when our far-ancestors with spine came from sea to land they were attacked by viruses and bacteria when our skin and immune system were not very evolved. (source?)

    Check the third link I gave you yesterday.

    Researchers discover ancient virus DNA remnants necessary for pluripotency in humans


    Quote
    -Why some animals are found only from some places, such as Homo habilis or austropithecus never found from Siberia or Mexico? (I don't really see how this proofs anything though)

    Think about it some more. If that doesn't work, ask again. Smiley


    Quote
    -No mosaique animals such as winged horse (Muhammad, is there something you want to confess? Cheesy), flying elephants, bees or birds with four legs, dinosaurs with both four legs and wings, locust with 4,8,10 or 12 legs etc. (cannot really see why this proves anything)

    Same answer.
    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Theory of [human] evolution
     Reply #72 - April 02, 2014, 08:23 PM
    Quote from: Quod Sum Eris on April 02, 2014, 07:53 PM
    Or in other words, we changed the world, the world no longer changes us.

    A common conceit, but not quite true.
    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Theory of [human] evolution
     Reply #73 - April 07, 2014, 08:42 AM
    Ok, was a bit bored so decided to do some of the lad's homework for him. I don't have any of this in Finnish, but I'm sure that L-gulonolactone oxidase will be spelled the same way in both English and Finnish science texts, so Siunaa Maailmaa can look it up himself if he needs it in Finnish.

    This is about the last bit of this stuff:

    Quote from: Siunaa Maailmaa on April 02, 2014, 02:44 PM
    Just yesterday I read this text I found:
    http://www.student.oulu.fi/~ktikkane/macro.html
    Google translate:
    http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=fi&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=fi&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.student.oulu.fi%2F%7Ektikkane%2Fmacro.html&act=url

    Basic points were, sadly without exact sources:
    -4 fuzed tailbones in humans, hipbones with pythons etc.
    -Leftover in our DNA that came when our ancestors ate mainly C-vitamin food and lost ability to create it. (source?)

    Like I said, the usual abbreviation used is GULO (which is just a shortened version of GULonolactone Oxidase), or you'll sometimes see it referred to as GULOP, where the P at the end is for pseudogene (which is an old gene that doesn't work any more).

    Here's the basic Wiki article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L-gulonolactone_oxidase

    Quote
    The non-functional gulonolactone oxidase pseudogene (GULOP) was mapped to human chromosome 8p21 that corresponds to an evolutionarily conserved segment on either porcine chromosome 4 (SSC4) or 14 (SSC14). GULO produces the precursor to ascorbic acid, which spontaneously converts to the vitamin ("vitamin C").

    The loss of activity of the gene for L-gulonolactone oxidase (GULO) has occurred separately in the history of several species. GULO activity has been lost in some species of bats, but others retain it. The loss of this enzyme activity is responsible for the inability of guinea pigs to enzymatically synthesize vitamin C. Both these events happened independently of the loss in the haplorrhini suborder of primates, including humans.

    Note the last bit about the haplorrhini suborder of primates. It includes humans. You'll need to know that to get through the techy bits here:

    Pseudogenes - Evidence for the Evolutionary Model

    That bangs on about haplorrhines quite a bit, so whenever it says haplorrhines just remember it means us, and apes we are closely related to, plus a few other sort of apey critters like tarsiers.

    Anyway, as well as banging on about haplorrhines it tells you why the GULO thingy is a good one for human evolution. I'm sure you can find more about this if you look.
    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Theory of [human] evolution
     Reply #74 - April 11, 2014, 04:26 PM
    Quote
    I told you about this already. Like I said, look up GULO if you want to know more (that's the usual term for the gene in question). It's well known in biology.


    Ok, I will. I missed your link.

    Quote
    Think about it some more. If that doesn't work, ask again.


    I see the basic logic behind the idea but I don't really see if that is very valid reasoning. If God created stuff, why couldn't he have just created some animals somewhere and others elsewhere?

    Quote
    Same answer.


    Why there should be mosaique animals whether evolution/creation was true or false?
    I ask many stupid questions frequently.
    I am curious, that's why I ask many questions.
    I am overly curious, that's why I ask stupid questions.
    I lack patience, that's why I ask frequently.
    So forgive me and answer me Smiley
  • Theory of [human] evolution
     Reply #75 - April 11, 2014, 05:03 PM
    Quote from: Siunaa Maailmaa on April 11, 2014, 04:26 PM
    I see the basic logic behind the idea but I don't really see if that is very valid reasoning. If God created stuff, why couldn't he have just created some animals somewhere and others elsewhere?

    Obviously an omnipotent deity could do anything it liked, including eating ice cream in Hell just to piss the condemned sinners off.

    If we found animals in places that didn't make sense, when considered against what we know of plate tectonics and evolution, that would be good evidence for creationism. We don't find such animals. We only find animals that are in places we would expect them to be if evolution was responsible.

    Quote
    Why there should be mosaique animals whether evolution/creation was true or false?

    There shouldn't be mosaic animals if evolution is responsible, because evolution does not work by chopping existing animals up and randomly sticking the bits back together to form new and different animals. Creation presumably could work that way.

    Since we don't see such animals....
    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Theory of [human] evolution
     Reply #76 - April 12, 2014, 08:19 AM
    MWAHAHAHAHA_fuckity_HA! dance

    Ok dude, I was trawling through the ancient catacombs of the forum in an attempt to find something in particular. I haven't found it yet, but did find some other stuff I'd temporarily forgotten about.

    First, how's this for evidence that humans evolved from primitive fish?





    Totally convincing, huh? bunny

    Ok, maybe not.

    Well we did evolve from primitive fish anyway, and there's a way you can tell: recurrent laryngeal nerve.

    The recurrent laryngeal nerve is killer evidence for common ancestry, not just for humans and fish but for a huge range of species. You seriously need to understand this one, so read up on it. Afro

    Also, for evolution in general:

    Quote from: osmanthus on November 06, 2010, 10:45 PM
    There's too much evidence for any one person to ever read it all. Everything from GULO genes in primates to antifreeze in notothenoids to diversification of cichlids and ring species effects in gulls and nylonase in bacteria.

    Now you're already aware of the GULO stuff, but the rest of it is worth looking into as well.

    Notothenoids are "ice fish" that live in the Antarctic. There is a lot of information out there about these fish, as they have been extensively studied.

    They have antifreeze in their blood, for obvious reasons. The other fish they are related to don't have antifreeze blood, but they do have existing precursor molecules which perform a useful metabolic function, and which are clearly the molecules that were adapted to form the notothenoids' antifreeze. I can get you actual scientific papers on this shiznit if you really want them.

    Diversification of cichlids: this is another thing that has been extensively studied. You can easily spend months just reading up on cichlid evolution if you have the time.

     Ring species effects in gulls: this doesn't just apply to gulls, but they're one of the most famous examples.

    Nylonase in bacteria: this is a good one, because it had to evolve after humans invented nylon. yes

    Anyway, do the recurrent laryngeal nerve first.  Afro
    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Theory of [human] evolution
     Reply #77 - April 12, 2014, 08:48 AM
    Oh and this rocks.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-secvJmHy7U
    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Theory of [human] evolution
     Reply #78 - April 12, 2014, 03:17 PM
    To my fellow monkeys and apes

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=igq_niFmXNs
    "I Knew who I was this morning, but I've changed a few times since then." Alice in wonderland

    "This is the only heaven we have how dare you make it a hell" Dr Marlene Winell
  • Theory of [human] evolution
     Reply #79 - April 12, 2014, 04:41 PM
    Seeing pictures of bald chimpanzees totally made me realise how close we are genetically to them。Plus one of them looked like a long–standing mate of mine、just without tattoos!
  • Previous page 1 2 3« Previous thread | Next thread »