[Mattshark]

turbonium, on 02 November 2009 - 09:48 AM, said:

And that's just your odds of any chromosomal fusion occurring. You haven't even considered that this "fusion event" must also create a more advanced species.

Cleary actually you have not paid any attention at all as this sentence clearly indicates. You are too happy wallowing in your own ignorance.

[Copasetic]

turbonium, on 02 November 2009 - 04:48 AM, said:

No, I simply didn't have the time to respond to it, until now.

It can essentially be summed up in your own comments...

"That is a whole lot of 'what ifs' and 'hypothetical'". And I say I know! Winning the lottery is also a big what-if, a big hypothetical, but the lottery is a process and when viewed as such it is inevitable that someone is going to win."

What does it say for your argument, when you've already conceded that it has as much chance of occurring as winning the lottery?

And that's just your odds of any chromosomal fusion occurring. You haven't even considered that this "fusion event" must also create a more advanced species.

In other words, your argument is "anything is possible over millions/billions of years". Evolution Theory uses that excuse all the time.

You obviously didn't really read and digest what I wrote and simply skimmed for something to "use" against me. That portion you copied and pasted above was referring to made up example I was using.

As I pointed out numerous times in the posts--Those kinds of translocations do happen and happen often. Robertsonian translocations (just one process responsible for chromosome number change) happens 1 in every 1000 births. That certainly seems like "long odds" to happen to you as an individual, but consider in the US alone there are 5 million babies born every year (give or take a few hundred thousand).

So you didn't understand that point about "and that's just your odds of any chromosomal fusion occurring."


Next you claim;

Quote

You haven't even considered that this "fusion event" must also create a more advanced species.

Which thoroughly reiterates your lack of understanding regarding evolution. I am not sure at this juncture how you can take your own self seriously with these posts. Surely you must be starting to realize how ill-informed you are?

Anyway, evolution isn't about creating more "advanced" species. Evolution isn't about trying to create anything, it's simply a reaction to competition and a changing environment.

Consider a small breeding population (such as geographically isolated types of pre genus homo which occurred in the African savannas) in which a balanced Robertsonian translocation arose, let's say 500 adult breeding sub-population.

On drift alone such a balanced translocation could become quickly fixed in population. For example, I ran a simulation regarding genetic drift and such a event, with 500 individual population and occurrence of 1 in a 1000 or .001 for a frequency. Based upon chance alone, no selection that is to say, you can see the trait become fixed in as long as (though this is still quick across geological time) 467 generations (roughly 10,000 years);



To fixations occurring very quickly like 74 (I believe the lowest I got was 12 generations)-Roughly 1500 years:



Again, this is based on purely chance alone and a small isolated sub-population. If such a translocation introduced even a mild selection factor, one in which say carriers achieved a relative fitness of 1 and non-carriers of .9 (a very close relative fitness), you can see how quickly selection will fix the trait;



This also isn't even beginning to consider the reproductive factors of balanced individuals mating more successfully with other balanced individuals as opposed to non-carriers. When you start factoring such things in, we are talking possibly fixating in a few centuries.


So as to your final statement;

Quote

In other words, your argument is "anything is possible over millions/billions of years". Evolution Theory uses that excuse all the time.

I am not using any such argument. Like we have seen in mice and other wild animal species fixation of a translocation that incurs a selective advantage would have very quickly (geologically speaking).

What's your excuse for failing to assimilate this information? Since of the two of us, only one seems to be using 'excuses'.

Edit: Apologies the population simulation software I used is Populus one of the many tools of population biologists. Available at the link for free.

This post has been edited by Copasetic: 02 November 2009 - 03:06 PM

[Qoais]

You are very observant jmccr8

[jmccr8]

i would just like to put this out there and see what your opinions are.in De Anima Aristotle determines that the soul has qualities that are unique to itself independant of the body.he also states that man is the unity of the body and the soul,and in the absense of this unity that you are not man.now if man evolved as described by evolutionist, the stuff that gives this primordial soup the opportunity to develop into a myriad of species over a given period of time,what caused man to have a higher spirit or soul than other emerging species?Aristotle does allow for lower classifications of soul for plant and animal,so did that meteorite also carry soul with it?or did aliens take a lesser developed hominoid life form that had an animanl soul and not only genetically alter the physical characteristics of the animal,but give it a greater soul as well?

[Mattshark]

jmccr8, on 03 November 2009 - 02:13 AM, said:

i would just like to put this out there and see what your opinions are.in De Anima Aristotle determines that the soul has qualities that are unique to itself independant of the body.he also states that man is the unity of the body and the soul,and in the absense of this unity that you are not man.now if man evolved as described by evolutionist, the stuff that gives this primordial soup the opportunity to develop into a myriad of species over a given period of time,what caused man to have a higher spirit or soul than other emerging species?Aristotle does allow for lower classifications of soul for plant and animal,so did that meteorite also carry soul with it?or did aliens take a lesser developed hominoid life form that had an animanl soul and not only genetically alter the physical characteristics of the animal,but give it a greater soul as well?

What is too say we have a higher developed spirit, or even a soul at all exactly? We are really no different from any other animal.

[Qoais]

Mattshark, on 02 November 2009 - 06:50 PM, said:

What is too say we have a higher developed spirit, or even a soul at all exactly? We are really no different from any other animal.

This is the part of the "attitude" of evolutionists that isn't very attractive. We are distinguished from the animal kingdom by being cultured and civilized, by our ability to solve problems and propose theories, and by our desire to try to help those less fortunate than ourselves. What animal other than us, does these things? We are flesh and blood like them, we have to eat to sustain ourselves like them, but we are not like them. In the other thread I asked Harte if he would give up all the niceties of life and go live with the pigs in a sty? I said I gave him pigsty because pigs are at least clean, they crap in only one place while other animals crap wherever they are standing. Most land animals do not voluntarily have a daily bath. So tell me, if you are the same as the animals, why is it that you are not living like they do?

[jmccr8]

Mattshark, on 03 November 2009 - 03:50 AM, said:

What is too say we have a higher developed spirit, or even a soul at all exactly? We are really no different from any other animal.

the way i understand Aristotle's position is that all things that have live have a soul.the soul attributed to plant life is that it procreates others like itself,that it has motivatiom in that it follows the sun and that it is motivated to survive though nourishment.for the animal soul it has the same qualities,and given that it has the ability to move that it has more qualities that the plant soul.the animal soul is of a higher level as it has instinct a neccessity for self preservation(hunting,self-defence).for man he determinds that man is given to calculation and reason.he also determines that the qualities that are unique to the soul are dependant on the inter-action of the unity of the body and the soul.that reason and calculation are properties of the soul and in the absence of the unity of body/soul the soul would no longer be able to experience new information,however the information that it had experienced while in union with the body was property of the soul.so stated then all of the experiences still give the soul the function of calculation and reason and that it could exist as an intelligent form that could still calculate and reason based on its previous life experiences.all i am asking is given this perspective,would the potetial for soul also been a part of the what it is that makes life in this evolutionary process and it is not made of the stuff that you can measure or quantify, how canit have gotten here.and if and alien culture can here and manipulated the genetic form of a speciec that was not capable of reason and calculation would they then have also given man a soul?i hope that this question is better phrased for you Mattshark as i have seen much better illustrated responses from you at other times.thanks jmccr8

[TheSearcher]

Qoais, on 03 November 2009 - 04:10 AM, said:

This is the part of the "attitude" of evolutionists that isn't very attractive. We are distinguished from the animal kingdom by being cultured and civilized, by our ability to solve problems and propose theories, and by our desire to try to help those less fortunate than ourselves. What animal other than us, does these things? We are flesh and blood like them, we have to eat to sustain ourselves like them, but we are not like them. In the other thread I asked Harte if he would give up all the niceties of life and go live with the pigs in a sty? I said I gave him pigsty because pigs are at least clean, they crap in only one place while other animals crap wherever they are standing. Most land animals do not voluntarily have a daily bath. So tell me, if you are the same as the animals, why is it that you are not living like they do?

Qoais, I would not put the desire to help those less fortunate than us as an ability. We do that under sociocultural influence, its a learned attitude if you will. Humans show often enough that they couldn't care less.

As to cultured and civilized, that's in the eye of the beholder. Having seen what war and religion can do, with my own eyes, I have my doubts about both of them. There was nothing cultured and civilized when Huttu's and Tutsi's started killing eachother in Africa, or during the war in Bosnia.
I call it "the thin layer of civilisation", which comes off easely, when scratched just a little.

I will agree however, that our ability to solve problems and propose theories differentiates us from most other species.

[Mattshark]

jmccr8, on 03 November 2009 - 03:47 AM, said:

the way i understand Aristotle's position is that all things that have live have a soul.the soul attributed to plant life is that it procreates others like itself,that it has motivatiom in that it follows the sun and that it is motivated to survive though nourishment.for the animal soul it has the same qualities,and given that it has the ability to move that it has more qualities that the plant soul.the animal soul is of a higher level as it has instinct a neccessity for self preservation(hunting,self-defence).for man he determinds that man is given to calculation and reason.he also determines that the qualities that are unique to the soul are dependant on the inter-action of the unity of the body and the soul.that reason and calculation are properties of the soul and in the absence of the unity of body/soul the soul would no longer be able to experience new information,however the information that it had experienced while in union with the body was property of the soul.so stated then all of the experiences still give the soul the function of calculation and reason and that it could exist as an intelligent form that could still calculate and reason based on its previous life experiences.all i am asking is given this perspective,would the potetial for soul also been a part of the what it is that makes life in this evolutionary process and it is not made of the stuff that you can measure or quantify, how canit have gotten here.and if and alien culture can here and manipulated the genetic form of a speciec that was not capable of reason and calculation would they then have also given man a soul?i hope that this question is better phrased for you Mattshark as i have seen much better illustrated responses from you at other times.thanks jmccr8

Well not to look down on Aristotle, but biologically, he is miles out. That could only be true if you ignore the past 2000 years of biological evidence.

[cormac mac airt]

Quote

We are distinguished from the animal kingdom by being cultured and civilized...

Riiiiight! Tell that to anyone who’s ever fought in, or lost a loved one in any war in, say, the last 5000 years.

Quote

We are flesh and blood like them, we have to eat to sustain ourselves like them, but we are not like them.

We kill for food, like them. We kill to protect our own, like them. We kill to protect our territory, like them. How are we not like them?

Most land animals do not voluntarily have a daily bath.

There is no evidence, AFAIK, that this is anything but a relatively recent concept for humans. Earliest evidence for bathing, even semi-regularly, in Mesopotamia, Ancient Egypt and the Indus Valley Civilization dating to around the 3rd millenium BC. Considering our species goes back 200,000+ years, that's not a significant percentage of our existance.

cormac

[Agent. Mulder]

KennyB, on 02 November 2009 - 04:30 AM, said:

jmccr8, I guess you could say that. #1 The Anunnaki #2 homo sapiens #3 The descendants of the Iggi crossed with homo sapiens. The Anunnaki lived an incredible length of time, like 400,000 years or more. It's possible the original ones who came to Earth could still be alive. Their planet, Nibiru, takes about 3600 years to make an orbit. They've only been gone less than that, they won't have changed at all, neither will the Iggi. I doubt if homo sapiens have evolved any in 3000 years. The descendants of the Iggi are all dead. The Anunnaki are gone, unless some stayed behind. Anyway, if the Anunnaki returned tomorrow, they could breed with Earth females. If some other alien race showed up, they probably couldn't. KennyB

and how would you go about proving any of this?
if it was true, it would be obvious to us, as we would find the remains and the differences in genetics.

[jmccr8]

Mattshark, on 03 November 2009 - 01:51 PM, said:

Well not to look down on Aristotle, but biologically, he is miles out. That could only be true if you ignore the past 2000 years of biological evidence.

thanks for the response Mattshark.i suppose where i'm going with this is if we and all other species evolved from the same roots at the dawn of time,why has the ability to reason and be given to calaulation made itself evidernt in the species of man?why is man the only species able to control his environment,and to manipulate his environment to create new food sources?why is man able to achieve a higher state of conciencness that any other species on the planet if all life formed from the same base elements capable of evolving life?thanks.jmccr8

[odiesbsc]

cormac mac airt, on 03 November 2009 - 06:23 PM, said:

Riiiiight! Tell that to anyone who’s ever fought in, or lost a loved one in any war in, say, the last 5000 years.

Sir, Not to belittle your thoughts, by all means, I have fought for two, One year tours in a war. War is a different entity than any culture or civilization, but there are times when compassion takes over.

Just my thoughts.

Odie

[Harte]

jmccr8, on 03 November 2009 - 03:46 PM, said:

...if we and all other species evolved from the same roots at the dawn of time,why has the ability to reason and be given to calaulation made itself evidernt in the species of man?why is man the only species able to control his environment,and to manipulate his environment to create new food sources?why is man able to achieve a higher state of conciencness that any other species on the planet if all life formed from the same base elements capable of evolving life?

Because we murdered, butchered and ate all the other animals that could do this.

Hey odie,

Is it just me or have you not been around or what?

Seems like I ain't seen you fer awhile. Maybe I'm having a senior moment.

Harte

This post has been edited by Harte: 03 November 2009 - 10:10 PM

[jmccr8]

Harte, on 03 November 2009 - 11:06 PM, said:

Because we murdered, butchered and ate all the other animals that could do this.

Hey odie,

Is it just me or have you not been around or what?

Seems like I ain't seen you fer awhile. Maybe I'm having a senior moment.

Harte

hello Harte,interesting statement,could you refer me to a site that describes the archetecual/philosophical/artistic/scientific achievements of these animals that we have murdered and canabalized for our own self fulfillment?i would be very interested in reading up on them as i haven't heard of this society of animanls before.where did they live eastern/western hemisphere,during which time period did this occur?thank you for you input.jmccr8