the13bats Posted October 17, 2019 #76 Share Posted October 17, 2019 18 minutes ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said: 99% exactly tells us It is not human, yes. Closely related but still not human. Researchers determined back in 2005 that chimpanzees share somewhere between 98.6 and 99 percent of our DNA. They're closer to humans than they are to gorillas! So your show found a puddle a chimp drank from or whizzed in? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docyabut2 Posted October 17, 2019 #77 Share Posted October 17, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said: 99% exactly tells us It is not human, yes. Closely related but still not human. Researchers determined back in 2005 that chimpanzees share somewhere between 98.6 and 99 percent of our DNA. They're closer to humans than they are to gorillas! right! read that again we are from chimpanzees but we are also the ancesters of the gorilla Edited October 17, 2019 by docyabut2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carnoferox Posted October 17, 2019 #78 Share Posted October 17, 2019 (edited) 13 minutes ago, docyabut2 said: right! read that again we are chimpanzees No we are not chimpanzees, we just share a common ancestor with them. While they are our closest living relatives, several extinct hominins like Paranthropus and Australopithecus are more closely related to us. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimpanzee–human_last_common_ancestor Edited October 17, 2019 by Carnoferox 3 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docyabut2 Posted October 17, 2019 #79 Share Posted October 17, 2019 (edited) 23 minutes ago, Carnoferox said: No we are not chimpanzees, we just share a common ancestor with them. While they are our closest living relatives, several extinct hominins like Paranthropus and Australopithecus are more closely related to us. I guess whats simple we are the frist hommids of the frist hommids of the homo sapiens https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_sapiens Edited October 17, 2019 by docyabut2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earl.Of.Trumps Posted October 17, 2019 #80 Share Posted October 17, 2019 1 hour ago, the13bats said: So your show found a puddle a chimp drank from or whizzed in? I didn't say that. I said what they found was "unknown". I never said chimp. a chimp is known. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docyabut2 Posted October 17, 2019 #81 Share Posted October 17, 2019 (edited) I remember reading ,we are from the first six hommids of frist hommids of the homo sapiens https://search.aol.com/aol/image;_ylt=A0geK.G79Khd_IoAqRxpCWVH;_ylu=X3oDMTByMDgyYjJiBGNvbG8DYmYxBHBvcwMyBHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzYw--?q=six+hominids+of+first+hominids+of+the+homo+sapiens&v_t=comsearch Edited October 17, 2019 by docyabut2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earl.Of.Trumps Posted October 17, 2019 #82 Share Posted October 17, 2019 Wow. Let us not carried away here, folks. All I ever tried to say was, yes - we share a lot of DNA with the chimp but a chimp is not human. Also, a chimp is known. What the Bhutan explorers found was an UNKNOWN species that is close to human - as close as the chimp, but not a chimp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carnoferox Posted October 17, 2019 #83 Share Posted October 17, 2019 25 minutes ago, docyabut2 said: I guess whats simple we are the frist hommids of the frist hommids of the homo sapiens https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_sapiens 11 minutes ago, docyabut2 said: I remember reading ,we are from the first six hommids of frist hommids of the homo sapiens https://search.aol.com/aol/image;_ylt=A0geK.G79Khd_IoAqRxpCWVH;_ylu=X3oDMTByMDgyYjJiBGNvbG8DYmYxBHBvcwMyBHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzYw--?q=six+hominids+of+first+hominids+of+the+homo+sapiens&v_t=comsearch I'm not sure exactly what you're trying to say, but we certainly aren't the first species of Homo. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the13bats Posted October 17, 2019 #84 Share Posted October 17, 2019 21 minutes ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said: Wow. Let us not carried away here, folks. All I ever tried to say was, yes - we share a lot of DNA with the chimp but a chimp is not human. Also, a chimp is known. What the Bhutan explorers found was an UNKNOWN species that is close to human - as close as the chimp, but not a chimp. No, it just means it wasnt complete 99% isnt 100% and that a match wasnt in their database, Can you link to the DNA dr/lab that carried out the tests so we may review their data for ourselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docyabut2 Posted October 17, 2019 #85 Share Posted October 17, 2019 (edited) its what we all came from Edited October 17, 2019 by docyabut2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stereologist Posted October 18, 2019 #86 Share Posted October 18, 2019 6 hours ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said: 99% exactly tells us It is not human, yes. Closely related but still not human. Researchers determined back in 2005 that chimpanzees share somewhere between 98.6 and 99 percent of our DNA. They're closer to humans than they are to gorillas! You might want to look up the numbers instead of making pointless guesses. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stereologist Posted October 18, 2019 #87 Share Posted October 18, 2019 4 hours ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said: I didn't say that. I said what they found was "unknown". I never said chimp. a chimp is known. Real DNA researchers have clearly stated that there is no such thing as unknown DNA. What pretend researchers are you referring to? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stereologist Posted October 18, 2019 #88 Share Posted October 18, 2019 4 hours ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said: Wow. Let us not carried away here, folks. All I ever tried to say was, yes - we share a lot of DNA with the chimp but a chimp is not human. Also, a chimp is known. What the Bhutan explorers found was an UNKNOWN species that is close to human - as close as the chimp, but not a chimp. Please tell us what pretend researchers you are referring to so that all of us know what jokers to laugh at. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horta Posted October 18, 2019 #89 Share Posted October 18, 2019 Quote Man says the footprints he found aren't human ...but reality says they aren't bigfoot lol. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earl.Of.Trumps Posted October 18, 2019 #90 Share Posted October 18, 2019 13 hours ago, the13bats said: No, it just means it wasnt complete 99% isnt 100% and that a match wasnt in their database, Can you link to the DNA dr/lab that carried out the tests so we may review their data for ourselves. I'v tried looking for it with no success, but I never looked on youtube. The lab was University of Grenoble, France. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earl.Of.Trumps Posted October 18, 2019 #91 Share Posted October 18, 2019 9 hours ago, stereologist said: You might want to look up the numbers instead of making pointless guesses. You should say that to the source that wrote it. What the hell is "pointless guesses" supposed to mean??? It's actually fact. Oh, I get it. You want a flame war. Doh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the13bats Posted October 18, 2019 #92 Share Posted October 18, 2019 10 minutes ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said: I'v tried looking for it with no success, but I never looked on youtube. The lab was University of Grenoble, France. I have been disappointed by a few so called DNA experts, like for profit ketchem https://bigfootbase.com/bigfoot-evidence/dna 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
openozy Posted October 18, 2019 #93 Share Posted October 18, 2019 On 10/13/2019 at 2:33 PM, the13bats said: Openozy, that big yowie hunter you met, does he get all into print casts like krantz etc did over here? Yeah,he had casts all over his shop. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stereologist Posted October 18, 2019 #94 Share Posted October 18, 2019 4 hours ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said: You should say that to the source that wrote it. What the hell is "pointless guesses" supposed to mean??? It's actually fact. Oh, I get it. You want a flame war. Doh! Like I suggested you might want to look up the numbers. Here is a hint 23 vs 24. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earl.Of.Trumps Posted October 18, 2019 #95 Share Posted October 18, 2019 9 hours ago, the13bats said: I have been disappointed by a few so called DNA experts, like for profit ketchem https://bigfootbase.com/bigfoot-evidence/dna Ketchem is just a flake. But Bryan Sykes of England seems to be free of the same types of criticisms as Ketchem. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the13bats Posted October 19, 2019 #96 Share Posted October 19, 2019 5 hours ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said: Ketchem is just a flake. But Bryan Sykes of England seems to be free of the same types of criticisms as Ketchem. Ketchem is just gone i think she believes her tripe, I've read she even liked bigfoot to canines. Sykes got roasted ( by jealous types that he proved yeti was a bear ) for saying the wrong type of bear at first due to his DNA databases being incomplete then he went off the deep end with his back theories of zana, but he proved she was not anything except a ( mistreated ) human, that chapped butts of people like Igor Burtsev who had promoted for decades zanas was part almasty, sub human, ape woman, surviving Neanderthal etc, then again burtsev stayed a week with Janice Carter who he insultingly to goodall called carter the goodall of bigfoot carter was that ( looney, delusinal ) the gal who claimed to be raised and friends with a bigfoot family, check out the results of the DNA from her sample, and what the co author of her book thought of her. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docyabut2 Posted October 19, 2019 #97 Share Posted October 19, 2019 We all come from the Mitochondrial Eve http://www.mhrc.net/mitochondrialEve.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docyabut2 Posted October 19, 2019 #98 Share Posted October 19, 2019 https://phys.org/news/2013-06-oldest-primate-skeleton.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docyabut2 Posted October 19, 2019 #99 Share Posted October 19, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docyabut2 Posted October 19, 2019 #100 Share Posted October 19, 2019 trying to find that report of the oldest ancestor of a fossil found that we have the same leg, they called it ellie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now