nwabekeyi:

In providing your proof, kindly explain why we share 99% of our DNA with chimpanzee with verifiable facts sir

becareful with this line of thought, we also share about 97 of our DNA with mouse and just half with a parent but that does not make us chimpanzee than our parent when say we share 99% of our genes with chimpanzees, we mean that 99% of our alignable DNA sequence is identical. Thus, chimps have some genes that we don't, and we have some genes that chimps don't. A example is the gene MYH16.

SoundLock:
Humans didn't evolve naturally from primates.

I'm not against evolution, I think it's a scientific reality, but one that occurs slowly over an extremely long period of time.

Science tells us that humans evolved from a line of primates. This is what I want to disprove. My refusal to accept this theory is that it is practically impossible given how different humans are from other so-called prehuman primates, and also given the extremely short period of time in which these drastic changes associated with the evolution of man(homo sapiens) couldn't have possibly occurred all at once.

Stop seeing it as something progressive. Evolution is not progressive. We are not more evolved than the cedar tree. Evolution produces a tree, not a ladder, representing organisms that are all evolved to adapt to their niche for that time. All science does not rely on controlled laboratory experiments. But still, many aspects of evolution can be studied in lab and observed in. check this fascinating article about an experiment in rapid evolution .nature.http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2014/02/evolution-in-real-time/

vaxx:
becareful with this line of thought, we also share about 97 of our DNA with mouse and just half with a parent but that does not make us chimpanzee than our parent when say we share 99% of our genes with chimpanzees, we mean that 99% of our alignable DNA sequence is identical. Thus, chimps have some genes that we don't, and we have some genes that chimps don't. A example is the gene MYH16.

I know, if we share 97% DNA with mouse, does that not also suggest that we have same evolutionary line and we must have evolve from them in one way?

Think about it, our DNA sequence would have been totally different

Following

nwabekeyi:
I know, if we share 97% DNA with mouse, does that not also suggest that we have same evolutionary line and we must have evolve from them in one way?

Think about it, our DNA sequence would have been totally different

No Scientists do not say that humans evolved from mouse nor chimpanzees. This is what scientists say:

“ About 8-9 million years ago, the descendants of the dryopithecines in Africa diverged into two lines--one that led to gorillas and another to humans, chimpanzees, and bonobos. Around 7 million years ago, a further divergence occurred which separated the ancestors of modern chimpanzees and bonobos from the early hominins (human-like primates) that were our direct ancestors''.

http://anthro.palomar.edu/earlyprimates/early_2.htm

Both plant and animal has an amount of DNA similarities not just human. we are all decedent of LUCA which to me shows representation of trademark. every manufacturer will like to put his label on his product

vaxx:
No Scientists do not say that humans evolved from nor chimpanzees. This is what scientists say:

“ About 8-9 million years ago, the descendants of the dryopithecines in Africa diverged into two lines--one that led to gorillas and another to humans, chimpanzees, and bonobos. Around 7 million years ago, a further divergence occurred which separated the ancestors of modern chimpanzees and bonobos from the early hominins (human-like primates) that were our direct ancestors''.

http://anthro.palomar.edu/earlyprimates/early_2.htm

Both plant and animal has an amount of DNA similarities not just human. we are all decedent of LUCA which to me shows representation of trademark. every manufacturer will like to put his label on his product

good, that's a very good one.

So if we share 50% DNA with plants, is it simply a basis to say that humans were not just created separately like some people claim?

interesting

nwabekeyi:
good, that's a very good one.

So if we share 50% DNA with plants, is it simply a basis to say that humans were not just created separately like some people claim?

All life on earth are related in the long intricate web of evolutionary ancestry.

If you are judging from an evolutionary perspective

Interesting thread. Following.

I'm not a scientist or evolutionist and not close to being one but I reasoned with what the holy book says that both man, animals and plant came from the sand and goes back to the sand and that proving from reality.... "Just my neutral view why We share similarities with animals and plant"

sholytomx:
I'm not a scientist or evolutionist and not close to being one but I reasoned with what the holy book says that both man, animals and plant came from the sand and goes back to the sand and that proving from reality.... "Just my neutral view why We share similarities with animals and plant"

man do not go back to sand, the flesh is decomposed b microorganisms.

Kill a rat, put it in a glass, it will still disappeared overtime and doesn't turn to sand, flesh don't turn to sand

nwabekeyi:
man do not go back to sand, the flesh is decomposed b microorganisms.

Kill a rat, put it in a glass, it will still disappeared overtime and doesn't turn to sand, flesh don't turn to sand

Have u tried it cos I did when I was abt 5 or 6 year old I kill a lizard kept it in a plastic bottle and kept it where nobody can reach and I actually forget it there for about a year or so then I remembered and go back to it, I found the plastic bottle sealed as I left it and inside it was tiny bones and sustances life dust, what do you call that sir?

nwabekeyi:
man do not go back to sand, the flesh is decomposed b microorganisms.

Kill a rat, put it in a glass, it will still disappeared overtime and doesn't turn to sand, flesh don't turn to sand

Have you notice this also cos I have overtime. I even ask others both young and old and they confirmed it: You clean and redress your bed before going to sleep at night and when you wake up "You Find little Sand on your Bed" not just dust but Sands....Note I wash my leg thoroughly many time just to confirm is not the sand from my Leg.....Pls try to give attention to it if you have not and explain to me Why that Happen.... As I said earlier this are just a neutral evidence to prove that the Bible is Right.

sholytomx:
I'm not a scientist or evolutionist and not close to being one but I reasoned with what the holy book says that both man, animals and plant came from the sand and goes back to the sand and that proving from reality.... "Just my neutral view why We share similarities with animals and plant"

The finished product of man,plant and animal is matter. scientifically we are composed of air and water. just little presence of silicon which is found in the high quantify in the dust. so the idea we are created out of dust is hanging. but i have read a scientific report that try to validate the claim.

nwabekeyi:
good, that's a very good one.

So if we share 50% DNA with plants, is it simply a basis to say that humans were not just created separately like some people claim?

logically it means we are all related.

vaxx:
The finished product of man,plant and animal is matter. scientifically we are composed of air and water. just little presence of silicon which is found in the high quantify in the dust. so the idea we are created out of dust is hanging. but i have read a scientific report that try to validate the claim.

So can you convinced me sir with evident why those claim does not prove my point? or else I'll go with what I found sensible.

sholytomx:

Have you notice this also cos I have overtime. I even ask others both young and old and they confirmed it: You clean and redress your bed before going to sleep at night and when you wake up "You Find little Sand on your Bed" not just dust but Sands....Note I wash my leg thoroughly many time just to confirm is not the sand from my Leg.....Pls try to give attention to it if you have not and explain to me Why that Happen.... As I said earlier this are just a neutral evidence to prove that the Bible is Right.

lolz

I have not noticed it, I'm hearing this for the first time.

Again, you cannot turn to sand, do an experiment yourself with a cockroach, kill it and leave it in a glass for months, it will decompose without turning to sand.

Leave fiction and embrace facts

vaxx:
logically it means we are all related.

that's it, no one should say humans are not related to even a banana tree

vaxx:
The finished product of man,plant and animal is matter. scientifically we are composed of air and water. just little presence of silicon which is found in the high quantify in the dust. so the idea we are created out of dust is hanging. but i have read a scientific report that try to validate the claim.

Biologically we are primarily composed of Oxygen, carbon, hydrogen and nitrogen..

sholytomx:

Have you notice this also cos I have overtime. I even ask others both young and old and they confirmed it: You clean and redress your bed before going to sleep at night and when you wake up "You Find little Sand on your Bed" not just dust but Sands....Note I wash my leg thoroughly many time just to confirm is not the sand from my Leg.....Pls try to give attention to it if you have not and explain to me Why that Happen.... As I said earlier this are just a neutral evidence to prove that the Bible is Right.

Hahahahaha nawa oo

johnydon22:


Biologically we are primarily composed of Oxygen, carbon, hydrogen and nitrogen..

And likewise in principle all living things were made of all these element , plants grow in soil (any of a large number of soils) and they get some of their substance from it, but really, plants are made mostly of water, oxygen, and carbon, none of which come from the soil. And the same goes for us.

nwabekeyi:
lolz

I have not noticed it, I'm hearing this for the first time.

Again, you cannot turn to sand, do an experiment yourself with a cockroach, kill it and leave it in a glass for months, it will decompose without turning to sand.

Leave fiction and embrace facts

This is not fiction, and talking based on my personal experience and if you take note my previous post I have tried it with small lizard when I was young. When you sleep tonight try notice it 2moro morning.

johnydon22:

Hahahahaha nawa oo

johnydon22:

Hahahahaha nawa oo

SoundLock please continue. The rest of you why don't you all just hold on to your individual points or arguments until the OP finishes with his presentation?

You are defeating his objective by your many distracting arguments.

Please let's all breath in some air and exercise patience.

Interesting thread

sholytomx:

This is not fiction, and talking based on my personal experience and if you take note my previous post I have tried it with small lizard when I was young. When you sleep tonight try notice it 2moro morning.

living matters don't turn to sand when they die, that's not a thing. The sand on your bed might probably have been carried by you or from your decking.

I have told you what to do to clarify that, do that little experiment to clear yourself

johnydon22:
How do we judge lack of this on previous humanoids that once walked this earth?

Neanderthals had burial practices which i believe showed their awareness of the inevitability of death. religious beliefs probably has a pre-homo sapiens origin.

How do we judge with required precision qualities that suggests lack of consciousness in humanoids that were not homo sapiens?

You ask very good questions.

Even if we grant that pre-human primates did have a consciousness similar to ours, it doesn't detract from the plausibility of my proposition, as the other human "evolved" features I listed, which you appended to, show lack of natural evolutionary consistency. Neanderthals although having allegedly diverged from a shared common ancestor with us, still possessed the characteristic prehuman anatomical features which humans lack.

Sorry about the delay.

vaxx:
And likewise in principle all living things were made of all these element , plants grow in soil (any of a large number of soils) and they get some of their substance from it, but really, plants are made mostly of water, oxygen, and carbon, none of which come from the soil. And the same goes for us.

The universe itself is primarily made of these elements.. Read through my thread Songs of the world https://www.nairaland.com/3145298/songs-worlds-johnydon22

The butterf-lying-lion has arrived the thread.

His new proof of god is that aliens exist, hence god exists. What a sad and deplorable existence.

Go easy while jerking off the op.
Arrividecci.

SoundLock:


You ask very good questions.

Even if we grant that pre-human primates did have a consciousness similar to ours, it doesn't detract from the plausibility of my proposition, as the other human "evolved" features I listed, which you appended to, show lack of natural evolutionary consistency. Neanderthals although having allegedly diverged from a shared common ancestor with us, still possessed the characteristic prehuman anatomical features which humans lack.

Sorry about the delay.

Alright the consciousness part we put to rest. I will like to have a discussion on consciousness, spirit and Afterlife some other time though. Anyway let us continue the thread, if you are done bringing forth your proposition, i may write an article that brings forth mine so our discussion may progress as intended

nwabekeyi:
these facts are inaccurate though I commend your questioning, it's good for science but let it be known to you that drastic civilization and hominid activities caused drastic climate changes, faster than it has ever occurred hence a need to adapt to the changes.

Earth’s climate has always been in a state of flux. Ever since our ancestors branched off the primate evolutionary tree millions of years ago, the planet has faced drastic swings between moist and dry periods, as well as long-lived glacial freezes and thaws. It’s clear that early humans were able to survive such changes—our existence confirms their success. But a growing number of scientists think that major climate shifts may have also forged some of the defining traits of humanity.

Roughly between 3 and 2.5 million years ago, the lineage of ‘Lucy’ [Australopithecus afarensis] became extinct and the first members of our own genus, Homo, appeared. The first simple stone tools also appeared with those fossils, which featured some modern traits like bigger brains. Then, between 2 million and 1.5 million years ago, we see Homo erectus. That bigger-brained hominin had a skeleton very much like our own, more sophisticated tools like double-bladed axes and new behaviors that led early humans out of Africa for the first time.

Both of these events happened at times when the local climate was undergoing dramatic shifts. We know, for instance, that some 3 million years ago—around the time the first Homo species appeared—Africa was switching from wooded areas to open grasslands as the climate dried out. This straightforward change in scenery may be part of why early humans evolved away from climbing and toward walking upright. But recent evidence collected from the seafloor gives an even more detailed look at the climate change during this period.

The changes that occurred from during the evolution of humans weren't gradual; they were dramatic, unprecedented and they occurred during a very short span of time. Please read my earlier comments where I touched on the time periods.

The way people like you speak about evolution is what makes most people unable to accept your claims. You speak of the development of new features like it's some usual thing that occurs frequently in complex multicellular creatures like mammals. It doesn't matter the environmental changes that ensue, as long as mutations don't occur, evolution doesn't occur -- And mutations occur quite rarely, and most mutations are negative and harmful and they usually do not get passed down through reproduction. The ones that do are practically a miracle and before they become predominant within a population, it takes time. Are you trying to tell me that between 700,000 years and 300,000 years, humans evolved all those features I mentioned all within the same period of time, even when other prehuman creatures were around in their characteristic anatomical form?