The Big Bang Theory is dead.

[ratiocinator]

Evolution is indeed the Theory of Nothing as it has no answer to the origin of anything.
what was the first living creature and what features did it have?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

It's a bit abstruse or complicated for me -- but even that fusion -- I can't figure how it shows (certainly not proves) that is/was the "common ancestor." Did it make for (whatever the right terminology is) humans for sure? Meantime, that fusion--do you think that it made/enabled/promoted the ability to read, write, and figure out things like quantum physics in humans while gorillas, chimps and orangutans remained the same?

You are moving the goalpost.

The original point made was "evolution can't be correct because chimps have 48 chromosomes and humans only 46". And you agreed that @SavedByTheLord was making a good point with that comment.

Then it was explained WHY the chromosome count is different and how the seemingly "missing" chromosomes in fact aren't missing at all.
It was explained how this not only is not a point against evolution, it actually SUPPORTS evolution, as it matches the evolutionary prediction about it.

So instead of acknowledging this, that it's not at all an argument against evolution and that instead it actually supports it, now suddenly you start yapping about "but does it enable us to do quantum mechanics?".

Nobody said any such thing, nobody made any kind of point even remotely similar to that.

The actual point was clear and dealt with.
The honest thing to do is acknowledge that first and then you can ask another question.
Moving the goalpost like you are doing here instead, is just dishonest.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

It doesn't show that. It postulates what you said. It does not show that.

Trying to argue with facts is never a good idea.

The genes on these chromosomes factually, demonstrably line up.
When you split human chromosome at the fusion site, you get exact matches with chromosome 2 and 13 of chimp dna (which are the ones we humans seemed to be "missing").

This is factual, testable, authentic, verifiable.

There is no "postulation" or whatever you wish to call it.
This is just how it is.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

By what criteria are you accepting it?

By the criteria of facts.

Aside from the position that it was fused, what ape did it come from?

Somewhere in the human lineage, after it split from the branch that went on to become chimps and bonobo's.

One or two apes?

???

Gorillas still remain gorillas, chimps remain chimps.

How many times have I corrected this silly point of yours?
Why are you still repeating this?

Did you forget how that is exactly what evolution predicts?
Did you forget how I explained ad nauseum to you why if gorillas would produce non-gorillas, evolution would be disproven?
Did you forget how I explained that in evolution, one never outgrows its own ancestry?

Seriously, HOW MANY TIMES must this be repeated before you will let go of this rookie basic error?
Do you like being wrong?

Guess the fusion isn't happening lately. Because--they say--it happened sooo many years ago -- someone, somewhere had their chromosomes fused. (wow and yikes.)

Many species have fused chromosomes.
It's not a very common occurance. Don't expect to observe it every week.
However, over millions of years in a pool of millions of species, many such fusion events will occur, as shown by the evidence of genetics.

This is just pure probability. You do understand how probabilities work, right?
The lowest of odds WILL become an inevitability given enough trials.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Gorillas are supposed to have come from that "Unknown Common Ancestor" as well as -- humans, chimps, orangutans. That ancestor, however, has not been found.

How many times must it be explained to you that identifying a common ancestor is not the same, nor required, as determining it existed?


A DNA test can perfectly tell you that you and I for example share a common ancestors 20 generations ago and that we are distant cousins.
We would never be able to find out who that was. Determining we share ancestry is one thing. Identifying that ancestor is another.

So once again I have to ask, why do you insist on being wrong all the time?
Why do you insist and continue to double down on mistakes that have been explained and corrected many times already?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I can't find the video again, perhapsyou can post it again? Because although I heard the lecturer's reason for thinking the chromosome must have fused, it appears to be only his suggestion as to how it could have happened.

This is akin to saying that when you see a tree lying down in the woods, it is just an "opinion" that it once stood upright and then fell down.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

So do you think this is the way it definitely came about that humans developed from one or two ancestors that were or were not gorillas, chimps, or orangutans but their Common Ancestor, as yet still unknown? Shouldn't be a hard question to answer as to what you think. I am questioning it and if someone were to ask me about if I believed that, I'd probably shrug my shoulders and say -- we really don't know and we also have no evidence for it, but that's what some people think as to why humans have 46 pairs of chromosomes but gorillas, orangutans and chimps have 48. Also -- why humans developed brains that can figure how to read, write, and figure geometry, but gorillas, chimpanzees and orangutans do not. See, because humans have 46 pairs while the others have 48.

Moving the goalposts again.

The original question was "if humans and chimps share ancestors, then why do chimps have 48 while humans have 46?"
The answer was given, together with the factual genetic evidence.

All other junk you wish to attached to this is just that: junk.

The question was asked. The answer was given.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

No, different unknown common ancestor. Why do you get so hung up on a non issue?

Likely because there aren't any real issues to get hung up on.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Evolution is indeed the Theory of Nothing as it has no answer to the origin of anything.

Well... you asked the question about the origin of the 46 chromosomes as opposed to the 48 in other apes and the answer was given.
So to say it has no answer to the origin of "anything" is factually and demonstrably false.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Well... you asked the question about the origin of the 46 chromosomes as opposed to the 48 in other apes and the answer was given.
So to say it has no answer to the origin of "anything" is factually and demonstrably false.

You flubbed it and had no proof.

Chimps have 48 chromosomes and mankind 46.

Supposedly they are descended from a common ancestor.

But how could this have happened through evolution given sexual reproduction?

Just show how this plays out for 20 generations of offspring.
Start with 48 chromosomes.
A primate with 48 by some weird event has an offspring with 46 .
The offspring then mates with another primate of the same species which of course has all 48.
Now each donates 1/2 and then what?
How many chromosomes from each parent does the first offspring have?
24 from each or 24 from one and 23 from the other?
How could that offspring even survive?
How did it ever have an offspring?
Who did the first offspring mate with if it is not another primate with 48 chromosomes?
How could 2 chromosomes fuse if their ends are protected?
Keep going until 20 generations.

And do not forget the over 100 million differences in the DNA between chimps and people.

And of course, there can be no common descent if the chromosome counts are different for any proposed species pairs.
I have proved that macro evolution is a lie.

And I have also proved abiogenies is impossible without God and the Big Bang too.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

You flubbed it and had no proof.

Chimps have 48 chromosomes and mankind 46.

Supposedly they are descended from a common ancestor.

But how could this have happened through evolution given sexual reproduction?

It has already been explained multiple times.
Chromosomal fusion.

Just show how this plays out for 20 generations of offspring.
Start with 48 chromosomes.
A primate with 48 by some weird event has an offspring with 46 .
The offspring then mates with another primate of the same species which of course has all 48.
Now each donates 1/2 and then what?
How many chromosomes from each parent does the first offspring have?
24 from each or 24 from one and 23 from the other?
How could that offspring even survive?
How did it ever have an offspring?
Who did the first offspring mate with if it is not another primate with 48 chromosomes?
How could 2 chromosomes fuse if their ends are protected?
Keep going until 20 generations.

And do not forget the over 100 million differences in the DNA between chimps and people.

And of course, there can be no common descent if the chromosome counts are different for any proposed species pairs.
I have proved that macro evolution is a lie.

And I have also proved abiogenies is impossible without God and the Big Bang too.

It sounds like you simply ignored the many times this chromosome fusion thing has been explained.

If you don't want to hear the answers or don't plan on hearing the answers, then don't ask the question.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

It has already been explained multiple times.
Chromosomal fusion.


It sounds like you simply ignored the many times this chromosome fusion thing has been explained.

Of course it has not.
There was no science at all.

explain using the first 20 generations.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Of course it has not.
There was no science at all.

explain using the first 20 generations.

This is a bs irrelevant question akin to saying that one needs to know second by second exactly what a murderer did, what he touched and where his feet touched the ground 48 hours leading up to the murder in order to be able to determine he's guilty.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

This is a bs irrelevant question akin to saying that one needs to know second by second exactly what a murderer did, what he touched and where his feet touched the ground 48 hours leading up to the murder in order to be able to determine he's guilty.

What a song and a dance with slides?

The first 20 generations using sexual reproduction and be very very specific.
Go.

 

[McBell]

This is a bs irrelevant question akin to saying that one needs to know second by second exactly what a murderer did, what he touched and where his feet touched the ground 48 hours leading up to the murder in order to be able to determine he's guilty.

God Did It.

See, problem solved.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

What a song and a dance with slides?

The first 20 generations using sexual reproduction and be very very specific.
Go.

I will, as soon as you tell me what Hitler's 20 first words were on the morning of 8 september 1939. Otherwise he didn't order the Holocaust.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

I will, as soon as you tell me what Hitler's 20 first words were on the morning of 8 september 1939. Otherwise he didn't order the Holocaust.

Bad analogy.

Chimps have 48 chromosomes and mankind 46.

Supposedly they are descended from a common ancestor.

But how could this have happened through evolution given sexual reproduction?

Just show how this plays out for 20 generations of offspring.
Start with 48 chromosomes.
A primate with 48 by some weird event has an offspring with 46 .
The offspring then mates with another primate of the same species which of course has all 48.
Now each donates 1/2 and then what?
How many chromosomes from each parent does the first offspring have?
24 from each or 24 from one and 23 from the other?
How could that offspring even survive?
How did it ever have an offspring?
Who did the first offspring mate with if it is not another primate with 48 chromosomes?
How could 2 chromosomes fuse if their ends are protected?
Keep going until 20 generations.

And do not forget the over 100 million differences in the DNA between chimps and people.

And of course, there can be no common descent if the chromosome counts are different for any proposed species pairs.
I have proved that macro evolution is a lie.

And I have also proved abiogenies is impossible without God and the Big Bang too.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Bad analogy.

Chimps have 48 chromosomes and mankind 46.

Supposedly they are descended from a common ancestor.

But how could this have happened through evolution given sexual reproduction?

Just show how this plays out for 20 generations of offspring.
Start with 48 chromosomes.
A primate with 48 by some weird event has an offspring with 46 .
The offspring then mates with another primate of the same species which of course has all 48.
Now each donates 1/2 and then what?
How many chromosomes from each parent does the first offspring have?
24 from each or 24 from one and 23 from the other?
How could that offspring even survive?
How did it ever have an offspring?
Who did the first offspring mate with if it is not another primate with 48 chromosomes?
How could 2 chromosomes fuse if their ends are protected?
Keep going until 20 generations.

And do not forget the over 100 million differences in the DNA between chimps and people.

And of course, there can be no common descent if the chromosome counts are different for any proposed species pairs.
I have proved that macro evolution is a lie.

And I have also proved abiogenies is impossible without God and the Big Bang too.

Genomic Structure and Evolution of the Ancestral Chromosome Fusion Site in 2q13–2q14.1 and Paralogous Regions on Other Human Chromosomes

Human chromosome 2 was formed by the head-to-head fusion of two ancestral chromosomes that remained separate in other primates. Sequences that once resided near the ends of the ancestral chromosomes are now interstitially located in 2q13–2q14.1. ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[YoursTrue]

That's why people put question marks at the end of some sentences instead of full stops.

So let me understand this if I may. You want me to answer questions, but you will not until I do, is that a correct assessment of your question?

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Genomic Structure and Evolution of the Ancestral Chromosome Fusion Site in 2q13–2q14.1 and Paralogous Regions on Other Human Chromosomes

Human chromosome 2 was formed by the head-to-head fusion of two ancestral chromosomes that remained separate in other primates. Sequences that once resided near the ends of the ancestral chromosomes are now interstitially located in 2q13–2q14.1. ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

A drawing is not evidence.

But my turn.

----> <---
see they do not fuse because of the end caps.