Re: Possible vs. Likely

On Nov 28, 11:50 am, "'Rev Dr' Lenny Flank" <lfl...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Nov 28, 12:11 pm, Seanpit <sean...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

(snip)> Name a unique functional difference between humans and chimps that
isn't just quantitative but qualitative . . .  Then, once you have
done this, show the minimum number of genetic differences needed to
produce this novel functional difference.

(snip)

I'm a little curious here . . .

Humans and chimps are closer to each other, genetically, than many
other species are which creationists consider to be the same "kind" --
horses and donkeys, for instance, or cheetahs and jaguars.

Why then do you consider it utterly absolutely completely impossible
for humans to have "micro-evolved" their genetic differencesd with
chimps, but NOT utterly absolutely completely impossible for members
of other "kinds" to have "micro-evolved" their LARGER genetic
differences with each other?

If the genetic differences between jaguars and cheetahs can have
evolved, then why do you insist that the SMALLER genetic differences
between chimps and humans, can not have?

Besides, of course, your religious opinion that humans are special and
simply cannot be related through descent to any other animal, no
matter what  . . .

================================================
Lenny Flank
"There are no loose threads in the web of life"

Editor, Red and Black Publishershttp://www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

It is worse than that for Sean because he seems to have this evidence
thing and backing up your own notions out of whack with reality. If
Sean wants to contend that he has something Sean has to come up with
examples that we can't explain. I haven't heard of any "qualitiative"
rather than "quantitative" difference that exist between humans and
chimps. Intellectually, chimps are about equivalent to 4 year old
humans. We share all our tissues and organs. Heck, we have about the
same number of hair folicles on our bodies as a chimp. The only
differences in our brains seems to be the size of the different
sections. We seem to share all brain parts. Sean has to demonstrate
that his type of gap exists.

What probably gets to Sean is how his bogus 1000 aa argument breaks
down with closely related species like chimps and humans. Sean comes
face to face with one obvious fact. Any change in any gene, protein,
whatever, has to work within the whole. Whether some new change is
part of a large existing complex or the start of some future large
complex it has to work within what already exists. If it doesn't it
has to limp along and exist against selection to remove it, and most
likely it is lost. What we see are the changes that fit well enough
to make it. Sean can't cope with that fact. His whole 1000 aa bull
pucky is based on some stupid reality that doesn't exist. He comes
face to face with that reality with chimps and humans, and has to
demand that his opposition provide what he cannot. Sean has to
demonstrate that his type of gaps ever existed. He can't do that with
the human and chimp example.

Ron Okimoto

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Possible vs. Likely
    ... Humans and chimps are closer to each other, genetically, than many ... If the genetic differences between jaguars and cheetahs can have ... It is worse than that for Sean because he seems to have this evidence ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Possible vs. Likely
    ... Humans and chimps are closer to each other, genetically, than many ... If the genetic differences between jaguars and cheetahs can have ... It is worse than that for Sean because he seems to have this evidence ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: No need for statistics in science?
    ... your story that humans and chimps once had the same ... NOT claim that large genetic sequences like the ones you want to see ... Sean? ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: No need for statistics in science?
    ... your story that humans and chimps once had the same ... Sean? ... OTHER human-level intelligence, and where did THAT come from? ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Australopithecus afarensis vs. chimps
    ... Australopithecus afarensis by John Gurche. ... much as modern humans, but their hands are *much* stronger than human hands. ... KWing doesn't contradict tool use & manufacture, see chimps. ... Why in Africa? ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)