re: Chromosome Study: All Men Can Be Traced to One Man

Here's another population chart. Kind of gives me the willies.

God was gracious enough to let us prosper after 1750. He truly does work in mysterious ways.

Oh yea....I refer to god as 'he'......masculinizing him. That means he has a penis. That gives me the willies, too. Knowing that god's giant dong is located somewhere in the ethereal.

Iambatman, it's called the Big Bang Theory. Funny how you u left off that last word. Don't you at least watch sitcoms?

if the random process which created these two people also created other people, then why didn't those other people procreate? That doesn't make sense. I guess we are supposed to believe that their reproductive organs didn't work?

Geez, I guess we got really lucky that those two people, and those two people only, were able to have children. Otherwise, I guess we wouldn't be having this discussion.

quote:

---

Why does there have to be a conflict between God and Science?

---

This is war bro. You're either ignorant or you're damned. Pick a side.

quote:

---

Geez, I guess we got really lucky that those two people, and those two people only, were able to have children. Otherwise, I guess we wouldn't be having this discussion.

---

You keep trying so hard.

Your OP was crushed throughout this thread. But by all means carry on.

As usual, asurob, you just said nothing.

The study indicates that mankind can be traced back to one man and one woman.

Thanks for being your usual dumbass self, though.

Did you ask earlier about when/why humans hit an extinction event?

There is a theorized massive volcanic eruption that occurred in Indonesia a loooong time ago, bigger than the Tambora eruption of 1815.

Here is an article on it: LINK

Thanks, Teddy. I asked about it simply because that's what the chart indicated.

Divine coincidences:


Note the divine similarities of this whale's skeleton to a human's: pelvic, leg, tarsal, etc. bones, the analogous bones (excluding the spinal column from the thoracic spine down) and the corresponding features (formina, process, etc.)


Do I need to post more examples that dismantle the 'theory' evolution?

quote:

---

If there wasn't any Supreme Being or guiding force (Intelligent Design) which was responsible for the genesis of the human race, then we are left with believing that some random process is responsible for the beginning of everything, including the human race. More precisely, we are reduced to believing that this random process only "created" one male and one female, from whom the rest of mankind is descended. Why would this random process have only created one "person" of each gender? That's hard to believe.

In fact, I don't believe it.

---

That's because what you are refusing to believe is a gross misunderstanding of the way it works. First of all, you are thinking as if we have pinpointed a single particular human being as a common ancestor, when actually all they did was calculate how many generations are necessary to achieve the diversity found in their sample, and estimated how long ago this man lived. Other humans existed at the same time as this single common ancestor, and many of us can be traced back to some of them, as well. Now, if this same study could have happened way back then, they would have found less diversity than today, and could have calculated how long before them their own single common ancestor must have lived. Going further back we can calculate approximately how long ago the common human-ape ancestor might have lived.

The type of random process that you find so hard to believe is as simple as this: every child is ever so slightly different from its parents. Imagine a population of 1000 human-ape ancestors. Most of them are very similar, but a couple of them might be a little smarter, and a couple of them might be a little bit better at climbing trees, whether they are stronger, have longer arms, or whatever. The smarter ones probably hang out together, and the tree climbers probably hang out together. There will be a lot of inter-breeding, but generally the smarter ones will probably breed more with one another, and the climbers will probably breed with one another more. After a few generations the intelligence starts to get passed on to more and more of them, and they probably even start breaking off into separate tribes and moving away to put their skills to better use, either for better hunting or whatever. This can have the effect of a new environment actually favoring the better-adapted, smartest of the smart, so that the less smart reproduce less, and the smarter ones reproduce more. Is it such a stretch to you that these traits can concentrate in this way? Similarly, the group of tree climbers would likely experience a similar concentration of traits that aid in climbing trees. Those less adapted would be out-competed and out-reproduced by the better adapted, and would diverge more and more from that common ancestor shared between them and the "smart" tribe. If this process continues for tens of thousands of generations, a point will be reached where the two tribes are so different and distinct that they can no longer interbreed. In general, this is where we might call them two distinct species.

These divergences can happen relatively quickly (like a few tens of thousands of generations among a small population), as long as the same environmental pressures continue to favor a particular set of traits. After such time as the less adapted fall out of the gene pool, and further random variations fail to increase survivability, a sort of stabilization takes place. Optimum suitability to the environment has been achieved, so the population can just settle and grow for possibly millions of generations. This is why, when we look at the fossil record, we find many of the same species, but it's impossible to find a fossil that represents each and every generation of a lineage that shows the transformation take place. Fossilization is an extremely rare event (most corpses are either consumed or just rot away), so that 1 in a million that does fossilize is overwhelmingly likely to be from a "stable" species.

Of course, this is a gross oversimplification of how speciation could happen, but it is a very logical sequence of events, isn't it?