- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Chromosome Study: All Men Can Be Traced to One Man
Posted on 2/6/14 at 4:16 pm to KCT
Posted on 2/6/14 at 4:16 pm to KCT
quote:
"We don't know" isn't really much of an answer. It just means you can't fully explain your theory.
just like you can't fully explain your theory, which is that an omnipresent Santa Claus snapped his fingers and 6 days later **poof** here we are all.
0
Posted on 2/6/14 at 4:17 pm to KCT
quote:
"We don't know" isn't really much of an answer. It just means you can't fully explain your theory.
A theory fully explains everything that it is intended to explain. If you want an explanation for something that is outside the scope of a theory, then you have to wait for one of the many competing hypotheses that are meant to describe that process to be rigorously tested in order to become a theory.
Posted on 2/6/14 at 4:17 pm to GumboPot
quote:
Uh oh. Science making me a creationist.
except for the 135,000 years part
Posted on 2/6/14 at 4:18 pm to Revelator
quote:
Yes because before we were evolved enough to digest milk we only drank Red Bull!
I'm having a really hard time deciding who is just being sarcastic and who is actually believing what they're typing
(not replaying to Revelator specifically)
Posted on 2/6/14 at 4:19 pm to JakeTheDog
quote:
JakeTheDog Arizona Fan Arizona Member since Jan 2014 93 posts Online
You haven't been around long enough to know we don't take kindly to thinkin round here.
Posted on 2/6/14 at 4:24 pm to KCT
quote:
So, no one is surprised that all people of all races can be traced back to one man? I don't think the Theory of Evolution promotes that possibility.
The idea of a mitochondrial Eve is well established and widely accepted in biology.
This thread is a damning indictment of scientific education in America.
Posted on 2/6/14 at 4:25 pm to Revelator
quote:
Yes because before we were evolved enough to digest milk we only drank Red Bull!
I'm going to step out on a limb and suggest that you don't know much about nutrition......particularly sugar digestion. I'll also add that many people who understand the tenets of evolution avoid these phony food concoctions because they are skeptical of the effects they have on metabolism among other biological processes.
Posted on 2/6/14 at 4:28 pm to KCT
quote:
It is pretty cool. 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.
Evolution is. Not. Random. Selection is the antithesis of random.
I dont know how many times this has been said on this board.
Posted on 2/6/14 at 4:35 pm to Upperaltiger06
quote:
You haven't been around long enough to know we don't take kindly to thinkin round here
Learn something new every day.
But that's just it, I am a thinker. And I see the reaction I've got from one or two is to assume I'm trying to make some creationist argument here. But really that's not what I'm doing. I will leave the Bible debates for those who know more about the Bible than I, although I have read and understand the Bible more or less.
What I wanted to get across here was that the big bang does not prove (or disprove) anything about the creation of the universe or the existence of God.. or gods, or flying spaghetti monsters for that matter. Despite this, every time the subject of creation comes up one of the main planks that many people rely on to argue their point is the big bang theory.
Anytime I see someone thinking themselves educated and intelligent by using the big bang theory in this manner I cannot help but feel a bit embarrassed for them in the same manner I would someone on a dance floor gyrating out of rhythm to the music. I'm all for trying to figure out how all this got here, where we came from and where we're going. And I'm not going to pretend to know the answer. But what I do know is it's impossible for the big bang to explain creation. That in a nutshell is what I wanted to get across.
Posted on 2/6/14 at 4:38 pm to KCT
quote:
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?
This is complete and total nonsense.
Posted on 2/6/14 at 4:42 pm to KCT
quote:are you illiterate? that's not what it says at all..
Chromosome Study: All Men Can Be Traced to One Man
Posted on 2/6/14 at 4:43 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
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?
quote:
This is complete and total nonsense.
I love a good debate so I'll point out that you need more than that to counter his point. Please explain why it's complete and total nonsense. I'd start by answering his question why only these two people from eons ago still have ancestors. In short, where are all ancestors of people from that time?
Posted on 2/6/14 at 4:44 pm to Roger Klarvin
How so, Roger? The study found that all of mankind can be traced back to one man and one woman. If several people were "created" simultaneously, how can that be?
Instead of being a smartass, why not clear it up for us, genius?
Instead of being a smartass, why not clear it up for us, genius?
Posted on 2/6/14 at 4:52 pm to JakeTheDog
quote:
I love a good debate so I'll point out that you need more than that to counter his point. Please explain why it's complete and total nonsense. I'd start by answering his question why only these two people from eons ago still have ancestors. In short, where are all ancestors of people from that time?
The problem is any explanation would be such a simplified summary it would almost be worthless. The kind of person who can believe what she is typing, by virtue of their ability to believe it, does not have the scientific background to understand a thorough explanation rooted in complex biological processes. People who have such an understanding would not be asking the questions she is asking, BECAUSE the questions are nonsense.
I will do my best in a minute, but I can almost guarantee you it will be futile.
Posted on 2/6/14 at 4:57 pm to KCT
quote:
How so, Roger? The study found that all of mankind can be traced back to one man and one woman. If several people were "created" simultaneously, how can that be?
You have managed to completely misunderstand the article you linked, and it's not even that complicated. Just reread the whole thing, dude.
Posted on 2/6/14 at 4:57 pm to JakeTheDog
quote:
I'd start by answering his question why only these two people from eons ago still have ancestors. In short, where are all ancestors of people from that time?
This is, as I've said many times in this thread, a misunderstanding of the results of the study.
Many of the people alive at the time of this common ancestor also have descendants alive today. You have two grandfathers, don't you? And 4 great-grandfathers? And 8 great-great-grandfathers? Well, someone else also has 8 great-great-grandfathers, and the two of you might have all of them in common (your sibling), or you might have 4 of them in common (a cousin), or you might have 1 in common (a distant cousin), or you might have none in common. If you look back far enough, we all have one common male ancestor, and this study has estimated how long ago he lived. That's it. You and I might have 1,000 common ancestors that lived at the same time, but you and a guy in China might only have 1.
Make sense?
This post was edited on 2/6/14 at 9:36 pm
Posted on 2/6/14 at 5:02 pm to Roger Klarvin
I didn't conduct the study, aggie. Why are you acting like I just made something up?
The fact is, you can't prove anything. That's why you and a few others have to resort to sarcastic comments that serve absolutely no constructive purpose.
The fact is, you can't prove anything. That's why you and a few others have to resort to sarcastic comments that serve absolutely no constructive purpose.
Posted on 2/6/14 at 5:06 pm to KCT
nm, korkstand said it better than me.
This post was edited on 2/6/14 at 5:09 pm
Posted on 2/6/14 at 5:13 pm to KCT
quote:
I didn't conduct the study, aggie. Why are you acting like I just made something up?
I'm not acting like you made anything up. I'm saying you do not understand the meaning of the results or the article in question. Your own lack of understanding is what this conversation is about, not the legitimacy of the article or the science behind it.
The article is perfectly valid. Your interpretation of what you read is hopelessly flawed, as has been explain to you over and over again in this thread.
quote:
The fact is, you can't prove anything.
You just refuse to listen. I've read this whole thread, it's been explained to you multiple times in multiple different ways why you are wrong.
Posted on 2/6/14 at 5:15 pm to Roger Klarvin
Please, just read this over and over again until you get it. Without an understanding of biology and genetics, it is impossible to explain it to you with any more depth than this:
quote:
Many of the people alive at the time of this common ancestor also have ancestors alive today. You have two grandfathers, don't you? And 4 great-grandfathers? And 8 great-great-grandfathers? Well, someone else also has 8 great-great-grandfathers, and the two of you might have all of them in common (your sibling), or you might have 4 of them in common (a cousin), or you might have 1 in common (a distant cousin), or you might have none in common. If you look back far enough, we all have one common male ancestor, and this study has estimated how long ago he lived. That's it. You and I might have 1,000 common ancestors that lived at the same time, but you and a guy in China might only have 1.
Page 6 of 17
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News