Results for: chimpanzees Search Results
Family Filter:
4:29
Man is indeed as unique, as different from all other animals, as had been traditionally claimed by theologians and philosophers. Evolutionist Ernst Mayr *******www.y-origins****/index.php?p=home_more4 A 2004 book by leading evolutionary biologist Ernst Mayr stated that "The earliest fossils of Homo, Homo rudolfensis and Homo erectus, are separated from Australopithecus (Lucy) by a large, unbridged gap. How can we explain this seeming saltation? Not having any fossils that can serve as missing links, we have to fall back on the time-honored method of historical science, the construction of a historical narrative. Misrepresentations of the Evidence for Human Evolutionary Origins: *******www.evolutionnews****/2009/04/texas_hold_em_part_ii_calling_1.html#more "Fossil evidence of human evolutionary history is fragmentary and open to various interpretations. Fossil evidence of chimpanzee evolution is absent altogether". Evolutionist Henry Gee, Nature 2001 *******www.nature****/nature/journal/v412/n6843/full/412131a0.html "If pressed about man's ancestry, I would have to unequivocally say that all we have is a huge question mark. To date, there has been nothing found to truthfully purport as a transitional species to man, including Lucy, since 1470 was as old and probably older. If further pressed, I would have to state that there is more evidence to suggest an abrupt arrival of man rather than a gradual process of evolving". Richard Leakey, world's foremost paleo-anthropologist, in a PBS documentary, 1990. *******www.wasdarwinright****/earlyman.htm Dr. Leakey produced a biased reconstruction (of 1470/ Homo Rudolfensis) based on erroneous preconceived expectations of early human appearance that violated principles of craniofacial development, Dr. Timothy Bromage - *******www.nyu.edu/public.affairs/pdf/2007_BROMAGE_IADR_1470.pdf "But what is the basis for the human evolution thesis put forward by evolutionists? It is the existence of plenty of fossils on which evolutionists are able to build imaginary interpretations. Throughout history, more than 6,000 species of ape have lived, and most of them have become extinct. Today, only 120 species live on the earth. These 6,000 or so species of ape, most of which are extinct, constitute a rich resource for the evolutionists to build imaginary interpretations with." *******www.darwinismrefuted****/origin_of_man.html Evolution of the Genus Homo - Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences - Tattersall, Schwartz, May 2009 Excerpt: "Definition of the genus Homo is almost as fraught as the definition of Homo sapiens. We look at the evidence for early Homo, finding little morphological basis for extending our genus to any of the 2.51.6-myr-old fossil forms assigned to early Homo or Homo habilis/rudolfensis." *******arjournals.annualreviews****/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.earth.031208.100202 Intelligent Design - The Anthropic Hypothesis *******lettherebelight-77.blogspot****/
22 Jan 2010
1375
Share Video

9:06
"Fossil evidence of human evolutionary history is fragmentary and open to various interpretations. Fossil evidence of chimpanzee evolution is absent altogether". Evolutionist Henry Gee, Nature 2001 *******www.nature****/nature/journal/v412/n6843/full/412131a0.html Dr. Leakey produced a biased reconstruction (of 1470/ Homo Rudolfensis) based on erroneous preconceived expectations of early human appearance that violated principles of craniofacial development, Dr. Timothy Bromage - *******www.nyu.edu/public.affairs/pdf/2007_BROMAGE_IADR_1470.pdf A 2004 book by leading evolutionary biologist Ernst Mayr stated that "The earliest fossils of Homo, Homo rudolfensis and Homo erectus, are separated from Australopithecus (Lucy) by a large, unbridged gap. How can we explain this seeming saltation? Not having any fossils that can serve as missing links, we have to fall back on the time-honored method of historical science, the construction of a historical narrative. Misrepresentations of the Evidence for Human Evolutionary Origins: *******www.evolutionnews****/2009/04/texas_hold_em_part_ii_calling_1.html#more Evolution of the Genus Homo - Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences - Tattersall, Schwartz, May 2009 Excerpt: "Definition of the genus Homo is almost as fraught as the definition of Homo sapiens. We look at the evidence for early Homo, finding little morphological basis for extending our genus to any of the 2.51.6-myr-old fossil forms assigned to early Homo or Homo habilis/rudolfensis." *******arjournals.annualreviews****/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.earth.031208.100202 Man is indeed as unique, as different from all other animals, as had been traditionally claimed by theologians and philosophers. Evolutionist Ernst Mayr *******www.y-origins****/index.php?p=home_more4 Something extraordinary, if totally fortuitous, happened with the birth of our species.Homo sapiens is as distinctive an entity as exists on the face of the Earth, and should be dignified as such instead of being adulterated with every reasonably large-brained hominid fossil that happened to come along. Anthropologist Ian Tattersall (curator at the American Museum of Natural History) "We found an enormous amount of diversity within and between the African populations, and we found much less diversity in non-African populations," Tishkoff told attendees today (Jan. 22) at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in Anaheim. "Only a small subset of the diversity in Africa is found in Europe and the Middle East, and an even narrower set is found in American Indians." Tishkoff; Andrew Clark, Penn State; Kenneth Kidd, Yale University; Giovanni Destro-Bisol, University "La Sapienza," Rome, and Himla Soodyall and Trefor Jenkins, WITS University, South Africa, looked at three locations on DNA samples from 13 to 18 populations in Africa and 30 to 45 populations in the remainder of the world.- Intelligent Design - The Anthropic Hypothesis *******lettherebelight-77.blogspot****/ Human Evolution - What Do The Bones Really Say? - Don Patton - video *******www.youtube****/watch?v=NEw8fk6NvbI From Darwin To Hitler - Richard Weikart *******www.youtube****/watch?v=w_5EwYpLD6A
2 Dec 2011
764
Share Video

5:21
Most materialists are adamant Darwinian evolution is proven true when we look at the supposed 98.8% genetic similarity between chimps and man. Though suggestive, the gene similarity, even if true, is not nearly good enough to be considered conclusive scientific proof. Primarily this "lack of conclusiveness" is due to concerns with the second law of thermodynamics and with the Law of Conservation of Information. But of more pressing concern, body plans are not even encoded in the DNA code in the first place. This inability of body plans to be reduced directly to the DNA code is clearly shown by Cortical Inheritance. Cortical Inheritance: The Crushing Critique Against Genetic Reductionism - Arthur Jones - video Part 1 *******www.youtube****/watch?v=5JzQ8ingdNY Part 2 *******www.youtube****/watch?v=o1bAX93zQ5o Steven Meyer - Functional Proteins And Information For Body Plans - video *******www.youtube****/watch?v=Ex8Fj8UAxc8 This inability for the DNA code to account for body plans is also clearly shown by extensive mutation studies to the DNA of different organisms which show "exceedingly rare" major morphological effects from mutations to the DNA code. Darwin's Theory - Fruit Flies and Morphology - video *******www.youtube****/watch?v=hZJTIwRY0bs If all that wasn't enough, the Human Genome Project really put the last nail in the coffin for "Genetic Reductionism": DNA: The Alphabet of Life - David Klinghoffer Excerpt: But all this is trivial compared to the largely unheralded insight gained from the Human Genome Project, completed in 2003. The insight is disturbing. It is that while DNA codes for the cell's building blocks, the information needed to build the rest of the creature is seemingly, in large measure, absent. ,,,The physically encoded information to form that mouse, as opposed to that fly, isn't there. Instead, "It is as if the 'idea' of the fly (or any other organism) must somehow permeate the genome that gives rise to it." *******www.evolutionnews****/2009/07/dna_the_alphabet_of_life.html Thus the 98.8% similarity derived from the DNA code, to the body plans of chimps and man, is purely imaginary, since it is clearly shown that the overriding "architectural plan" of the body is not even encoded in the DNA in the first place. Of more clarity though, this "98.8% similarity evidence" is derived by materialists from a very biased methodology of presuming that the 1.5% of the genome, which directly codes for proteins, has complete precedence of consideration over the other remaining 98.5% of the genome which does not directly code for proteins. Yet even when considering just this 1.5% of the genome that codes for proteins, we find that the proteins, which are directly coded by that 1.5% of the genome, are shown to differ by a huge 80% difference between chimps and man. Chimps are not like humans - May 2004 Excerpt: the International Chimpanzee Chromosome 22 Consortium reports that 83% of chimpanzee chromosome 22 proteins are different from their human counterparts,,, The results reported this week showed that "83% of the genes have changed between the human and the chimpanzee—only 17% are identical—so that means that the impression that comes from the 1.2% [sequence] difference is [misleading]. In the case of protein structures, it has a big effect," Sakaki said. *******cmbi.bjmu.edu.cn/news/0405/119.htm Eighty percent of proteins are different between humans and chimpanzees; Gene; Volume 346, 14 February 2005: *******www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15716009 A recent, more accurate, human/chimp genome comparison study, by Richard Buggs in 2008, has found the true genome similarity between chimps and man fell to slightly below 70%! Why is this study ignored since the ENCODE study has now implicated 100% high level functionality across the entire human genome? Finding compelling evidence that implicates 100% high level functionality across the entire genome clearly shows the similarity is not to be limited to the very biased "only 1.5% of the genome" studies of materialists. Chimpanzee? 10-10-2008 - Dr Richard Buggs - research geneticist at the University of Florida ...Therefore the total similarity of the genomes could be below 70%. *******www.refdag.nl/artikel/1366432/Chimpanzee.html The chimpanzee is found to have a 12% larger genome than humans. Thus, at first glance it would seem the chimpanzee is more evolved than us, but this discrepancy is no anomaly of just chimps/humans. This disparity of genome sizes is found throughout life. There is no logical "evolutionary" progression to be found for the amount of DNA in less complex animals to the DNA found in more complex animals. In fact the genome sizes are known to vary widely between Kinds/Species and this mystery is known as the c-value enigma: Intelligent Design - The Anthropic Hypothesis *******lettherebelight-77.blogspot****/
18 Jan 2010
2465
Share Video

8:05
SIGNATURE IN THE CELL by Stephen C. Meyer *******www.signatureinthecell****/ Journey Inside The Cell - video *******www.youtube****/watch?v=1fiJupfbSpg Evolution vs. Functional Proteins - Doug Axe - Video *******www.youtube****/watch?v=M4FvdOxIDfU Estimating the prevalence of protein sequences adopting functional enzyme folds: Doug Axe: Excerpt: Combined with the estimated prevalence of plausible hydropathic patterns (for any fold) and of relevant folds for particular functions, this implies the overall prevalence of sequences performing a specific function by any domain-sized fold may be as low as 1 in 10^77, adding to the body of evidence that functional folds require highly extraordinary sequences. *******www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15321723 Refutation of Szostak's 1 in 10^12 functional protein paper: A Man-Made ATP-Binding Protein Evolved Independent of Nature Causes Abnormal Growth in Bacterial Cells Excerpt: "Recent advances in de novo protein evolution have made it possible to create synthetic proteins from unbiased libraries that fold into stable tertiary structures with predefined functions. However, it is not known whether such proteins will be functional when expressed inside living cells or how a host organism would respond to an encounter with a non-biological protein. Here, we examine the physiology and morphology of Escherichia coli cells engineered to express a synthetic ATP-binding protein evolved entirely from non-biological origins. We show that this man-made protein disrupts the normal energetic balance of the cell by altering the levels of intracellular ATP. This disruption cascades into a series of events that ultimately limit reproductive competency by inhibiting cell division." *******www.plosone****/article/info:doi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0007385 Eighty percent of proteins are different between humans and chimpanzees; Gene; Volume 346, 14 February 2005: *******www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15716009 Yet by the late 1980s it was becoming obvious to most genetic researchers, including myself, since my own main research interest in the 80s and 90s was human genetics, that the heroic effort to find the information specifying lifes order in the genes had failed. There was no longer the slightest justification for believing that there exists anything in the genome remotely resembling a program capable of specifying in detail all the complex order of the phenotype (Body Plan)." Michael John Denton page 172 of Uncommon Dissent Waiting Longer for Two Mutations, Part 5 - Michael Behe Excerpt: the appearance of a particular (beneficial) double mutation in humans would have an expected time of appearance of 216 million years, *******behe.uncommondescent****/2009/03/waiting-longer-for-two-mutations-part-5/ Cortical Inheritance: The Crushing Critique Against Genetic Reductionism - Arthur Jones - video Part 1 *******www.youtube****/watch?v=5JzQ8ingdNY Part 2 *******www.youtube****/watch?v=o1bAX93zQ5o Darwin's Theory - Fruit Flies and Morphology - video *******www.youtube****/watch?v=hZJTIwRY0bs Evolution vs ATP Synthase - Molecular Machine - video *******www.youtube****/watch?v=qE3QJMI-ljc The Coding Found In DNA Surpasses Mans Ability to Code - Stephen Meyer - video *******www.youtube****/watch?v=HavmzWVt8IU Mathematically Defining Functional Information In Molecular Biology - Kirk Durston - video *******www.youtube****/watch?v=vUeCgTN7pOo The malaria parasite, and AIDS virus, due to their comparatively enormous population size, have in 1 year more mutation/duplication/selection events than all mammal lineages have had in the entire +100 million years they have been in the fossil record. What do we see? Michael Behe, The Edge of Evolution, pg. 162 Swine Flu, Viruses, and the Edge of Evolution "Indeed, the work on malaria and AIDS demonstrates that after all possible unintelligent processes in the cell--both ones we've discovered so far and ones we haven't--at best extremely limited benefit, since no such process was able to do much of anything. It's critical to notice that no artificial limitations were placed on the kinds of mutations or processes the microorganisms could undergo in nature. Nothing--neither point mutation, deletion, insertion, gene duplication, transposition, genome duplication, self-organization nor any other process yet undiscovered--was of much use." *******www.evolutionnews****/2009/05/swine_flu_viruses_and_the_edge.html Intelligent Design - The Anthropic Hypothesis *******lettherebelight-77.blogspot****/
2 Jun 2010
14773
Share Video

10:00
Richard Sternberg's website: *******www.richardsternberg****/ Waiting Longer for Two Mutations, Part 5 - Michael Behe Excerpt: the appearance of a particular (beneficial) double mutation in humans would have an expected time of appearance of 216 million years, *******behe.uncommondescent****/2009/03/waiting-longer-for-two-mutations-part-5/ Whale Evolution? - Exposing The Deception - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/4032568/whale_evolution_exposing_the_deception_in_the_fossil_record_dr_terry_mortenson/ Whale Tale Two Excerpt: We think that the most logical interpretation of the Pakicetus fossils are that they represent land-dwelling mammals that didn’t even have teeth or ears in common with modern whales. This actually pulls the whale evolution tree out by the roots. Evolutionists are back to the point of not having any clue as to how land mammals could possibly have evolved into whales. *******www.ridgecrest.ca.us/~do_while/sage/v6i2f.htm What Does It take To Change A Cow Into A Whale - David Berlinski - video *******www.youtube****/watch?v=DRqdvhL3pgM Chimpanzee? 10-10-2008 - Dr Richard Buggs - research geneticist at the University of Florida ...Therefore the total similarity of the genomes could be below 70%. *******www.refdag.nl/artikel/1366432/Chimpanzee.html Estimating the prevalence of protein sequences adopting functional enzyme folds: Doug Axe: Excerpt: Starting with a weakly functional sequence carrying this signature, clusters of ten side-chains within the fold are replaced randomly, within the boundaries of the signature, and tested for function. The prevalence of low-level function in four such experiments indicates that roughly one in 10^64 signature-consistent sequences forms a working domain. Combined with the estimated prevalence of plausible hydropathic patterns (for any fold) and of relevant folds for particular functions, this implies the overall prevalence of sequences performing a specific function by any domain-sized fold may be as low as 1 in 10^77, adding to the body of evidence that functional folds require highly extraordinary sequences. *******www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15321723 Evolution vs. Functional Proteins - Doug Axe - Video *******www.metacafe****/watch/4018222/evolution_vs_functional_proteins_where_did_the_information_come_from_doug_axe_stephen_meyer/ Chimps are not like humans - May 2004 Excerpt: the International Chimpanzee Chromosome 22 Consortium reports that 83% of chimpanzee chromosome 22 proteins are different from their human counterparts,,, The results reported this week showed that "83% of the genes have changed between the human and the chimpanzee—only 17% are identical—so that means that the impression that comes from the 1.2% [sequence] difference is [misleading]. In the case of protein structures, it has a big effect," Sakaki said. *******cmbi.bjmu.edu.cn/news/0405/119.htm Eighty percent of proteins are different between humans and chimpanzees; Gene; Volume 346, 14 February 2005: *******www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15716009 Stephen Meyer - Functional Proteins And Information For Body Plans - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/4050681/stephen_meyer_functional_proteins_and_information_for_body_plans/ The Paradox of the "Ancient" Bacterium Which Contains "Modern" Protein-Coding Genes: “Almost without exception, bacteria isolated from ancient material have proven to closely resemble modern bacteria at both morphological and molecular levels.” Heather Maughan*, C. William Birky Jr., Wayne L. Nicholson, William D. Rosenzweig§ and Russell H. Vreeland ; *******mbe.oxfordjournals****/cgi/content/full/19/9/1637 Mutation Studies, Videos, And Quotes *******docs.google****/Doc?docid=0AYmaSrBPNEmGZGM4ejY3d3pfMjZjZnM5M21mZg Simulating evolution by gene duplication of protein features that require multiple amino acid residues: Michael J. Behe and David W. Snoke Excerpt: We conclude that, in general, to be fixed in 10^8 generations, the production of novel protein features that require the participation of two or more amino acid residues simply by multiple point mutations in duplicated genes would entail population sizes of no less than 10^9.,,,The fact that very large population sizes—10^9 or greater—are required to build even a minimal [multi-residue] feature requiring two nucleotide alterations within 10^8 generations by the processes described in our model, and that enormous population sizes are required for more complex features or shorter times, seems to indicate that the mechanism of gene duplication and point mutation alone would be ineffective, at least for multicellular diploid species, because few multicellular species reach the required population sizes. *******www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=2286568 Evolution Cartoon - Waiting For That Beneficial Mutation - video *******www.youtube****/watch?v=71-QYtxi8Bw Intelligent Design - The Anthropic Hypothesis *******lettherebelight-77.blogspot****/
3 May 2010
23912
Share Video

9:56
Here is the entire Dr. Arthur Jones video: *******edinburghcreationgroup****/fishfossils.xml This inability for the DNA code to account for body plans is also clearly shown by extensive mutation studies to the DNA of different organisms which show "exceedingly rare" major morphological effects from mutations to the DNA code. Stephen Meyer - Functional Proteins And Information For Body Plans - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/4050681/stephen_meyer_functional_proteins_and_information_for_body_plans/ Hopeful monsters,' transposons, and the Metazoan radiation: Excerpt: Viable mutations with major morphological or physiological effects are exceedingly rare and usually infertile; the chance of two identical rare mutant individuals arising in sufficient propinquity to produce offspring seems too small to consider as a significant evolutionary event. These problems of viable "hopeful monsters" render these explanations untenable. Paleobiologists Douglas Erwin and James Valentine “Yet by the late 1980s it was becoming obvious to most genetic researchers, including myself, since my own main research interest in the ‘80s and ‘90s was human genetics, that the heroic effort to find the information specifying life’s order in the genes had failed. There was no longer the slightest justification for believing that there exists anything in the genome remotely resembling a program capable of specifying in detail all the complex order of the phenotype (Body Plan)." Michael John Denton page 172 of Uncommon Dissent This includes the highly touted four-winged fruit fly mutations: ...Advantageous anatomical mutations are never observed. The four-winged fruit fly is a case in point: The second set of wings lacks flight muscles, so the useless appendages interfere with flying and mating, and the mutant fly cannot survive long outside the laboratory. Similar mutations in other genes also produce various anatomical deformations, but they are harmful, too. In 1963, Harvard evolutionary biologist Ernst Mayr wrote that the resulting mutants “are such evident freaks that these monsters can be designated only as ‘hopeless.’ They are so utterly unbalanced that they would not have the slightest chance of escaping elimination through natural selection." - Jonathan Wells *******www.evolutionnews****/2008/08/inherit_the_spin_the_ncse_answ.html#footnote19 Darwin's Theory - Fruit Flies and Morphology - video *******www.youtube****/watch?v=hZJTIwRY0bs As well as "cloning" studies: "There is now considerable evidence that genes alone do not control development. For example when an egg's genes (DNA) are removed and replaced with genes (DNA) from another type of animal, development follows the pattern of the original egg until the embryo dies from lack of the right proteins. (The rare exceptions to this rule involve animals that could normally mate to produce hybrids.) The Jurassic Park approach of putting dinosaur DNA into ostrich eggs to produce a Tyrannosaurus rex makes exciting fiction but ignores scientific fact." The Design of Life - William Dembski, Jonathan Wells Pg. 50 If that wasn't enough, the Human Genome Project really put the last nail in the coffin for "Genetic Reductionism": DNA: The Alphabet of Life - David Klinghoffer Excerpt: But all this is trivial compared to the largely unheralded insight gained from the Human Genome Project, completed in 2003. The insight is disturbing. It is that while DNA codes for the cell's building blocks, the information needed to build the rest of the creature is seemingly, in large measure, absent. ,,,The physically encoded information to form that mouse, as opposed to that fly, isn't there. Instead, "It is as if the 'idea' of the fly (or any other organism) must somehow permeate the genome that gives rise to it." *******www.evolutionnews****/2009/07/dna_the_alphabet_of_life.html Higher Levels Of Information In Life - Stephen Meyer - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/4050638/the_coding_found_in_dna_surpasses_mans_ability_to_code_stephen_meyer/ Psalm 139:15 My frame was not hidden from You, When I was made in secret, And skillfully wrought in the depths of the earth; Jeremiah 1:5 Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart;,, The Coding Found In DNA Surpasses Mans Ability to Code - Stephen Meyer *******www.metacafe****/watch/4050638/the_coding_found_in_dna_surpasses_mans_ability_to_code_stephen_meyer/ Stephen Meyer - Molecular Machines & Information *******www.metacafe****/watch/4146691/stephen_meyer_molecular_machines_information/ Eighty percent of proteins are different between humans and chimpanzees; Gene; Volume 346, 14 February 2005: *******www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15716009 Chimpanzee? 10-10-2008 - Dr Richard Buggs - research geneticist at the University of Florida ...Therefore the total similarity of the genomes could be below 70%. *******www.refdag.nl/artikel/1366432/Chimpanzee.html Do Human and Chimpanzee DNA Indicate an Evolutionary Relationship? Excerpt: the authors found that only 48.6% of the whole human genome matched chimpanzee nucleotide sequences. [Only 4.8% of the human Y chromosome could be matched to chimpanzee sequences.] *******www.apologeticspress****/articles/2070 Mathematically Defining Functional Information In Molecular Biology - Kirk Durston - short video *******www.metacafe****/watch/3995236/mathematically_defining_functional_information_in_molecular_biology_kirk_durston/ Entire video: *******vimeo****/1775160 Intelligent Design - The Anthropic Hypothesis *******lettherebelight-77.blogspot****/
8 Apr 2011
1636
Share Video

5:14
Falsehoods In Textbooks - Ten Icons of Evolution - overview - Dr. Jonathan Wells - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/4050609/falsehoods_in_textbooks_icons_of_evolution_jonathan_wells/ Dr. Wells writes a article defending his criticism against the Ten Icons of Evolution in detail here: Inherit the Spin: The NCSE Answers "Ten Questions to Ask Your Biology Teacher About Evolution" *******www.evolutionnews****/2008/08/inherit_the_spin_the_ncse_answ.html#more Evolution of the Genus Homo - Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences - Tattersall, Schwartz, May 2009 Excerpt: "Definition of the genus Homo is almost as fraught as the definition of Homo sapiens. We look at the evidence for “early Homo,” finding little morphological basis for extending our genus to any of the 2.5–1.6-myr-old fossil forms assigned to “early Homo” or Homo habilis/rudolfensis." *******arjournals.annualreviews****/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.earth.031208.100202 Harvard zoologist Richard Lewontin wrote in 1995 that When we consider the remote past, before the origin of the actual species Homo sapiens, we are faced with a fragmentary and disconnected fossil record. Despite the excited and optimistic claims that have been made by some paleontologists, no fossil hominid species can be established as our direct ancestor. My Question: HUMAN ORIGINS. Why are artists drawings of ape-like humans used to justify materialistic claims that we are just animals and our existence is a mere acc^id^ent--when fossil experts cannot even agree on who our supposed ancestors were or what they looked like? NCSE's Answer: Drawings of humans and our ancestors illustrate the general outline of human ancestry, about which there is considerable agreement, even if new discoveries continually add to the complexity of the account. The notion that such drawings are used to 'justify materialistic claims' is ludicrous and not borne out by an examination of textbook treatments of human evolution. My Response in Outline: (a) The field of human origins is actually one of the most contentious in biology, because individual researchers interpret the relatively meager evidence on the basis of different biases and preconceptions. (b) Darwin's followers--like Darwin himself--agree that humans evolved from ape-like animals. This theoretical consensus, however, owes less to the evidence than to materialistic philosophy. (c) One consequence of this philosophy is the claim that there has been no purpose or direction in the history of life. Many biology textbooks promote this view and use drawings of ape-like humans to convince students that we are no exception to it. My Response in Detail: (a) Contrary the NCSE's claim of 'considerable agreement,' the field of human origins (paleoanthropology) is actually one of the most contentious in biology. According to experts in the field, this is because of subjective interpretations of the relatively meager evidence. Berkeley evolutionary biologist F. Clark Howell wrote in 1996: 'There is no encompassing theory of [human] evolution... Alas, there never really has been.' According to Howell, the field is characterized by 'narrative treatments' based on little evidence, so 'it is probably true that an encompassing scenario' of human evolution 'is beyond our grasp, now if not forever.' Arizona State University paleoanthropologist Geoffrey Clark was equally pessimistic in 1997: 'Scientists have been trying to arrive at a consensus about modern human origins for more than a century. Why haven't they been successful?' Clark is convinced it is because paleoanthropologists proceed from different 'biases, preconceptions and assumptions.' And in 1999 Henry Gee, chief science writer for Nature, pointed out that all the evidence for human evolution 'between about 10 and 5 million years ago--several thousand generations of living creatures--can be fitted into a small box.' According to Gee, the conventional picture of human evolution as lines of ancestry and descent is 'a completely human invention created after the fact, shaped to accord with human prejudices.' 21 (b) Of course, Darwins followers--like Darwin himself--agree that humans evolved from ape-like animals. This agreement, however, represents a theoretical consensus. It does not emerge from the evidence--not the meager evidence for human origins, nor (as we have seen) the evidence from four-winged fruit flies, Darwin's finches, peppered moths, vertebrate embryos, comparative anatomy, or the fossil record of the animal phyla. On what, then, is this theoretical consensus based? (c) It seems to me that it is based largely on a philosophical commitment--specifically, a commitment to materialism, the philosophical doctrine that the physical universe is the only reality; God, spirit and mind are illusions. One consequence of this doctrine is the claim that there has been no purpose or direction in the history of life. According to the NCSE, the notion that textbooks use drawings of supposed human ancestors to justify this claim is 'ludicrous.' Yet Guttman's Biology (1999) tells students that living things have developed 'just by chance,' by a roll of the 'cosmic dice,' through 'the action of random evolutionary forces.' Miller and Levine's Biology (5th Edition, 2000) asserts that 'evolution works without plan or purpose,' so 'evolution is random and undirected.' Purves, Sadava, Orians and Heller's Life: The Science of Biology (6th Edition, 2001) states that 'evolution is not directed toward a final goal or state.' And all three of these textbooks include fanciful drawings of ape-like humans that help to convince students we are no exception to the rule of purposelessness. Some biology textbooks use other kinds of illustrations as well as interviews with famous Darwinists to persuade students that human beings are merely accidental by-products of purposeless natural processes. Raven and Johnson's Biology (5th Edition, 1999) depicts a speculative reconstruction of the famous 'Lucy' fossil after treating students to an interview with Harvard professor Stephen Jay Gould, who tells them: 'Humans represent just one tiny, largely fortuitous, and late-arising twig on the enormously arborescent bush of life.' Campbell, Reece and Mitchell's Biology (5th Edition, 1999) uses drawings of reconstructed fossil skulls rather than whole animals, and features an interview with Oxford professor Richard Dawkins, who declares: 'Natural selection is a bewilderingly simple idea. And yet what it explains is the whole of life, the diversity of life, the complexity of life, the apparent design of life'--including human beings, who 'are fundamentally not exceptional because we came from the same evolutionary source as every other species.' Our existence was not planned, however, because natural selection is 'totally blind to the future'--the 'blind watchmaker.' For further reading, students are referred to Dawkins's book of that name, in which he writes: Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist.' 22 *******www.evolutionnews****/2008/08/inherit_the_spin_the_ncse_answ.html#more The Truth About Human Origins: Excerpt: "It is practically impossible to determine which "family tree" (for human evolution) one should accept. Richard Leakey (of the famed fossil hunting family from Africa) has proposed one. His late mother, Mary Leakey, proposed another. Donald Johanson, former president of the Institute of Human Origins in Berkeley, California, has proposed yet another. And as late as 2001, Meave Leakey (Richard's wife) has proposed still another.,," *******books.google****/books?id=J9pON9yB8HkC&pg=PT28&lpg=PT28 “Dr. Leakey produced a biased reconstruction (of 1470/ Homo Rudolfensis) based on erroneous preconceived expectations of early human appearance that violated principles of craniofacial development,” Dr. Timothy Bromage *******www.nyu.edu/public.affairs/pdf/2007_BROMAGE_IADR_1470.pdf Stephen Meyer - Functional Proteins And Information For Body Plans - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/4050681/stephen_meyer_functional_proteins_and_information_for_body_plans/ The Unbearable Lightness of Chimp-Human Genome Similarity Excerpt: One can seriously call into question the statement that human and chimp genomes are 99% identical. For one thing, it has been noted in the literature that the exact degree of identity between the two genomes is as yet unknown (Cohen, J., 2007. Relative differences: The myth of 1% Science 316: 1836.). ,,, In short, the figure of identity that one wants to use is dependent on various methodological factors. *******www.evolutionnews****/2009/05/guy_walks_into_a_bar_and_think.html#more Eighty percent of proteins are different between humans and chimpanzees; Gene; Volume 346, 14 February 2005: The early genome comparison by DNA hybridization techniques suggested a nucleotide difference of 1-2%. Recently, direct nucleotide sequencing confirmed this estimate. These findings generated the common belief that the human is extremely close to the chimpanzee at the genetic level. However, if one looks at proteins, which are mainly responsible for phenotypic differences, the picture is quite different, and about 80% of proteins are different between the two species. *******www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15716009 Bottom Line? The supposed naturalistic evolution of man from apes is IMPOSSIBLE!!! Intelligent Design - The Anthropic Hypothesis *******lettherebelight-77.blogspot****/
20 Jul 2011
4292
Share Video

9:49
Psalm 139:13-14 For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother's womb, I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well. Waiting Longer for Two Mutations, Part 5 - Michael Behe Excerpt: the appearance of a particular (beneficial) double mutation in humans would have an expected time of appearance of 216 million years, *******behe.uncommondescent****/2009/03/waiting-longer-for-two-mutations-part-5/ Darwin and the Mathematicians - David Berlinski “The formation within geological time of a human body by the laws of physics (or any other laws of similar nature), starting from a random distribution of elementary particles and the field, is as unlikely as the separation by chance of the atmosphere into its components.” Kurt Gödel, was a preeminent mathematician who is considered one of the greatest to have ever lived. Of Note: Godel was a Theist! *******www.evolutionnews****/2009/11/darwin_and_the_mathematicians.html In Barrow and Tippler's book The Anthropic Cosmological Principle, they list ten steps necessary in the course of human evolution, each of which, is so improbable that if left to happen by chance alone, the sun would have ceased to be a main sequence star and would have incinerated the earth. They estimate that the odds of the evolution (by chance) of the human genome is somewhere between 4 to the negative 180th power, to the 110,000th power, and 4 to the negative 360th power, to the 110,000th power. Therefore, if evolution did occur, it literally would have been a miracle and evidence for the existence of God. - William Lane Craig William Lane Craig - If Human Evolution Did Occur It Was A Miracle - video *******www.youtube****/watch?v=GUxm8dXLRpA Stephen Meyer - Functional Proteins And Information For Body Plans - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/4050681/stephen_meyer_functional_proteins_and_information_for_body_plans/ Eighty percent of proteins are different between humans and chimpanzees; Gene; Volume 346, 14 February 2005: The early genome comparison by DNA hybridization techniques suggested a nucleotide difference of 1-2%. Recently, direct nucleotide sequencing confirmed this estimate. These findings generated the common belief that the human is extremely close to the chimpanzee at the genetic level. However, if one looks at proteins, which are mainly responsible for phenotypic differences, the picture is quite different, and about 80% of proteins are different between the two species. *******www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15716009 Higher Levels Of Information In Life - Stephen Meyer - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/4050638/the_coding_found_in_dna_surpasses_mans_ability_to_code_stephen_meyer/ The Unbearable Lightness of Chimp-Human Genome Similarity Excerpt: One can seriously call into question the statement that human and chimp genomes are 99% identical. For one thing, it has been noted in the literature that the exact degree of identity between the two genomes is as yet unknown (Cohen, J., 2007. Relative differences: The myth of 1% Science 316: 1836.). ,,, In short, the figure of identity that one wants to use is dependent on various methodological factors. *******www.evolutionnews****/2009/05/guy_walks_into_a_bar_and_think.html#more Chimpanzee? 10-10-2008 - Dr Richard Buggs - research geneticist at the University of Florida ...Therefore the total similarity of the genomes could be below 70%. *******www.refdag.nl/artikel/1366432/Chimpanzee.html Evolution of the Genus Homo - Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences - Tattersall, Schwartz, May 2009 Excerpt: "Definition of the genus Homo is almost as fraught as the definition of Homo sapiens. We look at the evidence for “early Homo,” finding little morphological basis for extending our genus to any of the 2.5–1.6-myr-old fossil forms assigned to “early Homo” or Homo habilis/rudolfensis." *******arjournals.annualreviews****/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.earth.031208.100202 The Ape To Man Drawings - Another Blatant Deception of Evolution *******www.metacafe****/watch/4236845/the_ape_to_man_drawings_another_blatant_deception_of_evolution/ “Dr. Leakey produced a biased reconstruction (of 1470/ Homo Rudolfensis) based on erroneous preconceived expectations of early human appearance that violated principles of craniofacial development,” Dr. Timothy Bromage *******www.nyu.edu/public.affairs/pdf/2007_BROMAGE_IADR_1470.pdf The Center Of The Universe Is Life - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/3993426/the_center_of_the_universe_is_life/ Intelligent Design - The Anthropic Hypothesis *******lettherebelight-77.blogspot****/
4 Mar 2010
37384
Share Video

9:55
Human Evolution - Genetic Adam And Eve - Hugh Ross - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/4036776/human_evolution_genetic_adam_and_eve_hugh_ross/ The Unbearable Lightness of Chimp-Human Genome Similarity Excerpt: One can seriously call into question the statement that human and chimp genomes are 99% identical. For one thing, it has been noted in the literature that the exact degree of identity between the two genomes is as yet unknown (Cohen, J., 2007. Relative differences: The myth of 1% Science 316: 1836.). ,,, In short, the figure of identity that one wants to use is dependent on various methodological factors. *******www.evolutionnews****/2009/05/guy_walks_into_a_bar_and_think.html#more Chimpanzee? 10-10-2008 - Dr Richard Buggs - research geneticist at the University of Florida ...Therefore the total similarity of the genomes could be below 70%. *******www.refdag.nl/artikel/1366432/Chimpanzee.html Do Human and Chimpanzee DNA Indicate an Evolutionary Relationship? Excerpt: the authors found that only 48.6% of the whole human genome matched chimpanzee nucleotide sequences. [Only 4.8% of the human Y chromosome could be matched to chimpanzee sequences.] *******www.apologeticspress****/articles/2070 CHROMOSOME STUDY STUNS EVOLUTIONISTS Excerpt: To their great surprise, Dorit and his associates found no nucleotide differences at all in the non-recombinant part of the Y chromosomes of the 38 men. This non-variation suggests no evolution has occurred in male ancestry. *******www.reasons****/interpreting-genesis/adam-and-eve/chromosome-study-stuns-evolutionists Chimps are not like humans - May 2004 Excerpt: the International Chimpanzee Chromosome 22 Consortium reports that 83% of chimpanzee chromosome 22 proteins are different from their human counterparts,,, The results reported this week showed that "83% of the genes have changed between the human and the chimpanzee—only 17% are identical—so that means that the impression that comes from the 1.2% [sequence] difference is [misleading]. In the case of protein structures, it has a big effect," Sakaki said. *******cmbi.bjmu.edu.cn/news/0405/119.htm Eighty percent of proteins are different between humans and chimpanzees; Gene; Volume 346, 14 February 2005: The early genome comparison by DNA hybridization techniques suggested a nucleotide difference of 1-2%. Recently, direct nucleotide sequencing confirmed this estimate. These findings generated the common belief that the human is extremely close to the chimpanzee at the genetic level. However, if one looks at proteins, which are mainly responsible for phenotypic differences, the picture is quite different, and about 80% of proteins are different between the two species. *******www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15716009 Stephen Meyer - Functional Proteins And Information For Body Plans - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/4050681/stephen_meyer_functional_proteins_and_information_for_body_plans/ Fearfully and Wonderfully Made - Glimpses At Human Development In The Womb - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/4249713/fearfully_and_wonderfully_made_glimpses_at_development_in_the_womb/ New study suggests big bang theory of human evolution - U of M Press Release Excerpt: "The earliest H. sapiens (Human-like) remains differ significantly from australopithecines (Lucy-ape-like) in both size and anatomical details. Insofar as we can tell, these changes were sudden and not gradual." University of Michigan anthropologist Milford Wolpoff *******www.ns.umich.edu/Releases/2000/Jan00/r011000b.html Evolution of the Genus Homo - Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences - Tattersall, Schwartz, May 2009 Excerpt: "Definition of the genus Homo is almost as fraught as the definition of Homo sapiens. We look at the evidence for “early Homo,” finding little morphological basis for extending our genus to any of the 2.5–1.6-myr-old fossil forms assigned to “early Homo” or Homo habilis/rudolfensis." *******arjournals.annualreviews****/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.earth.031208.100202 Tracing Your Ancestors Through History - Noah's Descendants - video *******edinburghcreationgroup****/ancestors.xml Does human genetic evidence support Noah's flood? Fazale Rana - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/4116168/does_the_genetic_evidence_support_noahs_flood_fazale_rana_phd/ Darwin’s mistake: Explaining the discontinuity between human and nonhuman minds: Excerpt: There is a profound functional discontinuity between human and nonhuman minds. We argue that this discontinuity pervades nearly every domain of cognition and runs much deeper than even the spectacular scaffolding provided by language or culture can explain. We hypothesize that the cognitive discontinuity between human and nonhuman animals is largely due to the degree to which human and nonhuman minds are able to approximate the higher-order, systematic, relational capabilities of a physical symbol system (i.e. we are able to understand information). *******www.bbsonline****/Preprints/Penn-01062006/Referees/Penn-01062006_bbs-preprint.htm Origin of the Mind: Marc Hauser Excerpt: "Researchers have found some of the building blocks of human cognition in other species. But these building blocks make up only the cement footprint of the skyscraper that is the human mind",,, *******www.uncommondescent****/intelligent-design/ic-all-the-way-down-the-grand-human-evolutionary-discontinuity-and-probabilistic-resources/#comment-341275 The Center Of The Universe Is Life - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/3993426/the_center_of_the_universe_is_life/ Intelligent Design - The Anthropic Hypothesis *******lettherebelight-77.blogspot****/
8 Aug 2010
14681
Share Video

6:08
Courtesy of *******www.top10amazing**** -There are many unexplained things in this world…like from flying saucers or UFO’s, congos, big foot chimpanzees, artifacts etc.
15 Jun 2010
1188
Share Video

0:34
Animal activists invade a laboratory with the intention of releasing chimpanzees that are undergoing experimentation, infected by a virus -a virus that causes rage. The naive activists ignore the pleas of a scientist to keep the cages locked, with disastrous results. Twenty-eight days later, our protagonist, Jim, wakes up from a coma, alone, in an abandoned hospital. He begins to seek out anyone else to find London is deserted, apparently without a living soul. After finding a church, which had become inhabited by zombie like humans intent on his demise, he runs for his life. Selena and Mark rescue him from the horde and bring him up to date on the mass carnage and horror as all of London tore itself apart. This is a tale of survival and ultimately, heroics, with nice subtext about mankind's savage nature.
13 Aug 2010
113
Share Video

1:01
Indeed, math is not kind to Darwinism in the least when considering the probability of humans ‘randomly’ evolving: In Barrow and Tippler’s book The Anthropic Cosmological Principle, they list ten steps necessary in the course of human evolut...ion, each of which, is so improbable that if left to happen by chance alone, the sun would have ceased to be a main sequence star and would have incinerated the earth. They estimate that the odds of the evolution (by chance) of the human genome is somewhere between 4 to the negative 180th power, to the 110,000th power, and 4 to the negative 360th power, to the 110,000th power. Therefore, if evolution did occur, it literally would have been a miracle and evidence for the existence of God. William Lane Craig Darwin and the Mathematicians – David Berlinski “The formation within geological time of a human body by the laws of physics (or any other laws of similar nature), starting from a random distribution of elementary particles and the field, is as unlikely as the separation by chance of the atmosphere into its components.” Kurt Gödel, was a preeminent mathematician who is considered one of the greatest to have ever lived. Of Note: Godel was a Theist! *******www.evolutionnews****/2009/11/darwin_and_the_mathematicians027911.html “Darwin’s theory is easily the dumbest idea ever taken seriously by science.” Granville Sewell – Professor Of Mathematics – University Of Texas – El Paso Waiting Longer for Two Mutations – Michael J. Behe Excerpt: Citing malaria literature sources (White 2004) I had noted that the de novo appearance of chloroquine resistance in Plasmodium falciparum was an event of probability of 1 in 10^20. I then wrote that ‘‘for humans to achieve a mutation like this by chance, we would have to wait 100 million times 10 million years’’ (Behe 2007) (because that is the extrapolated time that it would take to produce 10^20 humans). Durrett and Schmidt (2008, p. 1507) retort that my number ‘‘is 5 million times larger than the calculation we have just given’’ using their model (which nonetheless “using their model” gives a prohibitively long waiting time of 216 million years). Their criticism compares apples to oranges. My figure of 10^20 is an empirical statistic from the literature; it is not, as their calculation is, a theoretical estimate from a population genetics model. *******www.discovery****/a/9461 This following calculation by geneticist John Sanford for ‘fixing’ a beneficial mutation, or for creating a new gene, in humans, gives equally absurd numbers that once again render the Darwinian scenario of humans evolving from apes completely false: Dr. Sanford calculates it would take 12 million years to “fix” a single base pair mutation into a population. He further calculates that to create a gene with 1000 base pairs, it would take 12 million x 1000 or 12 billion years. This is obviously too slow to support the creation of the human genome containing 3 billion base pairs. *******www.detectingtruth****/?p=66 The Human Body - You Are Amazing - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/5246456 Fearfully and Wonderfully Made - Glimpses At Human Development In The Womb - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/4249713 Fearfully and Wonderfully Made - (Amazing Trivia) video *******www.metacafe****/watch/5289335/ further notes: Human Evolution? - The Compelling Genetic, Fossil Evidence & Tool Making For Adam and Eve Dr. Fazale Rana - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/4284482 Another strong piece of genetic evidence, for the recent origin of man, is that scientists find the differences of the 'younger' human races (Chinese, Europeans, American Indians, etc.. etc..) are losing genetic information when compared to the original race of humans which is thought to have migrated out of east Africa some 50,000 years ago. "We found an enormous amount of diversity within and between the African populations, and we found much less diversity in non-African populations," Tishkoff told attendees today (Jan. 22) at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in Anaheim. "Only a small subset of the diversity in Africa is found in Europe and the Middle East, and an even narrower set is found in American Indians." Tishkoff; Andrew Clark, Penn State; Kenneth Kidd, Yale University; Giovanni Destro-Bisol, University "La Sapienza," Rome, and Himla Soodyall and Trefor Jenkins, WITS University, South Africa, looked at three locations on DNA samples from 13 to 18 populations in Africa and 30 to 45 populations in the remainder of the world.- I wonder what Hitler would have thought of that study? Does human genetic evidence support Noah's flood? - Fazale Rana - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/4116168 Book Review; Who Was Adam?: A Creation Model Approach to the Origin of Man: Excerpt: The Bible claims that there was a genetic bottleneck at the Genesis flood. Whereas all females can trace their ancestry back to Eve (through the three wives of Noah's sons), all males trace their Y-chromosomes through Noah (through his three sons). This predicted discrepancy for molecular dates of mitochondrial DNA and Y-chromosome data is actually seen in the scientific literature. *******www.godandscience****/newsletters/2005-09.html Kangaroo genes close to humans Excerpt: Australia's kangaroos are genetically similar to humans,,, "There are a few differences, we have a few more of this, a few less of that, but they are the same genes and a lot of them are in the same order," ,,,"We thought they'd be completely scrambled, but they're not. There is great chunks of the human genome which is sitting right there in the kangaroo genome," *******www.reuters****/article/science%20News/idUSTRE4AH1P020081118 I'm just left wondering exactly where evolutionists should place the kangaroos on their cartoon drawings that show man evolving from apes. The Ape To Man Drawings - Another Blatant Deception of Evolution - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/4236845 Eighty percent of proteins are different between humans and chimpanzees; Gene; Volume 346, 14 February 2005: *******www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15716009 Chimps are not like humans - May 2004 Excerpt: the International Chimpanzee Chromosome 22 Consortium reports that 83% of chimpanzee chromosome 22 proteins are different from their human counterparts,,, The results reported this week showed that "83% of the genes have changed between the human and the chimpanzee—only 17% are identical—so that means that the impression that comes from the 1.2% [sequence] difference is [misleading]. In the case of protein structures, it has a big effect," Sakaki said. *******cmbi.bjmu.edu.cn/news/0405/119.htm To put it mildly this huge +80% difference between chimps and humans is more than a slight problem for evolutionary materialists: CHROMOSOME STUDY STUNS EVOLUTIONISTS Excerpt: To their great surprise, Dorit and his associates found no nucleotide differences at all in the non-recombinant part of the Y chromosomes of the 38 men. This non-variation suggests no evolution has occurred in male ancestry. *******www.reasons****/interpreting-genesis/adam-and-eve/chromosome-study-stuns-evolutionists The following link clearly shows why the 'upward' evolution of any kind/species of animal from any other 'lower' kind/species of animal is impossible: Poly-Functional Complexity equals Poly-Constrained Complexity *******docs.google****/Doc?docid=0AYmaSrBPNEmGZGM4ejY3d3pfMjdoZmd2emZncQ DNA - Evolution Vs. Polyfuctionality - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/4614519 Scientists Map All Mammalian Gene Interactions - August 2010 Excerpt: Mammals, including humans, have roughly 20,000 different genes.,,, They found a network of more than 7 million interactions encompassing essentially every one of the genes in the mammalian genome. *******www.sciencedaily****/releases/2010/08/100809142044.htm Chimpanzee? 10-10-2008 - Dr Richard Buggs - research geneticist at the University of Florida ...Therefore the total similarity of the genomes could be below 70%. *******www.idnet****.au/files/pdf/Chimpanzee.pdf Post of interest refuting the 98% genetic similarity claim: *******www.uncommondescent****/intelligent-design/a-simple-statistical-test-for-the-alleged-99-genetic-identity-between-humans-and-chimps/#comment-364779 further notes: "Fossil evidence of human evolutionary history is fragmentary and open to various interpretations. Fossil evidence of chimpanzee evolution is absent altogether". Evolutionist Henry Gee, Editor Nature Magazine - 2001 *******www.nature****/nature/journal/v412/n6843/full/412131a0.html New study suggests big bang theory of human evolution - U of M Press Release Excerpt: "The earliest H. sapiens remains differ significantly from australopithecines in both size and anatomical details. Insofar as we can tell, these changes were sudden and not gradual." University of Michigan anthropologist Milford Wolpoff *******www.ns.umich.edu/Releases/2000/Jan00/r011000b.html The Truth About Human Origins: Excerpt: "It is practically impossible to determine which "family tree" (for human evolution) one should accept. Richard Leakey (of the famed fossil hunting family from Africa) has proposed one. His late mother, Mary Leakey, proposed another. Donald Johanson, former president of the Institute of Human Origins in Berkeley, California, has proposed yet another. And as late as 2001, Meave Leakey (Richard's wife) has proposed still another.,," *******books.google****/books?id=J9pON9yB8HkC&pg=PT28&lpg=PT28 The changing face of genus Homo - Wood; Collard Excerpt: the current criteria for identifying species of Homo are difficult, if not impossible, to operate using paleoanthropological evidence. We discuss alternative, verifiable, criteria, and show that when these new criteria are applied to Homo, two species, Homo habilis and Homo rudolfensis, fail to meet them. *******www3.interscience.wiley****/journal/68503570/abstract When we consider the remote past, before the origin of the actual species Homo sapiens, we are faced with a fragmentary and disconnected fossil record. Despite the excited and optimistic claims that have been made by some paleontologists, no fossil hominid species can be established as our direct ancestor. Richard Lewontin - Harvard Zoologist *******www.discovery****/a/9961 Evolution of the Genus Homo - Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences - Tattersall, Schwartz, May 2009 Excerpt: "Definition of the genus Homo is almost as fraught as the definition of Homo sapiens. We look at the evidence for “early Homo,” finding little morphological basis for extending our genus to any of the 2.5–1.6-myr-old fossil forms assigned to “early Homo” or Homo habilis/rudolfensis." *******arjournals.annualreviews****/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.earth.031208.100202 Man is indeed as unique, as different from all other animals, as had been traditionally claimed by theologians and philosophers. Evolutionist Ernst Mayr *******www.y-origins****/index.php?p=home_more4 “Something extraordinary, if totally fortuitous, happened with the birth of our species….Homo sapiens is as distinctive an entity as exists on the face of the Earth, and should be dignified as such instead of being adulterated with every reasonably large-brained hominid fossil that happened to come along.” Anthropologist Ian Tattersall (curator at the American Museum of Natural History) This following quotes sum up what materialists appear to be doing with this 'evidence' for human evolution: "But what is the basis for the human evolution thesis put forward by evolutionists? It is the existence of plenty of fossils on which evolutionists are able to build imaginary interpretations. Throughout history, more than 6,000 species of ape have lived, and most of them have become extinct. Today, only 120 species live on the earth. These 6,000 or so species of ape, most of which are extinct, constitute a rich resource for the evolutionists to build imaginary interpretations with." *******www.darwinismrefuted****/origin_of_man.html Human evolution: We know little, and with good reason: "Despite decades of patient work we still know rather little about the evolution of humanity…the remains we have are very scarce and very meager and that means that there are probably lots of different species that existed, lived for hundreds of thousands of years and then became extinct and we know nothing about them…All you need is just one to completely blow apart your well entrenched comfortable idea of the linear progress of evolution." - Henry Gee - Editor Of Nature Magazine - *******post-darwinist.blogspot****/2009/07/human-evolution-we-know-little-and-with.html etc... etc... etc... further notes here: Intelligent Design - The Anthropic Hypothesis *******lettherebelight-77.blogspot****/2009/10/intelligent-design-anthropic-hypothesis_19.html
16 Jul 2012
1207
Share Video

1:12
Two masters, one without arms, one without legs, together they will conquer all! Pure crippled kung-fu exploitation amusements that could have only come out of Hong Kong in the 1980s. Frank Shum and Jack Conn are back in deadly action. This time, along with a chimpanzee, they are protecting a beautiful girl who is on the run from local gangsters and who has become temporarily blinded. The cripples struggle for the young girl's affection while trying to hide the fact that they are handicapped. The two crippled heroes break out all kinds of kung-fu action including a skateboard like apparatus with hooks, spinning spider kicks and foot operated throwing knives. This DVD includes the bonus short film Pagoda Hell. From director Ernie "Hardware Wars" Fosselius comes an inspired short film that uncovers the ancient secret kung-fu style "Cur-Lee". A truly unique DVD that will keep you coming back to watch in awe again and again. Get it at *******www.TheCrippledMasters****
18 Nov 2010
392
Share Video

1:58
New Scientist: Darwin Was Wrong! *******edinburghcreationgroup****/blog/?p=116 The tree of life, one of the iconic concepts of evolution, has turned out to be a figment of our imagination, says Graham Lawton *******www.thedivineconspiracy****/Z5221S.pdf Why Darwin was wrong about the (genetic) tree of life: - 21 January 2009 Excerpt: Syvanen recently compared 2000 genes that are common to humans, frogs, sea squirts, sea urchins, fruit flies and nematodes. In theory, he should have been able to use the gene sequences to construct an evolutionary tree showing the relationships between the six animals. He failed. The problem was that different genes told contradictory evolutionary stories. This was especially true of sea-squirt genes. Conventionally, sea squirts - also known as tunicates - are lumped together with frogs, humans and other vertebrates in the phylum Chordata, but the genes were sending mixed signals. Some genes did indeed cluster within the chordates, but others indicated that tunicates should be placed with sea urchins, which aren't chordates. "Roughly 50 per cent of its genes have one evolutionary history and 50 per cent another," Syvanen says. ."We've just annihilated the tree of life. It's not a tree any more, it's a different topology entirely," says Syvanen. "What would Darwin have made of that?" *******www.newscientist****/article/mg20126921.600-why-darwin-was-wrong-about-the-tree-of-life.html Since evolutionists continually misrepresent the true state of the evidence for molecular sequences, here are several more comments and articles, by leading experts, on the incongruence of molecular sequences to Darwin's theory: Testing the Orchard Model and the NCSE’s Claims of “Nested Patterns” Supporting a “Tree of Life” Excerpt: Perhaps the reason why different genes are telling “different evolutionary stories” and “one group suggests one biogeographic pattern, and another group suggests another” is because the genes and organisms have wholly different stories to tell, namely stories that indicate that not all living organisms are ancestrally related, thereby fulfilling a testable prediction of the orchard model. *******www.evolutionnews****/2010/03/testing_the_orchard_model_and.html Botching Evolutionary Science - Casey Luskin - April 2009 Excerpt: The textbook touts the cytochrome C tree, but it ignores the cytochrome B tree, which has striking differences from the classical animal phylogeny. As one article in Trends in Ecology and Evolution stated: “[T]he mitochondrial cytochrome b gene implied,, an absurd phylogeny of mammals, regardless of the method of tree construction. Cats and whales fell within primates, grouping with simians (monkeys and apes) and strepsirhines (lemurs, bush-babies and lorises) to the exclusion of tarsiers. Cytochrome b is probably the most commonly sequenced gene in vertebrates, making this surprising result even more disconcerting.” (See Michael S. Y. Lee, “Molecular Phylogenies Become Functional,” Trends in Ecology and Evolution, Vol. 14: 177 (1999).) *******www.evolutionnews****/2010/04/the_biggest_problem_in_asking.html#more Congruence Between Molecular and Morphological Phylogenies - Colin Patterson Excerpt: "As morphologists with high hopes of molecular systematics, we end this survey with our hopes dampened. Congruence between molecular phylogenies is as elusive as it is in morphology and as it is between molecules and morphology." *******www.arn****/docs/odesign/od171/sampler171.htm 'The theory makes a prediction (for amino acid and nucleotide sequence studies); we've tested it, and the prediction is falsified precisely.' Dr. Colin Patterson Senior Principal Scientific Officer in the Paleontology Department at the British Museum *******www.uncommondescent****/intelligent-design/stephen-meyer-on-ids-scientific-bona-fides/comment-page-8/#comment-359598 Walter T. Brown, In the Beginning (1989), p. 7 Excerpt: "There is not a trace of evidence on the molecular level for the traditional evolutionary series: simple sea life > fish> amphibians > reptiles> mammals. In general, each of the many categories of organisms appear to be equally isolated." *******evolution-facts****/Appendix/a21.htm Bones, molecules...or both? Excerpt: Evolutionary trees constructed by studying biological molecules often don't resemble those drawn up from morphology. Can the two ever be reconciled?,,, When biologists talk of the 'evolution wars', they usually mean the ongoing battle for supremacy in American schoolrooms between Darwinists and their creationist opponents. But the phrase could also be applied to a debate that is raging (between Darwinists) within systematics. *******www.nature****/nature/journal/v406/n6793/full/406230a0.html The universal ancestor - Carl Woese Excerpt: No consistent organismal phylogeny has emerged from the many individual protein phylogenies so far produced. Phylogenetic incongruities can be seen everywhere in the universal tree, from its root to the major branchings within and among the various taxa to the makeup of the primary groupings themselves. *******www.pnas****/content/95/12/6854.full Shilling for Darwin — The wildly irresponsible evolutionist - William Dembski - Oct. 2009 Excerpt: The incongruence of gene and species trees is a standing obstacle, or research problem, in molecular phylogenetics. *******www.uncommondescent****/evolution/shilling-for-darwin-the-wildly-irresponsible-evolutionist/#comments Do orthologous gene phylogenies really support tree-thinking? Excerpt: We conclude that we simply cannot determine if a large portion of the genes have a common history.,,, CONCLUSION: Our phylogenetic analyses do not support tree-thinking. *******www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15913459 Evolution: Charles Darwin was wrong about the tree of life - 2009 Excerpt: "We have no evidence at all that the tree of life is a reality," Eric Bapteste, an evolutionary biologist *******www.guardian******/science/2009/jan/21/charles-darwin-evolution-species-tree-life Uprooting The Tree Of Life - W. Ford Doolittle Excerpt: as DNA sequences of complete genomes have become increasingly available, my group and others have noted patterns that are disturbingly at odds with the prevailing beliefs. *******people.ibest.uidaho.edu/~bree/courses/2_Doolittle_2000.pdf DNA Comparisons between Humans and Chimps - Fazale Rana Excerpt: It is interesting that when evolutionary biologists discuss genetic comparisons between human and chimpanzee genomes, the fact that, again, as much as 25 percent of the two genomes won’t align receives no mention. Instead, the focus is only on the portions of the genome that display a high-degree of similarity. This distorted emphasis makes the case for the evolutionary connection between humans and chimps seem more compelling than it may actually be. *******www.reasons****/dna-comparisons-between-humans-and-chimps-response-venema-critique-rtb-human-origins-model-part-2 A recent, more accurate, human/chimp genome comparison study, by Richard Buggs in 2008, has found when he rigorously compared the recently completed sequences in the genomes of chimpanzees to the genomes of humans side by side, the similarity between chimps and man fell to slightly below 70%! Why is this study ignored since the ENCODE study has now implicated 100% high level functionality across the entire human genome? Finding compelling evidence that implicates 100% high level functionality across the entire genome clearly shows the similarity is not to be limited to the very biased 'only 1.5% of the genome' studies of evolutionists. Chimpanzee? 10-10-2008 - Dr Richard Buggs - research geneticist at the University of Florida ...Therefore the total similarity of the genomes could be below 70%. *******www.idnet****.au/files/pdf/Chimpanzee.pdf Moreover, the following 'statistical test' found only a 62% similarity between chimp-human genomes rather than the 95%-98.5% similarity touted by many papers of evolutionists: A simple statistical test for the alleged “99% genetic identity” between humans and chimps - September 2010 Excerpt: The results obtained are statistically valid. The same test was previously run on a sampling of 1,000 random 30-base patterns and the percentages obtained were almost identical with those obtained in the final test, with 10,000 random 30-base patterns. When human and chimp genomes are compared, the X chromosome is the one showing the highest degree of 30BPM similarity (72.37%), while the Y chromosome shows the lowest degree of 30BPM similarity (30.29%). On average the overall 30BPM similarity, when all chromosomes are taken into consideration, is approximately 62%. *******www.uncommondescent****/intelligent-design/a-simple-statistical-test-for-the-alleged-99-genetic-identity-between-humans-and-chimps/ Post of interest refuting 98% similarity claim: *******www.uncommondescent****/intelligent-design/a-simple-statistical-test-for-the-alleged-99-genetic-identity-between-humans-and-chimps/#comment-364779 Moreover, when scientists did a actual Nucleotide by Nucleotide sequence comparison, to find the 'real world' difference between the genomes of chimps and Humans, they found the difference was even more profound than what Dr. Richard Buggs, or the statistical test, had estimated: Do Human and Chimpanzee DNA Indicate an Evolutionary Relationship? Excerpt: the authors found that only 48.6% of the whole human genome matched chimpanzee nucleotide sequences. [Only 4.8% of the human Y chromosome could be matched to chimpanzee sequences.] *******www.apologeticspress****/articles/2070 Even this more recent evolution friendly article found the differences in the protein coding genes of the Y chromosome between chimps and Humans to be 'striking': Recent Genetic Research Shows Chimps More Distant From Humans,,, - Jan. 2010 Excerpt: “many of the stark changes between the chimp and human Y chromosomes are due to gene loss in the chimp and gene gain in the human” since “the chimp Y chromosome has only two-thirds as many distinct genes or gene families as the human Y chromosome and only 47% as many protein-coding elements as humans.”,,,, “Even more striking than the gene loss is the rearrangement of large portions of the chromosome. More than 30% of the chimp Y chromosome lacks an alignable counterpart on the human Y chromosome, and vice versa,,," *******www.evolutionnews****/2010/04/recent_genetic_research_shows.html Chimp and human Y chromosomes evolving faster than expected - Jan. 2010 Excerpt: "The results overturned the expectation that the chimp and human Y chromosomes would be highly similar. Instead, they differ remarkably in their structure and gene content.,,, The chimp Y, for example, has lost one third to one half of the human Y chromosome genes. *******www.physorg****/news182605704.html Many times materialists will try to establish scientific validity for their evolution of man from apes by pointing to mere suggestive genetic similarities, of one type or another, all the while ignoring profound dissimilarities. For prime example of the flimsy 'similarity evidence', used by materialists to try to make their case for evolution, most materialists are adamant Darwinian evolution is proven true when we look at the supposed 98.8% genetic similarity between chimps and man. Though suggestive, the gene similarity, even if it were true which it is not, is not nearly good enough to be considered conclusive scientific proof. Primarily this 'lack of conclusiveness' is due to concerns with the Second Law of Thermodynamics and with the Law of Conservation of Information. But of more pressing concern, body plans are not even encoded solely by the DNA code in the first place. This inability of body plans to be reduced directly to the DNA code is clearly shown by Cortical Inheritance and 'epigenetic' studies. Cortical Inheritance: The Crushing Critique Against Genetic Reductionism - Arthur Jones - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/4187488 entire video: *******edinburghcreationgroup****/fishfossils.xml “Live memory” of the cell, the other hereditary memory of living systems - 2005 Excerpt: To understand this notion of “live memory”, its role and interactions with DNA must be resituated; indeed, operational information belongs as much to the cell body and to its cytoplasmic regulatory protein components and other endogenous or exogenous ligands as it does to the DNA database. We will see in Section 2, using examples from recent experiments in biology, the principal roles of “live memory” in relation to the four aspects of cellular identity, memory of form, hereditary transmission and also working memory. *******www.sciencedirect****/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6T2K-4FJXNG6-1&_user=10&_coverDate=06%2F30%2F2005&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1273117547&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=0bfa74d6bb0937402472343daa6bdef8 The Case Against Molecular Reductionism - Rupert Sheldrake and Bruce Lipton - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/4899469 The Gene Myth, Part II - August 2010 Excerpt: So even with the same sequence a given protein can have different shapes and functions. Furthermore, many proteins have no intrinsic shape, taking on different roles in different molecular contexts. So even though genes specify protein sequences they have only a tenuous influence over their functions.,,, So, to reiterate, the genes do not uniquely determine what is in the cell, but what is in the cell determines how the genes get used.,,, Only if the pie were to rise up, take hold of the recipe book and rewrite the instructions for its own production, would this popular analogy for the role of genes be pertinent. *******darwins-god.blogspot****/2010/08/gene-myth-part-ii.html This inability for the DNA code to account for body plans is also clearly shown by extensive mutation studies to the DNA of different organisms which show 'exceedingly rare' beneficial morphological changes from mutations to the DNA code. The Origin of Biological Information and the Higher Taxonomic Categories - Stephen Meyer "Neo-Darwinism seeks to explain the origin of new information, form, and structure as a result of selection acting on randomly arising variation at a very low level within the biological hierarchy, mainly, within the genetic text. Yet the major morphological innovations depend on a specificity of arrangement at a much higher level of the organizational hierarchy, a level that DNA alone does not determine. Yet if DNA is not wholly responsible for body plan morphogenesis, then DNA sequences can mutate indefinitely, without regard to realistic probabilistic limits, and still not produce a new body plan. Thus, the mechanism of natural selection acting on random mutations in DNA cannot in principle generate novel body plans, including those that first arose in the Cambrian explosion." *******eyedesignbook****/ch6/eyech6-append-d.html Stephen Meyer - Functional Proteins And Information For Body Plans - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/4050681 This following video and article are much more clear for explaining exactly why mutations to the DNA do not control Body Plan morphogenesis, since the mutations are the ‘bottom rung of the ladder’ as far as the 'higher levels of the layered information’ of the cell are concerned: Stephen Meyer on Craig Venter, Complexity Of The Cell & Layered Information *******www.metacafe****/watch/4798685 Getting Over the Code Delusion (Epigenetics) - Talbot - November 2010 - Excellent Article for explaining exactly why epigentics falsifies the neo-Darwinian paradigm of genetic reductionism: *******www.thenewatlantis****/publications/getting-over-the-code-delusion This following video gives a glimpse of this 'higher level' information in action: Fearfully and Wonderfully Made - Glimpses At Human Development In The Womb - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/4249713 further notes: Chimps are not like humans - May 2004 Excerpt: the International Chimpanzee Chromosome 22 Consortium reports that 83% of chimpanzee chromosome 22 proteins are different from their human counterparts,,, The results reported this week showed that "83% of the genes have changed between the human and the chimpanzee—only 17% are identical—so that means that the impression that comes from the 1.2% [sequence] difference is [misleading]. In the case of protein structures, it has a big effect," Sakaki said. *******cmbi.bjmu.edu.cn/news/0405/119.htm Chimp chromosome creates puzzles - 2004 Excerpt: However, the researchers were in for a surprise. Because chimps and humans appear broadly similar, some have assumed that most of the differences would occur in the large regions of DNA that do not appear to have any obvious function. But that was not the case. The researchers report in 'Nature' that many of the differences were within genes, the regions of DNA that code for proteins. 83% of the 231 genes compared had differences that affected the amino acid sequence of the protein they encoded. And 20% showed "significant structural changes". In addition, there were nearly 68,000 regions that were either extra or missing between the two sequences, accounting for around 5% of the chromosome.,,, "we have seen a much higher percentage of change than people speculated." The researchers also carried out some experiments to look at when and how strongly the genes are switched on. 20% of the genes showed significant differences in their pattern of activity. *******www.nature****/news/1998/040524/full/news040524-8.html Eighty percent of proteins are different between humans and chimpanzees; Gene; Volume 346, 14 February 2005: *******www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15716009 Evolution of the Genus Homo - Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences - Tattersall, Schwartz, May 2009 Excerpt: "Definition of the genus Homo is almost as fraught as the definition of Homo sapiens. We look at the evidence for “early Homo,” finding little morphological basis for extending our genus to any of the 2.5–1.6-myr-old fossil forms assigned to “early Homo” or Homo habilis/rudolfensis." *******arjournals.annualreviews****/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.earth.031208.100202 Man is indeed as unique, as different from all other animals, as had been traditionally claimed by theologians and philosophers. Evolutionist Ernst Mayr *******www.y-origins****/index.php?p=home_more4 “Something extraordinary, if totally fortuitous, happened with the birth of our species….Homo sapiens is as distinctive an entity as exists on the face of the Earth, and should be dignified as such instead of being adulterated with every reasonably large-brained hominid fossil that happened to come along.” Anthropologist Ian Tattersall (curator at the American Museum of Natural History) Intelligent Design - The Anthropic Hypothesis *******lettherebelight-77.blogspot****/2009/10/intelligent-design-anthropic-hypothesis_19.html
27 Dec 2010
1215
Share Video

1:41
*******tvfrees***.cc DOWNLOAD HERE *******tvfrees***.cc Rise of the Planet of the Apes Movie OFFICIAL Trailer (HD) In present day San Francisco, a scientist (Franco) looks for a cure for Alzheimer's disease by experimenting on a chimpanzee named Caesar. The development of animal intelligence brings about a war for supremacy between humans and apes. Director: Rupert Wyatt Writers: Pierre Boulle (suggested by novel "La planete des singes"), Rick Jaffa, and 2 more credits » Stars: James Franco, Andy Serkis and Freida Pinto Rise of the Planet of the Apes Movie ,OFFICIAL Trailer, Trailers, Action, Adventure, Fantasy, Jason Momoa, Rachel Nichols, Stephen Lang, Rose McGowan, Saïd Taghmaoui, Ron Perlman,James Franco, Andy Serkis,Freida Pinto,Rick Jaffa,Rupert Wyatt,Hd, High Quality, Film, Sneak Peak, Movie, Widescreen, Teaser, Movie Trailers, Teaser Trailer, Hollywood Sneak Peek
11 May 2011
738
Share Video

2:15
BY JENNIFER MECKLES You're watching multisource U.S. news analysis from Newsy. “An army of doctors replaced his nose, lips, and facial muscles and nerves from an anonymous donor.” “He will not look like himself, but he will also not look like the donor.” “Recovery will take months, and he will not be able to see...” (Video: NBC) Dallas Wiens first made headlines a few months ago, as the first person in the U.S. to receive a full face transplant, after a power line accident burned off all his features. Now, the Texas native is going public with his new appearance and... he looks pretty good! “There are no words to truly describe the debt and gratitude or love that I possess for the donor's family. The choices that they made have in a very real and a very great way, changed my life and my daughter's.” (Video: The Telegraph) Wiens’ inspiring story has warmed the hearts of both media outlets and their audiences. In an optimistic piece, CBS chronicles his small successes... and future prognosis: “Wiens is still blind but he’s now breathing through his nose and smelling again. His first aroma? Hospital lasagna!” WIENS: “You wouldn’t have imagined it smelled so delicious!" “Doctors expect Wiens to gain full control of his face and speech in the next two years.” And following Wiens’ surgery, doctors at his hospital are cheerful about the future of face transplants -- even receiving financial help from the government to make it happen. The Wall Street Journal reports: “Brigham & Women’s received a $3.4 million grant from the Department of Defense to fund facial transplants in both military veterans and civilians... Another man — also shocked by a power line — received a full-face transplant at the hospital in late April. And the Connecticut woman who was attacked by a 200-pound chimpanzee in 2009 is on the waiting list for full-face and hand transplants.” Wiens insists his motivation and drive comes from his young daughter, Scarlett. He can now feel her kisses on his face. She says her daddy looks “handsome.” We’ll leave you with ABC’s exclusive reunion video of their first meeting following his surgery. SCARLETT: “Daddy!” WIENS: “I missed you so much.” SCARLETT: “I missed you too, Daddy.” 'Like Newsy' on Facebook for updates in your newsfeed. Get more multisource U.S. video news analysis from Newsy. Transcript by Newsy.
14 May 2011
297
Share Video