Results for: american museum of natural history Search Results
Family Filter:
30:55
Part 1 of a video podcast from the American Museum of Natural Historys 2007 Mack Lipkin Man and Nature Series entitled Save the Microbes, Save the World: The Fate of Microbial Life on a Changing Planet. The panel was introduced by Michael Novacek, Senior Vice President and Provost of Science for the AMNH and moderated by Julie Burstein, Public Radio International and WNYC Radio’s Studio 360. Panelists include: # Rita Colwell, Distinguished University Professor, University of Maryland College Park and Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, and Chairman, Canon US Life Sciences, Inc.?Susan Perkins, Assistant Curator, Invertebrate Zoology and Sackler Institute for Comparative Genomics, AMNH # James Staley, Professor of Microbiology at the University of Washington Visit MicrobeWorld online at www.microbeworld****
9 Feb 2009
328
Share Video

35:25
Part 2 of a video podcast from the American Museum of Natural Historys 2007 Mack Lipkin Man and Nature Series entitled Save the Microbes, Save the World: The Fate of Microbial Life on a Changing Planet. The panel was introduced by Michael Novacek, Senior Vice President and Provost of Science for the AMNH and moderated by Julie Burstein, Public Radio International and WNYC Radio’s Studio 360. Panelists include: # Rita Colwell, Distinguished University Professor, University of Maryland College Park and Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, and Chairman, Canon US Life Sciences, Inc.?Susan Perkins, Assistant Curator, Invertebrate Zoology and Sackler Institute for Comparative Genomics, AMNH # James Staley, Professor of Microbiology at the University of Washington Visit MicrobeWorld online at www.microbeworld****
31 Jul 2008
204
Share Video

19:33
Part 3 of a video podcast from the American Museum of Natural Historys 2007 Mack Lipkin Man and Nature Series entitled Save the Microbes, Save the World: The Fate of Microbial Life on a Changing Planet. The panel was introduced by Michael Novacek, Senior Vice President and Provost of Science for the AMNH and moderated by Julie Burstein, Public Radio International and WNYC Radio’s Studio 360. Panelists include: # Rita Colwell, Distinguished University Professor, University of Maryland College Park and Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, and Chairman, Canon US Life Sciences, Inc.?Susan Perkins, Assistant Curator, Invertebrate Zoology and Sackler Institute for Comparative Genomics, AMNH # James Staley, Professor of Microbiology at the University of Washington Visit MicrobeWorld online at www.microbeworld****
31 Jul 2008
267
Share Video

4:48
Where do you go to play in the greatest of playgrounds? When Kevin is in New York, these are some of his favorite hangouts. Chelsea Piers has every kind of fun a family could want under one roof and if dinosaurs and earth science is your bag, check out the American Museum of Natural History. And an absolute must in the Big Apple is a stroll through Central Park.
4 Sep 2008
197
Share Video

4:02
Even jaded New Yorkers got a taste of the impossible made real last night as―Hangover‖ actress Heather Graham unveiled the extraordinary Spider Silk exhibit in the American Museum of Natural History (―AMNH‖) at an intimate and private reception honoring Simon Peers and Nicholas Godley, the dreamweavers behind the one of a kind textile made from the silk of more than a million spiders. Read the New York Times articel: *******www.nytimes****/2009/09/23/arts/design/23spiders.html?hp Distributed by Tubemogul.
30 Sep 2009
403
Share Video

2:02
Even jaded New Yorkers got a taste of the impossible made real last night as―Hangover‖ actress Heather Graham unveiled the extraordinary Spider Silk exhibit in the American Museum of Natural History (―AMNH‖) at an intimate and private reception honoring Simon Peers and Nicholas Godley, the dreamweavers behind the one of a kind textile made from the silk of more than a million spiders. Read the New York Times articel: *******www.nytimes****/2009/09/23/arts/design/23spiders.html?hp Distributed by Tubemogul.
30 Sep 2009
459
Share Video

3:06
WWW.SCREAMINGQUEENS.COM Screaming Queens Entertainment provides drag queens and other colorful performers for private parties and events. Enjoy New York's favorite blonde bombshell Miss Sherry Vine! Book Sherry Vine: Sherryvinescreamingqueens****. Check out our blog: www.screamingqueens.blogspot****. Screaming Queens Entertainment provides drag queens, celebrity impersonators, and theme characters for parties and events. Check out our website: WWW.SCREAMINGQUEENS.COM See what we're up to on our blog: WWW.BLOGSPOT.SCREAMINGQUEENS.COM Clients Include: The American Museum of Natural History Donna Karen Citibank Playboy istar Financial Diana Ross ABC Family Cartier MAC Saks Fifth Avenue Blaine Trump Beauty**** The National Association of Museums Bette Midler VH1 Marc Jacobs Soap Opera Digest The Whitney Museum of American Art Maxim Posner Cosmetics Leo Burnett New York Magazine Barbra Streisand Vivendi Universal Samsung Lucky Brand Jeans Crunch Fitness Colin Cowie Lifestyle
12 Nov 2009
1098
Share Video

0:56
See all there is to see in New York with the New York City Pass. This pass includes admission to the Empire State Building Observatory, American Museum of Natural History, MOMA, and Circle Line cruises. Find more information about the New York City Pass and order passes online at *******www.vacationsmadeeasy****/NewYorkNY/activity/CityPass.cfm
2 Dec 2009
327
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
994
Share Video

6:31
The Known Universe takes viewers from the Himalayas through our atmosphere and the inky black of space to the afterglow of the Big Bang. Every star, planet, and quasar seen in the film is possible because of the world's most complete four-dimensional map of the universe, the Digital Universe Atlas that is maintained and updated by astrophysicists at the American Museum of Natural History. The new film, created by the Museum, is part of an exhibition, Visions of the Cosmos: From the Milky Ocean to an Evolving Universe, at the Rubin Museum of Art in Manhattan through May 2010.
8 Aug 2010
766
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
2397
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
2161
Share Video