Results for: zoologist Search Results
Family Filter:
2:27
Pursue the Passion career interview with Director of Animal Management for the Phoenix Zoo, Dan Sabaitis.
27 Jan 2009
424
Share Video

1:43
RML holds Aha Pet Project world-wide. Welcome to share your materials & ideas on pet related topics with Royal Mentor Lee.
8 Aug 2017
213
Share Video

0:25
Royal Mentor Lee, or RML, is the initiator of Aha Pet project, which is one of SunTree Projects held by RML. Aha Pet project will be operated by RML and 3 partners, it is a world-wide project concerning the relationship between humankind and pet. The project covers wide range of pet related topics, include and beyond storie, food and vet.....
8 Aug 2017
253
Share Video

0:19
The Alligator Snapping Turtle (Macrochelys temminckii) is one of the largest freshwater turtles in the world. It is a larger and slightly less aggressive relative of the Common Snapping Turtle. The epithet temminckii is in honor of Dutch zoologist Coenraad Jacob Temminck.
24 Aug 2008
5797
Share Video

1:24
The Alligator Snapping Turtle (Macrochelys temminckii) is one of the largest freshwater turtles in the world. It is a larger and slightly less aggressive relative of the Common Snapping Turtle. The epithet temminckii is in honor of Dutch zoologist Coenraad Jacob Temminck.The Alligator Snapping Turtle is found in the Mississippi River and its tributaries throughout the Southeastern U.S.. They are also found in the Missouri River at least as far north as the Gavins Point Dam at Yankton, South Dakota. The Alligator Snapping Turtle has also been found in New England. It is also present in Indiana on the state's endangered species list. The largest freshwater turtle in North America, the alligator snapper keeps to primarily southern U.S. waters, while the smaller, more aggressive common snapper inhabits lakes and streams from South America to Canada. These turtles can remain submerged for up to an hour. Typically only nesting females will venture onto open land.The Alligator Snapping Turtle is characterized by a large, heavy head and a long, thick tail with three dorsal ridges of large scales (osteoderms) giving it a primitive appearance reminiscent of some of the plated dinosaurs. They can be immediately distinguished from the Common Snapping Turtle by the three distinct rows of spikes and raised plates on the carapace, whereas the Common Snapping Turtle has a smoother carapace. They are a solid gray, brown, black, or olive-green in color, and often covered with algae. They have radiating yellow patterns around the eyes, serving to break up the outline of the eye and keep the turtle camouflaged. Their eyes are also surrounded by a star-shaped arrangement of fleshy filamentous "eyelashes." There is an unverified report of a 403-pound Alligator Snapping Turtle found in the Neosho River in Kansas in 1937,[2] but the largest one actually on record is 236 lb, and housed at Brookfield Zoo in Chicago, Illinois. They generally do not grow quite that large. Average adult size is around 26 inches shell length with a weight of 175 lb. Males are typically larger than females.[3] Alligator snapping turtles can also range in length from 16 to 32 inches (40.4 to 80.8 cm). A Tartaruga Aligator, também conhecida em inglês como Alligator Snapping Turtle e em espanhol Tortuga caimán é uma das maiores e mais agressivas tartarugas de água doce que existe, habita regiões profundas de rios, lagoas, pântanos, canais e lagos de diversas regiões dos Estados Unidos em sistemas de rios que desembocam no Golfo do México, como Kansas, Tennesse, Kentucky, Texas, Oklahoma, Missouri, Mississipi, Louisiana, Arkansas, sul do Alabama e Flórida. Os machos possuem as caudas mais grossas e mais compridas e são maiores que as fêmeas. Ambos possuem garras extremamente poderosas, que os ajudam a rasgar seus alimentos. As Tartarugas Aligator são ótimas caçadoras, elas possuem uma língua rosa bipartida ( semelhante as das cobras ) que imita vermes em sua boca, atraindo assim peixes que vem atacar os supostos vermes entrando assim em sua boca e se tornando presas fáceis, porém sua alimentação não é baseada somente em peixes, elas comem quase tudo que se mexa, pois suas mandíbulas são extremamente grandes e fortes, sendo capazes de quebrar ossos, em seu cardápio estão incluídos além de peixes, camarões, lagostas, caranguejos, moluscos, salamandras, sapos, cobras, patos, garças, pequenos roedores, filhotes de crocodilos e tartarugas menores, porém na falta destes elas também se alimentam de plantas aquáticas, raízes e frutas. E podem ficar mais de 50 minutos submersos a espera de suas presas, pois elas podem baixar sua frequencia cardíaca, taxa metabólica e temperatura. E por passarem muito tempo submersos podem até crescer algas em seu casco, aumentando ainda mais sua camuflagem.Apesar de passar a maior parte de suas vidas no fundo de rios e lagos, as Tartarugas Aligator também necessitam dos raios solares para o aquecimento e para ajudar no desenvolvimento da carapaça, sendo essencial principalmente durante as fases iniciais de grande crescimento corpóreo.A tartaruga mais pesada de água doce já encontrada foi uma Tartaruga Aligator pesando 183 quilos capturada no Rio Neosho condado Cherokee no Kansas em 1937, porém esses dados não foram bem registrados e o fato acabou se tornando lenda.
9 Dec 2008
5023
Share Video

1:07
*******ExplodeYourPocket**** Mystery Creature Alien found killed in Panama City by four 4 teens in creek they threw rocks at it killing killed murdered it and threw it in the water . *******8d22384yzyumu7zr5mj-nn1r8d.hop... . then went back and took pictures images photos of it CNN news Zoologists in Panama aren't sure what it is
24 Sep 2009
178
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
4722
Share Video

9:12
Genetic Entropy & the Mystery of the Genome - Book Review *******www.tccsa.tc/articles/genetic_entropy.html John C. Sanford - Bio Excerpt: * Co-developer of “Mendel’s Accountant” – today’s most advanced forward-time population genetics simulation program * Primary inventor of the biolistic (gene gun) process * Co-inventor of the Pathogen-derived Resistance (PDR) process * Co-inventor of the Genetic Vaccination process * Primary inventor of numerous conventionally-bred fruit varieties * Most of the world's transgenic crop acreage were transformed via my biolistic process *******www.nysaes***rnell.edu/hort/faculty/sanford/ This following study confirmed the "detrimental" mutation rate for humans, of 100 to 300, estimated by John Sanford in his book "Genetic Entropy" in 2005: Human mutation rate revealed: August 2009 Every time human DNA is passed from one generation to the next it accumulates 100–200 new mutations, according to a DNA-sequencing analysis of the Y chromosome. (Of note: this number is derived after "compensatory mutations") *******www.nature****/news/2009/090827/full/news.2009.864.html This mutation rate of 100 to 200 is far greater than even what evolutionists agree is an acceptable mutation rate for an organism: Beyond A 'Speed Limit' On Mutations, Species Risk Extinction Excerpt: Shakhnovich's group found that for most organisms, including viruses and bacteria, an organism's rate of genome mutation must stay below 6 mutations per genome per generation to prevent the accumulation of too many potentially lethal changes in genetic material. *******www.sciencedaily****/releases/2007/10/071001172753.htm Professional evolutionary biologists are hard-pressed to cite even one clear-cut example of evolution through a beneficial mutation to the DNA of humans which would violate the principle of genetic entropy. Although a materialist may try to claim the lactase persistence mutation as a lonely example of a "truly" beneficial mutation in humans, lactase persistence is actually a loss of a instruction in the genome to turn the lactase enzyme off, so the mutation clearly does not violate Genetic Entropy. Yet at the same time, the evidence for the detrimental nature of mutations in humans is overwhelming for doctors have already cited over 3500 mutational disorders (Dr. Gary Parker). (of note: this figure is now known to be over 6000 mendelian mutational disorders - John Sanford - 2010) "Mutations" by Dr. Gary Parker Excerpt: human beings are now subject to over 3500 mutational disorders. (Now known to be over 6000 - John Sanford - 2010) *******www.answersingenesis****/home/area/cfol/ch2-mutations.asp Using Computer Simulation to Understand Mutation Accumulation Dynamics and Genetic Load: Excerpt: We apply a biologically realistic forward-time population genetics program to study human mutation accumulation under a wide-range of circumstances. Using realistic estimates for the relevant biological parameters, we investigate the rate of mutation accumulation, the distribution of the fitness effects of the accumulating mutations, and the overall effect on mean genotypic fitness. Our numerical simulations consistently show that deleterious mutations accumulate linearly across a large portion of the relevant parameter space. *******bioinformatics.cau.edu.cn/lecture/chinaproof.pdf MENDEL’S ACCOUNTANT: J. SANFORD†, J. BAUMGARDNER‡, W. BREWER§, P. GIBSON¶, AND W. REMINE *******mendelsaccount.sourceforge**** *******www.scpe****/vols/vol08/no2/SCPE_8_2_02.pdf Human Evolution - Genetic Adam And Eve - Hugh Ross - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/4036776 Human Evolution? - The Compelling Genetic, Fossil Evidence & Tool Making For Adam and Eve - Dr. Fazale Rana - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/4284482 Does human genetic evidence support Noah's flood? Fazale Rana - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/4116168 Tracing Your Ancestors Through History - Noah's Descendants - video *******edinburghcreationgroup****/ancestors.xml TABLE OF NATIONS (GENEALOGY OF MANKIND) by Tim Osterholm Excerpt: The fact is, that wherever its statements can be sufficiently tested, Genesis 10 of the Bible has been found completely accurate; resulting partly from linguistic studies, partly from archaeology, and, more recently still, from the findings of physical anthropologists, who are, to this day, recovering important clues to lines of migration in ancient historic times. As implied in verse 32 of Genesis 10, this Table includes everybody; meaning that so-called fossil man, primitive peoples (ancient and modern) and modern man are all derived from Noah's three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth. *******www.soundchristian****/man/ Startling Evidence That Noah's Flood Really Happened - video *******video.google****/videoplay?docid=-7075979791519871387 Even evolutionists admit the fossil record does not reveal a gradual process of monkeys evolving into humans: 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 "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 The following video is downright eye-opening with its evidence for Biblical authenticity: The Physical Ashen Remains Of Sodom and Gomorrah - video *******www.youtube****/watch?v=FwTVFk1HK3Y The entire 49 min. video by John Sanford may be ordered here: The Mystery of Our Declining Genes DVD ********store.creation****/us/product_info.php?sku=30-9-583 Intelligent Design - The Anthropic Hypothesis *******lettherebelight-77.blogspot****/
6 May 2010
2814
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
2535
Share Video