Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Misc Discussion Boards => Religious Debates & Threads => Topic started by: 24KT on July 21, 2006, 03:58:30 AM
-
Neanderthal genome project launches
By Geir Moulson, Associated Press Writer
(http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20060720/capt.4706d1eed83542d79d8e2f00a2e98d00.germany_neandertal_genome_les107.jpg?x=180&y=198&sig=w.rq_IHh9JWiNyquF6CDJQ--)
The undated picture released by the Max-Planck-Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig shows the 3D reconstruction of a Neandertal skull. Together with scientists from the 454 Life Sciences Corporation, Branford, USA, the institute wants to complete a first draft of the Neandertal genome within the next two years. (AP Photo/Max-Planck-Institute)
BERLIN - U.S. and German scientists on Thursday launched a two-year project to decipher the genetic code of the Neanderthal, a feat they hope will help deepen understanding of how modern humans' brains evolved.
Neanderthals were a species that lived in Europe and western Asia from more than 200,000 years ago to about 30,000 years ago. Scientists from Germany's Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology are teaming up a company in Connecticut to map the genome, or DNA code.
"The Neanderthal is the closest relative to the modern human, and we believe that by sequencing the Neanderthal we can learn a lot," said Michael Egholm, a vice president at 454 Life Sciences Corp. of Branford, Conn., which will use its high-speed sequencing technology in the project.
There are no firm answers yet about how humans picked up key traits such as walking upright and developing complex language. Neanderthals are believed to have been relatively sophisticated, but lacking in humans' higher reasoning functions.
The Neanderthal project follows scientists' achievement last year in deciphering the DNA of the chimpanzee, our closest living relative. That genome map produced a long list of DNA differences between humans and chimps and some hints about which differences might be crucial.
The chimp genome "led to literally too many questions, there were 35 million differences between us and chimpanzees — that's too much to figure out," Jonathan Rothberg, 454's chairman, said in a telephone interview.
"By having Neanderthal, we'll really be able to home in on the small percentage of differences that gave us higher cognitive abilities," he said. "Neanderthal is going to open the box. It's not going to answer the question, but it's going to tell where to look to understand all of those higher cognitive functions."
Over two years, the scientists aim to reconstruct a draft of the 3 billion building blocks of the Neanderthal genome — working with fossil samples from several individuals.
They face the complication of working with 40,000-year-old samples, and of filtering out microbial DNA that contaminated them after death.
Only about 5 percent of the DNA in the samples is actually Neanderthal DNA, Egholm estimated, but he and Rothberg said pilot experiments had convinced them that the decoding was feasible.
At the Max Planck Institute, the project also involves Svante Paabo, who nine years ago participated in a pioneering, though smaller-scale, DNA test on a Neanderthal sample.
That study suggested that Neanderthals and humans split from a common ancestor a half-million years ago and backed the theory that Neanderthals were an evolutionary dead end.
The new project will help in understanding how characteristics unique to humans evolved and "will also identify those genetic changes that enabled modern humans to leave Africa and rapidly spread around the world," Paabo said in a statement Thursday.
-
I wonder what happened to all the "Neanderthal" fossils? :-\
-
Believe it or not there are still neanderthals amongst us! This board probably has a very large group of them browsing as I type.
-
I wonder what happened to all the "Neanderthal" fossils? :-\
go to a museum..plenty around..or bits and pieces of some around
how do ya think they r gonna study the genome? you need the DNA..they'll get it from bone..
-
go to a museum..plenty around..or bits and pieces of some around
how do ya think they r gonna study the genome? you need the DNA..they'll get it from bone..
I've been to plenty of museums. They're all "replicas," like the picture in this thread.
-
jag's excited that they're finally working on a project that will benefit her. ;D
-
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.shef.ac.uk/content/1/c6/01/98/21/pp-picture01.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.shef.ac.uk/archaeology/staff/pettitt.html&h=236&w=180&sz=9&hl=en&start=16&tbnid=pqFgxJtvXUwDRM:&tbnh=109&tbnw=83&prev=/images%3Fq%3DNeanderthal%2Bfossils%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26sa%3DG (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.shef.ac.uk/content/1/c6/01/98/21/pp-picture01.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.shef.ac.uk/archaeology/staff/pettitt.html&h=236&w=180&sz=9&hl=en&start=16&tbnid=pqFgxJtvXUwDRM:&tbnh=109&tbnw=83&prev=/images%3Fq%3DNeanderthal%2Bfossils%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26sa%3DG)
-
I've been to plenty of museums. They're all "replicas," like the picture in this thread.
so this whole DNA thing is a conspiracy by the athiests to hide god from you :-\
We are descended from Neanderthals
Most experts now agree that Neanderthals were an evolutionary dead end; a species that became extinct about 30,000 years ago. In recent years, this belief has been supported by groundbreaking research on Neanderthal DNA. Tiny quantities of DNA have been recovered from Neanderthal bones and then analysed on computers. The results support the view that they are different species to Modern Humans.
http://www.channel4.com/history/microsites/N/neanderthal/facts/myths.html
now that the species have been claimed to be different you all of a sudden believe in neanderthals right? ::)
http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s952446.htm
http://www.archaeologyinfo.com/
-
so this whole DNA thing is a conspiracy by the athiests to hide god from you :-\
We are descended from Neanderthals
Most experts now agree that Neanderthals were an evolutionary dead end; a species that became extinct about 30,000 years ago. In recent years, this belief has been supported by groundbreaking research on Neanderthal DNA. Tiny quantities of DNA have been recovered from Neanderthal bones and then analysed on computers. The results support the view that they are different species to Modern Humans.
http://www.channel4.com/history/microsites/N/neanderthal/facts/myths.html
now that the species have been claimed to be different you all of a sudden believe in neanderthals right? ::)
http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s952446.htm
http://www.archaeologyinfo.com/
We could have the "late" Johnny Apollo battle of links and not really get anywhere. I'm sure I could find a plethora of information disputing "Neanderthal DNA," particularly when there are no Neanderthal fossils.
But it does make for good theater. Loved those Jurassic Park movies. :) Jurassic Park IV is currently scheduled for a 2008 release, with Keira Knightley rumored to have a role. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0369610/
-
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.shef.ac.uk/content/1/c6/01/98/21/pp-picture01.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.shef.ac.uk/archaeology/staff/pettitt.html&h=236&w=180&sz=9&hl=en&start=16&tbnid=pqFgxJtvXUwDRM:&tbnh=109&tbnw=83&prev=/images%3Fq%3DNeanderthal%2Bfossils%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26sa%3DG (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.shef.ac.uk/content/1/c6/01/98/21/pp-picture01.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.shef.ac.uk/archaeology/staff/pettitt.html&h=236&w=180&sz=9&hl=en&start=16&tbnid=pqFgxJtvXUwDRM:&tbnh=109&tbnw=83&prev=/images%3Fq%3DNeanderthal%2Bfossils%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26sa%3DG)
They have fossils here.
-
I wonder what happened to all the "Neanderthal" fossils? :-\
I've been to plenty of museums. They're all "replicas," like the picture in this thread.
::) omg
¿So you actually believe "neanderthals" are some sort of scientific mislead, as part of a conspiracy against stupid religious theories like "creationism"?
Just asking...
-
::) omg
¿So you actually believe "neanderthals" are some sort of scientific mislead, as part of a conspiracy against stupid religious theories like "creationism"?
Just asking...
I believe the facts: there is a complete absence of transitional fossils. No half man, half ape fossils. No half bird/half rabbit fossils. And so on. That's why they're called "missing links." Transitional fossils don't exist, because my uncle was not a monkey. :)
-
my uncle was not a monkey. :)
i'm sure people have referred to you as a big ape though . . . ;) ;D
-
i'm sure people have referred to you as a big ape though . . . ;) ;D
Big Daddy (check). Big Daddyo (check). Big Idiot (check). Big (check). Big Ape . . . not yet. :)
-
Big Daddy (check). Big Daddyo (check). Big Idiot (check). Big (check). Big Ape . . . not yet. :)
hmmm . . . you must be prettier than me, or you must associate with nicer people.
-
hmmm . . . you must be prettier than me, or you must associate with nicer people.
None of the above. I just look like a Big Ape, so people don't mess with me. ;D Little do they know I'm a Big Softie.
-
I believe the facts: there is a complete absence of transitional fossils. No half man, half ape fossils. No half bird/half rabbit fossils. And so on. That's why they're called "missing links." Transitional fossils don't exist, because my uncle was not a monkey. :)
¿Does archaeopteryx ring a bell? "No transitional fossils"... ::)
-
¿Does archaeopteryx ring a bell? "No transitional fossils"... ::)
No, it doesn't. Looks like a big bird to me. Actually looks sort of like an ostrich. But let's assume this is really a "transitional fossil" and not a big bird. What was it evolving from and to? And why isn't the fossil record replete with transitional fossils?
-
No, it doesn't. Looks like a big bird to me. Actually looks sort of like an ostrich. But let's assume this is really a "transitional fossil" and not a big bird. What was it evolving from and to? And why isn't the fossil record replete with transitional fossils?
So you're really questioning the theory of evolution... ¿aren't you?
Wikipedia might be crappy, but it works ok for this kind of things... there you go: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_evolution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_evolution)
-
Wikipedia might be crappy, but it works ok for this kind of things... there you go: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_evolution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_evolution)
wow, you have a really masterful way of arguing . . . i'm sure he's never read a 2 pg. article on evidence of evolution before.
-
Haha. Yeah, I've never read a word about evolution. One of the reasons it's a theory is we don't have transitional fossils, which "Martin" hasn't addressed yet.
BTW, there is something strangely familiar about "Martin." Sounds like Johnny Apollo. Funny how "Martin" would say "Wikipedia might be crappy" and then proceed to cite JA's favorite web site? Does not pass the smell test. :)
But Wikipedia does have some good information, like this:
Shirley Ardell Mason (January 25, 1923–February 26, 1998), the woman whose life was documented in the book and film both released under the name Sybil. The book was penned by Flora Rheta Schreiber and published in 1973. The movie was made for TV and was broadcast in 1976. The name Sybil Isabel Dorsett was used in the book and movie to protect her identity.
Sybil told the story of a woman who was treated for multiple personality disorder (since renamed Dissociative identity disorder) with up to 16 alternate personalities.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shirley_Ardell_Mason
;D
-
Haha. Yeah, I've never read a word about evolution. One of the reasons it's a theory is we don't have transitional fossils, which "Martin" hasn't addressed yet.
BTW, there is something strangely familiar about "Martin." Sounds like Johnny Apollo. Funny how "Martin" would say "Wikipedia might be crappy" and then proceed to cite JA's favorite web site? Does not pass the smell test. :)
But Wikipedia does have some good information, like this:
Shirley Ardell Mason (January 25, 1923–February 26, 1998), the woman whose life was documented in the book and film both released under the name Sybil. The book was penned by Flora Rheta Schreiber and published in 1973. The movie was made for TV and was broadcast in 1976. The name Sybil Isabel Dorsett was used in the book and movie to protect her identity.
Sybil told the story of a woman who was treated for multiple personality disorder (since renamed Dissociative identity disorder) with up to 16 alternate personalities.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shirley_Ardell_Mason
;D
That's just lame... So you're actually getting owned by modern science, and the best thing you can do is come up with this?
You're trying too hard, relax. Any mod could verify my ip and set this straight, if you want to stand by what you just implied.
-
That's just lame... So you're actually getting owned by modern science, and the best thing you can do is come up with this?
You're trying too hard, relax. Any mod could verify my ip and set this straight, if you want to stand by what you just implied.
Sure "Martin." ::)
You know what, I actually thought JA was smart and liked debating with him. But as it turned out, he was just a big chicken. Things got hot in the kitchen and he ran like a scalded dog. Maybe he'll stop hiding behind multiple personalities and come back to get slapped around some more. ;D
-
I believe the facts: there is a complete absence of transitional fossils. No half man, half ape fossils. No half bird/half rabbit fossils. And so on. That's why they're called "missing links." Transitional fossils don't exist, because my uncle was not a monkey. :)
Holy Crap Beach... The human line did not come from Neanderthals. If you don't believe in Neanderthals, you don't believe in Gorillas either.
-
Sure "Martin." ::)
You know what, I actually thought JA was smart and liked debating with him. But as it turned out, he was just a big chicken. Things got hot in the kitchen and he ran like a scalded dog. Maybe he'll stop hiding behind multiple personalities and come back to get slapped around some more. ;D
Ever heard about "self-ownage"? That's what you're doing here.
-
Holy Crap Beach... The human line did not come from Neanderthals. If you don't believe in Neanderthals, you don't believe in Gorillas either.
I believe in gorillas, I just don't believe in evolution. Even if I weren't a Christian I wouldn't believe in that cockamamie theory.
-
Ever heard about "self-ownage"? That's what you're doing here.
No, I have never heard about "self-ownage." Not in my dictionary (I just checked). Sounds like some slag term that most intelligent people don't use.
I was just pointing out how that lily-livered JA ran away because he couldn't stand the heat. Picked up his bat and ball and ran home to his momma. But that has nothing to do with you, "Martin."
-
I believe in gorillas, I just don't believe in evolution. Even if I weren't a Christian I wouldn't believe in that cockamamie theory.
::)
-
Neanderthal genome project launches
Very charitable of you to volunteer for the project Jaguar.
-
I wonder what happened to all the "Neanderthal" fossils? :-\
Genuine La Ferrassie skull of Homo neanderthalensis from the Smithsonian Institution of Science.
(http://www.mnh.si.edu/anthro/humanorigins/ha/images/laferr3.JPG)
-
Genuine La Ferrassie skull of Homo neanderthalensis from the Smithsonian Institution of Science.
(http://www.mnh.si.edu/anthro/humanorigins/ha/images/laferr3.JPG)
Looks like an ape to me.
-
Looks like an ape to me.
There are alot of species of Apes. What "Ape" skull does it look like? Gorillas? Chimps? Which?
-
There are alot of species of Apes. What "Ape" skull does it look like? Gorillas? Chimps? Which?
Okay. It looks like an ape, gorilla, and a chimp. Doesn't look like a human or half human, half ape/gorilla/chimp.
-
Okay. It looks like an ape, gorilla, and a chimp. Doesn't look like a human or half human, half ape/gorilla/chimp.
There is no such "species" as "ape". Gorillas and Chimpanzees are both "Apes".
However you say it looks like both a Gorilla and a Chimp?
Here is a Gorilla skull.
(http://www.amonline.net.au/human_evolution/images/gorilla_skull_jaw_front.jpg)
Here is a Chimpanzee skull.
(http://skullduggery.com/images/0208.jpg)
Not only do Chimps and Gorilla skulls look very different...They both look completly different from Neanderthal skulls.
Neanderthal skull
(http://www.mnh.si.edu/anthro/humanorigins/ha/images/laferr3.JPG)
So it's obvious to me that not only do you know nothing about molecular genetics, You also know absolutely nothing about Primate anatomy. Implying the Neanderthal skull looks like both like a Chimp and Gorilla skull when the Chimp and Gorilla skulls are themselves totally different.
-
Crime artists reconstruction of skull taken from the Gibraltar Neanderthal child.
(http://www.rdos.net/neanderthal.jpg)
-
There is no such "species" as "ape". Gorillas and Chimpanzees are both "Apes".
However you say it looks like both a Gorilla and a Chimp?
Here is a Gorilla skull.
(http://www.amonline.net.au/human_evolution/images/gorilla_skull_jaw_front.jpg)
Here is a Chimpanzee skull.
(http://skullduggery.com/images/0208.jpg)
Not only do Chimps and Gorilla skulls look very different...They both look completly different from Neanderthal skulls.
Neanderthal skull
(http://www.mnh.si.edu/anthro/humanorigins/ha/images/laferr3.JPG)
So it's obvious to me that not only do you know nothing about molecular genetics, You also know absolutely nothing about Primate anatomy. Implying the Neanderthal skull looks like both like a Chimp and Gorilla skull when the Chimp and Gorilla skulls are themselves totally different.
Dude, it's a monkey fossil okay. I couldn't give a rip about the technical differences between a chimp, gorilla, monkey, ape, etc. Bottom line is it ain't a transitional fossil. I don't need to know anything about molecular genetics to understand the absence of transitional fossils. I'm in VERY good company when it comes to those who either don't believe in the evolution of species, or have significant questions about Darwin's theory.
-
Crime artists reconstruction of skull taken from the Gibraltar Neanderthal child.
(http://www.rdos.net/neanderthal.jpg)
Wow. A crime artist invents the picture of a purported human ancestor that looks like . . . a human. Go figure. Stop the presses.
-
Dude, it's a monkey fossil okay. I couldn't give a rip about the technical differences between a chimp, gorilla, monkey, ape, etc. Bottom line is it ain't a transitional fossil. I don't need to know anything about molecular genetics to understand the absence of transitional fossils. I'm in VERY good company when it comes to those who either don't believe in the evolution of species, or have significant questions about Darwin's theory.
Do you even know the difference between a "monkey" and an "ape"?
If you don't care about the "differences between a chimp, Gorilla or monkey" how can you make absurd claims about the fossils themselves?
It's like saying "Ok, That aint no Chevy! I don't know a damn thing about trucks or even what a Chevy looks like but that aint no Chevy!"
Ok,Ok...Let me get this straight...
- You don't know what the skull of a "Chimp" looks like.
- You don't know what the skull of a "Gorilla" looks like.
- You claim Chimp and Gorilla skulls look alike.
- Then you claim the Neanderthal skull is a chimp or gorilla skull despite them looking nothing alike.
Did your mommy drop you when you were a baby?
-
Did your mommy drop you when you were a baby?
Quite a statement ::)
-
they were just humans wit disese or fake