1 of 2
1
Project Hopes to Trace Your Ancestors Back 10,000 Years
Posted: 13 April 2005 02:58 AM   [ Ignore ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2957
Joined  2004-12-02

I don't know if this is even a proper subject for this forum, but it does speak to a "conversation" I was having the other day with your (our) resident bible-thumper.

I read an article in the WSJ this morning about a joint project of IBM and the National Geographic which hopes to develope a database that will trace the flow of humanity from leaving Africa to settlement in different places in the world.  Here is a link to the article in USA today

 

Here is link to the National Geographic web site:

 

Champ, what they are intending to use as a "tracer" is that genetic marker I was referring to in our evolution chat.  Face it, kid, the handwriting is on the wall for creationism.  DNA will be the final nail in a coffin science has been hammering on since 1859.

If any care to comment, I am curious about your thoughts about what impact projects such as these may have culturally over the next few years.  My thought (hope) is that they will lead to a new awakening, and awareness of how we are all connected, and a decrease in the necessity for organized religion to explain the world around us.

William

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 April 2005 03:22 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  280
Joined  2005-02-24

While in grad school I worked on a research project that involved some obscure proteins that served as very clear genetic markers. Nobody had any idea at the time what these proteins actually did in the body, but the fact that there were two inherited types of them plus a third type that resulted from inheriting both of the original two types, so a lot of people were studying them. An enterprising scientist wrote an article pointing out that the more simple type of these proteins was also found in peas! I found this fascinating.<g>

This was a long time ago, I did not become a geneticist, but a lot of my friends did and I’ve watched the growth of the evidence in favor of evolution with great interest. I think it’s the best evidence for evolution we now have. We appear to be related to virtually every life form on this planet in very literal ways. Before all this DNA evidence appeared the best evidence we had was comparative anatomy—which was taught were I was in college by a Roman Catholic nun who was as enthusiastic about evolution as she was about God. She considered understanding evolution an insight into how God works.<g> It’s only this handful of die-hard Fundamentalists who insist that every word of the Bible must be literally true who keep fighting for Creationism. I guess our president is one of them. The rest of the Christian world, including the ultra-conservative Catholic church, accepted evolution long ago.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 April 2005 03:24 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2957
Joined  2004-12-02

This is spectacular! thanks William

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 April 2005 04:10 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2957
Joined  2004-12-02

[quote author=“William”]
If any care to comment, I am curious about your thoughts about what impact projects such as these may have culturally over the next few years.  My thought (hope) is that they will lead to a new awakening, and awareness of how we are all connected, and a decrease in the necessity for organized religion to explain the world around us.

William

I’m betting they will, but only in those receptive to learning and understanding.  The rest will fight to the end.  And, me, I’m betting on there being a real fight - civil war, only global in scale.  The adamant religious vs. the rational evolutionists. Or something like that.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 April 2005 04:11 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2957
Joined  2004-12-02

William, like I have said before, the scientific community knows very little about anything. Because the litter the following words in ALL of their theories: hopes, may, may be, could, could be, might, might have been, etc. When you guys finally got something down, lock solid-brass tacks, come talk to me…..ha! (just kidding, but here we go again).

MJ, how can any Christian be excited about evolution? Evolution removes God from the equation. Remember, he created them male and female, not monkey and ape. So one of us is right. I stake my eternal destination on it. I pray you will make the right decision as well. By the way, that must have been a fascinating class. What area of scientific work do you do?

Fencesitter, I think I know what side of the fence you’re on these days….(need to get you back on the other side, grin

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 April 2005 04:20 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2957
Joined  2004-12-02

MJ, how can any Christian be excited about evolution? Evolution removes God from the equation.

Fencesitter, I think I know what side of the fence you’re on these days….(need to get you back on the other side, grin

No, it only removes the Christian god from the equation. Also, science does indeed use of words like “maybe” etc. very often, but only when it applies to things unproven. These words are used in hypothesis and theories, not observations and conclusions.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 April 2005 04:27 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 6 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  754
Joined  2005-01-03

I agree that the careful analysis of human (and non-human) DNA will ultimately thoroughly disprove the biblical creation myth.

Sadly, it won’t really matter to fundies like The Champ what the science shows to be the truth. 

They will continue to be in denial until they draw their last breaths and realize, with their last conscious thought, that they are not being welcomed to heaven by their non-existent God.

 Signature 

Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful…..Lucius Annaeus Seneca, Roman (3 BC - 65 AD)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 April 2005 04:33 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 7 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2957
Joined  2004-12-02

Champ, here I go again.  I have another theory.  I believe that the recent resuscitation of the old “Intelligent Design” theory (which dates from the 1850’s) is no accident.  The creationist crowd is ignorant, but not stupid.  There are 100 times as many archaeologists in the field now then there were 50 years ago, and new discoveries in the fossil record are occuring almost monthly.  Have you noticed that?

In addition, DNA studies, such as this one are going to leave very little room for ridiculous creation nonsense.  To counter all of this, and still leave some room for a “creator” to do something, the ID theory was dragged out, dusted off, and propped up in front of school boards throughout the land.

Problem, it has no more scientific validity than creationism!  There is absolutly no foundation for either, outside of that book you keep quoting (although I notice that you only quote those passages that say what you want us to hear).

If you thind the ID movement can save your idea of God, forget it!  ID assumes an old Earth.  Not your cup of tea at all.

Sorry,

William

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 April 2005 10:43 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 8 ]  
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  496
Joined  2005-02-22

[quote author=“William”]I read an article in the WSJ this morning about a joint project of IBM and the National Geographic which hopes to develope a database that will trace the flow of humanity from leaving Africa to settlement in different places in the world. 


Have you seen Spencer Wells on PBS last year? It was called “Journey of Man: A Genetic Odyssey” The photos of people who could be traced to a specific y-chromosone marker are startling.  
Wells says there may as few as 2000 generations that seperate all of us. Also of note is his conversations with people about their creation stories and his useless attempt to present genetics as a “Europeon” creation story.

[ Edited: 13 April 2005 12:20 PM by ]
 Signature 

Delude responsibly.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 April 2005 11:10 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 9 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  280
Joined  2005-02-24

“MJ, how can any Christian be excited about evolution? Evolution removes God from the equation. Remember, he created them male and female, not monkey and ape. So one of us is right. I stake my eternal destination on it. I pray you will make the right decision as well.”

Evolution does NOT remove God from the equation. It neither proves nor disproves the existence of God, no matter who wants to use it for either purpose. If you knew anything about evolution or comparative anatomy, you’d know that “he created them male and female” reaches way, way back in evolution to some of the earliest life forms. Being “male and female” was actually one of the most successful evolutionary strategies because it allows sharing the gene pool among other members of the same species. The very primitive species that simply divide themselves to create new life always carry the same genes, with all their flaws and accidental mutations, and have no opportunity to develop.

The real reason for most of the original fuss over evolution was that it was very hard for the human ego to accept that it wasn’t as unique as it thought it was.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 April 2005 11:38 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 10 ]  
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  69
Joined  2005-04-12

I thought someone would find this interesting:

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2003-06/danl-tfi061203.php

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 April 2005 11:42 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 11 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  280
Joined  2005-02-24

” No, it only removes the Christian god from the equation. Also, science does indeed use of words like “maybe” etc. very often, but only when it applies to things unproven. These words are used in hypothesis and theories, not observations and conclusions.”

Actually neither of these two statements is entirely correct. The theory of evolution has nothing to say about the existence or lack thereof of the Christian god or any other kind of god. It’s entirely about how life developed on this particular planet, not how life began developing. That’s a separate scientific problem we haven’t answered yet.

Also, scientists report their conclusions cautiously and with humility for good reasons. One is the “cascading uncertainty rule;” there is always uncertainty to be found in a world of imperfect information. Scientific conclusions are developed in very small steps. One person publishes a paper, another comes along and adds new observations, and this process goes on and on. Unless ALL the data that could possibly ever be available can be examined, you can’t state definitively that your observation is the absolute last word. That doesn’t mean that you can’t act or draw conclusions from what you already know. In the case, say, of a spreading epidemic, you have to.

You have to be very careful how you state your conclusions. One good example is the Black Swan problem, and this actually happened. No matter how many zillions of white swans you examine, or on how many continents you examine them, you can’t say definitively that “all swans are white” unless you’ve examined every swan everywhere in the world and they’re all white. It was assumed that all swans are white—until black swans were discovered in Australia. But they had to explore Australia before they knew that.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 April 2005 11:52 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 12 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2957
Joined  2004-12-02

Actually neither of these two statements is entirely correct.

good point. Is anything entirely correct, besides 1+1=2? Then again one might argue that even mathematical truths are not entirely correct, and might still not be entirely correct :?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 April 2005 02:00 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 13 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  291
Joined  2005-04-02

When you guys finally got something down, lock solid-brass tacks, come talk to me…..ha! (just kidding, but here we go again).

Vaccines, antibiotics, airplanes, space shuttles, skyscrapers, plastic. These were all created by faith in god, not science. Want to go to Mars? Just memorize some quotes from the bible. Need a heart transplant? Make sure you go to church every Sunday. Science is just a bunch of trial and error! Sometimes they even make mistakes and have to (gasp) admit it!

Why do we waste so much time and energy on science?!
[/sarcasm]

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 April 2005 03:50 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 14 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  177
Joined  2005-03-12

I recently saw this quote, I can’t remember who said it;

“Man is missing link between anthropoid apes and human beings.”

 Signature 

“Every minute we spend oblivious to the value of a minute is a minute of unconsciousness. This isn’t some screwball scheme to latch onto the present moment in time, it’s simply what it means to be awake.”

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 April 2005 09:00 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 15 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2957
Joined  2004-12-02

Pretty exciting stuff!!  I just received my “kit” from the Genographic people.  Just think!  In just a few weeks, I may know for certain which of Noah’s sons I decend from! 

William

Profile
 
 
   
1 of 2
1
 
RSS 2.0     Atom Feed