vaxx:
what kind of species will human likely evolve to in the future?

I sincerely do not know as that's difficult to ascertain but it's so sure that humans like every other organisms will evolve by adapting to changing environmental conditions or go into extinction like some other organisms have done.

SoundLock:


And I haven't even brought up the big question of consciousness: Why only humans have it and why science hasn't discovered how it originated and it's point of locality in the human body.

People like to think that the ancients who told stories of being created by Gods were all stupid people fabricating nonsense. Well I don't think they were. I think there is some truth in all their similar accounts. They all talk of Gods from the skies coming down on earth and creating humans. Every single human civilization, even our own Nigerian cultures had this story. I don't think it's a coincidence.

I don't think its coincidence either.

Besides ancient discoveries have been made (can't recall the tribes now) but they were a mountain people I think somewhere in Australia who had very clear drawings of spacecraft and people they called gods who came down and taught them many things and even genetically modified them (as it were).

Now the link you posted shows that all attention has been shifted to Australia .

There must be some correlation because such talk does not just originate out of the blue. They must have witnessed something of the sort that prompted the very beginning of such stories in all cultures worldwide even in cultures without access to internet or external information, same is applicable.

SoundLock:


My proof is embedded in my earliest posts where I stated how unrealistic it was from an evolutionary standpoint, given the overnight transformations in anatomical and physiological features, which I listed, that humans evolved from preceding primates.

you didn't state any proof to support creation sir, I can't see anything, kindly repost proof here.

If you think humans were created distinctly, can you explain why we share 96% DNA similarities with chimpanzees?

Butterflyleo:


More like you have no inkling about what is being said so find it intriguing.

I get you

This is not a thread open to mock religious idea but to educate each other while creationist and evolutionist may both be right. which made me stick to the thread. ''No room to received pleasure while bashing religion... their many army on ground''.. although the op find it as a challenge to decipher it in the beginning. but now he is gradually relaxing. The op wanted to educate creationist but he end up being educated. do u see the benefit of this thread to the op himself and to all those who may think creationist idea suck.

vaxx:
This is not a thread open to mock religious idea but to educate each other while creationist and evolutionist ma be both right. which made me stick to the thread. ''No room to received pleasure while bashing religion... their many army on ground.. although the op find it as a challenge to decipher it in the beginning. but now he is gradually relaxing. The op wanted to educate creationist but he end up being educated. do u see the benefit of this thread to the op himself and to all those who may think creationist idea suck.

Well you and I know that I am always up for a little mental stimulation.

However I wanted to cut to the chase real quick by asking for his alleged "updated ideas" so as to save us the long ride.

Yes he is receiving quite some schooling. Hope he learns though.

I chose not to be too involved with the thread as you noticed otherwise my usual aggressive drilling would have been evident all over the place

nwabekeyi:
you didn't state any proof to support creation sir, I can't see anything, kindly repost proof here.

If you think humans were created distinctly, can you explain why we share 96% DNA similarities with chimpanzees?

Since I've debated on this thread I've consistently said that my opinion on the subject of the emergence of humans on this earth is that either the evolution of humans from primates was accelerated by genetic engineering or they were created anew. If their evolution was accelerated, they of course they'd still share DNA with other species close to them on the evolutionary tree. If they were created anew, then they were probably created using the DNA of other primates and mixing them with the DNA of the beings that created them or some other intelligent beings. Hence the phrase common among ancient religions and cultures of the creator Gods creating humans in their likeness.

Butterflyleo:


I don't think its coincidence either.

Besides ancient discoveries have been made (can't recall the tribes now) but they were a mountain people I think somewhere in Australia who had very clear drawings of spacecraft and people they called gods who came down and taught them many things and even genetically modified them (as it were).

Now the link you posted shows that all attention has been shifted to Australia .

There must be some correlation because such talk does not just originate out of the blue. They must have witnessed something of the sort that prompted the very beginning of such stories in all cultures worldwide even in cultures without access to internet or external information, same is applicable.

The scientists can shift their attentions anywhere and it still would leave them confounded simply because their initial suppositions are wrong. If you ask me, I don't think human civilization started at a particular place and then people began to spread out. I think the creator of humans specifically created different human races in different locations at the same time. The Australian aboriginals you made mention of say exactly the same thing the Sumerians and the ancient Indians say. The Sumerians for instance tell stories of Gods who came to earth and created them from less intelligent life forms. The Indians in their vedic texts also have images of all sorts of space crafts. All these stories are scattered across ancient civilizations, but told differently.

SoundLock:


Since I've debated on this thread I've consistently said that my opinion on the subject of the emergence of humans on this earth is that either the evolution of humans from primates was accelerated by genetic engineering or they were created anew. If their evolution was accelerated, they of course they'd still share DNA with other species close to them on the evolutionary tree. If they were created anew, then they were probably created using the DNA of other primates and mixing them with the DNA of the beings that created them or some other intelligent beings. Hence the phrase common among ancient religions and cultures of the creator Gods creating humans in their likeness.

now I get your point, I'm sure you agree with me that humans were pregnated by apes irrespective of whether it was engineered by a super being or via gradual evolution.

Now question is, what proof do you have to support the claim that this genetic engineer was done by a super being?

science is based of facts and not emotional belief. Scientists has provided fossil evidence, done radiocarbon dating to determine the ages of these fossils and created models to actually determine the evolutionary line which made sense to you until it got to the point of how humans evolved.

Are you saying the result gotten from the radiocarbon datings of fossils are inaccurate?

nwabekeyi:
[b]I sincerely do not know [/b]as that's difficult to ascertain but it's so sure that humans like every other organisms will evolve by adapting to changing environmental conditions or go into extinction like some other organisms have done.

i like Ur honest, but i assume Most likely? we may end into Dumber humans. why? There is compelling evidence our brains have grown smaller in the last 10,000 years, and despite attempts to paint this news in optimism, the most sensible explanation is that since the rise of agriculture and division of labor, intelligence simply no longer has the individual survival value it had for our more distant ancestors.


if we do not intervene by taking control of our genetic destiny (a most dangerous and unsettling path) or destroy ourselves in one way or another, we can expect that auto-domestication to continue until we are barely able to maintain the technology handed down by our enlightenment ancestors. Then, eventually, life will throw us a curve ball we can’t handle, and like any dumb brute, we’ll go extinct.

That will be an ignoble end for the only species ever to arise with the capacity to envision a better one, and it’s a theme often explored in my writing.

in all honest, i assume that the early men who propound creationist idea are smarter than us, while our generation will likely be smarter than the next generation

nwabekeyi:
now I get your point, I'm sure you agree with me that humans were pregnated by apes irrespective of whether it was engineered by a super being or via gradual evolution.

Now question is, what proof do you have to support the claim that this genetic engineer was done by a super being?

science is based of facts and not emotional belief. Scientists has provided fossil evidence, done radiocarbon dating to determine the ages of these fossils and created models to actually determine the evolutionary line which made sense to you until it got to the point of how humans evolved.

Are you saying the result gotten from the radiocarbon datings of fossils are inaccurate?

What do you mean by humans were pregnated by apes?

My proof is the fact that evidence points to our evolution being accelerated or our emergence on earth having been a result of some divine transformation. I also have proof that "super beings" have been involved in our ancient past. So if they exist, and have been involved in our past, then it only reinforces my argument.

I've explained countlessly why the evolutionary narrative concerning the evolution of homo sapiens doesn't make sense to me.

The result gotten from carbon dating is exactly the result that renders their claims regarding man's evolution as preposterous.

Butterflyleo:


Well you and I know that I am always up for a little mental stimulation.

However I wanted to cut to the chase real quick by asking for his alleged "updated ideas" so as to save us the long ride.

Yes he is receiving quite some schooling. Hope he learns though.

I chose not to be too involved with the thread as you noticed otherwise my usual aggressive drilling would have been evident all over the place

i just like the way the thread keep off those who find solace and pleasure in religious bashing. good thread i must say

SoundLock:


What do you mean by humans were pregnated by apes?

My proof is the fact that evidence points to our evolution being accelerated or our emergence on earth having been a result of some divine transformation. I also have proof that "super beings" have been involved in our ancient past. So if they exist, and have been involved in our past, then it only reinforces my argument.

I've explained countlessly why the evolutionary narrative concerning the evolution of homo sapiens doesn't make sense to me.

The result gotten from carbon dating is exactly the result that renders their claims regarding man's evolution as preposterous.

where is this super being located and how can we verify him/her?

You agreed that humans must have been engineered from apes hence why we share 96% DNA and you said it was done by a super being. You have not provided any scientific acceptable proof to this.

You can't just come here and tell us that a super being removed genes from apes and made humans while he haven't seen the being before.

Your claims are a contradictory and doesn't make any scientific sense, how can you support fact that evolution is still occruing and then claim humans are not involved in the process?

You sound like you barely understand life at the molecular level

nwabekeyi:
where is this super being located and how can we verify him/her?

You agreed that humans must have been engineered from apes hence why we share 96% DNA and you said it was done by a super being. You have not provided any scientific acceptable proof to this.

You can't just come here and tell us that a super being removed genes from apes and made humans while he haven't seen the being before.

Your claims are a contradictory and doesn't make any scientific sense, how can you support fact that evolution is still occruing and then claim humans are not involved in the process?

You sound like you barely understand life at the molecular level

I don't think any human completely understands life at the molecular level.

I never said humans aren't involved in the process of evolution. I said that the process of our creation ie our evolution, must l have been accelerated and I provided evidence why. All you have to do is read my earlier arguments which you've since failed to refute convincingly.

On the issue of the existence of this super being, I can't tell you the name or nature of the being that could have been involved in our creation or acceleration of our evolution, but I can provide evidence for existence of beings of higher intelligence that have been involved in our ancient past.

SoundLock:


I don't think any human completely understands life at the molecular level.

I never said humans aren't involved in the process of evolution. I said that the process of our creation ie our evolution, must l have been accelerated and I provided evidence why. All you have to do is read my earlier arguments which you've since failed to refute convincingly.

On the issue of the existence of this super being, I can't tell you the name or nature of the being that could have been involved in our creation or acceleration of our evolution, but I can provide evidence for existence of beings of higher intelligence that have been involved in our ancient past.

if this was how Michael Faraday provided evidences when he discovered electromagnetic field, you think you would be able to get a mobile device, connect to the internet and send me messages at the speed of light?

You have not provided any thing meaningful to back your claims, all I see is "super being"

SoundLock:


I don't think any human completely understands life at the molecular level.

I never said humans aren't involved in the process of evolution. I said that the process of our creation ie our evolution, must l have been accelerated and I provided evidence why. All you have to do is read my earlier arguments which you've since failed to refute convincingly.

On the issue of the existence of this super being, I can't tell you the name or nature of the being that could have been involved in our creation or acceleration of our evolution, but I can provide evidence for existence of beings of higher intelligence that have been involved in our ancient past.

you keep using the word "BEING" how are you sure it is a "BEING" ,if at all there is anything responsible for human evolution of which science has not deciphered

Butterflyleo:

Some atheists who I have also conversed with are ignorant of what evolution is and how it works so I suggest you generalize your ignoramus tag to every ignorant Soul and not make it a creationist thing.
.

The opposite of Atheism is not Creationism.......

nwabekeyi:
thanks boss, it's all about sharing ideas and nobody can know it all sir...

We keep doing our best to enlighten our people

You are doing a wonderful job indeed and are appreciated for it.

nwabekeyi:
first, you are seeing it this way because you are Human and have the sense to rationalize.

Every organism have a particular organ you can't beat them to, we were very fortunate that ours is our brain, for example the mantis shrimp has the most developed eyes of the animals kingdom, it's sees even UV lights, we don't have such eyes.
We maybe closely related to gorillas, but we don't have the muscle mass and strength of gorillas, we don't need them based on how we are adapting hence we have to exchange muscle pack for Brain development overtime.
Another example that the polar bears liver is superior to that of humans, it stores many folds of vitamins more than that of humans and works better, they adapted to what they eat.
A cow has more developed GIT than humans, they need it, we don't because of our form of adaptation.

So if humans have more developed Brains, it doesn't mean we have better liver, intestine, kidney, it all depends on adaptive requirements.

Looking at the evolutionary pattern of the brain, it's evident that we gave up most of our muscle mass for brain mass overtime.

You don't get my point, better built in body systems is far from it because humans are also OK when it comes to intestine, kidney or liver. Except for cases where disease is involved.

What I am saying is that why are these other life forms lacking intellectually and mentally regardless there better physical ability? Could it be that natural selection picked humans alone out of millions of other life forms to be exceptionally developed mentally? Why is there no other animal that measure up to humans even slightly?

Maamin:


You don't get my point, better built in body systems is far from it because humans are also OK when it comes to intestine, kidney or liver. Except for cases where disease is involved.

What I am saying is that why are these other life forms lacking intellectually and mentally regardless there better physical ability? Could it be that natural selection picked humans alone out of millions of other life forms to be exceptionally developed mentally? Why is there no other animal that measure up to humans even slightly?

there's no fundamental difference between other mammals and human, the difference in intelligence between animals and humans is just in few degrees.
Animal brains are also capable of cognitive abilities: memory, curiosity, ability to reason and to imitate others. The only reasons why humans could be more intelligent is the enlarged brain to body index and bigger neocortex portion of our brain which is responsible for higher order brain function

If animals had the same brain/body index as humans, they maybe equally or even more intelligent than we are.

nwabekeyi:
there's no fundamental difference between other mammals and human, the difference in intelligence between animals and humans is just in few degrees.
Animal brains are also capable of cognitive abilities: memory, curiosity, ability to reason and to imitate others. The only reasons why humans could be more intelligent is the enlarged brain to body index and bigger neocortex portion of our brain which is responsible for higher order brain function

If animals had the same brain/body index as humans, they maybe equally or even more intelligent than we are.

It's not about the brain to body index mass. If it were to be so, then shouldn't an obese human being live like one of these animals due to large body mass and small brain?

Shouldn't at least a cow be more intelligent due to it bigger brain to that of a human.

Maamin:


It's not about the brain to body index mass. If it were to be so, then shouldn't an obese human being live like one of these animals due to large body mass and small brain?

Shouldn't at least a cow be more intelligent due to it bigger brain to that of a human.

brain to body mass index is not what you are defining it to be.

Brian/body mass index is actually the percentage of the mass of your body that your brain occupies and that of a cow is just 0.1% compare to humans that have 2%.

And aside brain index, the neocortex like I said is quite bigger in human brain compared to other part of our brain. For example, a rat has a Brain/body percentage of 3% but has a smaller neocortex portion, it has dedicated most portion of its brain to those parts controlling other senses other than the neocortex (this portion is meant for higher order brain function), that's why a rat typically has better smell, reflex, nocturnal sight, they can hear ultrasound waves than humans.

So, major reason for higher intelligence, is the bigger neocortex and then the brain/body index.

I hope you understand now

nwabekeyi:


1. Humans and dinosaurs never existed in the same era.

2. Every animal has a skin colour, the human skin colour is different from that of others based on difference in the skin pigments secreted, that of human is called "melanin" and even within human race, we have different forms of melanin pigment, this is also due to evolution. The process of melanin secretion is strictly dependent on mutation/translation of several genes storing necessary information for secretion. You can make the question more specific if this didn't answer your question

3. I really do not understand what you mean by procreation, you mean procreation of humans or living things?

And yes, there's always a first of everything, there's a first human, though it may not be in the concept of how creationists see it.

Alright, thanks.

SoundLock:

...

On the issue of the existence of this super being, I can't tell you the name or nature of the being that could have been involved in our creation or acceleration of our evolution, but I can provide evidence for existence of beings of higher intelligence that have been involved in our ancient past.

Please provide such evidence

nwabekeyi:
there's no fundamental difference between other mammals primates and human, the difference in intelligence between them and humans is just in few degrees.
Animal brains are also capable of cognitive abilities: memory, curiosity, ability to reason and to imitate others. The only reasons why humans could be more intelligent is the enlarged brain to body index and bigger neocortex portion of our brain which is responsible for higher order brain function

If animals had the same brain/body index as humans, they maybe equally or even more intelligent than we are.

Sorry for striking you out but there's a world of difference between mammals and humans even though humans are mammals. Bats, dolphins, whales, dogs etc are also mammals.

My question: Can evolution be induced by say genetic engineering or does it have to occur naturally? You mentioned introduction of specific genes from plasmids into DNA or something like that. So, can controlled mutation like that lead to a new breed of organism?

What do you think of cloning and designing and growing 'superhumans' from scratch, possible or futuristic? ignore the ethical barriers

vaxx:
insertions likely stands for addition i assume.

It can I guess. Nwabekeyi, what do you think?

TheEminentLaity:


Sorry for striking you out but there's a world of difference between mammals and humans even though humans are mammals. Bats, dolphins, whales, dogs etc are also mammals.

My question: Can evolution be induced by say genetic engineering or does it have to occur naturally? You mentioned introduction of specific genes from plasmids into DNA or something like that. So, can controlled mutation like that lead to a new breed of organism?

What do you think of cloning and designing and growing 'superhumans' from scratch, possible or futuristic? ignore the ethical barriers

I thought you would understand what I meant by there's no fundamental differences between humans and other mammals. I still strongly suggest that the fundamental features of mammals are quite the same considering our basic anatomy and biochemistry and comparing them to other forms of animals, all we see are just little genetic variations that lead to striking physical differences and these physical differences still maintain a fundamental structure amongst all mammals irrespective of their habitat.

Evolution occurs by natural selection while artificial genetic engineering is trying to bypass evolution. Even if we try to manipulate genes artificially, overtime if those genes cannot stand the environmental changes, organism translating those genes will go into extinctions, so it's basically though natural selection. Introduction of plasmids is basically dine with bacteria and can only lead to same kind of bacteria that has differentiate function like a gene for resistance of a certain drug, increased production of a certain chemical etc, it doesn't lead to another organism.

Growing "super humans" genetically is possible but the aftermath is dicey hence the strict laws.

budaatum:

It can I guess. Nwabekeyi, what do you think?

yes, addition but evolution mustn't necessarily be as a result of addition of an exon (translated gene), lose of exons and rearrangement of exons also leads to evolution.

nwabekeyi:
yes, addition but evolution mustn't necessarily be as a result of addition of an exon (translated gene), lose of exons and rearrangement of exons also leads to evolution.

I think "insertion, deletion and duplication" can be synonyms for gene "rearrangement, lose and addition", though not in specific order. Both phrases can sum up to one another. If so, the only disagreement with vaxx would be in the specifics of terms used, wouldn't you think?

Butterflyleo:


I don't think its coincidence either.

Besides ancient discoveries have been made (can't recall the tribes now) but they were a mountain people I think somewhere in Australia who had very clear drawings of spacecraft and people they called gods who came down and taught them many things and even genetically modified them (as it were).

Now the link you posted shows that all attention has been shifted to Australia .

There must be some correlation because such talk does not just originate out of the blue. They must have witnessed something of the sort that prompted the very beginning of such stories in all cultures worldwide even in cultures without access to internet or external information, same is applicable.

Create a new thread for this, I have discussed the possibilities countless times on this board.

Let's discuss every creation theory.

God theory
Ancient astronauts theory
Evolution
Migration theory..

I'm very much in need of a sound discussion if you all are game..

Vaxx, Nwabekeyi, badaatum.

budaatum:

I think "insertion, deletion and duplication" can be synonyms for gene "rearrangement, lose and addition", though not in specific order. Both phrases can sum up to one another. If so, the only disagreement with vaxx would be in the specifics of terms used, wouldn't you think?

yes insertion, deletion and duplication are all rearrangements.

This is how it works, we have two forms of genes, the introns(non-expressed genes) and exons (the expressive gene), only the exons can be translated into proteins. Some times, exons added by exonization process ( I.e. converting introns to exons).
And sometimes, exons are converted to introns or an already existing exon will be rearranged.

So what vaxx could have said was the addition addition, rearrangement or removal of exons in a DNA and not addition of a new set to genes to the DNA.

johnydon22:


Create a new thread for this, I have discussed the possibilities countless times on this board.

Let's discuss every creation theory.

God theory
Ancient astronauts theory
Evolution
Migration theory..

I'm very much in need of a sound discussion if you all are game..

Vaxx, Nwabekeyi, badaatum.

tag me when you open the thread

SoundLock:


I don't think any human completely understands life at the molecular level.

I never said humans aren't involved in the process of evolution. I said that the process of our creation ie our evolution, must l have been accelerated and I provided evidence why. All you have to do is read my earlier arguments which you've since failed to refute convincingly.

On the issue of the existence of this super being, I can't tell you the name or nature of the being that could have been involved in our creation or acceleration of our evolution, but I can provide evidence for existence of beings of higher intelligence that have been involved in our ancient past.

Curious position. I think this deserves to be given adequate consideration.

and the penitent question we must ask is; What accelerated this process? How was this process accelerated?

Maybe a new thread will be good for this