2006-07-03 08:55:19 · 13 answers · asked by Olivia 4 in Environment
While theoretically it seems possible, the whole concept of evolution would itself take centuries, or millenia and a seemingly simple experiment of evolution started today would only give conclusive evidence after nothing less than 10000generations. Besides... if your talking about proving humans evolved from chimpanzees, sorry to correct you there but Darwin was the first to say humans DID NOT evolve from apes but evolved along a completely INDEPENDENT line... having only a common ancestor..which is already EXTINCT!! So no amount of ape IVF is going to generate a human, ok? 2ndly, IVF and use of animal embryos has ALOT of ethical issue which up until today have stalled scientists at every level.
2006-07-03 09:06:07 · answer #1 · answered by Jest21 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
A. It wouldn't test evolution, hybrids happen all the time in closely related species and subspecies, but our last common ancestor with the great apes was too far back. The differences are in critical areas that wouldn't mesh together anymore.
B. You wouldn't need to use in-vitro, people will screw anything given the chance, it would have happened already if it were possible.
D. yuck.
E. chimpanzees and humans don't have the same number of chromosomes, we lost some back down the evolutionary road a piece.
2006-07-03 22:36:17 · answer #2 · answered by corvis_9 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You are talking about two different subjects and trying to make them fit one. Even if we could genetically use the DNA of a chimpanzee for human in-vitro fertilization, this does not answer the evolution question. It doesn't prove we "came from the monkeys, " it only shows that we could genetically master DNA.
As to why we cannot use monkey DNA? That 4% is SO dramatically different from human DNA that it is not a match.
2006-07-03 12:04:01 · answer #3 · answered by Lola 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because evolution it's not a chemist's reaction, it is a process that encompasses thousands of years, and tens of generations, besides you say chimps as if there was genealogical connection between them and humans which there's not.
In vitro fertilization wouldn't test evolution, it may help to know about embryology, and in a unusual way unusual, what would be the theory behind that experiment? what would you do with such result?.
2006-07-03 08:58:04 · answer #4 · answered by pogonoforo 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because even though it's very similiar, there's no way that anyone can figure out what parts of that 4% changed when. The whole theory of evolution is based on the principle that random mutuations happen, and if they are useful for that particular organism (meaning that it will make it easier for them to survive and reproduce), then they will be carried on to the offspring.
But evolution relies on that random chance, so there's no way to figure out in what order things happened. So if we went and just tried making changes at random, the chances are that humans will have evolved into something else by the time we figure out the question that you're asking.
2006-07-03 09:00:55 · answer #5 · answered by Archangeleon 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, I'll be a a monkey's uncle does not prove or disprove evolution. The devil scattered old bones in stone so that people would not believe a mysterious all knowing being created all creatures out of nothing just because he wanted to be entertained.
Evolution is going on in microbes which are easier to study because there are millions of generations in a short time. Bacteria are always adapting in very short spans of time.
2006-07-03 09:21:11 · answer #6 · answered by a603 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What makes something observed as something. someone got here up with a popularity for human beings and now we together call ourselves human beings (as far as English is worried). How are we diverse from different issues? we glance diverse, we've diverse genes, we've diverse applications, and some would say we received the breath of existence from God. What makes us human contained in the jap way of wondering? A human that conforms to the societal norms. Even the bible says you're a beast in case you provide your self as a lot as sin.
2016-10-14 02:19:19 · answer #7 · answered by chardip 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
this has been tried and did not work. 4% difference in DNA is sufficient to make species incompatible.
and I do not see how would this prove or disprove evolution beyond the mentioned 96% similarity.
2006-07-03 08:56:46 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's scary , but I know it's been done and did not work. Thank God!!! Are DNA is different and so is our RNA and thank goodness for that 4% difference that makes us human. Besides if we did evolve from an Ape then why are they still around?
2006-07-03 09:28:54 · answer #9 · answered by crash 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because that wouldn't test evolution.
2006-07-03 08:57:05 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋