The genetic difference between man and it's closet relative the chimp is 1.6%, that doesn't seem like much but when calculated out that is a gap 48 million nucleatides and a change of only 3 nucleatides is fatal to an animal. There is no possiblity of change.
We have now discovered that the difference is much greater. Are you guys either confused or lying?
2007-04-02 11:56:06 · 20 answers · asked by Chris 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Did u know a cloud is 100% water?
Did u know a watermelon is 97% water?
That's only 3% difference
Does that mean that the watermelon evolved from a cloud?
A jellyfis is 98% water and so are snow cones that proves how they can evolve right?
2007-04-02 12:04:09 · update #1
What about one nucleatide at a time over many years?
Edit: Though I respect your point of view, the fascinating examples you gave are not actual scientific evidence that evolution is incorrect.
If Evolution is "correct" it is not evidence that God does not exist.
If you really care about this stuff, why don't you study science?
2007-04-02 11:58:30 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
And yet flavobacteria can survive an entire frameshift, lose its ability to digest glucose but develop entirely new enzymes (READ: new information) and gain the ability to digest nylon byproducts that have only existed for 70 years.
That isn't evolution at work, surely? Genetic mutation resulting in new information and an advantage in its current environment.
And what are you babbling about on percentages? You're basing your assumptions on the percentage of water in something?
"Hay guys! A bucket of water contains 100% water and so does a teapot of water! Does that mean they evolved from each other? LAWL"
It doesn't work like that. Both the human body and the Earth are 70% water, it means nothing. The topic here is genetic similarity. Complex chemical make-up, not how much water something needs to survive. How many genes does a cloud have hrm?
2007-04-03 11:23:11 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yea, but you got to remember from an evolutianary standpoint, the chimpanzee has the similar characteristics we have, nucleatides is 1 in 4 out of the process, being that any animal can take repercussions to be made into a genome species over time, to make us the humans that we are today.
I think that over time, I believe it will be to a point were every monkey has evolved, and there will be no monkeys left... we have to wait like 2000 years for that to happen I'm guessing.
2007-04-02 19:03:03 · answer #3 · answered by Randy S 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The evolutionary divergence of chimpanzees and humans from a common ancestor of around 6 million years ago gives an estimate of 2 x 10^-8 base substitutions per site per year in those organisms. Observed rates are between 1 and 5 x 10^-8 per year, a very good match with the prediction of evolutionary theory. So, the evidence supports evolution.
2007-04-02 18:58:49 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 1⤋
You seem confused, apparently you don't know what evolution is because this ignorant argument of yours is saying humans and chimps came directly from the same ancestor without any changes through their own family trees.
2007-04-02 19:11:00 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I see your point, but the problem is that there are changes in nucleotides all the time. A change in 3 nucleotides is very likely, granted it may not be 48 million. However, you do have a good point.
2007-04-02 19:02:57 · answer #6 · answered by ddjerin 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I can get that same study to statistically prove that evolution MUST have happened. So what? Everyone knows that depending on the scientist's personal beliefs and WHO is paying for the study, the results can be from A to Z.
2007-04-02 18:58:55 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
quote: "a change of only 3 nucleatides is fatal to an animal"
No. You are wrong. But it doesn't matter does it. You and your moraless kind will lie through your teeth to suit yourselves.
eg. your second lie: "we have now discovered that the difference is much greater"
2007-04-03 07:45:35 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
For a start--the theory of evolution doesn't say we evolved from monkeys--but from a common ancestor,Hominids,---the overwhelming amount of fossil evidence --which is still being added to daily--just can't be ignored--except of course by the most close-minded religious bigots.
2007-04-02 19:06:35 · answer #9 · answered by huffyb 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The changes are made from smaller changes that add up. This allows the gap to get bigger and bigger with each generation. You are sort of misunderstanding the evolutionary process as it relates to genetics.
2007-04-03 10:36:57 · answer #10 · answered by Take it from Toby 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋