Guest Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 I love how the DNA shows thats it more along the DNA line of an Ancient lemur. And everyone is jumping on it saying Lemurs and Humans can't breed etc... One we don't know what happened in the past do we really? we speculate. So then I guess i have a question. How did a Lemur dna show up in the United States Forests? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cotter Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 @leisure - I didnt' dig too deep into it (see my edit comment), but wanted to share that lemur-associated fossils were found outside of Madagascar.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thermalman Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 I love how the DNA shows thats it more along the DNA line of an Ancient lemur. And everyone is jumping on it saying Lemurs and Humans can't breed etc... One we don't know what happened in the past do we really? we speculate. So then I guess i have a question. How did a Lemur dna show up in the United States Forests? Good question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 (edited) @leisure - I didnt' dig too deep into it (see my edit comment), but wanted to share that lemur-associated fossils were found outside of Madagascar.... Fair enough. Just FYI - newer investigations have shown that Ida, the fossil you mentioned, was not a human ancestor. http://scienceblogs.com/laelaps/2010/03/03/almost-ten-months-ago-an/ She has. And you haven't proven your point of 47m years old. I'll save you the effort. You can't.......absolutely impossible. Take a look at my avatar. I can tell you anything you want to hear, as to what it is. Just like the fossil evidence. Only difference is, I know exactly what I caught on thermal and will not lead you along for generations. I probably shouldn't go down this rabbit hole, but I'm bored and stuck here for at least another hour. Why, exactly, is it impossible to accurately date fossils? Edited March 1, 2013 by leisureclass Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 (edited) I'm an attorney and this statement makes no sense to me. LoL, Wow! I must have a really smart lawyer, because it helped win a case I had. I guess it pays to use a good lawyer Edited March 2, 2013 by AaronD to soften snarky comment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 RR, I'm a bit confused by your post. Are you saying that you think she did find a new species, and your only issue is with the taxonomy? No, I don't think she has found a species with the genome she is suggesting. But the conclusions of the paper do not support the naming of the species Homo sapies congnatum. I can not prove the contig is wrong (it make no biological sense to me the way it is) without access to the raw data. But if it was right, it would not be a Homo sapiens. I hope this makes more sense. I love how the DNA shows thats it more along the DNA line of an Ancient lemur. And everyone is jumping on it saying Lemurs and Humans can't breed etc... One we don't know what happened in the past do we really? we speculate. So then I guess i have a question. How did a Lemur dna show up in the United States Forests? The sequence in question is likely highly homologous to lemur rather than being a perfect match. It is also likely to be homologous to dozens of other species, at similar or slightly lower percentages. I will try and isolate the lemurian sequence and give you all some numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
See-Te-Cah NC Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 This topic has been locked to allow for moderation by the forum staff. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AaronD Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 Ok, the topic is now opened. Please remember to stick to the subject-don't attack the other members. If you have problems with someone from outside here, leave it at the door when you enter. For those of you who were discussing the Ketchum Report, I apologize for the inconvenience...Rock on! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thermalman Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 (edited) I probably shouldn't go down this rabbit hole, but I'm bored and stuck here for at least another hour. Why, exactly, is it impossible to accurately date fossils? There is no sure way to accurately date the age of rock or fossils. The error factor is far to extreme. Help me understand, how you accept a 47 million year old date theory, but don't believe present day DNA results? No, I don't think she has found a species with the genome she is suggesting. But the conclusions of the paper do not support the naming of the species Homo sapies congnatum. I can not prove the contig is wrong (it make no biological sense to me the way it is) without access to the raw data. But if it was right, it would not be a Homo sapiens. I hope this makes more sense. The sequence in question is likely highly homologous to lemur rather than being a perfect match. It is also likely to be homologous to dozens of other species, at similar or slightly lower percentages. I will try and isolate the lemurian sequence and give you all some numbers. Humans share 97% of DNA with chimpanzees. What's not to say that the UNKNOWN HOMINID DNA sharing with lemurs is not the same level or less? So DNA speaking......BF is a mix of UKNOWN HOMINID, chimpanzee, lemur and human. Go figure? Edited March 2, 2013 by thermalman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 (edited) No, I don't think she has found a species with the genome she is suggesting. But the conclusions of the paper do not support the naming of the species Homo sapies congnatum. I can not prove the contig is wrong (it make no biological sense to me the way it is) without access to the raw data. But if it was right, it would not be a Homo sapiens. I hope this makes more sense. The sequence in question is likely highly homologous to lemur rather than being a perfect match. It is also likely to be homologous to dozens of other species, at similar or slightly lower percentages. I will try and isolate the lemurian sequence and give you all some numbers. Gotcha. Thanks for clarifying. There is no sure way to accurately date the age of rock or fossils. The error factor is far to extreme. Help me understand, how you accept a 47 million year old date theory, but don't believe present day DNA results? What, exactly is the error factor? How big a margin of error is there, in your opinion, and why is it a problem? I'm genuinely curious. LoL, Wow! I must have a really smart lawyer, because it helped win a case I had. I guess it pays to use a lawyer that really knows the law That's great. I'm glad you won your case. That being said, I still don't know what you're talking about, unless you mean bringing up someone's past criminal record because they were stupid enough to lie about it on the stand. Edited March 2, 2013 by leisureclass Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Theagenes Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 LOL, nope. Unless you're getting $1000/hr and drag it on for years.......... Hmmm.... Does that sound like anybody we know? (And yes I'm being snarky. I figure there's no need to hold back anymore now that the thread has devolved into people seriously arguing that humans mated with lemurs in order to try and salvage her paper. Ridgerunner you have my utmost respect for the patience you are displaying. You are a scholar and a gentleman.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Gawd... She said it seems to follow the Lemur line not that humans got it on with a Lemur. Seriously saying that is a completely false and is only said to try to discredit it by making sensational headline. its a statement to make fun of with out going you know we don't have a real idea about our pasts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Did they mate in Madagascar, or are we looking for the rare, Canadian lemur? I here they are large and sneaky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Did they mate in Madagascar, or are we looking for the rare, Canadian lemur? I here they are large and sneaky. Thats great! Just great!! Who told you about the Canadian lemur? It was suppose to be a secret. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Gawd... She said it seems to follow the Lemur line not that humans got it on with a Lemur. Seriously saying that is a completely false and is only said to try to discredit it by making sensational headline. its a statement to make fun of with out going you know we don't have a real idea about our pasts. Except that we actually have a very good idea of our past. We don't have all the details yet, but we pretty much know where we came from, when, and how. Did they mate in Madagascar, or are we looking for the rare, Canadian lemur? I here they are large and sneaky. Crap, instead of bagels, we should be leaving out Tim Horton's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts