southernyahoo Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 ^ Could be, but it might also eliminate good samples. I know I don't have an extra 2k to gamble with. ^^^Actually, not so much. It could be a degraded hair from a known primate, part of the reason, I'd wager, why that result doesn't mean much to the mainstream unless recognizable parts accompany it. Sorry DWA, but you prequalified my statement by calling the DNA "unknown primate" meaning it is already determined to not be from a known primate. Therefore it is a new one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 ^^^Well, I can't say that. Far's I'm concerned, "unknown primate" could mean "primate, unknown," or: it's a primate but we can't tell what kind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thermalman Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Having fun yet SY? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Oh yes! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Urkelbot Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Last comments on the kouprey. The whole mystery behind the kouprey was whether it was a seperate species or a hybridization of other bovine species in the area. An animal called the kouprey was always known to exist there were just doubts it was a seperate species. What was finally demonstrated in that 2007 paper based upon the DNA results, and fossil evidence, the kouprey was in fact a seperate species. It's most likely extinct at this point and doesn't really matter it was just a neat little mystery that interested some scientists and probably funded by a Cambodian conservation group. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Much agreed Urkelbot, and to the greater point, the DNA is what provided the information. And so we learn a little bit about hybridization as a origin for new species. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted February 5, 2014 Author Share Posted February 5, 2014 ^^ So you're saying that a small, bovine hybrid in Sout East Asia with confirmed DNA does not totally legitimize the idea of a giant ape-man running around North America? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 You just need to the DNA that shows that Dmaker. What we've seen for Bigfoot is hairs and tissue plucked from the wild that have a morphology like a man or primate with human mitochondria, and we are still waiting on the verified, repeatable, definitive nonhuman ape part in the mix. The biology still works the same whether it's an ape or a bovine. Thats what I'm saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Really, those analyses I posted up there are just as powerful as any fossil tooth or skull piece or finger fragment that has generated: EUREKA! NEW (OLD) HOMINID!!!!! (In fact there's a school of thought that we are letting differences in bone structure tell us too much; they may not be delineating fossil species.) When footprint evidence is convincing people whose job is footprint evidence, and clearly explain their reasoning, and scaring away anthropologists and primatologists who cannot explain their reasoning, that's as good a litmus test of denial as any philosopher could come up with. To me, that's as good as a skull fragment. So, this snipe hunt aside, the real question is: Why is evidence tantamount to virtual proof being totally ignored? Generally you get the DNA after following the evidence to the type specimen. Right? To continue with "no proof" in the face of such evidence is to say: Here are the footprints; they lead straight to the murder scene...so let's call it a day and pretend the murder didn't happen. Lunch? I'm starved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incorrigible1 Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Hey, if it's good enough for the self-proclaimed scientist....... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 What isn't is somebody who saw a bird that isn't real. You still aren't getting the colossal-irony part of this, are you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 (edited) Regarding mDNA of the Peruvian elongated skulls , wonder what the nDNA looks like ? "It had mtDNA (mitochondrial DNA) with mutations unknown in any human, primate, or animal known so far. But a few fragments I was able to sequence from this sample indicate that if these mutations will hold we are dealing with a new human-like creature, very distant from Homo sapiens, Neanderthals and Denisovans." http://www.ancient-origins.net/news-evolution-human-origins/dna-analysis-paracas-elongated-skull-finally-complete-incredible Edited February 5, 2014 by GEARMAN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Hey, if it's good enough for the self-proclaimed scientist....... When you can't address the evidence...can't help it. When the techies have gotten out of their depth, we just need to step in with the reminders. You're welcome! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Regarding mDNA of the Peruvian elongated skulls , wonder what the nDNA looks like ? "It had mtDNA (mitochondrial DNA) with mutations unknown in any human, primate, or animal known so far. But a few fragments I was able to sequence from this sample indicate that if these mutations will hold we are dealing with a new human-like creature, very distant from Homo sapiens, Neanderthals and Denisovans." http://www.ancient-origins.net/news-evolution-human-origins/dna-analysis-paracas-elongated-skull-finally-complete-incredible That would sure light a fire under the anthropologists feet to have another type of human living just 3 thousand years ago in Peru. There is something about the ruins at Puma Punku that impresses me in their cutting and fitting of colossal stones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Yep things are getting weird if this is a true article... Aliens, God , Angels , Nephilim , Bigfoot who knows ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts