View Single Post
  #60   Report Post  
Old April 20th 09, 11:35 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
JB[_3_] JB[_3_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Apr 2008
Posts: 543
Default American interpretation

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...
JB wrote:
The scientific method doesn't allow us to
make assumptions then try to back them up in further investigations.


Sorry, that's exactly what the scientific method allows
us to do.

1. Form an hypothesis
2. Compare it to reality
3. If it doesn't fit, fine tune the hypothesis
4. Then goto 1, Else it is true

The fact that we humans share 95% of a chimpanzee's
DNA is proof enough that evolution is valid and we
are literally a "Monkey's Uncle". The only question
left is: "Did God cause that evolution?"
--
73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, http://www.w5dxp.com


OK, so what other primate shows at least 90% Ok so what other organism
shares 95% of a human's or Chimpanzee's DNA. And now show that a chimpanzee
did not evolve from a human. So maybe you're a monkey's daddy. Maybe they
evolved from each other. Of maybe there are similarities that just worked
out and perhaps one didn't come from the other at all. Lots of speculation
here. Speak for yourself.


"Evolution
Further information: RNA world hypothesis

DNA contains the genetic information that allows all modern living things to
function, grow and reproduce. However, it is unclear how long in the
4-billion-year history of life DNA has performed this function, as it has
been proposed that the earliest forms of life may have used RNA as their
genetic material.[84][96] RNA may have acted as the central part of early
cell metabolism as it can both transmit genetic information and carry out
catalysis as part of ribozymes.[97] This ancient RNA world where nucleic
acid would have been used for both catalysis and genetics may have
influenced the evolution of the current genetic code based on four
nucleotide bases. This would occur since the number of unique bases in such
an organism is a trade-off between a small number of bases increasing
replication accuracy and a large number of bases increasing the catalytic
efficiency of ribozymes.[98]

Unfortunately, there is no direct evidence of ancient genetic systems, as
recovery of DNA from most fossils is impossible. This is because DNA will
survive in the environment for less than one million years and slowly
degrades into short fragments in solution.[99] Claims for older DNA have
been made, most notably a report of the isolation of a viable bacterium from
a salt crystal 250-million years old,[100] but these claims are
controversial.[101][102]" --from Wiki DNA http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA