It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: wisvol
Religion is defined etymologically as a mental link between people who share specific beliefs.
All you have to do is admit that you're a monkey.
Oh, right, you have been indoctrinated so deeply, from such a young age, and literally been fed genetically modified korn, sick, malad cattle full of pharmaceuticals and brawndo for so long that it's not a conspiracy, it's not a religion, it's just "the truth"
The creative process that made our world is an explosion, and the origin of all living things is soup.
It's true because science, it's demonstrated, you don't even need to demonstrate it, it's been done for you.
This is so sad
Seriously, just try to conceive something else, even scientology, just for a day.
originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: Cogito, Ergo Sum
You are 50% genetically similar to a banana. Therefore, you must have evolved from a banana, right? The science says so, doesn't it?
But banana's are sterile seedless mutants. They are all grown from cuttings of the original plants - for thousands of years. Without human intervention, there would be no edible bananas. They are all essentially 'cloned'.
So, no, we couldn't be evolved from a banana. Banana's have ceased evolving. In the tree of life, they are a dead end branch.
Just saying, err on the side of caution in your pronouncements.
originally posted by: Cogito, Ergo Sum
originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: Cogito, Ergo Sum
You are 50% genetically similar to a banana. Therefore, you must have evolved from a banana, right? The science says so, doesn't it?
No, the science doesn't say that.
We certainly have this evolutionary relationship that you mention though, like we do with every other biological form (to a more or less extent). This is because, as we do with everything else, we share a common ancestor with bananas.
But banana's are sterile seedless mutants. They are all grown from cuttings of the original plants - for thousands of years. Without human intervention, there would be no edible bananas. They are all essentially 'cloned'.
This is called "selective breeding".
So, no, we couldn't be evolved from a banana. Banana's have ceased evolving. In the tree of life, they are a dead end branch.
I agree, humans didn't evolve from bananas. So does science. Well done chr0naut! The banana is a fascinating story, it seems there are concerns about it becoming extinct because of lack of disease resistance and infertility. Thanks for pointing that out chr0naut.
Just saying, err on the side of caution in your pronouncements.
I certainly did err on the side of caution. We are Apes, not much fear of contradiction there.
ps. Nearly every species that has existed is now extinct. This is consistent with evolution. How would infertility in bananas change this?
originally posted by: Cogito, Ergo Sum
pps. looks like the banana will be safe after all Chr0nat.
www.independent.co.uk...
originally posted by: chr0naut
Can't be selective breeding. Bananas are sterile. They cannot 'breed'.
Also, we and the apes have a common ancestor.
We didn't evolve from any existing ape and we are not apes by taxonomy.
The Hominidae (/hɒˈmɪnᵻdiː/), also known as great apes[note 1] or hominids, are a taxonomic family of primates that includes seven extant species in four genera: Pongo, the Bornean and Sumatran orangutan; Gorilla, the eastern and western gorilla; Pan, the common chimpanzee and the bonobo; and Homo, the human.[1]
We are genus homo and closer genetically to Bonobos and Chimpanzees (that are genus pan) than apes (genus gorilla).
There are at least 11 distinct taxonomic species between homo sapiens and just the common ancestor with chimpanzees and bonobos.
If you want to be taxonomically sloppy, you could also call us fish or single cell eukaryotes. We may have evolved from them, but we are not them.
Humans are primates, but the primates that we most closely resemble are the apes. We are therefore classified along with all other apes in a primate sub-group known as the hominoids (Superfamily Hominoidea).
The fact that we carry a protein found in birds and reptiles but not in other primates, calls into question our relationship (genetically) to those primates.
originally posted by: Cogito, Ergo Sum
originally posted by: chr0naut
Can't be selective breeding. Bananas are sterile. They cannot 'breed'.
The current situation is a result of millennia of selective breeding and propagation by humans. That better?
So what?
Also, we and the apes have a common ancestor.
We and the other great apes.
We didn't evolve from any existing ape and we are not apes by taxonomy.
Of course not. We evolved from the banana, according to your previous post lol.
The Hominidae (/hɒˈmɪnᵻdiː/), also known as great apes[note 1] or hominids, are a taxonomic family of primates that includes seven extant species in four genera: Pongo, the Bornean and Sumatran orangutan; Gorilla, the eastern and western gorilla; Pan, the common chimpanzee and the bonobo; and Homo, the human.[1]
We are genus homo and closer genetically to Bonobos and Chimpanzees (that are genus pan) than apes (genus gorilla).
Seems you are being selectively sloppy. Wouldn't the gorilla simply be be genus gorilla, according to your standards?
In a morphological sense it seems we most closely resemble the Orang-utan. Some fascinating similarities there with our evolutionary cousins. There was a paper around at one time that claimed a variation of OOA theory based on it. Fascinating, but not well received for obvious reasons.
There are at least 11 distinct taxonomic species between homo sapiens and just the common ancestor with chimpanzees and bonobos.
Does one of those taxonomic species include your banana lol?
If you want to be taxonomically sloppy, you could also call us fish or single cell eukaryotes. We may have evolved from them, but we are not them.
No you couldn't, because that would be ridiculous.
Once again...
Humans are primates, but the primates that we most closely resemble are the apes. We are therefore classified along with all other apes in a primate sub-group known as the hominoids (Superfamily Hominoidea).
australianmuseum.net.au...
The fact that we carry a protein found in birds and reptiles but not in other primates, calls into question our relationship (genetically) to those primates.
No it doesn't. Unless you can demonstrate why.
But banana's are sterile seedless mutants.
I certainly did err on the side of caution. We are Apes, not much fear of contradiction there. We certainly aren't bananas.
originally posted by: chr0naut
Other primates do not carry the protein beta-keratin. Humans do.
There are also other scenarios that fall outside of evolution which may explain it, too, but too many are committed to 'evolution only' mindset that they refuse to face that biological change, over time, is a dirty, chaotic and confusing business.
originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: Cogito, Ergo Sum
Yes, all of us are apes....but some of us are both apes AND "bananas." If ya know what I mean. Just saying.