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 Heronumber0
I cannot see how humans can evolve from chimps.
If humans are just chimps with more mutations in their DNA then where the heck is the survival advantage? If you tell me that greater height is a survival advantage for seeing further for food -I don't buy it! This is not a life or death situation.
How come most DNA mutations are harmful and even life threatening to humans, e.g. Thalassaemia, Motor Neurone Disease, Huntington's Disorder. The only incidence of a mutation that is advantageous seems to be sickle cell anaemia which still debilitates sufferers.
Heck if we consider that brain size or intelligence gave us a survival advantage then think of people like Einstein and others who are INCAPABLE of interacting with other human beings to give themselves a survival advantage.
Finally, if human adaptation gave us a selective advantage, why are there still chimps about nowadays?
Explain how Huntington's disorder or Thalassaemia has a selective advantage? It is a dead-end mutation (no disrespect intended) which would be naturally not passed on under natural circumstances.
The point about increased brain size and intelligence is that in species, including bonobos and Barbary apes, any member of the species which shows abereant behaviour is ostracised and dies from the ostracism. One intelligent ostracised ape would not be able to mate.
Originally posted by Heronumber0
Darkside, I have got you man! If mutations do not have a selective advantage then NO evolution can occur.
Excessive intelligence leads to aberrant behaviour. Our most intelligent people do not conform to normal behaviour. Chimps are intelligent but not capable of recursive thought - e.g. 'I think you thought I was angry' An extra intelligent chimp with aberrant behavoiur would not survive in the social milieu of other chimps. Please excuse the solipsistic arguments.
Originally posted by Heronumber0
If the Einstein ape dies there is no increased intelligence and therefore no evolutionary advantage. The reason for genetic make up of apes and humans is difficult to address I admit. However 50% of the genetic make up of humans is shared by a banana. That WOULD explain the origin of our world leaders but not the rest of humanity.
Originally posted by Heronumber0
The point is that alll living organisms chare certain genes because these are needed for essential functions, e.g. respiration or photosynthesis.
Bananas and humans and bacteria must share certain genes.
However, with reference to your savannah argument, which is well stated, which DNA mutations do you know of which can facilitate bipedal movement? That being the case, you would need at least two mutated individuals to mate as a minimum, like Adam and Eve I suppose.
which brings us to the common ancestor theory.
Right or wrong?
I say wrong.
Originally posted by ixiy
I think that scientist cannot find the large missing gap/link between the mordern humans and the most advanced ape in the past because the mordern man was geneticly tampered with by the star gods for a specific task/reason.
which brings us to the common ancestor theory.
Right or wrong?
I say wrong.