Nibiru and the six papers it was posted in

Just something to note:

Take a claim of the existence of X. Said existence has not been definitively proven by science, but for whatever reason, supposed evidence exists to support the belief in X's existence.

Now: why is that every time X is discussed, there is always some magical property of X that prevents its direct observation by science? In this case, we have the implausible (and scientifically incorrect) postulate that X is made of ash, and thus is hard to detect.

Furthermore, why is it that in said discussions, the fact that science has not validated X's existence is always ruled to be a conspiracy by the world governments?

Does anyone else see how self-supporting this logic always is?

reply to post by Phage


I got the number wrong, im sorry about the info, i changed it to the correct information.

We have 23 pairs of chrom. and apes have 24. Sorry i haven't taken biology in a few years.

Doesn't change the fact that apes are less evolved and have more chromosomes then humans do.

[edit on 26-8-2008 by Quickfix]

Originally posted by Quickfix

We have 46 pairs of chrom. and apes have 48. Sorry i haven't taken biology in a few years.

Nope, you get one more try.

reply to post by Phage


23 and 24 lol. woo google. Though i thought there was a difference by two chromosomes. something to look into more tho.

[edit on 26-8-2008 by Quickfix]

Originally posted by Phage
What happened to our hands on our feet?

Why are chimps/apes/monkeys/gorillas not still evolving into humans?

Why is it that humans have 48 pairs of chromosomes and some chimps/apes/monkeys/gorillas have 50 pairs of chromosomes?

If I recall correctly, primates have 48 chromosomes and humans have 46. I find it hard to believe that we evolved from primates and lost 2 chromosomes in the process. Somebody correct me if I am wrong.

reply to post by Quickfix

What happened to our hands on our feet?

We never had that. Our ancestors were like squires with big brains.




(MODS: I don't know if that's uploaded right. Is wiki's image links good? or should I reupload it on photobucket?)

Why are chimps/apes/monkeys/gorillas not still evolving into humans?

Because humans aren't the apex of evolution. Why aren't elephants, dolphins, or crows evolving into humans? They have very complex brains? Why isn't a cuddlefish evolving into a human? they're the most intelligent of all non-mammalian sea creatures.

Humans have our own niche. We are not a target, we are a line of opportunity that humans fit into.

Why is it that humans have 48 pairs of chromosomes and some chimps/apes/monkeys/gorillas have 50 pairs of chromosomes?

Why does a lung fish have the the most amount of genes of all known life?

Because it's how it evolved. It's quality, not quantity.

It is true that humans are related to chimps/apes/monkeys/gorillas because some of our genes do come from them, but where do the rest come from? The rest of our genetic makeup is completely alien.

No, Technically they evolved from us! And in some cases, we mated with them and merged into one species for some time periods.

And if we didn't have that unique DNA, we wouldn't be us. DNA is more like a historic graph. The genes that lungfish had are within us.

If you were to deactivate certain genes, and activate others, you could make a chicken give birth to a dinosaur. It';s because dinosaur DNA is still within them, just unused.

Fits in with the Nibiru theory, that humans were created beings and that did not evolve from chimps/apes/monkeys/gorillas.

We didn't. we evolved from squirrel-like creatures. Some evolved into us, others into primates.

If I recall correctly, primates have 48 chromosomes and humans have 46. I find it hard to believe that we evolved from primates and lost 2 chromosomes in the process. Somebody correct me if I am wrong.

As I said, quality, not quantity. Lungfish have the most genes, but are the most primitive of land species. It depends on necessity.

[edit on 26-8-2008 by Gorman91]

[edit on 26-8-2008 by Gorman91]

reply to post by VernonBC


No thats what i thought too, though someone says i was wrong. I'm looking at wiki and it shows humans have 24 distinct pairs of chromosomes.

I think the link is best at this point

en.wikipedia.org...

Originally posted by VernonBC

If I recall correctly, primates have 48 chromosomes and humans have 46. I find it hard to believe that we evolved from primates and lost 2 chromosomes in the process. Somebody correct me if I am wrong.

You are right about the chromosome count but wrong in your conclusion. Number of chromosomes is not an indication of stage of evolution. Goldfish have 50 pairs.


[edit on 26-8-2008 by Phage]

reply to post by Quickfix






will you just look at my post already



MOD NOTE: I couldn't resist, forgive me. he has fail-tatstic understanding of evolution.

[edit on 26-8-2008 by Gorman91]

[edit on 26-8-2008 by Gorman91]

[edit on 26-8-2008 by Gorman91]

Originally posted by Phage
You are right about the chromosome count but wrong in your conclusion. Number of chromosomes is not an indication of stage of evolution. Guinea Pigs have 64 pairs. Goldfish have 100.

Those are completely unrelated, that has nothing to do with humans evolving.

If scientists say we evolved from apes you can not take something with a higher amount of chromosomes and get something with a lower amount that is more evolved, its simply IMPOSSIBLE.

Originally posted by Quickfix
If scientists say we evolved from apes you can not take something with a higher amount of chromosomes and get something with a lower amount that is more evolved, its simply IMPOSSIBLE.

And where did you get your degree in genetic paleoanthropology? There you go again, spouting nonsense.

Originally posted by Phage

Originally posted by Quickfix
If scientists say we evolved from apes you can not take something with a higher amount of chromosomes and get something with a lower amount that is more evolved, its simply IMPOSSIBLE.

And where did you get your degree in genetic paleoanthropology? There you go again, spouting nonsense.

Lol, good post

Remember he said that he was either a creationist or believed in creationism, which shows his lack of knowledge about evolution and biology.

Oh and how did this thread get onto evolution vs creationism? Shouldnt we get back on topic?

reply to post by Phage


Yes i'm the one spouting nonsense, saying apes have more chromosomes then humans and are less evolved then humans are. Thats nonsense, well then i wonder what does make sense.

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by Quickfix

 

What happened to our hands on our feet?

We never had that. Our ancestors were like squires with big brains.




(MODS: I don't know if that's uploaded right. Is wiki's image links good? or should I reupload it on photobucket?)

Why are chimps/apes/monkeys/gorillas not still evolving into humans?

Because humans aren't the apex of evolution. Why aren't elephants, dolphins, or crows evolving into humans? They have very complex brains? Why isn't a cuddlefish evolving into a human? they're the most intelligent of all non-mammalian sea creatures.

Humans have our own niche. We are not a target, we are a line of opportunity that humans fit into.

Why is it that humans have 48 pairs of chromosomes and some chimps/apes/monkeys/gorillas have 50 pairs of chromosomes?

Why does a lung fish have the the most amount of genes of all known life?

Because it's how it evolved. It's quality, not quantity.

It is true that humans are related to chimps/apes/monkeys/gorillas because some of our genes do come from them, but where do the rest come from? The rest of our genetic makeup is completely alien.

No, Technically they evolved from us! And in some cases, we mated with them and merged into one species for some time periods.

And if we didn't have that unique DNA, we wouldn't be us. DNA is more like a historic graph. The genes that lungfish had are within us.

If you were to deactivate certain genes, and activate others, you could make a chicken give birth to a dinosaur. It';s because dinosaur DNA is still within them, just unused.

Fits in with the Nibiru theory, that humans were created beings and that did not evolve from chimps/apes/monkeys/gorillas.

We didn't. we evolved from squirrel-like creatures. Some evolved into us, others into primates.

If I recall correctly, primates have 48 chromosomes and humans have 46. I find it hard to believe that we evolved from primates and lost 2 chromosomes in the process. Somebody correct me if I am wrong.

As I said, quality, not quantity. Lungfish have the most genes, but are the most primitive of land species. It depends on necessity.

[edit on 26-8-2008 by Gorman91]

[edit on 26-8-2008 by Gorman91]

Squirells are no where near related to humans or apes, they have a seperate family.

Sea creatures have nothing to do with human/ape evolution. Apes are the closest to the human gene family any other creature is therefore ruled out of evolutionary process.

Originally posted by Quickfix
Squirells are no where near related to humans or apes, they have a seperate family.

Sea creatures have nothing to do with human/ape evolution. Apes are the closest to the human gene family any other creature is therefore ruled out of evolutionary process.

Your posts are getting more ridiculous

You obviously have never heard about how complex evolution really is. Maybe familiarise yourself with it before posting such unintelligent garbage

en.wikipedia.org...

Squirrels are actually the line of evolution primates come from.

After the dinosaurs went extinct, there were arboreal mammals that acted like lemurs. These evolved into many species, one eventually becoming us.


One species does NOT, I repeat NOT, evolve into one other species.

One species evolves into many other species.

That's why it's an evolutionary tree, not an evolutionary line.

[edit on 26-8-2008 by Gorman91]

Originally posted by Quickfix
reply to post by Phage

 

Yes i'm the one spouting nonsense, saying apes have more chromosomes then humans and are less evolved then humans are. Thats nonsense, well then i wonder what does make sense.

Can you show me a reference that lists chromosome count as an indicator of advanced evolution?

reply to post by OzWeatherman


Yeah we should get back on topic, the whole evolution came from me i'm sorry i started the questions.

And i owe a response to your previous post anyways.

How many times has this Op contradicted themselves?

If Nibiru is covered in ice like you say, then the need to spot it using infrared is waste of time. Ice reflects light, not absorbs it

Stars, even brown dwarfs are made of gas, they do not contain ice

Large planets and stars, usually emit to much heat to be covered in ice

Op has constantly referred to the alleged Nibiru to be a planet and star

The interpretation of Nibiru came from Sitchin, who does not have a degree in ancient languages. 99.9% of REAL ancient texts scholars, specialising in Sumerian interpretations, disagree with him.

I've contradicted myself more then once i bet, its cause i don't have all the answers.

I said theres ice on Nibiru because the extremes in weather it goes through. The heat on the inside from the reaction [if it still has a reaction that is] and whatever is produced from the cold because of its orbit be it ice or something.

Sitchin was interpreting language, i never did of the sort, i interpreted the tablet that was found, most of the stuff you hear is 2nd hand hearsay which is dismisable right from the start.

reply to post by OzWeatherman


Lol, yeah i'm not an evolutionary expert, its not my daily work. I never got much into studying evolution, likely something i should do. Though looking at evolution and what the scientists say just looks and sounds like a lot of B.S.

Originally posted by Quickfix

I've contradicted myself more then once i bet, its cause i don't have all the answers.

Don't worry about it. There is only one answer.
There is no such thing as Nibiru.