Leading geneticist says we are a hybrid of Pigs and Chimps

reply to post by bottleslingguy


I would equate it more with driving north
on I-95 and knowing exactly where you're going and then all of a sudden this really interesting roadside attraction pops up that makes Me want to pull over and see what kind of cool stuff they have for sale. Not so much driving while looking in the rear view mirror as havin a good idea of where
I'm headed while being aware that there
May be some turn offs that improve upon the journey and make it more informative.

reply to post by Antigod

Referring to science as dogmatic displays a bit of a fail in understanding.

I referred to genetic/eugenic dogma. I'm good with science.



PS. I already asked you not to put words in my mouth. Interesting you find it necessary to do so.

reply to post by peter vlar

"knowing exactly where you're going "

haha

have wonderful holiday season!

reply to post by Astyanax


www.sheldrake.org...&Papers/papers/morphic/morphic_intro.html

reply to post by peter vlar


what's wrong with the Electric Comet idea? sounds so Keseyesque

bottleslingguy
what's wrong with the Electric Comet idea? sounds so Keseyesque

A comet's orbital path is far too long in most cases.
No way there's an extension cord that long!

Now, an electric asteriod ... maybe...

Harte

reply to post by Harte


I had a mobile like that for my son when he was an infant. Complete with asteroids but no comet. It stopped working though when the cat became overly fond of jumping at it from the bookcase. The cat managed a spectacular landing that would have made an Olympic gymnast proud but alas it was the end of my electric solar system.

peter vlar
reply to post by Harte

 

I had a mobile like that for my son when he was an infant. Complete with asteroids but no comet. It stopped working though when the cat became overly fond of jumping at it from the bookcase. The cat managed a spectacular landing that would have made an Olympic gymnast proud but alas it was the end of my electric solar system.

Hmmmm.
That was some smart cat, for figuring out the electric universe.

Was his name Schrödinger?

Harte

reply to post by IkNOwSTuff



Wow. Just when one thinks they've heard everything . . . something MORE preposterous surfaces . . . often from the Religion of Scientism.

I do confess . . . he sure sounds rather pig-headed.

reply to post by BO XIAN


LOL

Yu made me laugh so you get a star

So what exactly is wrong with his theory?
I assume you are a creationist?

Harte
Was his name Schrödinger?

Harte

Only when he's in the box. I too afraid to open it though, I never know if he's dead or alive.

peter vlar

Harte
Was his name Schrödinger?

Harte

Only when he's in the box. I too afraid to open it though, I never know if he's dead or alive.

Run 60 hz of 120 volts through him - if his tail points away from the Sun, you'll have your answer.

Harte

reply to post by IkNOwSTuff


Thanks for your kind and civil reply.

1. Yes, I am a creationist--NOT a 6,000 year old earth one, however. That, imho, is absurd. There are Chinese characters older than 7,000 years.

2. I'm convinced that Almighty God meant it when He noted that He created everything to reproduce after its kind.

3. I'm convinced that whatever God's hostility to pigs for the children of Israel . . . God would NOT have involved pigs in the DNA of His favorite creation--humans.

4. However, fallen angels were evidently dinking around with human DNA in Noah's era and . . . as predicted . . . are doing so again in our era--with even more hostility from God regarding such efforts on their parts.

5. It seems to me that the doc is groping to make a publicity splash to make himself appear larger on the world stage than he already was.

6. I'm not a geneticist. I just find the proposition preposterous on the face of it. And, my understanding of DNA is that if one wants to go about talking of SIMILARITIES--there are FAR MORE SIMILARITIES in DNA across some pretty diverse creatures than there are DISSIMILARITIES. So what. It just, to me, bespeaks of God's cleverness and ability to create wide diversity with RELATIVELY minimal changes in the blueprint.

7. To me, Religion of Science acolytes are persistently coming out with wild claims . . . seemingly designed to fly in the face of the Biblical outline. Whoop T Doo. What an unsurprise. The spiritual opposition has been fostering such stuff for a very long time. And in our era, he has the satanic globalists carrying his water big time. No surprise there. It was predicted more than 2,000 years ago for this era.

8. It is nice of the pigs, that their valves seem to work in human hearts, however. LOL.

reply to post by Harte


what it means is when it interacts with the solar wind it lights up like a light bulb with arcing across its surface that produces dust, gasses and crystals that you see in the coma and tail. There are no jets of ice and dust boiling off the surface. The Deep Impact probe left no crater when they looked at it the second time, which indicates the comet had a hard solid surface. they also discovered olivine in the comet dust which is found in volcanic rocks not ice.

BO XIAN
His favorite creation--humans.

I could never worship an almighty being who played favorites.

reply to post by bottleslingguy


I'm sure He'll be super impressed with your integrity construed to be loftier than His. /sarc

reply to post by bottleslingguy


Your link is broken.

You're not exactly doing too well here, are you?

Astyanax
reply to post by bottleslingguy

 

Your link is broken.

You're not exactly doing too well here, are you?

lol, you guys don't understand what I'm talking about any more than I understand how random chemical processes could turn into cells with a genetic memory. something has to organize the players. had to. and I'm not saying God. what manipulates or perturbs the chemicals you guys play with? and don't say "lightning".

Antigod
reply to post by bottleslingguy

 

why do we find the prokaryotes and eukaryotes but not what led up to them?

that's relevant how?

because it lends credibility to the idea they LANDED here instead of rising out of the "primordial soup" being mixed together by lightning or whatever the cockamamie theory says it was.

Astyanax

If there is clear evidence of the existence of morphogenetic fields, post links to the evidence here. I am speaking of peer-reviewed scientific studies, not YouTube videos or ghost stories you heard round the last campfire you sat at.

www.sheldrake.org...&Papers/papers/morphic/morphic_intro.html

there must be something wrong with the link.......

so I'll just quote from the site and whoever wants to enlarge their brain can read up on what I'm talking about.

"See Morphic Fields for a general introduction to the theory.

A new, fully updated edition of A New Science of Life was published in the UK in 2009 by Icon Books, London, and in the US under the title Morphic Resonance by Inner Traditions International, Rochester, VT.
A new fully updated edition of The Presence of the Past was published in 2011 by Icon Books, London, and in the US by Inner Traditions International, Rochester, VT.
A new fully updated edition of Dogs that Know When Their Owners Are Coming Home was published in 2011 in the US by Broadway Books/ Random House, New York.
A new fully updated edition of The Sense of Being Stared At was published in 2013 in the US by Inner Traditions International, Rochester, VT.

In the new (2009) edition of A New Science of Life/ Morphic Resonance, Appendix A described results of experimental tests since the first edition was published in 1981. It is online here: New Experiments
In Appendix B, there is a dialogue between Rupert Sheldrake and the physicist David Bohm, online here:"


and now you are going to say "But wait! those are not peer-reviewed scientific studies!" and my response to that is "Sheldrake's peers agree with him!"