Isn't it reasonable to doubt Young Earth Creationism?
- Thread starter Vulcan Logician
- Start date
iouae
Well-known member
Yes, God used about 5% of Neanderthal genes, if I remember correctly in Homo sapiens.
But Homo sapiens was a separate, unique creation of a new hominid species, 6000 years ago (give or take).
6days
New member
It is hereticsl to suggest God created sub humans. Why would you deny the humanity of Neandertals? The answer is that you reject Scripture telling us that sin, then death entered our world from first Adam. BTW.... It isn't 5% ... try closer to 98%.iouae said:
Science helps confirm the truth of God's Word. Neandertals are descendants if first Adam, and people that Last Adam went to Calvary for.
iouae
Well-known member
"Prüfer and Pääbo say that, based on the new high-quality genome, modern populations carry between 1.8 to 2.6 percent Neanderthal DNA—that’s higher than the previous estimates of about 1.5 to 2.1 percent. More specifically, East Asians have about 2.3 to 2.6 percent Neanderthal DNA, while people from western Europe and Asia have retained about 1.8 to 2.4 percent DNA. African populations have virtually none because their ancestors did not mate with Neanderthals."
https://gizmodo.com/humans-have-even-more-neanderthal-dna-than-we-realized-1819182225
Jose Fly
New member
No way! As a biologist for the last 25 years, this is the first I've ever heard of such a thing.
The funny thing here is how you post that like it's some sort of revelation and/or means for you to demonstrate your immense knowledge. Hilarious.
Ok, now I've seen everything. You're actually saying the concept of anaerobic organisms is "a misnomer and hype/sensationalism" and that's what's really going on with your ignorant gaffe?
Thanks Lon. As you know, entertainment is one of the reasons I'm here and you've provided that in spades. :thumb:
Jose Fly
New member
Exactly how did science establish that?
Jose Fly
New member
And what specifically did they find that allowed them to "establish" that humans and neanderthals were related? And what exactly led them to "establish" that neanderthals were "descendants of the first Adam" as [MENTION=15431]6days[/MENTION] claimed?
iouae
Well-known member
I don't really know what they mean by saying we have a few % Neanderthal genes.
As far as I have read we have a 90-something percent similar genes to monkeys, so I would assume we would have 90-something percent similar genes to Neanderthals.
Can anyone explain this perhaps?
Neanderthals are closer genetically to humans than one chimp is to another chimp.
See also kgov.com/caveman
Jose Fly
New member
Are you saying that merely being genetically "close" is sufficient to establish relatedness?
And again, exactly how did science "establish" that neanderthals were "descendants of the first Adam"?
Jose Fly
New member
It means certain human populations have genetic sequences they inherited from neanderthals. It varies by percentage, as was noted earlier.
Not sure what you're asking, but here's a good recent read: https://gizmodo.com/humans-have-even-more-neanderthal-dna-than-we-realized-1819182225
You remember a god putting 5% Neanderthal genes into homo sapiens? You seem not to have remembered any of that in your previous post.
Homo sapiens and Neanderthal took a bit of a fancy to one another for a short period before the Neanderthals went extinct.
No, we weren't.
Stuart
Lon
Well-known member
No way! As a biologist for the last 25 years, this is the first I've ever heard of such a thing.
The funny thing here is how you post that like it's some sort of revelation and/or means for you to demonstrate your immense knowledge. Hilarious.
Ok, now I've seen everything. You're actually saying the concept of anaerobic organisms is "a misnomer and hype/sensationalism" and that's what's really going on with your ignorant gaffe?
Thanks Lon. As you know, entertainment is one of the reasons I'm here and you've provided that in spades. :thumb:
Only for a simple mind, Jose. You just aren't too bright and miss a lot of what is pertinent, even in science. You? You actually 'like' trying to be above your peers. Me? I'd rather you be educated instead of using lame stuff like this for my own fragile ego. You are just this transparent
It is all you do on TOL and it shows an easily entertained shallow mind. Fact. Sorry again about that, except you probably don't realize what that really means :wave:
He's saying that it is possible to tell from DNA that two organisms are of the same type.
Neanderthals were people.
Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk
6days
New member
Your belief in an old earth causes your inability to understand the Gospel, and the inability to explain why Christ had to die for our sin. (Rom. 5, Gen. 1-4, geneaologies from first Adam to Last Adam, I Cor. 15iouae said:
There was no other way for God to redeem us other than the shed blood of Jesus. (Heb 9)
Foolish... see 1 Cor. 1:18iouae said:
Your beliefs are heretical and render the cross to be foolishness. The OT believers were not saved by animal sacrfices. They were saved by the blood of Jesus.iouae said:
Your rejection of God's Word...and of science is noted. (Evolutionists have always tried to dehumanize Neandertals....Fortunately science has proved those beliefs are false)iouae said:
Your rejection of the perfect God of scripture has already been noted.iouae said:
'Thanks' for the heretical and psuedoscience story. I'm going to believe God's account though which is found in Genesis and is foundational to the Gospel... and the purpose of Last Adams physical death.iouae said:
6days
New member
The simple explanation is ....you have suckered by evolutionism. Evolutionism always has tried to humanize monkey / apes/ pigs and lemurs: while they deny humanity of people.iouae said:
Re. Your DNA silly numbers...
In the past evolutionists claimed we were 98% similar to chimps and that Neandertals were incapable of breeding with humans. Science has shown those claims were false... based on a false belief system, and the rejection of God's Word.
Chimps are NOT 98% similar to human DNA. It actually is impossible to assign a number because we have complete sequences of DNA that chimps do not have and vice versa. But, in any case you can argue the numbers support a Common Designer ... .... not common ancestry(based on God's Word).
Re. Your 2%+ number you used for Neandertals.... you are not the first person to be suckered by deceptive number comparisons. The number is referring to your ancestry....not the % of DNA that is similar to you and me. You might have 75% European ancestry, 20% Asian ancestry 3% Neandertal and 2% South America. Science has helped to show that the evolutionist belief system about neanderthals was totally false...We are ancestors of Neanderthalswho were descendants of Adam and Eve
6days
New member
The simple explanation is ....you have suckered by evolutionism. Evolutionism always has tried to humanize monkey / apes/ pigs and lemurs: while they deny humanity of people.iouae said:
Re. Your DNA silly numbers...
In the past evolutionists claimed we were 98% similar to chimps and that Neandertals were incapable of breeding with humans. Science has shown those claims were false... based on a false belief system, and the rejection of God's Word.
Chimps are NOT 98% similar to human DNA. It actually is impossible to assign a number because we have complete sequences of DNA that chimps do not have and vice versa. But, in any case you can argue the numbers support a Common Designer ... .... not common ancestry(based on God's Word).
Re. Your 2%+ number you used for Neandertals.... you are not the first person to be suckered by deceptive number comparisons. The number is referring to your ancestry....not the % of DNA that is similar to you and me. You might have 75% European ancestry, 20% Asian ancestry 3% Neandertal and 2% South America. Science has helped to show that the evolutionist belief system about neanderthals was totally false...We are ancestors of Neanderthalswho were descendants of Adam and Eve