I hate to be pedantic, especially considering how much I love your writing as
fiction, but because I'm viewing this thread in scientific mode, I'd love if
you'd provide some citation to your statements regarding the Soviet model of
evolution based on the bear, and the differences in chinese and western models
of evolution.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
--- Begin Message ---
The Soviets were apt to write up the bear as a more likely human
ancestor and once claimed the dinosaurs went extinct through
constipation when a laxative plant they needed died out. The Chinese
still teach that they are descended from homo erectus. DNA is
somewhat more reliable than this Clyde had a better attitude towards
politicians and bureaucrats than we seem to manage. An Uncle Clyde
would be useful in my life!
On 23 July, 00:05, frantheman <[email protected]> wrote:
> You just knew I was going to do this, didn't you, Don? :-)
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFFr91atHqE&feature=related
>
> Francis
>
> On 22 Jul., 23:54, Don Johnson <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > OMG. GMTA. Just saw your post after I posted mine. It was Every
> > Which Way But Loose with Clint Eastwood.
>
> > dj
>
> > On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 2:39 PM, iam deheretic<[email protected]> wrote:
> > > What was that line out of a famous movie scene? "Right turn Clyde! "
> > > Allan
>
> > > On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 8:21 PM, Chris Jenkins
> > > <[email protected]>
> > > wrote:
>
> > >> From another list I'm on...chimps may not be our closest relative after
> > >> all?
>
> > >> From the Pittsburgh-Tribune Review. Anyone interested in a pdf of the
> > >> original article please let me know. John Grehan
> > >> Pitt anthropologist argues humans more like orangutans than chimps
> > >> A University of Pittsburgh anthropologist argues in a paper published
> > >> today that humans most likely share a common ancestor with orangutans,
> > >> and
> > >> not chimpanzees, which is the prevailing belief.
>
> > >> Jeffrey H. Schwartz hopes the paper will get researchers to practice
> > >> fundamental science and question some assumptions.
> > >> "What I'll be happy with is if people actually think out of the box and
> > >> consider alternative theories of human relationships with apes," Schwartz
> > >> said Wednesday in a phone interview from Zagreb, Croatia.
>
> > >> He concedes it won't happen overnight, but the paper in the Journal of
> > >> Biogeography that he co-authored could help, said Schwartz, who's the
> > >> president of the World Academy of Art and Science.
>
> > >> "We've done the analysis," said John Grehan, who is the paper's other
> > >> co-author, director of science at the Buffalo Museum in New York and a
> > >> research associate at the Carnegie Museum of Natural History.
>
> > >> Jeffrey L. Boore, an adjunct biology professor at the University of
> > >> California-Berkeley who specializes in interpretive genome sequences,
> > >> said
> > >> he knows of no strong reason to discount the DNA studies that have
> > >> demonstrated chimps and gorillas are more closely related to humans than
> > >> orangutans.
>
> > >> "The overwhelming majority of those studies have given very strong
> > >> support
> > >> to excluding orangutans from the human-chimp-gorilla group," said Boore,
> > >> who's also CEO of Genome Project Solutions, Inc., in Hercules, Calif.
>
> > >> "If people disagree with it, they need to put out their evidence and let
> > >> it go back and forth," said Grehan, an entomologist who also studies the
> > >> origin and evolution of animals and plants. "But I think a lot of people
> > >> are
> > >> incapable of dealing with it."
>
> > >> That's because for years most of the scientific community accepted DNA
> > >> analyses that suggest humans are most closely related to chimps, Schwartz
> > >> and Grehan said.
>
> > >> But an examination of fossil and other evidence shows humans and
> > >> orangutans share 28 features -- including reproductive systems, tooth
> > >> structures and mouth palates, the scientists say.
>
> > >> Schwartz and Grehan write in their paper that humans share only two
> > >> features with chimpanzees and seven with gorillas.
> > >> "In science, you must integrate the fossil record with the living
> > >> record,"
> > >> Grehan said. "That's what we've done."
> > >> They propose a scenario that explains the migration of the
> > >> human-orangutan
> > >> common ancestor from Southeast Asia, where modern orangutans are from.
>
> > >> The molecular evidence that scientists commonly cite to demonstrate the
> > >> link between humans and chimps is flawed, Schwartz said.
>
> > >> "Only 2 percent of the entire human genome can be verified," he said.
> > >> "But
> > >> people are saying that chimps and humans share 98 percent of some
> > >> portion of
> > >> that 2 percent to make their case."
>
> > >> That's not good science, said Malte Ebach, a paleontologist at Arizona
> > >> State University's International Institute for Species Exploration, who,
> > >> like Grehan, studies the origin and evolution of animals and plants.
>
> > >> "People think DNA data is better because they perceive it as
> > >> technologically superior and more progressive," Ebach said. "But
> > >> technology
> > >> doesn't make data better."
>
> > >> Schwartz proposed his human-orangutan theory in 1982. He wrote the book,
> > >> "The Red Ape: Orangutans and Human Origins," in 1986 that expanded on
> > >> those
> > >> ideas. In 2005, Schwartz published and revised an updated version of the
> > >> book.
>
> > >> The work was ignored as molecular studies came out that showed the
> > >> similarity between chimps and humans.
> > >> Grehan said alternative views should not be dismissed when a theory
> > >> becomes so accepted.
> > >> During the mid-20th century, scientists so fervently disagreed with
> > >> Barbara McClintock's theory that genes could move along a chromosome that
> > >> she stopped publishing, Grehan said. In 1983, McClintock won a Nobel
> > >> Prize
> > >> for her research in "jumping genes."
>
> > >> Subscription options and archives available:
> > >>http://listserv.buffalo.edu/archives/anthro-l.html
>
> > > --
> > > (
> > > )
> > > I_D Allan
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
--- End Message ---
