Email address obfuscation in effect -- please
click here to turn it off.
[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
> I don't know what we have from the fossil record, but you have to
> understand that it is very incomplete because we only find one in of many
> thousands or even many millions of remains. Animals with hard shells or
> bones can be found more easily. We also seem to find bones in deserts and
> we don't look for them 1,000 feet underneath of a jungle. So we are
> missing many samples that might exist and many more animal remains are
> simply completely lost forever.
>
> A better, more modern way of determining phylogenetic trees is to look at
> DNA similarities. We are most like the chimp.
OK Mike, but there is a study that says that a Chimps DNA is not
nearly as close as was orginally suspected. The 98% drops to 86% when
compared to one another directly.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12799463&dopt=Citation
Interestingly, having similar genomes does not necassarily mean they
are from a common ancester.
http://www.genomenewsnetwork.org/articles/05_02/mouse_053102.shtml
This report says that humans and mice are in many ways more related
than chimps and humans.
I guess this serves to point out that all life on this planet is built
very similarly and in a way everything is related to everything else.
Maybe that is the way God planned it all along.
--
Thanks
F Vernon Green
_______________________________________________
discussion mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion