Ancient DNA shows earliest European genomes weathered the Ice Age

November 6, 2014
An image of the Kostenki skull fossil. Credit: Peter the Great Museum

A ground-breaking new study on DNA recovered from a fossil of one of the earliest known Europeans - a man who lived 36,000 years ago in Kostenki, western Russia - has shown that the earliest European humans' genetic ancestry survived the Last Glacial Maximum: the peak point of the last ice age.

The study also uncovers a more accurate timescale for when humans and Neanderthals interbred, and finds evidence for an early contact between the European hunter-gatherers and those in the Middle East – who would later develop agriculture and disperse into Europe about 8,000 years ago, transforming the European gene pool.

Scientists now believe Eurasians separated into at least three populations earlier than 36,000 years ago: Western Eurasians, East Asians and a mystery third lineage, all of whose descendants would develop the unique features of most non-African peoples - but not before some interbreeding with Neanderthals took place.

Led by the Centre for GeoGenetics at the University of Copenhagen, the study was conducted by an international team of researchers from institutions including the University of Cambridge's Departments of Archaeology and Anthropology, and Zoology, and is published today in the journal Science.

By cross-referencing the ancient man's complete genome – the second oldest modern human genome ever sequenced – with previous research, the team discovered a surprising genetic "unity" running from the first modern humans in Europe, suggesting that a 'meta-population' of Palaeolithic hunter-gatherers with deep shared ancestry managed to survive through the Last Glacial Maximum and colonise the landmass of Europe for more than 30,000 years.

While the communities within this overarching population expanded, mixed and fragmented during seismic cultural shifts and ferocious climate change, this was a "reshuffling of the same genetic deck" say scientists, and European populations as a whole maintained the same genetic thread from their earliest establishment out of Africa until Middle Eastern populations arrived in the last 8,000 years, bringing with them agriculture and lighter skin colour.

An image of the Kostenki skeleton, drawn by Philip Nigst. Credit: Philip Nigst, University of Cambridge

"That there was continuity from the earliest Upper Palaeolithic to the Mesolithic, across a major glaciation, is a great insight into the evolutionary processes underlying human success," said co-author Dr Marta Mirazón Lahr, from Cambridge's Leverhulme Centre for Human Evolutionary Studies (LCHES).

"For 30,000 years ice sheets came and went, at one point covering two-thirds of Europe. Old cultures died and new ones emerged - such as the Aurignacian and the Grevettian - over thousands of years, and the hunter-gatherer populations ebbed and flowed. But we now know that no new sets of genes are coming in: these changes in survival and cultural kit are overlaid on the same biological background," Mirazón Lahr said. "It is only when famers from the Near East arrived about 8,000 years ago that the structure of the European population changed significantly."

The Kostenki genome also contained, as with all people of Eurasia today, a small percentage of Neanderthal genes, confirming previous findings which show there was an 'admixture event' early in the human colonisation Eurasia: a period when Neanderthals and the first humans to leave Africa for Europe briefly interbred.

The new study allows scientists to closer estimate this 'event' as occurring around 54,000 years ago, before the Eurasian population began to separate. This means that, even today, anyone with a Eurasian ancestry – from Chinese to Scandinavian and North American – has a small element of Neanderthal DNA.

However, despite Western Eurasians going on to share the European landmass with Neanderthals for another 10,000 years, no further periods of interbreeding occurred.

"Were Neanderthal populations dwindling very fast? Did modern humans still encounter them? We were originally surprised to discover there had been interbreeding. Now the question is, why so little? It's an extraordinary finding that we don't understand yet," said co-author Professor Robert Foley, also from LCHES.

Unique to the Kostenki genome is a small element it shares with people who live in parts of the Middle East now, and who were also the population of farmers that arrived in Europe about 8,000 years ago and assimilated with indigenous hunter-gatherers. This early contact is surprising, and provides the first clues to a hereto unknown lineage that could be as old as – or older than – the other major Eurasian genetic lines. These two populations must have interacted briefly before 36,000 years ago, and then remained isolated from each other for tens of millennia.

"This element of the Kostenki genome confirms the presence of a yet unmapped major population lineage in Eurasia. The population separated early on from ancestors of other Eurasians, both Europeans and Eastern Asians," said Andaine Seguin-Orlando from the Centre for GeoGenetics in Copenhagen.

Mirazón Lahr points out that, while Western Eurasia was busy mixing as a 'meta-population', there was no interbreeding with these mystery populations for some 30,000 years – meaning there must have been some kind of geographic barrier for millennia, despite the fact that Europe and the Middle East seem, for us at least, to be so close geographically. But the Kostenki genome not only shows the existence of these unmapped populations, but that there was at least one window of time when whatever barrier existed became briefly permeable.

"This mystery population may have remained small for a very long time, surviving in refugia in areas such as the Zagros Mountains of Iran and Iraq, for example," said Mirazón Lahr. "We have no idea at the moment where they were for those first 30,000 years, only that they were in the Middle East by the end of the ice age, when they invented agriculture."

Lead author and Lundbeck Foundation Professor Eske Willerslev added: "This work reveals the complex web of population relationships in the past, generating for the first time a firm framework with which to explore how humans responded to climate change, encounters with other populations, and the dynamic landscapes of the ."

Explore further: Oldest DNA ever found sheds light on humans' global trek

More information: Genomic Structure in Europeans dating back at least 36,200 years," by A. Seguin-Orlando et al. Science, 2014. www.sciencemag.org/lookup/doi/10.1126/science.aaa0114

Related Stories

New branch added to European family tree

September 17, 2014

The setting: Europe, about 7,500 years ago. Agriculture was sweeping in from the Near East, bringing early farmers into contact with hunter-gatherers who had already been living in Europe for tens of thousands of years.

Ancient human bone reveals when we bred with Neanderthals

October 24, 2014

When a human bone was found on a gravelly riverbank by a bone-carver who was searching for mammoth ivory, little did he know it would provide the oldest modern-human genome yet sequenced. The anatomically modern male thigh-bone, ...

New evidence on Neanderthal mixing

October 23, 2014

New research on a 45,000-year-old Siberian thighbone has narrowed the window of time when humans and Neanderthals interbred to between 50,000 and 60,000 years ago, and has shown that modern humans reached northern Eurasia ...

Recommended for you

Major Viking Age manor discovered at Birka, Sweden

January 19, 2017

During spring of 2016 a number of large presumed house terraces were identified by the authors at Korshamn. As a consequence high resolution geophysical surveys using ground-penetrating radar were carried out in September ...

89 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

foolspoo
5 / 5 (9) Nov 06, 2014
before anyone claims right or wrong. look yourself in the eyes in a mirror and ask yourself if you have the ability to accept knew information with an open mind. or will you interpret the results based on the prejudices and biases of your beliefs?

if you find any contempt when reading this message, we have your answer.
Egleton
1.4 / 5 (5) Nov 06, 2014
"Africa until Middle Eastern populations arrived in the last 8,000 years, bringing with them agriculture and lighter skin colour."[-/q]
Implying that we have evidence of the early european skin colour, and it was dark. I assume that information was extracted from the dna?
I was led to believe that Neanderthals were red headed and that is commonly held to be a marker for a certain amount of grittiness in the sporting field- which is consistent with the facts.
I do hope that Political Correctness is not colouring this interesting scientific topic.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4 / 5 (5) Nov 06, 2014
Well sure he survived. He looks like a terminator.

"a mystery third lineage"

-Yeah. Terminators.
shotnoyz
1 / 5 (3) Nov 06, 2014
I don't really know how the conclusion that an interbreeding hiatus occurred between Neanderthals and modern humans. I do know that the temperature of a gas can be cooled by removing the most energetic particles comprising it. Many of us possess Neanderthal DNA, but perhaps not as much as others who succumbed to disease. So a hypothesis, easily tested, is the hiatus wasn't a real hiatus, but the result of comparing our current genetics with those of Neanderthals, but not comparing the genetics of those who died in plagues or day to day disease to that of Neanderthals.

Tell you the truth, I don't really know if any such comparisons have ever occurred, or how to go about doing it. So I may have fibbed a bit when I said easily tested.
KDK
1 / 5 (7) Nov 06, 2014
"The" ice age? Are you "scientists" aware there have been some 40 major ice ages and interglacials that our ancestors survived over the last 2 million years or so?
Vietvet
5 / 5 (4) Nov 06, 2014
"I was led to believe that Neanderthals were red headed---"

A probability but not confirmed.
Vietvet
5 / 5 (6) Nov 07, 2014
"The" ice age? Are you "scientists" aware there have been some 40 major ice ages and interglacials that our ancestors survived over the last 2 million years or so?


" Last Glacial Maximum: the peak point of the last ice age."

From the writer of the article, not a scientist, and the statement is correct.
dtxx
5 / 5 (1) Nov 07, 2014
Well sure he survived. He looks like a terminator.

"a mystery third lineage"

-Yeah. Terminators.


Ahlll be baaahck! In 36,000 years no less.
Jeffhans1
5 / 5 (1) Nov 07, 2014
I can't wait for the time when we have both the computing power, and the dna sample data needed to get a true understanding of the ancient peoples of earth. By figuring out the exact links that we all share, we can make educated guesses on population movements, wars, peace, times of plenty, time of famine and trading and exploration that went on and left genetic ripples down through the ages. With occasional discovery of ancient samples to verify that ancestors of that genetic makeup did exist, we can delve further and further back into the murky past of our race. Of course we might just have something like Watson figure it all out in a fraction of the time that it would take us to work through the project.
viko_mx
1 / 5 (13) Nov 07, 2014
When we have interbreding between similar species, their offspring are sterile and scientists know this problem very well. But those readers unfamiliar with microbiology and genetics can be impressed. Approximately 50% of human genes and bananas match. Does that mean that we are relatives? Again missing important details of the analysis methods for examining the samples and identification of their age and the criteria on which to make this conclusions. Traditionally, such researchers avoid giving any details of its research and to answer to specific targeted questions. This article sounds more like a fairy tale than a scientific study.
Captain Stumpy
4.3 / 5 (13) Nov 07, 2014
When we have interbreding between similar species, their offspring are sterile and scientists know this problem very well. But those readers unfamiliar with microbiology and genetics can be impressed
@viko
and any scientist or dog lover (especially a breeder) will also be able to tell you that it really depends on the species mating and the distance of relations
horses and donkey's = sterile mule
wolf and malamute = viable offspring
bulldog and terrier = viable offspring
etc
Approximately 50% of human genes and bananas match. Does that mean that we are relatives?
intentional misinformation and obfuscation for the purpose of your faith
This article sounds more like a fairy tale than a scientific study
1- how would you know?
you IGNORED all the science i have given as evidence
&
2- your religion is worse still! it is a KNOWN fairy tale!
plus it promotes PSEUDOSCIENCE which you readily accept without evidence because it sounds good enough to accept per your faith

viko_mx
1 / 5 (12) Nov 07, 2014
There is no exception to the rule. There may be a normally functioning generation if parents share the same gene pool. Otherwise interbreding give sterile offspring when is between closely related species with different gene pool. In humans, children between individuals of different races are normally functioning generation, because differnet races share the same gene pool, and the difference between them is in the genotype. But surely it is not possible interbreding between man and simian.
SteveS
5 / 5 (13) Nov 07, 2014
There is no exception to the rule. There may be a normally functioning generation if parents share the same gene pool. Otherwise interbreding give sterile offspring when is between closely related species with different gene pool. In humans, children between individuals of different races are normally functioning generation, because differnet races share the same gene pool, and the difference between them is in the genotype. But surely it is not possible interbreding between man and simian.


Neanderthals were not simian they were human, of the genus homo.
Captain Stumpy
4.6 / 5 (13) Nov 07, 2014
But surely it is not possible interbreding between man and simian.
@viko
1- spellcheckers are free
2- who said simians and man were interbreeding? only you that i know of
3- you are making assumptions without evidence which is what you are complaining about above with regard to the article
and likely you are basing it all upon the ARTICLE and not the study

can you read the whole study?
(better question: WILL you read the whole study?
i already know you will dismiss the study findings based upon your previous posts and your willingness to ignore empirical evidence for your personal faith)

why do you post on a science site when you ignore evidence?

Neanderthals were not simian they were human, of the genus homo.
@SteveS
you will have to ignore viko's stupid comments
he is a creationist posting to a science site
he also ignores evidence for his faith

i just wanted to give you a heads up
thatsitalright
4.5 / 5 (4) Nov 07, 2014
Conjecture goes that most of the offspring between man and neanderthal were in fact sterile, and that the two were on the verge of biological compatibility. In fact it may have been only the female hybrids (or a percentage of them) that were not sterile.
viko_mx
1 / 5 (13) Nov 07, 2014
"Neanderthals were not simian they were human, of the genus homo."

How is it proven and by who? How did it came to the idea of Neanderthals? There is no need to invent a new reality that fit to comfortable for someone theory. Honest researchers with rational approach do the opposite and alter or change the theory when it is contrary to the facts collected over the years of observation and research.
Captain Stumpy
4.6 / 5 (14) Nov 07, 2014
There is no need to invent a new reality that fit to comfortable for someone theory. Honest researchers with rational approach do the opposite and alter or change the theory when it is contrary to the facts collected over the years of observation and research.
@viko-tard
1- this is a lot of nonsense... you should try using a translator or something
2- there IS plenty of evidence
3- science uses rational approaches, only religion and your dogma are not rational
you are arguing about the science without ANY knowledge backing you up other than a few pointers from a creationist website (that is how your arguments appear)

you should go back to TROLLING reddit or 4chan and leave the science to the people who can comprehend it and don't ignore evidence
because you are ignoring decades of collected data which is taught while clinging to a faith that has offered NO EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE

STFU and TROLL somewhere else
Vietvet
4.7 / 5 (13) Nov 07, 2014
"Neanderthals were not simian they were human, of the genus homo."

How is it proven and by who? How did it came to the idea of Neanderthals? There is no need to invent a new reality that fit to comfortable for someone theory. Honest researchers with rational approach do the opposite and alter or change the theory when it is contrary to the facts collected over the years of observation and research.


You get dumber with every post.
SteveS
5 / 5 (9) Nov 07, 2014
Neanderthals were not simian they were human, of the genus homo.


My mistake, Neanderthals were a member of the infraorder Simiiformes (simian), and so are we. This doesn't change the fact that they were of the same genus as modern humans.
Egleton
2.3 / 5 (4) Nov 07, 2014
This percentage-of-genes thing is nearly meaningless. What are the percentage gene difference between a healthy human and one with Huntington's disease? Very small, yet the consequences for the individual are profound.
The significant thing is the function of the gene change- what does it do?

And because the nucleus can be removed from a cell, and the cell continue to survive for months afterwards we can conclude that epigenetics have greater consequences. The nucleus is there as an amino acid template.
viko_mx
1 / 5 (13) Nov 07, 2014
> Captain Stumpy

That say that evolutionary theory has all the characteristics of religious dogma. And you call it science when it is not proven by scientific methods. You have little knowledge in the disciplines of physics, microbiology and genetics that do not allow you to see insurmountable problems for evolutionary theory . Therefore you advocating yours ideas with links, without being able to explain them with own words.
viko_mx
1 / 5 (11) Nov 07, 2014
>Egleton

That's what I say. Seemingly small difference of 3% in genetic code between human and ape is actually a huge difference in functionality and is no guarantee of a common origin.

"And because the nucleus can be removed from a cell, and the cell continue to survive for months afterwards we can conclude that epigenetics have greater consequences. The nucleus is there as an amino acid template."

Under what conditions can survive the cell with removed nucleus? In controlled in the laboratory environment or in the natural environment?
Vietvet
5 / 5 (9) Nov 07, 2014
@viko mix
You don't believe in the evidence supporting evolution.

Millions of species have lived and gone extinct. Other species have arose and are living now.

How do you account for the biodiversity we see today?
Torbjorn_Larsson_OM
5 / 5 (7) Nov 07, 2014
As always it is a mix-and-match between isolation and mixing. So (middle eastern) asians evolved the fair skin and took it to Europe. Makes sense, it is simplest.

"We were originally surprised to discover there had been interbreeding. Now the question is, why so little?"

While the surviving Neanderthal alleles are very fit, there are signs that it brought alleles that were bad at sperm competitions. The species barrier may have been close, and the interbreeding a short initial period of partial success. (Later it would perhaps been even more problematic as humans diversified, and culture has a memory of failures.)

[And aargh, once again I downrated a regular commenter when I intended to downrate the anti-scientists. ]
Torbjorn_Larsson_OM
5 / 5 (7) Nov 07, 2014
@Egleton: Yes, the sequencing of mainly old swedish material (colder climate) showed that europeans were dark before the agrarians came. Can't remember the eye color though.

@shotnoyz: Certainly extinction of alleles figure in. But the Neanderthal amount is fairly constant, implying it happened close to the out-of-Africa bottleneck.

@thatsitalright: "the two were on the verge of biological compatibility".

Yes, but it clears the biological species definition according to those biologists who use it.

There are 3 matters mixed here:

- Humans at large are Homo, which is a lineage ~ 3 million years old, and with fossil but perhaps not biological speciation. We have many fossil human species besides anatomically modern humans.

[tbctd]
viko_mx
1 / 5 (8) Nov 07, 2014
>Vietvet
In the gene pool of a species is all possible variety for this species and it contains all the genes and their alleles of this species. Characteristics of an individual are due to built-in functionality or DNA recombination mechanisms between genes of both his parents. In organisms that do not reproduce sexually such as bacteria, biodiversity is provided through the rearrangement of certain genes in specialized sections of their DNA or recombination of some of their genes with genes from other bacteria of the same or different kind through the embeded mechanisms for exchange of DNA fragments. This gives them new opportunities without changing their essential characteristics that distinguish them from other species. These mechanisms work fine even in an ideal environment with no adverse factors that may cause undesired mutations. ...
Torbjorn_Larsson_OM
5 / 5 (6) Nov 07, 2014
[ctd]

- Fossil speciation is not directly aware of biological speciation, scientists sort according to all traits found in fossils, not the sexual traits used in the biological species conception. The overall topology of the phylogenetics will be the same, which is what matters.

- Now our gene fossils (allele diversity, say) and genes in fossils are used too, and they can perhaps be more aware of biological species (se sperm competition mentioned earlier).
viko_mx
1 / 5 (9) Nov 07, 2014
>Vietvet
... Although the gene pool provides rich biodiversity in species, there is built in mechanisms which prevent mixing with other gene pool of another species. Therefore there can not be functionally generation between even close in characteristics different species.
So mutations cause only genetic or malignant diseases, when fall within the more important zones or genes in DNA, or gradual loss of functionality and information in gene pool of certain sepcies with each successive generation, when there are less significant mutations.Therefore, the protective mechanisms of cells and the immune system is constantly fighting with them.
SteveS
5 / 5 (11) Nov 07, 2014
@Viko
That (sic) say that evolutionary theory has all the characteristics of religious dogma.

who says this?
And you call it science when it is not proven by scientific methods.

As a young earth creationist can you provide proof of your beliefs?
You have already stated on another thread that the act of creation you believe in is not open to scientific analysis and that it is fundamentally incomprehensible to human beings.
I do not know how the Creator created our reality, but that's the least of our problems. I do not think any man will ever understand this.

http://phys.org/n...ure.html
You are in no position to talk about religious dogma.
Mike_Massen
4.7 / 5 (12) Nov 07, 2014
viko_mx claimed
When we have interbreding between similar species, their offspring are sterile and scientists know this problem very well.
Not true, progeny have been born, Eg Mules & even tigons etc.
Rare but occurs, nature has been doing this for millions of years longer than we noticed !

viko_mx
But those readers unfamiliar with microbiology and genetics can be impressed.
You are ignorant of details so U still make dumb claims.

viko_mx
Approximately 50% of human genes and bananas match.
& 98% bonobo monkeys which exercised "do unto others" long before greeks & jesus

viko_mx
Does that mean that we are relatives?
Of course, by distant ancestor(s), all chemistry matches - Africans eat bananas as easily as consuming monkeys - SAME amino acids & each one has Amines - ie Ammonia !

Why can U not see what is everywhere - SAME constituents, it is ONLY the arrangements which are varied.

Was your god lazy AND a racist as evidenced in all bibles ?
Mike_Massen
4.6 / 5 (11) Nov 07, 2014
viko_mx ignores much
There is no exception to the rule. There may be a normally functioning generation if parents share the same gene pool.
Wrong. Eg Humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes, great apes have 24, there is evidence from chromosome 2 iirc, that there was a fusion, even the telomeres & centromeres prove this. So at some point there was some odd anomaly which produced a human branch FROM any number of great ape breeding which were viable in their own right !

viko_mx
But surely it is not possible interbreding between man and simian.
Although it is bothersome to human ideals & troubling to accept we are just as other organisms then one has to ask why should it NOT be possible. Sad to imagine a retarded human male who has immense sex drive impregnating female bonobo monkeys !

Have U actually read of the immense similarity of bonobo's & humans:-

Especially:- http://en.wikiped...behavior

Why does your god force mutations ?
foolspoo
5 / 5 (11) Nov 07, 2014
Do you choose whether to believe in gravity as well viko? evolution is no more theoretical than gravity. we are not able to take two species and introduce environmental variables and determine the outcome. (mostly because evolution usually works on a timescale that is not able to be comprehended by the human mind) hence theory. you lunatics claim to have an open mind to science, yet you refuse to crack the door to openness when discussing your beliefs. you are an irrelevant voice to this universe, though you will never live a life outside of your perception. its time to transcend, or face extinction.
Mike_Massen
4.7 / 5 (13) Nov 07, 2014
viko_mx claimed
This article sounds more like a fairy tale than a scientific study.
In contrast, tell me about scifi story of your god ?

Have you collated the ways humans are born with built-in suffering, here is a SHORT list:-

https://www.googl...gQ_AUoAQ

And here is one which may well explain Jesus' friendly nature & skills later in life
http://en.wikiped...syndrome

Why does your god hate humans so much in that some people are BORN with immense mutations & deformities ?

Which is more likely viko_mx, that a god made us but punished us so badly or nature is completely consistent with all the same chemistry shared with ALL life-forms & ALL subject to variations, mutations, uncertainty, permutations, arrangements & above all "Survival of the fittest" which OBVIOUSLY is observed reality !
pandora4real
4 / 5 (5) Nov 07, 2014
"However, despite Western Eurasians going on to share the European landmass with Neanderthals for another 10,000 years, no further periods of interbreeding occurred."

Most Neanderthal sites are being re-dated and you can make a good case that none are younger than 50,000 years. Not even the ones in Spain. Google the latest new dating techniques on the subject. It's certainly a much, much more parsimonious hypothesis that there was no further DNA mixing because...they weren't in Europe anymore!

More and more consistent dating is indicating that populations of Neanderthals and HS interbred in the Levant circa 60,000-70,000 years ago, and the resulting hybrids then moved into Eurasia during the last Ice Age. After it the population broke into the three branches mentioned here.

I will put money on the fact that there will be no serious researchers saying that there were human/Neanderthal interactions in Europe ever, in another 10 years. That invalidates a lot of theory.
pandora4real
5 / 5 (10) Nov 07, 2014
viko_mx spewed: "here is built in mechanisms which prevent mixing with other gene pool of another species"

Patently untrue. If that were true you and I would not be able to interbreed but I fear it is physically possible. Speciation happens. If we accept that songbirds that look alike in the same habitat are different species because they choose not to interbreed based on culture (songs, mating rituals, etc), even though they physically could, and they can- then we are different species.

Speciation happens. Still.
Captain Stumpy
4.6 / 5 (11) Nov 07, 2014
That say that evolutionary theory has all the characteristics of religious dogma
@viko
1- you do realize that this sentence makes no sense as written?
2- science is not religious
you are the one failing to accept the empirical evidence and deciding that something must be false based upon your religion, not i
you call it science when it is not proven by scientific methods
and you are making conjecture without any empirical evidence
please prove to me with the equivalent type evidence that i have linked to you that evolution is not true
make sure there are studies linked for my review
You have little knowledge in the disciplines of physics, microbiology and genetics that do not allow you to see insurmountable problems for evolutionary theory
baseless conjecture
also a lie
please prove, using the scientific method, that evolution is not real
make sure you point out the supporting evidence for the "insurmountable problems"
Captain Stumpy
4.6 / 5 (10) Nov 07, 2014
you to see insurmountable problems for evolutionary theory
@viko-matic
this is the unsupported conjecture that makes stupid creationist's like you look so blatantly idiotic on a science site
you make CLAIMS but never provide evidence
So mutations cause only genetic or malignant diseases
not ALL mutations are bad
mutations can also be beneficial as proven here: http://myxo.css.m...dex.html

so you are directly refuted with scientific evidence which proves you are a religious nut-job promoting pseudoscience

please leave the science to those with the mental capacity for reason

you are basing your conclusions on fear and conspiracy based religious dogma delusions

Do you choose whether to believe in gravity as well viko?
@foolspoo

well said!
foolspoo
5 / 5 (8) Nov 07, 2014
ren82, your beliefs precede your arrogance. and that is scarrrrry
Captain Stumpy
4.6 / 5 (9) Nov 07, 2014
And this is what the researchers found: Never once been observed the case of a real favorable mutation or mutation that is durable and transmitted from one generation to another
@Ren
i am calling this a blatant lie based upon the fact that i already linked: http://myxo.css.m...dex.html
By their nature, mutations largely weaken the body so that if an organism survive his descendants fail
most mutations are not beneficial, but again, you did not read the overwhelming evidence from Lenski that proves you wrong, either
there is a PO article on it too: http://phys.org/n...lts.html
Lenski has watched E. coli bacteria multiply through 59,000 generations, a span that has allowed him to observe evolution in real time. Since his Long-Term Experimental Evolution Project began in 1988, the bacteria have doubled in size, begun to mutate more quickly, and become more efficient at using the glucose in the solution
Maggnus
4.5 / 5 (8) Nov 07, 2014
Conjecture goes that most of the offspring between man and neanderthal were in fact sterile, and that the two were on the verge of biological compatibility. In fact it may have been only the female hybrids (or a percentage of them) that were not sterile.


Cite? Conjecture by whom?
Captain Stumpy
4.6 / 5 (9) Nov 07, 2014
At 60,000 generations of bacteria in the experiment of Lensky what is the probability different samples to have been contaminated with other species of bacteria accidentaly or not?
@ren
1- you're stupid for not reading up on his page
2- he is not just doing all 60,000 at once
3- protocols are carefully adhered to http://myxo.css.m...rot.html
easily found in 2 clicks http://myxo.css.m...tam.html
Also, molecular genetic analyses (see especially the work on IS elements by Papadopoulos et al. 1999 http://myxo.css.m...l#pub_13 ) confirm that our evolved lines are indeed derived from the ancestral strain and not from contaminants

you really, REALLY should have read the link because by forming conjecture with easily available data, you now have undermined your whole argument and your own credibility

are you being intentionally stupid or is this a simple communication gaffe?
SteveS
5 / 5 (9) Nov 08, 2014
Evolution is not a science built on solid evidence from observations and experiments, but pure ideology that relies solely on religious faith, ignorance and falsified evidence.


So it's all a big conspiracy and nothing anybody can say will change your mind.

How are these people lying?

http://www.ncbi.n...0378.pdf
Mike_Massen
4.7 / 5 (12) Nov 08, 2014
Ren82 claimed
I mention only facts that can be checked. Get learn how to prove scientific facts.
Such as the facts thousands of microbiologists, infectious disease researchers, pathologists etc observe bacterial & viral adaptation/evolution on a routine basis.

Have you Ren82, seenabout bacterial disease resistance to antibiotics, Eg

http://en.wikiped...s_aureus
http://en.wikiped...rococcus
Details here:- http://en.wikiped...athogens

Mutations obviously are beneficial to the organism's survival !

Creationism is a clear Dogma - ie some god "did it", ie Made stuff for the heck of it. All suffer in any number of ways; deformities, diseases, accidents, aging then death - happens to all so called "created beings" - why ?

All gods seem to WANT to entertain much suffering, why Ren82 ?

Isnt evolution a more sensible paradigm re survival ?

TBC
Mike_Massen
4.6 / 5 (9) Nov 08, 2014
Ren82 muttered
At 60,000 generations of bacteria in the experiment of Lensky what is the probability different samples to have been contaminated with other species of bacteria accidentaly or not?
Studied microbiology (as part of a post grad in food science), I can tell you aseptic techniques are straightforward. It is also easy to separate species & identify them after the experiment has run its course. Its very easy to separate a 'pure strain' as bacteria have different properties re food, metabolisation products & multiple characteristics.

Point of Science here especially, these experiments are easy to replicate, that is part of the process confirming evidence.

Ren82
I will not discuss the optional methods for interpreting the reliability of the data from the study and the methods of control and surveillance of the experiment.
Y not ?

Seems to prove you prefer a dogma over science investigation.

How did your god ever communicate "creationism" ?
Mike_Massen
4.6 / 5 (10) Nov 08, 2014
The "creationists" :-
https://sciencex....viko_mx/
https://sciencex....r/Ren82/

"Created" within ~1 day of each other (does this mean they congratulate themselves of creation in less than 7 days) & with very similar patterns of vague discussion question suggesting the assumption it arises from a dogma & not answering simple questions.

Clones, bizarre mitosis ?

@Ren82 & viko_mx, questions for U which still go unanswered:-

1. How did your god ever communicate "creationism" to you ?

2. How does any god actually communicate by what method ?

To go on:-

3. What are the rules of creationism ?

4. What is the Provenance ?

5. What governs when something is 'created' & then 'destroyed' ?

6. Why are there SO MANY dangerous bacteria, viruii, fungi, protozoa, prions ?

7. Why does it seem that all gods Want to watch over so many beings constantly suffering ?

8. Why does any god treat all humans same as all other beings - by survival ?
Mike_Massen
4.6 / 5 (9) Nov 08, 2014
Ren82 claimed
The emergence of mutations that are parallel to the natural mechanisms to ensure biodiversity, which can make them not susceptible and resistant to certain chemical agents or immune system, can give them temporary advantage in certain situation.
You seem to be claiming persistent antibiotic strains of bacteria only have 'temporary advantage'.

So why is it only temporary, have you been around long enough or have evidence to support that very strange idea which doesn't seem to be represented by reality ?

Ren82 claimed
But compared to other strains of the same species under standard conditions lose competitiveness, so ultimately mutations never lead to positive changes.
Evidence please ?

Please answer my previous questions about your god & how it communicates creationism ?

What is your first language, I know a few & may speak it ?
Mike_Massen
4.6 / 5 (10) Nov 08, 2014
Ren82 claimed
Because antibiotics only temporarily present in the environment in which the bacteria live and through its selection remain only resistant to them bacteria.
Whether temporary or not why should their adaptation be dropped ?

Ren82
Their stability is due to either their natural characteristics due to mechanisms for ensuring bio diversity within species, or due to damage of some their characteristics by random mutations.
Evidence ?

Ren82
But if their resistance is due to mutations, they have lost some of their vital capacity compared to atibiotic unsustainable strains, and can not compete with them in a normal environment.
Evidence ?

[Ren82
On the other hand, some bacterial and viral strains have specific natural characteristics that make them more effective agents that can cause a number of adverse conditions and have natural immunity to drugs used to combat them.
U mean they didn't have resistance before, Evidence ?

Answer my questions ?
Captain Stumpy
4.5 / 5 (8) Nov 08, 2014
When the results of Lenski's experiment is confirmed by various independent organizations
@ren&stupid
you mean like Dr. Extavour and her work?
again, just because you do not like what is happening and you have no ability to refute the study doesn't mean you can dismiss it out of hand and make up lies about it (called libel)

Lenski et al is being used AND built upon by other labs and it has not been refuted

you would think, considering the HUGE success that it was, that if a refute was out there it would be all over the news by now

but there is silence
naive is faith that random mutations can act purposefully to create miracles
then it must also be true that "naive is the faith that believes in implausible miracles and random acts of kindness without empirical evidence"

you are undermining your own argument STILL

i suggest you return to the faith/religious site whence you came crawling out from under
science trumps stupid every time
Captain Stumpy
4.5 / 5 (8) Nov 08, 2014
You start with wrong assumptions...conclusions are wrong
@ren&dumber
you are actually using this argument when ALL of your assumptions are based upon a FAITH/RELIGION and have NO empirical evidence?
ROTFLMFAO
Evolution is not a science built on solid evidence from observations and experiments
personal conjecture based upon faith/religion and delusional stupidity
you have NO PROOF supporting this conjecture
pure ideology that relies solely on religious faith
this is the definition of religion as well as creationists
there is no science in creationist movement, and even the lawyers can see that
https://en.wikipe...Arkansas
until you can prove by showing evidence from higher education showing that there is no science, then you are simply promoting libelous fallacies based upon fear, religion and stupidity
provide links to empirical evidence proving your statements or STFU
Captain Stumpy
4.4 / 5 (8) Nov 08, 2014
There are many examples in history of how its proponents falsifying facts of observations and made false evidence to prove it
dumb&Ren
and if this were true of evolution you would have empirical evidence proving it false
but you have NOTHING but what your faith tells you to give
also: conspiracy theory built upon lies with circular self-sealing argument is not an argument
this is like the AGW argument: there is no possible way that thousands upon thousands of scientists from around the world are involved with a conspiracy just to undermine your religion when most cultures cannot even agree on what is appropriate for meals during certain times

your circular non-logical argument against mutations is based upon a fallacy that is supported only by conspiracy theory and taken without evidence (on faith) that it is correct

again... unless you have empirical evidence proving your point, STFU and quit TROLLING
you are posting religion, not science
Captain Stumpy
4.4 / 5 (7) Nov 08, 2014
I mention any verifiable facts and ask questions
@dumb&Ren
no
you mention comments that can be proven to exist elsewhere, not verifiable facts

verifiable facts come with empirical evidence that is not refutable, which you have yet to provide any proof of in any way, shape or form
your argument is from religion only, and your fear of the blackness of death when you pass on and there is nothing at all

you keep saying that evolution has not been observed, but you keep ignoring the empirical evidence supporting it, especially supported by the FACT that you are not providing evidence of your claims

it is getting tiring producing evidence without anything in return

I think i am just going to start reporting all your posts as PSEUDOSCIENCE since you will not support your conjecture with any proof at all but religious pejorative kohl-slaw designed to obfuscate science and reality

your faith/religion is a Delusional Disorder

now try science
jewelblade
1.4 / 5 (10) Nov 08, 2014
Ignore the Bible, whatever these scientists say is true cuz they are scientists, and why are they scientists? Because they are smart, and why are they smart? Because they are scientists who don't believe the Bible. And why are they scientists who don't believe the Bible? Because they are smart, and why are they smart? Keep chasing your tail, "scientists".
Mike_Massen
4.4 / 5 (7) Nov 09, 2014
jewelblade muttered from ignorance
And why are they scientists who don't believe the Bible? Because they are smart, and why are they smart? Keep chasing your tail, "scientists".
jewelblade get an education in WHY Science has given us all the technological advances since last few hundred years that NO religion EVER has.

Chief is the means to alleviate suffering, religion has NO power to do that.

Did religion eradicate smallpox ?
Did religion create antibiotics ?
Did religion devise surgical techniques ?
Did religion produce semiconductors & the internet ?
The list goes on, too many items which Science & Engineering created WITHOUT religion.

This is why Science is successful, it is a new paradigm of thought structures that uses evidence, it is objective & does not rely on anyone who claims a god "did it".
Details: http://en.wikiped...c_method

Religion, first attempt to explain & a dismal failure, no discipline & makes more suffer !

Gods kill.
Mike_Massen
4.5 / 5 (8) Nov 09, 2014
@jewelblade

Since many of contrary view either won't or cannot have discipline to read, here is essential.
In contrast to the requirement for scientific knowledge to correspond to objective fact, poorly attested beliefs (such as various myths) can be believed and acted upon irrespective of truth, often taking advantage of the narrative fallacy that when narrative is constructed its elements become easier to believe. Myths intended to be taken as objectively true must have their elements assumed a priori, while science requires testing and validation a posteriori before ideas are accepted.
In contrast then, what is the alternative ?

Tell me the details of any gods you imagine & how they communicate effectively ?

Vietvet
5 / 5 (9) Nov 09, 2014
@ren82

You need to take you unscientific bullshit somewhere else.
Mike_Massen
4.5 / 5 (8) Nov 09, 2014
Ren82 claimed
Original sin however was the reason Creator to withdraw part of support for the man.
So the 'creator' claimed by Moses (no evidence) punished EVERYONE for ALL time, especially the INNOCENT & unintelligent, because the creator let a girl be manipulated by a powerful angel he created.

Ren82, do U claim the creator knew the future or didn't & couldn't predict a mere human would be influenced & hypnotised by an angel created & foreseen by him ?

Ren82 tell us where is the evidence for claims by Moses that god spoke to him ?

Ren82 tell us why god only spoke to Moses & David through dreams ?

The creator must be really powerful to make sure innocent people suffer so badly - madness !!!

Ren82, if U did something wrong & any authoritative god figure punished your grand-daughter, then would U be considered INSANE & would it set a good example for all of us to follow ?

In Samuel, it is stated god killed 50,000 people for looking in a box is this sane ?

tbc
Mike_Massen
4.4 / 5 (7) Nov 09, 2014
Ren82 claimed
Then have emerged diseases, and some living organisms have become predators and parasites аnd life has become much more difficult for people.
Where is the evidence there were no predators before humans ?

Where is there evidence there were no parasites before humans ?

Why did 'the creator' also punish all animals because a girl was manipulated by an angel ?

Where is evidence for any of this ?

Ren82 previously complained about being unscientific, isnt any insane belief about a god the most unscientific idea imaginable ?

How/when/where did ANY god prove Moses & associates didn't write a scifi story ?

Ren82, Science is about observation, experiment, hypotheses that are testable, not belief.

PLEASE Ren82 read & understand, please do not be so emotionally feeble u need a parent:-
http://en.wikiped...c_method

Cant u see Ren82, there are SO MANY logical problems and bad thinking in ANY god centered belief - it can never be proved ?
Mike_Massen
4.4 / 5 (9) Nov 09, 2014
Ren82 hypocritically claimed
So your attitude shows that you lack even a tenuous link with science.
This is the basis of Science:-
http://en.wikiped...c_method

Show me where Ren82 that YOU have any discipline of observation, hypothesis, experiment ?

Show me where you Ren82 have a 'link' with Science, did u read the above link ?

Show me Ren82 the Science of Moses' proof a (any) god spoke to him ?

Where Ren82 ?

How Ren82 ?

Science is about details & investigation Ren82, where are they ?

Details of Moses direct communication with any god ?

There are SO MANY failures of any god centered belief in any sort of personal god that is claimed to communicate with humans, the logic is a staggering failure in all respects !

Show at least ONE claim in any religious text that is proven by scientific method - anywhere ?
Mike_Massen
4.4 / 5 (7) Nov 09, 2014
Ren82 claimed
Original sin however was the reason Creator to withdraw part of support for the man. Then have emerged diseases, and some living organisms have become predators and parasites аnd life has become much more difficult for people.
To make this clear Ren82, U are claiming a human female made a mistake & maliciously punished ?

And this meant not just Eve was punished but ALL her children AND all life FOREVER ?

Does this make sense ?

This shows 'the creator' did not have ability to prevent punishment of anyone else ?

Doesn't this suggest 'the creator' is impotent & very NASTY because punishes innocents ?

Is it therefore a good example of a high moral code to punish all those related to a criminal ?

Show me where this example is considered moral and a 'good thing to do' ?

How could one find this out, do you have 'the creators' contact details or do we have to do something SPECIAL to get attention, maybe when we are insane too, he then talks to us ?
Vietvet
5 / 5 (9) Nov 09, 2014
@Ren82

You don't understand that this is a SCIENCE site. Go peddle your crap somewhere else.

Stupid troll.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.5 / 5 (8) Nov 09, 2014
Never once been observed the case of a real favorable mutation or mutation that is durable and transmitted from one generation to another. Something that is known to be a mutation rather than simply rearranging the latent characteristics in the genes. If after so many experiments with mutations in fruit flies for example, scientists have not found even one useful and unrelenting mutation
-So how many billions of fruit flies are reproducing over hundreds of gens a year, for 1000s of years? I think you need to consider sampling which is beyond your imagination.

I think the main problem with creationists is that they can't imagine a time span longer than a few 1000 years. And of course if they can't imagine it, it didn't happen.

Scientists have learned to work beyond the limits of their imagination and other human faculties to follow evidence wherever it leads. This is why there is no limit to what they can discover, despite what priests and philos will tell you.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.5 / 5 (8) Nov 09, 2014
god is too big and people too small so he gave us the bible
?? So why does the book fail so spectacularly to describe the world it's author created? Why is the book full of stories about things we know didn't happen and people we know didn't exist?

Does god think we are so small and stupid that we wouldn't actually go out and LOOK?

No creation. No first people. No flood. No 2M jews in goshen. No exodus or genocidal Joshuan rampage through Egyptian-occupied territory. No mt Sinai. No great davidic/Solomonic kingdoms.

And no godman who wasn't a direct copy of perhaps a dozen earlier godmen.

If such a god exists then he is either an incompetent or a liar. And we can't trust such a faulty god when he promises to grant wishes, forgive sins, or enable us to live forever.

We can assume however that he is the creation of very human incompetents and liars. Because that is so obviously what he is.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (4) Nov 09, 2014
Keep chasing your tail, "scientists"
@jewelblade
and like every other terrified idiot religious dipsh*t, you con't comprehend the conversation
it is like this: a FAITH is a belief in something WITHOUT EVIDENCE
a RELIGION is the dogmatic institution that grows up around a faith
SCIENCE is the defininf of the world around us with EVIDENCE
IOW - idiot religious morons cannot PROVE anything about their faith whereas scientists can give empirical evidence of what they are defining

THAT is why you listen to scientists!

Original sin however was the reason Creator to withdraw part of support for the man
ren&dumber
according you YOUR religion... but there are thousands of religions
and there are PLENTY that are far older than your religion, which means that they are FAR more likely to be more accurate than your beliefs are!
so which religion is the most accurate?
You need to take you unscientific bullshit somewhere else
I TOTALLY AGREE, Vietvet!
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (4) Nov 09, 2014
If people stuck to God's laws and principles would not be required antibiotics and other chemistries that treat one problem while create ten new problems
@dumb&ren'er
people are dying far less frequently today than 100 years ago even!

and here we see the fallacy of religion over science
even WHEN they DID stick to the law, people died of anthrax, the plague (bubonic and pneumonic), and even simple things like pneumonia, broken limbs and common colds which are TREATABLE today
your argument is from blatant stupidity and ignoring reality
When samo scienties exclude the Creator of the equation of life, science and society are doomed to failure
and what makes you think YOUR creator is more important or even more powerful than any OTHER religious "creator"?
so.. to use your own words, you've proven that
your attitude shows that you lack even a tenuous link with science
you have NO IDEA what science is, yet you want to preach about it on a science site?
WTF?
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (5) Nov 09, 2014
A process which can not happen in certain circumstances in one year, will not happen even for one trillion years
dumb&ren-er
you mean like heavier than air flight?
that process didn't happen for THOUSANDS of years, but then suddenly we were able to do it! so that simple thing there totally undermines your stupidity
God is too big and people too small to speak personally with all of them
then your bible lies when it says "all things are possible through God"?
So he has given us the Bible with which he speaks to all who read it
whicxh is full of misinformation, lies and contradictions of itself...
again, you think this is proof of a god?
I do not understand why in such almost scientific site you allow yourself to offend strangers just because they do not share your way of thinking
it is not that you have a different opinion, it is that you have NO PROOF of anything

THIS is a SCIENCE SITE
not a religious one
go promote your pedo-faith elsewhere
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (5) Nov 09, 2014
Life around you if you have not failed to notice is quite colorful. Enjoy that there are other people who do not think like you, because otherwise the world would be quite boring and gray.
dumb&ren-er-er
i relish the fact that not everyone thinks like i do
that is how people leave their paradigm and explore... or, like you, they fearfully cling to old, outdated ideals and then try to force them upon others who don't want them

religion is the dogmatic institution that serves its master (those in charge) in order to cause segregation (by defining what is a good follower and what is not), it causes friction thorugh segregation and forced compliance

this means it is designed to CONTROL others, not to spread love, life or anything else you dream up in your delusion
religion is NO DIFFERENT than politics... it is used to control the weak minded and force you to do what the leaders want you to do

take it elsewhere
this is a SCIENCE site
Torbjorn_Larsson_OM
5 / 5 (4) Nov 09, 2014
Conjecture goes that most of the offspring between man and neanderthal were in fact sterile, and that the two were on the verge of biological compatibility. In fact it may have been only the female hybrids (or a percentage of them) that were not sterile.


Cite? Conjecture by whom?


"Neanderthals were a different species and yet we interbred, just as polar bears and brown bears sometimes do. But matings between different species are notoriously susceptible to fertility problems. There are hints that our trysts suffered the same fate. The evidence lies again with a stretch of modern human DNA that has largely rejected Neanderthal inheritance – the X chromosome. It is, says Reich, a pattern often seen in couplings between not-quite-compatible species, as the X chromosome carries genes that are crucial for sperm fertility. Reich hypothesises that this is why genes from the Neanderthal X were rejected."
Torbjorn_Larsson_OM
5 / 5 (4) Nov 09, 2014
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.6 / 5 (10) Nov 09, 2014
A process which can not happen in certain circumstances in one year, will not happen even for one trillion years
Well then explain 7 year locusts.
Everything that is written in the Bible coincides with historical data
Deaf, dumb, and blind - the preferred religious mindset.

"Tel Aviv University archaeologist Ze'ev Herzog:
"This is what archaeologists have learned from their excavations in the Land of Israel: the Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander in the desert, did not conquer the land in a military campaign and did not pass it on to the 12 tribes of Israel. Perhaps even harder to swallow is that the united monarchy of David and Solomon, which is described by the Bible as a regional power, was at most a small tribal kingdom. And it will come as an unpleasant shock to many that the God of Israel, YHWH, had a female consort and that the early Israelite religion adopted monotheism only in the waning period of the monarchy and not at Mount Sinai"
TheGhostofOtto1923
5 / 5 (9) Nov 09, 2014
Instead of hiding their heads in the sand, archeologists have chosen to dig in it.

"Jewish archaeologists have found no historical or archaeological evidence to back the biblical narrative on the Exodus, the Jews' wandering in Sinai or Joshua's conquest of Canaan. On the alleged Temple of Solomon, Finkelstein said that there is no archaeological evidence to prove it really existed. Professor Yoni Mizrahi, an independent archaeologist ... agreed with Israel Finkelstein.

"Regarding the Exodus... Egyptian archaeologist Zahi Hawass:
"Really, it's a myth... This is my career as an archaeologist. I should tell them the truth. If the people are upset, that is not my problem."

"Falsely attributed writings are often referred to as "pseudepigraphs" but [Bart] Ehrman maintains that the more honest term is "forgery". The book posits that 11 or more books out of the 27 books of the Christian New Testament canon were written as forgeries."
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.6 / 5 (10) Nov 09, 2014
Experts agree, the bible is full of crap.

"BART EHRMAN: I was a born-again Christian in high school and I went off to a fundamentalist Bible college and got interested in teaching the New Testament at the Moody Bible Institute in Chicago. My original plan was to get a Ph.D. in New Testament studies and to teach at a secular university as an evangelical Christian... I went to Princeton Theological Seminary, where the faculty was not evangelical, and I took courses in the New Testament and studied the New Testament in Greek and started finding what my professors had said, that there were discrepancies in the Bible, contradictions. Once you start seeing discrepancies in the Bible, you start seeing lots of them, and that's what I did. So my view of scripture started changing drastically."
http://www.indywe...=1214629

-Some of the most egregious; the last 9 verses of mark and the 'cast the first stone' story.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.6 / 5 (9) Nov 09, 2014
Remember that people really can be very stupid when they are led by a big ego
I think its pretty clear that you are talking about yourself here dude. After all, out of the billions of people on earth, god loves YOU enough to mind everything you do, say, and think.

What stunted, wounded egos wouldnt be overjoyed to hear THAT? And what healthy, mature egos wouldnt resent the thought that some ever-vigilant superbeast is just waiting for them to make a mistake?
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.5 / 5 (8) Nov 09, 2014
Enjoy that there are other people who do not think like you, because otherwise the world would be quite boring and gray
Your fantasies are caustic. They erode peoples trust in themselves, and the genuine desire to examine the world to find out how it works.

And far from being boring and gray, your fantasies have turned much of the world blood red. For how can minorities be bored when they are running for their lives from believers like you who only want to give them the sacred gift of eternal salvation?

Whats that you say? Xians havent done that sort of thing in a century or so (at least not in this part of the world)?

Your book hasnt changed. No one has edited out all the parts which make this sort of horrific behavior mandatory at the proper time, and in the proper place.

And so guaranteed, it will happen again. There is no difference between your religion and the others. They all promise the very same things in return for service and commitment. Ask joseph Kony.
saccoflame
1 / 5 (2) Nov 10, 2014
Those ancient humans who lived through the ice age were frightened about global warming.
saccoflame
1 / 5 (4) Nov 10, 2014
All athiests are like me. We all beleive in death camps.
-Joseph Stalin
EnricM
5 / 5 (1) Nov 10, 2014
if you have the ability to accept [b]knew[/b] information with an open mind.

if you find any contempt when reading this message, we have your answer.


The answer is somewhat unclear I am afraid...
Mike_Massen
4.2 / 5 (5) Nov 10, 2014
saccoflame muttered
All athiests are like me. We all beleive in death camps.
-Joseph Stalin
Evidence please, that Stalin said this & what context was it stated ?

iirc from my history study Stalin never referred to labour camps as "death camps", so it seems your claim of his uttering is only a claim, he never said that ?

Is this a reflection on Hitler who was a devout christian who ordered the bible be taught in schools when he became Chancellor ?

Is this any better than the bible claiming a god killed 50,000 people for looking in a box ?

saccoflame claimed
Those ancient humans who lived through the ice age were frightened about global warming.
Really ? Any evidence at all ?
EnricM
5 / 5 (3) Nov 10, 2014
Xians havent done that sort of thing in a century or so (at least not in this part of the world)?


Oklahoma bombings, Rwanda, recent disturbs in Central Africa...
foolspoo
5 / 5 (1) Nov 10, 2014
Ren, i believe its safe to say english is not your first language. no problem there though, as you are articulating your aptitude very well. you discuss things that you do not understand. you talk of timescales that humans are not able to comprehend. you talk of equipment that is supposed to rival collisions that create more power than our sun will only we able to create for one instant. best of luck in your explorations. i hope you finally begin sooner, than later.
EnricM
5 / 5 (2) Nov 10, 2014
All athiests are like me. We all beleive in death camps.
-Joseph Stalin

What is an "athiest" ??? I can find the verb "beleive" either. Maybe Josef Stalin stole it!! Bad dog, Josef, give these words back, bad dog!!!
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.2 / 5 (5) Nov 10, 2014
Xians havent done that sort of thing in a century or so (at least not in this part of the world)?
Oklahoma bombings, Rwanda, recent disturbs in Central Africa...
Belfast, bosnia, Egyptian copts martyring themselves and their families for nothing...
Poor emotional control
Religionists love to display their stupor as if it's something to admire. They are able to ignore SO MUCH.
The world is as it is
And how is it exactly? Religions all intent in outgrowing and overrunning one another, using their books as justification for persecuting and murdering and martyring.

Anyone who harbors a belief in the supernatural as you do, is complicit in the sorry state that the world is currently in. Why is it only people like me are angry about that?

Your godman threw the money changers out of the temple. He was angry. So are we.

Of course you don't read my posts. Your head is in the sand.

Your God is false because your book is false. FACE IT. Grow up.
foolspoo
5 / 5 (4) Nov 10, 2014
"I do not understand why in such almost scientific site you allow yourself to offend strangers"

Ren, of course you don't. its for the exact same reason you have yet to accept many realities of our universe. honest introspection is the only savior you must seek at this point. your bible has been regurgitated many times from many millenia ago. your king james bible is only 1800 some years old. the evolution of your beliefs can be definitively traced. just thank the jews, or else you would still be touting a legion of gods and not your chosen monotheistic dogmatic idol. an idol that was intelligently designed to be above recourse.
Mike_Massen
3.7 / 5 (3) Nov 11, 2014
@Ren82 & viko_mx

All religions ONLY have a book written by humans with a CLAIM a god told them to do it.

Thats ALL you have !
Thats why you cannot be taken seriously & especially on any Science forum.

No evidence, no chance ever of any proof, the god refuses to talk to anyone EVER.

Those hypnotised by belief make up excuses why their god only spoke to one person.

Ren82 made a BIG claim with
God is too big and people too small to speak personally with all of them.
Where does it say that in ANY religious work anywhere, did u check the book ?

Science is about observation, hypothesis & evidence.

WHERE Ren82 is the EVIDENCE anyone was EVER told by a god to write a book ?
jsdarkdestruction
5 / 5 (1) Nov 11, 2014
All athiests are like me. We all beleive in death camps.
-Joseph Stalin

An appeal to authority featuring joseph stalin? really? you consider him a spokesperson for all atheists? you think he is some kind of authority on atheism? pretty sad when you are so desperate that you need to quote joseph stalin...

Mike_Massen
3 / 5 (2) Nov 11, 2014
Ren82 admitted
Do you think that I can speak on behalf of the Creator?
Well why not, did u ask him/her/it to communicate to you - what did he/she/it say ?

Lots of people make claims they can speak on behalf of a god, some claim god told them to kill people who have Aids, are they right Ren82, how could you tell ?

All gods are silent, they can only communicate from human claims, why is that Ren82 ?

Did you notice Ren82, you have an appendix a vestigial organ, why is that Ren82 ?

No organ anywhere is complete, all are comparatively inefficient.

Obviously organs that don't support the survival of the host don't allow the host to procreate,
its called *LOGIC* Ren82 ?

Did your god ever supply an education, such as Logic, surgery, microbiology, diet advice, how about anything on genetic disorders, eg Wilsons, Menke's so advise how to deal with suffering ?

Why do ALL gods watch over so much suffering, it is as if they WANTED it ?

Can't a god predict ?
Mike_Massen
3 / 5 (2) Nov 11, 2014
Ren82 muttered
This is incredibly complex task that even with modern supercomputers and equipment can not be resolved yet and very likely never will be resolved.
U R not aware computing has only been around ~100years with last 25 in high end processors.

How long is it since its claimed a god made the world, longer or shorter ?

Ren82 you confirm you cannot imagine or predict where computing will be in another 100yrs.

Ren82 claimed
.. emergence of the first living cell by chance step by step, to be sure that it happened with certainty.
You should speak to evolutionary biologists, their detail is beyond the material here & far beyond yours because you have NO education in physics, chemistry, biology & especially probability & statistics, specifically permutations.

It is certaint ALL components for life were present & are still there, evidence shows (from genetic algorithms) all you need is time, environment & selection criteria.

Answer my questions !
Mike_Massen
3.7 / 5 (3) Nov 11, 2014
Ren82 offered
According to scientific speculators, in the hypothetical past there was an atmosphere free of oxygen or with a small percentage of oxygen and some other simple gases.
No. Early speculation supported by Evidence.

Ren82
In addition to these gases there was inorganic substances in the environment and existing physical and chemical laws, and we get everything which had pure chance for the emergence of the first living cell.
No. NOT "pure" chance. Already proved atoms & molecules self assemble according to discoverable rules with Evidence.

Ren82
Under these conditions, I can not understand how life originated.
Quite understandable for those without education of physics, chemistry, biochemistry, mathematics of probability/permutations.

Ren82
I look at the problem from different directions in accordance with the basic sciences and laws of physics and chemistry and still seems to me impossible for this to happen.
Yes, for the uneducated.
foolspoo
5 / 5 (2) Nov 11, 2014
"very likely never will be resolved"

ren82. goodbye

thanks for the -ignore user- feature phys org!
flying_finn
5 / 5 (1) Nov 11, 2014
So the gene pool was refreshed 8000 years ago, to a percentage of humans. Since then it's been inbreeding leading to physical and mental deformities. When did Earthlings peak?

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.