# Lifestyles & Discussion > Science & Technology >  If we're 98+% chimp DNA, then why aren't we 98+% chimp?

## Ronin Truth

If we're 98+% chimp DNA, then why aren't we 98+% chimp?

Inquiring non-chimp minds want to know. 






https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...77.6f_rJzGHRNo

----------


## acptulsa

> If we're 98+% chimp DNA, then why aren't we 98+% chimp?


That is awfully disingenuous of us.  Maybe you should write your congressman and get a law passed.




> Inquiring non-chimp minds want to know.


The grocery store has bananas on sale this morning.  Better hurry.

----------


## Ronin Truth

> That is awfully disingenuous of us. Maybe you should write your congressman and get a law passed.
> 
> 
> 
> The grocery store has bananas on sale this morning. Better hurry.


Chimps are superior, "no government nor church".

----------


## CPUd

LOL go read a book.

----------


## Ronin Truth

> *We're Going Away!*
> *by Butler Shaffer**
> by Butler Shaffer 
> *_Recently by Butler Shaffer: What Is Justice?_
> The late Arthur Koestler was of the view that mankind is an evolutionary mistake doomed to extinction. To have given a killer ape the capacity for intelligence was not, he reasoned, nature's smartest strategy.
> 
> Intelligence has been a factor that has, in many ways, set humanity apart from other species. The stabilizing influence of instinct has kept other life forms within a relatively narrow range of development: the possum, for instance, one of the oldest of animal species, has changed very little over the tens of millions of years of its presence on earth. In contrast, mankind has fundamentally changed itself and the world in what may be the first million years of its infancy.
> 
> But what has been the nature of man's development? How has intelligence informed our behavior? A view of human history  not just from the political perspective upon which historians focus  provides substantial evidence of our using the powers of the mind for both creative and destructive purposes. Sad to say, the use of our intelligence to generate tools and systems that destroy life has been in the ascendancy for well over a century. Why has this been so? Was Koestler right? 
> ...


http://www.lewrockwell.com/shaffer/shaffer194.html

----------


## Ronin Truth

> LOL go read a book.


Thank you for your enlightened and helpful contribution to the thread.

----------


## fisharmor

Watermelons are 93% water.
Clouds are 100% water.

Obviously clouds descended from watermelons.

----------


## acptulsa

> Watermelons are 93% water.
> Clouds are 100% water.
> 
> Obviously clouds *ascended* from watermelons.


FTFY

----------


## Ronin Truth

> Watermelons are 93% water.
> Clouds are 100% water.
> 
> Obviously clouds descended from watermelons.


 Obviously clouds ascended 100% from oceans (or other pools).  Therefore .........

----------


## William Tell

> Watermelons are 93% water.
> Clouds are 100% water.
> 
> Obviously clouds descended from watermelons.


Just look at the name though, watermelon. You have it backwords, watermelons are evolved water. At some point, water will go extinct, and watermelons will dominate. The juice will feed the whole earth!

----------


## erowe1

If you think about it, we're all half-centaur.

----------


## Ronin Truth

> Just look at the name though, watermelon. You have it backwords, watermelons are evolved water. At some point, water will go extinct, and watermelons will dominate. The juice will feed the whole earth!


  Drink Brawndo, it's got electrolytes!

----------


## Ronin Truth

> If you think about it, we're all half-centaur.


 No, just the Sagittarians.

----------


## Ronin Truth

*"The supreme arrogance of religious thinking is that a
carbon-based bag of mostly water on a speck of ironsilicate
dust around a boring dwarf star in a minor
galaxy in an unfashionable suburb of (our) supercluster
would look up at the sky and declare: “It was all made
so that I could exist!” " -- Peter Walker*

----------


## erowe1

> "The supreme arrogance of religious thinking is that a
> carbon-based bag of mostly water on a speck of ironsilicate
> dust around a boring dwarf star in a minor
> galaxy in an unfashionable suburb of (our) supercluster
> would look up at the sky and declare: “It was all made
> so that I could exist!” " -- Peter Walker


And what could be more religious than the thinking expressed in the above quote?

----------


## acptulsa

> And what could be more *arrogant* than the thinking expressed in the above quote?


FTFY

----------


## Ronin Truth

> And what could be more religious than the thinking expressed in the above quote?


Ask a chimp.  Maybe you'll get 98+% of an answer.

----------


## Occam's Banana

> "The supreme arrogance of religious thinking is that a carbon-based bag of mostly water on a speck of ironsilicate dust around a boring dwarf star in a minor galaxy in an unfashionable suburb of (our) supercluster would look up at the sky and declare: It was all made so that I could exist! " -- Peter Walker


I have no idea who Peter Walker is, but he should apologize to Douglas Adams ...

_Far out in the uncharted backwaters of the unfashionable end of the western spiral arm of the Galaxy lies a small unregarded yellow sun. Orbiting this at a distance of roughly ninety-two million miles is an utterly insignificant little blue green planet whose ape-descended life forms are so amazingly primitive that they still think digital watches are a pretty neat idea. - Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy_

----------


## Ronin Truth

> I have no idea who Peter Walker is, but he should apologize to Douglas Adams ...
> 
> _Far out in the uncharted backwaters of the unfashionable end of the western spiral arm of the Galaxy lies a small unregarded yellow sun. Orbiting this at a distance of roughly ninety-two million miles is an utterly insignificant little blue green planet whose ape-descended life forms are so amazingly primitive that they still think digital watches are a pretty neat idea. - Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy_


https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...99.JygfeKDfOI0

----------


## erowe1

> https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...99.JygfeKDfOI0


Did that quote really come from a landscape architect? Or did one of your google search answers make you look silly once again?

----------


## KCIndy

> Clouds are 100% water.


Oh, I must disagree...  A few days ago I had beans for lunch, and the subsequent clouds being produced were closer to hydrochloric acid, according to my dear wife.  Of course, she wasn't a chemistry major, so what the hell does she really know, anyway??

----------


## Ronin Truth

> Did that quote really come from a landscape architect? Or did one of your google search answers make you look silly once again?


Some searches work out better than others.  It's a fun (often amusing) harmless crapshoot for me.

----------


## Ronin Truth

> Oh, I must disagree... A few days ago I had beans for lunch, and the subsequent clouds being produced were closer to hydrochloric acid, according to my dear wife. Of course, she wasn't a chemistry major, so what the hell does she really know, anyway??


Methane? Hydrogen sulfide?

----------


## juleswin

Maybe we had a common ancestor, maybe that's why we both have remnants of a tailbone when both no longer have tails. you have to remove whatever block is preventing you from believing in evolution.

Poured water on my keyboard, makes it hard to type

----------


## Ronin Truth

> Maybe we had a common ancestor, maybe that's why we both have remnants of a tailbone when both no longer have tails. you have to remove whatever block is preventing you from believing in evolution.
> 
> Poured water on my keyboard, makes it hard to type


  My only evolution believing block is reality, reason, logic, intelligence, evidence, etc..

Also there's that pesky fused chromosone phenomena that the primates just don't have.

----------


## juleswin

> My only evolution believing block is reality, reason, logic, intelligence, evidence, etc..
> 
> Also there's that pesky fused chromosone phenomena that the primates just don't have.


I don't think its any of that, I was thinking something do to with religion but then again, I don't know you that well so I better stop trying to speculate what it is. But fused chromosomes? I don't even know what that is. Then again, what the point in bringing it up since we humans are primates, have always been and still are primates.

You need to understand that as humans evolved they just accumulated DNAs for traits they no longer used. There are so many ways your body can turn off a gene. They can remove the promoters around the gene, place it in a kink around a DNA etc etc etc which essentially silences the gene. This is why every once in a while a human being who was designed not to have a tail all of a sudden grows a tail (probably see less of it in the US cos the hospitals promptly remove it so as not to freak creationists out)

----------


## amy31416

Chimps are probably more civilized and empathetic than us, despite their tendency towards violence and occasional desire to rip someone's face off.

----------


## pcosmar

> Maybe we had a common ancestor, maybe that's why we both have remnants of a tailbone when both no longer have tails. you have to remove whatever block is preventing you from believing in evolution.


Or maybe we were all created from the same "dust" of the same planet we live on.
All the similarities are due to simply being carbon based life forms.

----------


## Ronin Truth

> I don't think its any of that, I was thinking something do to with religion but then again, I don't know you that well so I better stop trying to speculate what it is. But fused chromosomes? I don't even know what that is. Then again, what the point in bringing it up since we humans are primates, have always been and still are primates.
> 
> You need to understand that as humans evolved they just accumulated DNAs for traits they no longer used. There are so many ways your body can turn off a gene. They can remove the promoters around the gene, place it in a kink around a DNA etc etc etc which essentially silences the gene. This is why every once in a while a human being who was designed not to have a tail all of a sudden grows a tail (probably see less of it in the US cos the hospitals promptly remove it so as not to freak creationists out)


Speculations are just about 2 cents a truckload.  In the absence of definitive evidence to the contrary, it's wise to go with the self appraisal.

Question:  How come ALL primates have 48 chromosomes but we have only 46?  ANSWER: We're hominids, not primates.

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...28.gfbOYgkzers

----------


## juleswin

> Speculations are just about 2 cents a truckload.  In the absence of definitive evidence to the contrary, it's wise to go with the self appraisal.
> 
> Question:  How come ALL primates have 48 chromosomes but we have only 46?  ANSWER: We're hominids, not primates.
> 
> https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...28.gfbOYgkzers


I dunno which set of classification you are using but under linnaean classification, human beings are primates and its has always been that way. For chromosome fusion, that could just be proof that humans and chimps shared the a common ancestor and that why why the have similar number of chromosomes. Its not like we haven't seen mutations with chromosome sets, down syndrome babies have an extra chromosome and we they weren't created. 

You ask for evidence and I tell you that organisms with DNA experience mutations through out their lives and is passed down to their offspring. This fact is not denied by even the most ardent creationist promoter and mutation sometimes leads to creation of a new trait which some people call adaptation. Also this mutation has never been observed to stop in any organism alive today. Following this premise, what about evolution do you still have a problem with?

----------


## otherone

> Following this premise, what about evolution do you still have a problem with?


I'm guessing this:

_ Genesis 1 New International Version (NIV)
The Beginning

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.

6 And God said, “Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.” 7 So God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the vault “sky.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day.

9 And God said, “Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear.” And it was so. 10 God called the dry ground “land,” and the gathered waters he called “seas.” And God saw that it was good.

11 Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.” And it was so. 12 The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day.

14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.

20 And God said, “Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the vault of the sky.” 21 So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living thing with which the water teems and that moves about in it, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 God blessed them and said, “Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth.” 23 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fifth day.

24 And God said, “Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: the livestock, the creatures that move along the ground, and the wild animals, each according to its kind.” And it was so. 25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.

26 Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals,[a] and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”

27 So God created mankind in his own image,
    in the image of God he created them;
    male and female he created them.

28 God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.”

29 Then God said, “I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. 30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food.” And it was so.

31 God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the sixth day.

_

----------


## jllundqu

> If we're 98+% chimp DNA, then why aren't we 98+% chimp?
> 
> Inquiring non-chimp minds want to know. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...




The human body is 60% water.  Why aren't we 60% swimming pool????

----------


## Ronin Truth

> The human body is 60% water. Why aren't we 60% swimming pool????


  Not enough chlorine.

You may want to consider working just a bit more on the relevance and accuracy of your analogies there.

----------


## Influenza

And humans share 50% of DNA with bananas. Relatively "minute" changes in DNA can apparently lead to drastic changes in phenotype. Perhaps some studying of biology and genetics is in order...

----------


## Ronin Truth

> I dunno which set of classification you are using but under linnaean classification, human beings are primates and its has always been that way. For chromosome fusion, that could just be proof that humans and chimps shared the a common ancestor and that why why the have similar number of chromosomes. Its not like we haven't seen mutations with chromosome sets, down syndrome babies have an extra chromosome and we they weren't created. 
> 
> You ask for evidence and I tell you that organisms with DNA experience mutations through out their lives and is passed down to their offspring. This fact is not denied by even the most ardent creationist promoter and mutation sometimes leads to creation of a new trait which some people call adaptation. Also this mutation has never been observed to stop in any organism alive today. Following this premise, what about evolution do you still have a problem with?






> *Difference between Apes and Hominids*
> 
> There is a great difference between the apes and hominids. Apes can be found in trees and also on the land while hominids are exclusively terrestrial. Apes are not fully bipedal like the hominids. Hominids also have a unique characteristic that shows pair bonding with another member and also having a home base, where apes lack that certain developmental trait. It has been shown that apes are not very good with food sharing, while hominids have been shown to care and share food with other members of the group. This is also a development of social groups. Hominids such as the **** habilis, were discovered with the first making and use of tools and also fire. Apes have not found the ability to make and use tools. Scientific studies also show that the apes have a much smaller brain than the hominids resulting in these vast differences between the two groups.


https://bcrc.bio.umass.edu/courses/f...s-and-hominids




> Why, if species have descended from other species by fine gradations, do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms? But as by this theory innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth?
> 
> Charles Darwin, _Origin of Species,_ p. 172 1st ed.





> "Transformism [evolution] is a fairy tale for adults." Jean Rostand, an athiest French biologist (he was a member of the Academy of Sciences of the French Academy). The precise quotation is as follows: "Transformism is a fairy tale for adults." (Age Nouveau, [a French periodical] February 1959, p. 12).


Etc., etc., etc..

----------


## Ronin Truth

> I'm guessing this:
> 
> _Genesis 1 New International Version (NIV)
> The Beginning
> 
> 1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.
> 
> 3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.
> 
> ...


Keep guessing.

----------


## Ronin Truth

> And humans share 50% of DNA with bananas. Relatively "minute" changes in DNA can apparently lead to drastic changes in phenotype. Perhaps some studying of biology and genetics is in order...



Bring me a fruit based human and we'll talk.

----------


## ctiger2

Evolution is nonsense. No type of being has ever mutated into another type of being ever. Even Darwin realized this. God created everything and there is a spark of God (source) in all living and non-living things in the entire Galaxy(s).

----------


## Ronin Truth

From all of the irrelevant off topic non-answers received, I SWAG the OP question must be tougher than I thought. 

Hmmmmm?

----------


## otherone

The OP assumes we are not 98% chimp when it states we are.

----------


## otherone

> Chimps are probably more civilized and empathetic than us, despite their tendency towards violence and occasional desire to rip someone's face off.




yeah...chimps.

----------


## otherone

> If you think about it, we're all half-centaur.


some more than others.

----------


## Ronin Truth

> The OP assumes we are not 98% chimp when it states we are.


Starts with an "If" ends with a '?', I see the question, but not the statement. <shrug>




> *Chimps vs. Humans: How Are We Different?
> 
> *"Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you."
> 
> That's the longest string of words that Nim Chimpsky, a chimpanzee who scientists raised as a human and taught sign language in the 1970s, ever signed. He was the subject of Project Nim, an experiment conducted by cognitive scientists at Columbia University to investigate whether chimps can learn language.
> 
> After years of exposing Nim to all things human, the researchers concluded that although he did learn to express demands  the desire for an orange, for instance  and knew 125 words, he couldn't fully grasp language, at least as they defined it. Language requires not just vocabulary but also syntax, they argued. "Give orange me," for example, means something different than "give me orange." From a very young age, humans understand that; we have an innate ability to create new meanings by combining and ordering words in diverse ways. Nim had no such capacity, which is presumably true for all chimps.
> 
> Many cognitive scientists believe that humans' ability to innovate by varying syntax engenders much of the richness and complexity of our thoughts and ideas. This gulf between humans and our nearest primate relatives is but one of many.
> ...


http://www.livescience.com/15297-chimps-humans.html

----------


## otherone

> Starts with an "If" ends with a '?', I see the question,* but not the statement*. <shrug>





> If we're 98+% chimp DNA, then *why aren't we* 98+% chimp?


You claim we are not.

----------


## Ronin Truth

> You claim we are not.


  Claims don't start with *'why'* according to my understandings. Whatever.

----------


## Occam's Banana

> Originally Posted by Ronin Truth
> 
> 
> Starts with an "If" ends with a '?', I see the question, but not the statement. <shrug>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...





> Claims don't start with *'why'* according to my understandings. Whatever.


In that case, you have very strange "understandings" ...

"Why do fools fall in love?"  --> claim: fools fall in love
"Why do you beat your wife?" --> claim: you beat your wife
"Why are you such an idiot?" --> claim: you are an idiot
...
"Why aren't we 98+% chimp?" --> claim: we aren't 98+% chimp

----------


## CPUd

https://www.google.com/#q=first+order+logic

----------


## Ronin Truth

> In that case, you have very strange "understandings" ...
> 
> "Why do fools fall in love?" --> claim: fools fall in love
> "Why do you beat your wife?" --> claim: you beat your wife
> "Why are you such an idiot?" --> claim: you are an idiot
> ...
> "Why aren't we 98+% chimp?" --> claim: we aren't 98+% chimp


Then according to you, 'Why' has no meaning and for economy reasons, should just be omitted. 

Sorry, just not buying it.

----------


## Ronin Truth

> https://www.google.com/#q=first+order+logic


First order logic? 

OK, why?  

How about a new thread for that?

----------


## Occam's Banana

> Then according to you, 'Why' has no meaning and for economy reasons, should just be omitted.


Bull$#@!. The "why" prompts for the cause or basis of the included claim - which the mere assertion of the claim would not do.

But the claim is obviously there in both cases.




> Sorry, just not buying it.


*shrug* In that case, you won't mind me asking, "Why are you being so obstinately and willfully stupid?"

----------


## Ronin Truth

> Bull$#@!. The "why" prompts for the cause or basis of the included claim - which the mere assertion of the claim would not do.
> 
> But the claim is obviously there in both cases.
> 
> 
> 
> *shrug* In that case, you won't mind me asking, "Why are you being so obstinately and willfully stupid?"


  Why not?

----------


## Occam's Banana

> Why not?


Why not _what_?

----------


## otherone

> Why not _what_?


"why not waste everyone's time by being so obstinately and willfully stupid"

----------


## Ronin Truth

> Why not _what_?


Isn't that the same as "not _what?"?

_

----------


## Ronin Truth

> "why not waste everyone's time by being so obstinately and willfully stupid"


Is that a question or a claim?

----------


## jmdrake

> Just look at the name though, watermelon. You have it backwords, watermelons are evolved water. At some point, water will go extinct, and watermelons will dominate. The juice will feed the whole earth!


Not watermelon juice.  Brawndo!

----------


## otherone

> Is that a question or a claim?


dunno. That's up to you.

----------


## Ronin Truth

> dunno. That's up to you.



OK, without proper beginning capitalization and final punctuation, I dub it merely chimp type.

----------


## otherone

> OK, without proper beginning capitalization and final punctuation, I dub it merely chimp type.


You haven't established that we are not 98+% chimp, yet you positively maintain what comprises "chimp type"?

----------


## Occam's Banana

> Isn't that the same as "not _what?"?_


Only to fatuous jackasses.




> Is that a question or a claim?


Yes.

----------


## Ronin Truth

> You haven't established that we are not 98+% chimp, yet you positively maintain what comprises "chimp type"?


No, it was just a SWAG,  2nd choice is government schooling graduate.

----------


## Ronin Truth

> Only to fatuous jackasses.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes.





> "Why do fools fall in love?" --> claim: fools fall in love
> "Why do you beat your wife?" --> claim: you beat your wife
> "Why are you such an idiot?" --> claim: you are an idiot
> ...
> "Why aren't we 98+% chimp?" --> claim: we aren't 98+% chimp


Yes, we have no bananas, only fatuous jackasses.

----------


## otherone

> No, it was just a SWAG,  2nd choice is _government schooling graduate._


It's ironic that someone who claims to be superior to chimps is the first to start flinging dung.

----------


## Ronin Truth

> It's ironic that someone who claims to be superior to chimps is the first to start flinging dung.


Post #3




> Chimps are superior, "no government nor church".


Post #53 (aerial fecal matter, your's)




> "why not waste everyone's time by being so obstinately and willfully stupid"

----------


## dannno

We are at least 98% chimp, at least compared to say a grain of salt.

----------


## Ronin Truth

> We are at least 98% chimp, at least compared to say a grain of salt.


Yep, comparing life to non-life closes up a lot of differences.

----------


## Occam's Banana

> Yes, we have no bananas, only fatuous jackasses.


https://www.google.com/search?q=blarg+blarg+blarg

----------


## CPUd



----------


## Ronin Truth

> https://www.google.com/search?q=blarg+blarg+blarg



Oh no, not the dreaded triple blarg Google link bomb.

----------


## Influenza

> Then according to you, 'Why' has no meaning and for economy reasons, should just be omitted. 
> 
> Sorry, just not buying it.



So unwittingly obtuse...

----------


## Ronin Truth

> So unwittingly obtuse...


https://www.google.com/search?q=blarg+blarg+blarg

----------

