Human Chimp-Pig Hybrid Theory
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
30-07-2013, 06:58 AM
RE: Human Chimp-Pig Hybrid Theory
(30-07-2013 06:55 AM)Chas Wrote:  I have a decent understanding of hybridization.

What is not present here is any convincing evidence of this hybridization or any credible mechanism for it.

The descriptions of similarities read like any crackpot justification, just enough truth to sound plausible.
What happens in the DNA of hybrids is well established... Especially after several generations of back crossing.

For the present, I ask the reader to reserve judgment concerning the plausibility of such a cross. I'm an expert on hybrids and I can assure you that our understanding of hybridization at the molecular level is still far too vague to rule out the idea of a chimpanzee crossing with a nonprimate. Anyone who speaks with certainty on this point speaks from prejudice, not knowledge. No systematic attempts to cross distantly related mammals have been reported. However, in the only animal class (Pisces) where distant crosses have been investigated scientifically, the results have been surprisingly successful (399.6, 399.7, 399.8). In fact, there seems to be absolutely nothing to support the idea that interordinal crosses (such as a cross between a primate and a nonprimate) are impossible, except what Thomas Huxley termed "the general and natural belief that deliberate and reiterated assertions must have some foundation."

“Forget Jesus, the stars died so you could be born.” - Lawrence M. Krauss
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-07-2013, 07:02 AM
RE: Human Chimp-Pig Hybrid Theory
(30-07-2013 06:58 AM)DeepThought Wrote:  
(30-07-2013 06:55 AM)Chas Wrote:  I have a decent understanding of hybridization.

What is not present here is any convincing evidence of this hybridization or any credible mechanism for it.

The descriptions of similarities read like any crackpot justification, just enough truth to sound plausible.
What happens in the DNA of hybrids is well established... Especially after several generations of back crossing.

For the present, I ask the reader to reserve judgment concerning the plausibility of such a cross. I'm an expert on hybrids and I can assure you that our understanding of hybridization at the molecular level is still far too vague to rule out the idea of a chimpanzee crossing with a nonprimate. Anyone who speaks with certainty on this point speaks from prejudice, not knowledge. No systematic attempts to cross distantly related mammals have been reported. However, in the only animal class (Pisces) where distant crosses have been investigated scientifically, the results have been surprisingly successful (399.6, 399.7, 399.8). In fact, there seems to be absolutely nothing to support the idea that interordinal crosses (such as a cross between a primate and a nonprimate) are impossible, except what Thomas Huxley termed "the general and natural belief that deliberate and reiterated assertions must have some foundation."

No, I speak with the voice of skepticism. There is insufficient evidence either from DNA or a credible mechanism.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-07-2013, 07:04 AM
RE: Human Chimp-Pig Hybrid Theory
The anatomical evidence provided is pretty compelling to me. If it was just one or 2 things I could dismiss it easily.

This is a large set of traits that are missing in our closest ancestors, non-human primates, but they exist in pigs.

Even the structure of our internal organs resemble a pig. Pigs are used as a practice animal for graduate surgeons before they start operating on humans.

In the military they shoot pigs and have the field medics practice by saving the pig.

He has provided allot of evidence. You just refuse to read it.

“Forget Jesus, the stars died so you could be born.” - Lawrence M. Krauss
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-07-2013, 07:10 AM
RE: Human Chimp-Pig Hybrid Theory
(30-07-2013 07:04 AM)DeepThought Wrote:  The anatomical evidence provided is pretty compelling to me. If it was just one or 2 things I could dismiss it easily.

This is a large set of traits that are missing in our closest ancestors, non-human primates, but they exist in pigs.

Even the structure of our internal organs resemble a pig. Pigs are used as a practice animal for graduate surgeons before they start operating on humans.

In the military they shoot pigs and have the field medics practice by saving the pig.

He has provided allot of evidence. You just refuse to read it.

Thank you for your continuing ad hominem attack.

I read it. I remain unconvinced. Ever hear of convergent evolution?

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-07-2013, 07:16 AM
RE: Human Chimp-Pig Hybrid Theory
(30-07-2013 07:10 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(30-07-2013 07:04 AM)DeepThought Wrote:  The anatomical evidence provided is pretty compelling to me. If it was just one or 2 things I could dismiss it easily.

This is a large set of traits that are missing in our closest ancestors, non-human primates, but they exist in pigs.

Even the structure of our internal organs resemble a pig. Pigs are used as a practice animal for graduate surgeons before they start operating on humans.

In the military they shoot pigs and have the field medics practice by saving the pig.

He has provided allot of evidence. You just refuse to read it.

Thank you for your continuing ad hominem attack.

I read it. I remain unconvinced. Ever hear of convergent evolution?

Convergent evolution of traits that have no known function? How many of these "convergent" traits does it take before that becomes absurd?

Now I'm still wondering if you actually read it. There is more too... if you read source article I linked. The structure of our spine also. Parts of our spine more closely resemble pig than primate.

ad hominem?

“Forget Jesus, the stars died so you could be born.” - Lawrence M. Krauss
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-07-2013, 07:25 AM
RE: Human Chimp-Pig Hybrid Theory
(30-07-2013 07:16 AM)DeepThought Wrote:  ad hominem?

DeepThought Wrote:Read the source article. What happens in the DNA of hybrids is well established... Especially after several generations of back crossing. Stop being intellectually lazy.
DeepThought Wrote:Anyone who speaks with certainty on this point speaks from prejudice, not knowledge.
DeepThought Wrote:You just refuse to read it.
DeepThought Wrote:Now I'm still wondering if you actually read it.

Yeah, ad hominem.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
30-07-2013, 07:36 AM
RE: Human Chimp-Pig Hybrid Theory
There are a number of interesting hypotheses about our origins. I would rank this one as significantly less plausible than the aquatic ape hypothesis, if only because of the extreme non-sterile hybrids that would be required. That is to say, the fact this this hypothesis explains known facts is in no way sufficient to justify its acceptance. It must make specific surprising predictions that would allow us to verify it.

It's an interesting idea, but I wonder if there isn't a bit of unreasonable human-centrism going on here. Why are we so special? Why are we so different? Are they really questions we are justified in making asking? Perhaps we need to focus more on "Are we so special? Are we so different?" before latching on too hard to specific proposed explanations. Ordinary genetic drift is a reasonable default hypothesis for all human traits that are not being obviously selected for. Any other hypothesis must earn its place, not by explaining what is known but by predicting what is unknown and having those predictions verified.

Give me your argument in the form of a published paper, and then we can start to talk.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Hafnof's post
30-07-2013, 07:40 AM
RE: Human Chimp-Pig Hybrid Theory
(30-07-2013 07:25 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(30-07-2013 07:16 AM)DeepThought Wrote:  ad hominem?

DeepThought Wrote:Read the source article. What happens in the DNA of hybrids is well established... Especially after several generations of back crossing. Stop being intellectually lazy.
DeepThought Wrote:Anyone who speaks with certainty on this point speaks from prejudice, not knowledge.
DeepThought Wrote:You just refuse to read it.
DeepThought Wrote:Now I'm still wondering if you actually read it.

Yeah, ad hominem.

What happens in the DNA of hybrids is well established... Especially after several generations of back crossing. It will get masked by the chimp DNA.

After a while when you keep asking for DNA evidence it just gets annoying to have to repeat the same things again.

And asking someone to read something is a pretty reasonable request isn't it? It's not like Idiot! Dickhead! Gramps pants! etc...

Not enough is known about hybridization to rule out this hypothesis. You can be skeptical but you can't disprove it without countering the evidence provided.

Quote:Anyone who speaks with certainty on this point speaks from prejudice, not knowledge. No systematic attempts to cross distantly related mammals have been reported. However, in the only animal class (Pisces) where distant crosses have been investigated scientifically, the results have been surprisingly successful (399.6, 399.7, 399.8). In fact, there seems to be absolutely nothing to support the idea that interordinal crosses (such as a cross between a primate and a nonprimate) are impossible, except what Thomas Huxley termed "the general and natural belief that deliberate and reiterated assertions must have some foundation."

Science is about exploring questions with an open mind. If we dismiss everything like that science wouldn't get us anywhere.

“Forget Jesus, the stars died so you could be born.” - Lawrence M. Krauss
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-07-2013, 07:51 AM (This post was last modified: 30-07-2013 07:57 AM by DeepThought.)
RE: Human Chimp-Pig Hybrid Theory
(30-07-2013 07:36 AM)Hafnof Wrote:  Any other hypothesis must earn its place, not by explaining what is known but by predicting what is unknown and having those predictions verified.

I'm gonna start bonobo-pig and chimp-pig orgy experimentation right away...

I heard those bonobo's are horny bastards... They will fuck anything that moves.

Sounds familiar. Consider


Allot of people assume hybrids are sterile, the males usually are, but females can quite often be fertile. The mule is a fairly unique case as far as hybrids go.
When you back cross you can stabilize the hybrid such that their males become fertile again and the hybrid becomes self sustaining..

“Forget Jesus, the stars died so you could be born.” - Lawrence M. Krauss
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-07-2013, 08:10 AM
RE: Human Chimp-Pig Hybrid Theory
(30-07-2013 07:40 AM)DeepThought Wrote:  Not enough is known about hybridization to rule out this hypothesis. You can be skeptical but you can't disprove it without countering the evidence provided.

All known cases of hybridization occur between extremely closely related individuals. Humans and pigs descend from lineages whose last common ancestor was during the Cretaceous.

The pigs which coexisted with our ancestors in East Africa were not the ancestors of modern 'pig' pigs (genus Sus), but bushpigs and warthogs. I don't know off the top of my head but I doubt all of the very specific morphological similarities in question are found in those different species.

There is no genetic evidence mentioned here.

No human/non-human sexual encounter has ever resulted in offspring (and that's not even a small dataset to consider).

(30-07-2013 07:40 AM)DeepThought Wrote:  Science is about exploring questions with an open mind. If we dismiss everything like that science wouldn't get us anywhere.

How about this, then?

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like cjlr's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: