currently about 97% of the human genome as been described as junk DNA - that is it doesn't code for anything. Maybe it will code for something in the future or a now defunct attribute from our past.
I cant see why it matters if there has been these genetically identical people or not - can some one explain the point in cold hard logic
But that doesn't cover it. For instance, identical twins tend to have the same thoughts and feelings, so why don't we all have the same thoughts and feelings? For instance, for any given situation human cogniscense should dictate that the same answer would be derived by every person on every occasion, but it's plainly not so.Which means that environment plays a part - and that environment includes religion. You are therefore assuming that science has shaped religion, which means that in order for science to be right, religion must be right in which case most of you here are wrong.There are no stupid questions, only stupid answers.
Which is a flaw of science. There is no reason at all under a scientific basis that two people couldn't be exactly alike. Science has proven through cloning that it's possible, therefore it should be able to occur in the wild. Theoretically every child that is born to the same parents should be identical as they have the same genetic makeup. They aren't which means that there must be something else (apart from pure science) that determines who we are.
But this is already occuring in nature AND in man-made conditions. Therefore it should be possible to introduce the same genetic material (from a man and a woman) and turn out an identical result. But it doesn't - why not?
currently about 97% of the human genome as been described as junk DNA - that is it doesn't code for anything. Maybe it will code for something in the future or a now defunct attribute from our past.considering that such a large portion of our own DNA codes for nothing it is foolish of you to think that all those possible combinations, and you are assuming that they will combine, will combine AND then code for the production of proteins. what we do know now is that the vast majority of genes are coded for exactly the same thing, google RNA cordon table if you don't believe me. Also futher I recommend you check out watson crick pairing, just because that is the possible number that will occur does not mean it will.you clearly don't have a good grounding man, it is way more advance that total number of combinations. And I can't really be fucked getting into it. The very fact that the human genome is 3 billion base pairs long and ONLY codes for 20,000-25,000 genes gives you a idea of how naive you are being.
Your theory is way flawed. Firstly, humans (homo sapiens sapiens) have only been around for about 120000 years, not half a million. But even then, i would say that what we generally know as "human" have only been around for 10000 years or so, which reduces the number significantly.Then you have to take into account mortality rates, where in earlier times probably only 1 in 5 managed to procreate themselves. Taking all that into account, i'm happy 10 billion. It might be a shade light, but it works for what we're trying to accomplish.
dude, i already explained - sure in theory it code all code for something magic and new, but considering that 97% of our own DNA doesn't code for anything that is likely. also certain base pairs are much much more likely than others...
On another note: Science is all about naieveity. A photon is intelligent. Dark matter knows only Gravity. Cats always land on their feet
maybe the eygptians where right - cats are god....
well - there is no proof that cats didn't create the universe - it makes you think
pretty stupid mice ,to make a universe with cats in it. then again, explain dogs if cats created the universe.
yes your school teacher was not interested in learning the truth of the world they were wrong but didn't get that from the bible.i belive dinosaurs were on the ark.
Dutchman's Noah's Ark opens doors The ark is nearly three storeys highA half-sized replica of the biblical Noah's Ark has been built by a Dutch man, complete with model animals. Dutch creationist Johan Huibers built the ark as testament to his literal belief in the Bible. The ark, in the town of Schagen, is 150 cubits long - half the length of Noah's - and three storeys high. A cubit was about 45cm (18in) long. The ark opened its doors on Saturday, after almost two years' construction, most of it by Mr Huiber himself.
Many civilisations have a "Great Flood" myth as part of thier history, it's just another case of the Bible\Christians co-opting stories from elswhere to perpetuate thier own beliefs\ideaologies.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deluge_(mythology)
Q: What is a gentleman?A: A man who can play the accordion, but doesn\'t.
The longest wooden ships we have today are no-longer than 340 feet(sorry, I cant find metric measurements), reinforced with iron straps and leak like all buggery and require constant pumping to remove the water.Noahs ark is 450 feet. And has eight people on it. Eight people have to pump out the water by hand.
wouldnt it have been coated with tar to seal the joints?
woods flexible, oceans aren't calm, sealed joints crack/split.
Yes and I think Private has missed the point....Right now, in the Twenty-First century, there is no way to make a boat that big out of the materials we have(steel reinforced wood) that would create a boat that wouldnt require modern technology or a HUGE amount of human effort to keep afloat.Originally that noob Dutchman wanted to set his Ark afloat but that might be out of the question now
But if the ark was sealed with jesus's love it could float
Cobra is obviously being sarcastic, but to any person who believes the story as it appears in the bible, the power of God overrules any technical shortcomings.
