Where is evidence & what is name & what kind of creature is Human/Ape Common Ancestor? Facts only, no guesses.?

Until the 1980s most evidence for human evolution came from fossils. The fossil record of human evolution is incomplete. No working anthropologist ever argued otherwise. Fossils are chance discoveries. Sometimes chance is reduced by informed guesses about were to look; but until we've excavated every square metre of the planet, there's necessarily a random aspect to the fossil record.

Even with this incomplete collection of fossils, a broad outline of human evolution has emerged, accepted by most anthropologists. Within this consensus there is much variation and debate - it is not fixed dogma. Many competing theories of human evolution based on this evidence continue to be investigated.

Since the 1980s DNA analysis has opened up new vistas for evolutionary research. The fossil record is incomplete, but the genetic record is not: we carry a complete history of our evolution in every cell of our body. Genetic analysis has improved greatly over the last 25 years. The accuracy and validity of these techniques are verified by their use in fields other than evolutionary studies. The same methods of DNA analysis are used in medical research, pharmaceuticals, agricultural science, bioinformatics and computer science; where the outcomes are purely pragmatic, and cannot tolerate ideological bias to support pet theories about evolution. We will undoubtedly improve the accuracy of DNA analysis in future. Already, we have discovered and confirmed more in the last 25 years than in the previous 150 years.

The results of genetic analysis have confirmed the broad outline of the human evolutionary tree created from the fossil record. Many ideas have been overturned or corrected, so it is not a blanket endorsement. Yet the broad outline has remained largely intact.

To see facts about the shared common descent of humans with other apes, read the first 3 articles listed below. These are the original scientific reports published in 'Nature', the oldest, most famous, and one of the most respected scientific journals in the world.

If there is evidence which has been overlooked in the consensus narrative of human evolution, tell us what that evidence is. That evidence should be more compelling than badly-translated Babylonian religious texts, or a the 900 year old skull of a deformed Peruvian child :-) Those don't prove anything about human evolution.

Regards,

EDIT: Evidence - facts - here

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v437/n7055/fu...

EDIT 2: The main thrust of the article is expressed in the first paragraph:

"Here we present a draft genome sequence of the common chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes). Through comparison with the human genome, we have generated a largely complete catalogue of the genetic differences that have accumulated since the human and chimpanzee species diverged from our common ancestor, constituting approximately thirty-five million single-nucleotide changes, five million insertion/deletion events, and various chromosomal rearrangements. We use this catalogue to explore the magnitude and regional variation of mutational forces shaping these two genomes, and the strength of positive and negative selection acting on their genes. In particular, we find that the patterns of evolution in human and chimpanzee protein-coding genes are highly correlated and dominated by the fixation of neutral and slightly deleterious alleles. We also use the chimpanzee genome as an outgroup to investigate human population genetics and identify signatures of selective sweeps in recent human evolution."

EDIT 3: Geez, I dunno. There's no 'flannel' there, it's all hard scientific reporting. Maybe you're imposing very specific evidenciary requirements knowing they'll be impossible to meet, and you can thus claim 'victory' over the evolutionists.

It boils down to this: Genetically humans and chimpanzees are very similar. This closeness reflects their shared descent from a common ancestor, 6-8 million years ago. The evidence to support this claim is in the articles cited. This evidence involves several related facts and findings, and can't be expressed in a few words. The putative common ancestor is often labelled Pan prior. Pan prior is not attested in the fossil record. However we infer it existed, from the genetic evidence. The genetic evidence is based on solid peer-reviewed and published science, using techniques verified in non-evolutionary work. Fossils of several close matches to Pan prior have been found, dating from slightly before or after the common ancestor eg Ardipithecus ramidus.

if that doesn't fit the bill, I regret to say you're being wilfully obdurate: rejecting all the evidence not because it is wrong, but because one fragment isn't in the form you like.

.

Sigh. Based on your track record here, you'll never find any evidence acceptable. Why not subject your beliefs to the same level of proof?

Let's start with evolution. It's a fact. Unless you want to believe that flu vaccine from 10 years ago will confirm the same protect as this years vaccines. The flu strains evolve and we continually need to develop new vaccines to keep pace. The same is true with the 'super-bugs" Penicillin once was a wonder drug that killed almost all disease causing organisms. However survivors cause the next generation to have more resistance and the wide spread use of antibiotics, and such things as antibiotic soaps cause numerous organisms to become even more resistant. Today it's a race to develop new drugs to resist disease.

The Nation Center for Science Education lists 10 major court cases where the verdict was that evolution exists.

There's also the Explanation of Evolution. You'd call it "theory." It's taking the known facts and building an explanation for them. As the Explanation of Evolution has stood 150 years of attacks and examination it's well established.

However, can it point to a body and say "that's the fist Homo Sapien Sapiens" Nope.That's where the creations clap their hands and dance for joy. When have such remains and unlike a well disproved chain post there are much more then 'a few bones." There are some 21 known species in the human lineage. That's evolution.

With the election season on us we see many attack ads. Words taken out of context, smears and outright lies. All intended to tear someone down. Just how does this make the "opponent" better?" The attack ads don't address issue, just try to make the voter doubt the opponent.

How is the cam pain for a national holiday on October 23rd doing? After all that's the exact day of creation. At leases according to Archbishop Ussher. and his study of the Bible.

How are the archeological "studies" of Ron Wyatt doing? To quote from a creationist site

Ron Wyatt has claimed, among other things, to have discovered the following:

• The Ark of the Covenant.

• Chariot wheels and other relics from Pharaoh’s drowned army at the bottom of the Red Sea.

• The real Sodom and Gomorrah, with building outlines still standing as piles of sulfur-fried ash.

• Noah’s Ark.

• The real Mt Sinai.15

• The rock at Horeb.

• The true site of Korah’s earthquake.

• Noah’s house, and the graves of Mr and Mrs Noah, together with millions worth of her jewelry (allegedly then stolen from Wyatt).

• The real site of the crucifixion, apparently above the cave containing the Ark of the Covenant, so that Christ’s blood would drip on to the Mercy Seat.

• An actual sample of Christ’s blood, with chromosomes allegedly still visible under the microscope, showing that there was no human father. Placed in growth medium, the cells began dividing, says Ron.

• The tablets of the Ten Commandments, bound by golden hinges.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/cm/v21/n2...

Sadly the same site prove that Wyatt is a fraud.

Where is the lake that when it drained formed the Grand Canyon in 3 months? Geographical location, amount of water and the delta formed by removal of all the sentiment.

No doubt you've never been on a dig. It's amazing what it takes to find a fossil. First death and burial have to be fast. Otherwise the scavengers destroy the body, Then the sentiment that covers the body must be the type the preserves the remains. The hard part is finding the fossil in the short time that it's exposed and eroded away.The famous T-Rex "Sue" was found only by a bored paleontologist killing time.Otherwise this 40 foot long, 13 foot high fossil would have been quickly lost.We know many human remains have been lost by erosion. More have just become dust.

As your so good about post 'additional details, please explain about the Grand Canyon. Better Wyatt s chariot wheels (3 spokes of 4?)

Maybe we should be asking "where is evidence for Truthseeker's faith in little green men zapping the DNA of ancient Sumerians with laser guns?". I have in the past countered your arguments with evidence after evidence, but you are not interested.. When in a corner, you simply berate and insult other YA! users like a playground bully.

I can't be asked anymore. What's the point. You have a fundamentalist belief and no-one could ever persuade you otherwise with evidence, experimentation, reason, or observation.

EDIT

Sorry Jack, can't yet come up with a complete skeleton of a representative member of the prehistoric population that diverged around seven million years ago, not complete with DNA, and a tag hanging from it's collar stating "it was me!" complete with an affidavit and a comprehensive family tree guaranteed by Burkes. I know that you believe that it couldn't exist if we haven't found at least one fossil, despite the rarity of fossils in that environment. Although fossils are turning up that 'could' represent that population, there is no other way that we can say irrefutably that any of them ARE representative of our lineage just prior to that particular divergence. How could we?

Instead I'm just linking to an image of some of the hominid fossil record. Look at it and think. Really think. If you can accept that aliens have been coming to earth and interfering with the DNA of every living creature on this planet for billions of years ... then maybe, just maybe, this image might mean something? Maybe this is one image provides much more evidence of human transitional evolution, than your Sumerian scripts?

EDIT II. This is an example of evidence - evidence of your appalling attitude towards others in this community:

"I don't normally respond to childish, moronic ignoramuses"

"you silly, insignificant little idiot!"

An example of the playground bully that throws his teddy out of the pram, berating and insulting others everytime that he is cornered with reason.

EDIT III - add "gormless prat" to the above evidence of your behaviour towards other contributors.

If you would bother to read this Wiki article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimpanzee-human_last...

You would see that quite correctly, there is no specific fossil we can point to, although there are several candidates. These are derived strictly from morphology, as no DNA exists from specimins some 7 million years old.

If you were to do some reading in the actual science, instead of Creationist pamphlets, you'd realize that there is not going to be "irrefutable proof" that one particular fossil specimen is going to be shown to be the common ancestor for both contemporary great apes and contemporary humans.

Again, we're talking about 7 million years. Fossilization is a remarkably rare process, and animals of this type are much less likely to leave fossils behind than are many others. It's entirely possible that there are no discoverable fossils of the earliest ancestral forms.

However, we can come very close... The article lists three distinct species that if not the actual common ancestor would be very, very closely related.

Since the users above provided you with the necessary information, I want to ask you this...

"Believe that evidence we have points to the strong possibility of Super advanced & ancient extraterrestrial involvement in our origin." (taken straight from your activity page)

Where is the evidence to suggest that this is a "strong possibility"; is it simply because you reject evolution as a plausible theory to explain the diversity of organisms on this planet, so you must resort to a fringe theory such as extraterrestrial involvement?

You're using YahooAnswers! as a medium to perpetuate your nonsense. Why not publish something, since you've been studying human origins for over FIFTY YEARS (emphasis).

Can you at least answer these two questions? (And try to hold back on the ad hominem this time)

Yeah, really. Your pointless fanatical trolling is getting really tedious. You aren't "seeking truth" and never have been. You have a brainwashed religious agenda that you are intent on propping up by lamely trying to undermine well-established scientific determinations that the overwhelming majority of intelligent, educated and open-minded humans on the planet accept as valid.

Your uneducated nit-picking proves nothing except that you are uninformed, tiresome and naive. Go find something useful to do with your life, OK?

FELLOW ANTHROPOLIGISTS AND EDUCATED RESPONDENTS: Perhaps if we just ignore these persistent fanatical gadflies with their crackpot agendas they will go away. You (and I) are casting pearls before swine with this nimrod and his kin.