|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
jaganath69
Joined: 17 Jul 2003
|
 Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2006 4:17 am Post subject: |
 |
|
I wouldn't eat a chimp. Long pig on the other hand, that would be interesting.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
jaganath69
Joined: 17 Jul 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2006 4:23 am Post subject: Re: Would you eat a chimpanzee? |
|
|
You've peaked my curiosity here, J. You often speak of Islam as a cruel, barbaric and atavistic faith hell bent on world domination, however you gladly use a source from a leading Islamic creationist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adnan_Oktar
Try the link above, there is also the question of this guy possibly being a holocaust denier.
Bang, gotcha again. Just because its on the intermanet thingy, don't make it true.
| Junior wrote: |
| madowlspeaks wrote: |
| Chimpanzees have DNA that is 99.7% comparable to a humans DNA. Because of this FACT. |
hate to blow you out the water there mad owl, but:
THE "99 %" MYTH IS DEAD
Biologists have long held that the genes of chimps and humans are about 98.5 percent identical. But a biologist at the California Institute of Technology, said in a study published this week that a new way of comparing the genes shows that the human and chimp genetic similarity is only about 95 percent.
http://www.darwinism-watch.com/99_myth_is_dead.php
and I've personally eaten plenty of these:-
So i'd have no probs with a chimp. I wouldn't however, because they're endangered. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Junior
Joined: 18 Nov 2005
Location: the eye
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2006 5:06 am Post subject: Re: Would you eat a chimpanzee? |
|
|
[quote="jaganath69"]
| Quote: |
| You've peaked my curiosity here, J. You often speak of Islam as a cruel, barbaric and atavistic faith hell bent on world domination, however you gladly use a source from a leading Islamic creationist. |
Even devils tell some truth, dear boy. he was quoting from new scientist.
Human-chimp DNA difference trebled
NewScientist.com news service
Andy Coghlan
We are more unique than previously thought, according to new comparisons of human and chimpanzee DNA.
It has long been held that we share 98.5 per cent of our genetic material with our closest relatives. That now appears to be wrong. In fact, we share less than 95 per cent of our genetic material, a three-fold increase in the variation between us and chimps.
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2833
So, New scientist has now fallen below your appraisal of what is credible?i guess harvard is probably a backstreet ameteur source to you as well.
Must I really make a monkey out of you again?  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ChopChaeJoe
Joined: 05 Mar 2006
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2006 5:48 am Post subject: Re: Would you eat a chimpanzee? |
|
|
| madowlspeaks wrote: |
| Chimpanzees have DNA that is 99.7% comparable to a humans DNA. Because of this FACT, some people argue that humans too can be classified as animals. Those who say that humans are not, in fact, animals and who choose to eat meat, would then have to philosophically support the moral cause of eating a chimpanzee. |
Is that a fact? comparable is sort of an opinion word isn't it? And a more intersting moral cause is eating humans. Every damn day, in just about everycity, a perfectly good piece of meat is put in the ground. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jaganath69
Joined: 17 Jul 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2006 5:53 am Post subject: Re: Would you eat a chimpanzee? |
|
|
[quote="Junior"]
| jaganath69 wrote: |
| Quote: |
| You've peaked my curiosity here, J. You often speak of Islam as a cruel, barbaric and atavistic faith hell bent on world domination, however you gladly use a source from a leading Islamic creationist. |
Even devils tell some truth, dear boy. he was quoting from new scientist.
Human-chimp DNA difference trebled
NewScientist.com news service
Andy Coghlan
We are more unique than previously thought, according to new comparisons of human and chimpanzee DNA.
It has long been held that we share 98.5 per cent of our genetic material with our closest relatives. That now appears to be wrong. In fact, we share less than 95 per cent of our genetic material, a three-fold increase in the variation between us and chimps.
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2833
So, New scientist has now fallen below your appraisal of what is credible?i guess harvard is probably a backstreet ameteur source to you as well.
Must I really make a monkey out of you again? |
No, but its interesting that once again you go to a source whose whole raison d'etre is easily called into question. Why not just take the quote from the original? Seems your aversion to peer-reviewed academic material and serious journalism persists. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Antrugha
Joined: 05 Jan 2006
Location: On a 2-wheeled engine
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2006 6:16 am Post subject: Re: Would you eat a chimpanzee? |
|
|
| ChopChaeJoe wrote: |
| madowlspeaks wrote: |
| Chimpanzees have DNA that is 99.7% comparable to a humans DNA. Because of this FACT, some people argue that humans too can be classified as animals. Those who say that humans are not, in fact, animals and who choose to eat meat, would then have to philosophically support the moral cause of eating a chimpanzee. |
Is that a fact? comparable is sort of an opinion word isn't it? And a more intersting moral cause is eating humans. Every damn day, in just about everycity, a perfectly good piece of meat is put in the ground. |
I usually stay away from these discussions, but having done my undergraduate project on protein sequence comparisons based and having done numerous molecular biology courses, I thought I would add a little to this. Firstly, the fact is, humans are animals. By the very definition of animals, we fall into this category, we are living, breathing, self-motivated automatons with similar primal interests as, say, a dog. We need to eat, drink (water that is) and have sex. As for the DNA argument, you may be surprised to know that we, in fact, have a relatively high percentage of similar DNA with almost every species of life on the planet. This is the main argument for evolutionary genetics because of the redundancy inherent in DNA. So, the fact that we are so close to monkeys has little to do with whether we can justify eating them. What you really have to look at is the gene pool of the monkeys vs. that of the humans.
Now, as you may know, the mapping of human DNA was completed in the year 2003; however, this didn't result in the breakthrough scientists were hoping for mainly because we just have no idea how the genes in our DNA work, or, how they interact with each other to create the living person within us. We're getting closer and closer every day with technologies such as microarrays (a huge chunk of my major involved image processing and quantification of said microarrays), but we're a good ways off. So, in conclusion, it's inherently flawed to look at the similarity of DNA between us and the monkey because that 0.3% is mostly made up of the difference in genes which ultimately separate our species, and most of that 99% of DNA is redundant, noncoding (or junk as some scientists call it) archaic DNA from billions of years of evolution. Now, this isn't meant to be taken completely factual, but from the way we understand it now, this is how it looks. I would really be interested to see similarity of gene products instead, but we don't have a complete human genome, nor do we for the monkey, so until then, we'll be left with pointless arguments such as these.
Oh, and furthermore, 0.3% of the 3 billions base pairs that make up our DNA is a difference of about 90000000. Now, it's likely that a lot of that difference arises from genetic mutation, but regardless, it's not an insignificant amount.
Just a breakdown of how DNA works for those interested. DNA is mainly made up of non-coding regions, some of which have effects on downstream coding regions, but most of which does not. This is called junk DNA and is the archaic DNA from billions of years of evolution. The reason that everyone is different is because the duplication machinery that creates two almost identical strands of DNA during mitosis isn't absolutely perfect and will make a mistake every few thousand or so base pairs. When a mistake is made within a coding region of DNA, you get a difference in genetic product. Possibly resulting in hair colour change, or, perhaps in a genetic disease. Regardless, the system isn't perfect but it's also the reason for adaptability and why life is so diverse on this planet. So, when genes are being read by the translation machinery, little bits of protein products are created called mRNA. mRNA is then processed into proteins which are the basic units that make up our cells. Different proteins do different things and different concentrations of different proteins interact with each other in different ways and may also act on the DNA itself, up or downregulating the production of more proteins, etc etc. It's a wholly complicated and extremely hard to understand system, and that's why we're having so many problems tackling genetic diseases.
Anyway, this is why you can't just look at genetic similarity. We are a helluva lot more complicated than we give ourselves credit for. It's amazing that we exist as we do now and how all of this micro-machinery works in such a perfectly coordinated manner.
NOTE: my knowledge on this isn't a 100%, I graduated from uni last April, so while a lot of this knowledge is fairly fresh in my mind, I may be off here and there. The general jist of it is there though. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
madowlspeaks
Joined: 07 Dec 2006
Location: Somewhere in time and space
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2006 6:51 am Post subject: Re: Would you eat a chimpanzee? |
|
|
| Junior wrote: |
| madowlspeaks wrote: |
| Chimpanzees have DNA that is 99.7% comparable to a humans DNA. Because of this FACT. |
hate to blow you out the water there mad owl, but:
THE "99 %" MYTH IS DEAD
Biologists have long held that the genes of chimps and humans are about 98.5 percent identical. But a biologist at the California Institute of Technology, said in a study published this week that a new way of comparing the genes shows that the human and chimp genetic similarity is only about 95 percent.
http://www.darwinism-watch.com/99_myth_is_dead.php
and I've personally eaten plenty of these:-
So i'd have no probs with a chimp. I wouldn't however, because they're endangered. |
No blow out of the water really, but a nice call for a marco polo water match..
MARCO ??? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nobbyken
Joined: 07 Jun 2006
Location: Yongin ^^
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2006 8:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I ate monkey nuts one time, and they tasted OK?
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aldershot
Joined: 17 Jul 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2006 9:06 pm Post subject: Re: Would you eat a chimpanzee? |
|
|
| madowlspeaks wrote: |
| Chimpanzees have DNA that is 99.7% comparable to a humans DNA. Because of this FACT, some people argue that humans too can be classified as animals. Those who say that humans are not, in fact, animals and who choose to eat meat, would then have to philosophically support the moral cause of eating a chimpanzee. |
...phew... this is entirely fallacious. nearly embarrassing to read it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wangja
Joined: 17 May 2004
Location: Seoul, Yongsan
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2006 10:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| When I was in the Congo, I think I might have done. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
madowlspeaks
Joined: 07 Dec 2006
Location: Somewhere in time and space
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2006 10:40 pm Post subject: Re: Would you eat a chimpanzee? |
|
|
| aldershot wrote: |
| madowlspeaks wrote: |
| Chimpanzees have DNA that is 99.7% comparable to a humans DNA. Because of this FACT, some people argue that humans too can be classified as animals. Those who say that humans are not, in fact, animals and who choose to eat meat, would then have to philosophically support the moral cause of eating a chimpanzee. |
...phew... this is entirely fallacious. nearly embarrassing to read it. |
Apparently you failed your philosophy 101 class back in high school. That's more embarrassing than this post could ever hope to be. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
willneverteachagain
Joined: 17 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2006 11:07 pm Post subject: well... |
|
|
well what kind of sauce are we talking about
bullseye? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aldershot
Joined: 17 Jul 2006
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 19, 2006 6:45 pm Post subject: Re: Would you eat a chimpanzee? |
|
|
| madowlspeaks wrote: |
| aldershot wrote: |
| madowlspeaks wrote: |
| Chimpanzees have DNA that is 99.7% comparable to a humans DNA. Because of this FACT, some people argue that humans too can be classified as animals. Those who say that humans are not, in fact, animals and who choose to eat meat, would then have to philosophically support the moral cause of eating a chimpanzee. |
...phew... this is entirely fallacious. nearly embarrassing to read it. |
Apparently you failed your philosophy 101 class back in high school. That's more embarrassing than this post could ever hope to be. |
come now, i'm not mocking you. just stating your argument has more holes than a hooker who uses heroin. listen to your statment (above, in bold):
all humans who declare to be above animals and who are carnivorous MUST therefore MORALLY SUPPORT eating chimpanzee.
you can't possibly think this is logical. you are making a universal statement without syllogism or proof. for fun, let's existentially deduce your statement:
a) some humans declare to be above animals.
b) some humans eat meat.
c) some humans support eating chimps.
if a), then c)? nope. if b) then c)? nope. if a) then b)? nope. if c) then b)? OK. if b)then a)? nope. sorry dude. your argument can't logically hold sway. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tsgarp
Joined: 01 Dec 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 19, 2006 10:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| How closely are Chimps and Monkeys related? To me, a Man eating a Chimp is not unlike a Chimp eating a Monkey. Oh wait, Chimps eat Monkeys all the time. Yah, I'd eat a Chimp. Other exotic animals on the short list are manatees, tapirs, pangolins, and wombats. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
millsy99
Joined: 20 Oct 2006
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 20, 2006 11:08 pm Post subject: Hell NO!! |
|
|
They are way too cute 
However, I think in a serious survival situation, we would all resort to it. You'd have to. Sorry, Bubbles. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
