Login

Join for Free!
118890 members


The Mule Theory.

Discussion of everything related to the Theory of Evolution.

Moderator: BioTeam

The Mule Theory.

Postby surealworld » Fri Dec 25, 2009 12:03 pm

I came up with a new scientific theory that proves human are not evolved from apes, as popular science claims. I call my theory the Mule Theory. Horses and mules are in the same family,and they can mate and have off spring. The only problem is mules can't reproduce their own kind. So this being true, then apes and human should be able to produce offspring together, either buy intercourse of by artificial insemination. So knowing that scientist who believe that man evolved from apes,would chop off their own children's limbs to prove their theory is true , then were are the living hybrids . I see the mules,but no apemen.
So the evolutionist scientists should stop being stubborn as mules and admit they are wrong.
surealworld
Garter
Garter
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Dec 25, 2009 11:34 am

Postby Darwin420 » Sat Dec 26, 2009 12:24 am

do more research, especially about gametes and zygote formation.

I can tell you numerous things that would prove you wrong, just research more please.

I am drunk and it is Christmas, but if you want to have a debate.

I CHALLENGE YOU.

Just please, do more research.

Offspring is one word.

"...buy intercourse"

..cmon...wrong word....Jesus.
Darwin420
Coral
Coral
 
Posts: 170
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2008 3:09 am

Postby kolean » Sat Dec 26, 2009 9:39 pm

And possible info on fertilization of the oocyte by the sperm (gametes). If they do not have the same biochemicals the sperm can not penetrate the oocyte for fertilization to even have a chance to begin. Then there is all the cleavage and gastrulation, which have to be in sync also. Not all donkey sperm that fertilize a horse oocyte make it thru embryology. It has to be the right combination of chromosomes/extra chromosomes to produce any 'offspring'.
I also do not see the reasoning of ape and man matings to produce offspring as a valid reason for proof of evolution.
kolean
Coral
Coral
 
Posts: 345
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 3:15 am


Re: The Mule Theory.

Postby robsabba » Wed Dec 30, 2009 6:07 pm

surealworld wrote:I came up with a new scientific theory that proves human are not evolved from apes, as popular science claims. I call my theory the Mule Theory. Horses and mules are in the same family,and they can mate and have off spring. The only problem is mules can't reproduce their own kind. So this being true, then apes and human should be able to produce offspring together, either buy intercourse of by artificial insemination. So knowing that scientist who believe that man evolved from apes,would chop off their own children's limbs to prove their theory is true , then were are the living hybrids . I see the mules,but no apemen.
So the evolutionist scientists should stop being stubborn as mules and admit they are wrong.


1. Please find one scientist that would "chop off their own children's limbs" to prove anything. Just one would do.
2. In science we do not "prove" anything.
3. Show us that members of the same family are always capable of producing hybrids; or even that most are.
4. Maybe you should try and mate with a chimpanzee and see what happens.
User avatar
robsabba
Coral
Coral
 
Posts: 106
Joined: Tue Aug 25, 2009 6:53 pm
Location: North Dakota State University

Postby MrMistery » Sat Jan 02, 2010 4:51 pm

@surealworld

No offense, but you're a scientific idiot. Just because two organisms have a common ancestor doesn't mean they have to produce offspring. Humans and tulips have a common ancestor, it's just that it's an extremely distant common ancestor. The common ancestor of horses and donkeys is very recent, which is why they can still produce offspring. The common ancestor of humans and chimps, not so recent, hence no offspring can be produced.

Please do more research before you claim you can revolutionize science.
http://xkcd.com/675/
"As a biologist, I firmly believe that when you're dead, you're dead. Except for what you live behind in history. That's the only afterlife" - J. Craig Venter
User avatar
MrMistery
Inland Taipan
Inland Taipan
 
Posts: 6832
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2005 10:18 pm
Location: Romania(small and unimportant country)

Re: The Mule Theory.

Postby firechild » Fri Jan 15, 2010 2:55 am

surealworld wrote:I came up with a new scientific theory that proves human are not evolved from apes, as popular science claims. I call my theory the Mule Theory. Horses and mules are in the same family,and they can mate and have off spring.


Here is your first mistake. Mules are sterile so therefore cannot produce offspring, with their own or any other species. Also, you may have come up with a (very poor) hypothesis but not a theory. A scientific theory is a highly tested hypothesis that is accepted as true by the scientific community after many attempts to disprove it.

The only problem is mules can't reproduce their own kind. So this being true, then apes and human should be able to produce offspring together, either buy intercourse of by artificial insemination. So knowing that scientist who believe that man evolved from apes,would chop off their own children's limbs to prove their theory is true , then were are the living hybrids . I see the mules,but no apemen.
So the evolutionist scientists should stop being stubborn as mules and admit they are wrong.


There are ethical issues surrounding the hybridization of humans and other species but it is believed that hybrids of humans and chimps or bonobos may be viable. Besides, horses and donkeys (which I believe you may have actually been talking about as their hybrids are mules/hinneys) are from the same genus, Equus, while humans have no living ancestors within the genus Homo. It is possible that humans may have been able to produce hybrids with Homo erectus or H. habilis and they may or may not have been sterile.
firechild
Garter
Garter
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 3:58 am

Postby mkwaje » Sun Jan 31, 2010 3:59 pm

I really can't follow your logic. Since when do you base your "scientific theory" about humans using other animals as examples. If A and B produces C; it doesn't follow that D and E produces F. Because A, B,D, and E are different. That's basic logic.

surealworld wrote:...
So the evolutionist scientists should stop being stubborn as mules and admit they are wrong.


Evolutionist scientists are not stubborn as mule, they will have the decency to accept if the are wrong, IF your proof is very conclusive and sound. In this case your Mule Theory has only bare hints of a scientific basis. In my opinion, your Mule theory is a just a lot of Bull.
User avatar
mkwaje
Coral
Coral
 
Posts: 146
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 2:48 am
Location: Philippines

Postby alextemplet » Sun Jan 31, 2010 6:08 pm

I've read that the Soviets tried to produce human/ape hybrids, but nothing ever came of it. The genetic divergence and chromosomal differences are too great to make successful interbreeding possible.
Generally speaking, the more people talk about "being saved," the further away they actually are from true salvation.

~Alex
#2 Total Post Count
User avatar
alextemplet
King Cobra
King Cobra
 
Posts: 5599
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2005 4:50 pm
Location: South Louisiana (aka Cajun Country)

Re:

Postby firechild » Mon Feb 01, 2010 3:05 am

alextemplet wrote:I've read that the Soviets tried to produce human/ape hybrids, but nothing ever came of it. The genetic divergence and chromosomal differences are too great to make successful interbreeding possible.


I have also heard that they successfully impregnated a female chimp with human DNA but the animal was destroyed before birth for ethical reasons. The Russians don't tend to let out a lot fo information so it's hard to know how true or untrue these stories are. It is still believed it may be possible but noone has any evidence to suggest it is or is not possible.
firechild
Garter
Garter
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 3:58 am


Return to Evolution

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests