the theory of Darwinian evolution..of chimps into man..IS a self-contradiction, a grandiose and grotesque presumption to legitimacy that appeals to the intellectually dis functional...of those faithful..TO A godless god free creation/story.

in sciences..being half wrong is being all wrong
the math never did ad up..till you got the pig 'evE'..OF MEN-KIND
what got RAPED BY SOME APE LIKE CHIMP ADAM..that wanted what 'the beasts got'..a mate.

ANYHOW..THE OLD Sow [eve]..gave birth to 11 wee tiny piglets
There was a shortage of feeding stations/thus these critters..fought for their suck at the nipple[they been fighting EVER SINCE.

now i haven't been studying 'mules'..HYBRIDS..BUT WHERE THEY ARE NORMALLY INFERTILE..BUT CLEARLY TWO OR MORE ..OF THESE PIG APES..bred successful..because here WE ARE

Where are we now..../OUR RACE WAS CREATED BY WHAT LOOKS LIKE RAPE[or a very lusty sow..lets TRUST IT Was the later]..and of the resultant hybrids..at least 7 of the f1..was fertile/EVES..[IF YOU FOLLOW THE 7 EVE THEORY]..ITS LIKELY ONE [OR TWO]..was a fertile male..

by our races we could determine their piggy colors
BUT ITS WORTH NOTING..THAT roman wolf..feeding romulous et'al
is closer to the root OF Man..only the wolf is a sow/feeding little ape men
http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSSMbR-XscaSXekDOpW9JtkKBUzWTl_x3SC3tKrAiEZcAoAgqLN3KH7gcfd

thing is you heard this science
via a CREATIONIST..WHO YET SEES GOD HAND IN ALL OF THIS

[I KNOW BY THE STUNNED SILENCE..both sides feel they lost
but get over it..both of us were a little RIGHT..A LITLE WRONG
but how darwin missed the pig thing/and all of you 'evolutionists'..as well/

*thats because you haVE FAITH....in science
not by science KNOWING..let alone comprehension..or application

to get to fertile f2/f3..etc
f1 hybred pig..APES..NEEDED TO DO THEIR RECOMBINATION
so..you too..can say..i am..because cause was being as I AM/BEFORE ME.

When it comes to topics like human origins, where the opinions are rigid and the evidence thin, reservation of judgment is best. It is my hope that the arguments presented here will serve as an intellectual springboard allowing the mind to rise above the inflexible creeds of traditional evolutionary thought.

I must admit that I initially felt a certain amount of repugnance at the idea of being a hybrid. The image of a pig mating with an ape is not a pretty one, nor is that of a horde of monstrous half-humans breeding in a hybrid swarm. But the way we came to be is not so important as the fact that we now exist.

As every Machiavellian knows, good things can emerge from ugly processes, and I think the human race is a very good thing. Moreover, there is something to be said for the idea of having the pig as a relative.
ITS ONLY HIDEN..FROM SEEING BY TAXONOMY/lies..IT turns out
the same..'TAXONOMIC'..features evolved..via many MUTATIONS/many GENE-RECOMBINATION.S

god..did not place pigs..and humans..in different taxonomic/orders. Taxonomists did...A great deal of evidence..(read a discussion of this topic)..exists to suggest..that taxonomists are,..in no way, infallible.

http://www.macroevolution.net/dubious-assumptions.html
Our ideas..concerning the proper categorization..of animals are shaped..by bias and tradition..to such an extent..that it would be rash to reject,..[solely on taxonomic grounds,]..the feasibility of such a cross.
http://www.macroevolution.net/hybrid-hypothesis-section-6.html

My opinion of this animal has much improved during the course of my research. Where once I thought of filth and greed, I now think of intelligence, affection, loyalty, and adaptability, with an added touch of joyous sensuality — qualities without which humans would not be human.

LEARN..OF KARYOTYPe
http://www.macroevolution.net/karyotype.html

SOME/EDITS..RE GENUS..4..science/GENIUSES
http://www.macroevolution.net/karyotype.html

In the upcoming discussion..of stabilization theory,.the vagueness of the word species and..the consequent difficulties of its application in a theoretical context..are avoided through the use of chromoset, chromotype,..somaset,..and somatype,..words more specific than species

The sorts of structural differences just described distinguish, for example, the human karyotype from that of a chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes). Humans and chimpanzees do not have the same number of chromosomes and there are also differences in the structure of the individual chromosomes.

The Y chromosome differs markedly in size in humans and chimpanzees. An obvious structural difference is that the equivalent of human Chromosome 2 exists as two separate chromosomes (2A and 2B) in the chimpanzee...Moreover, various other human chromosomes cannot be aligned intact with those of a chimpanzee.

For example, there are regions on human chromosomes 1 and 18 that are inverted relative to the same regions on the equivalent chimpanzee chromosome. Two large inversions also distinguish a human Y chromosome from that of a chimpanzee...There are many other structural differences differentiating these karyotypes...In general, the karyotypes of more distantly related organisms are more extensively rearranged relative to each other.

Chromotypes and Chromosets.

Since many populations treated as separate species differ with respect to karyotype, many hybrids have chromosomes that do not exactly match in pairs...This mismatching is a result of the normal process of sexual reproduction, where a parent typically passes only one chromosome..of each of the types present in its karyotype to its offspring.

Since the other parent does the same, an F1 hybrid receives a pair of a given type only when that same type is found in both its parents. Any type of chromosome found in only one parent will have no match in the hybrid...Individuals with such unmatched chromosomes, ones not occurring in pairs,..are known as structural heterozygotes.

Each of the chromosets within the single somaset Mus musculus constitutes a reproductively stable population because all members of a particular chromoset have the same karyotype...But when the members of different chromosets come into contact and interbreed, they produce structurally heterozygous offspring..[hence..the gaps-theory..is fraud].

http://www.macroevolution.net/reproductive-isolation.html

http://www.macroevolution.net/reproductive-isolation.html

QUOTE..Regarding the activities of taxonomists, Ernst Mayr (1963: 499)..once wrote that.."an outsider would never realize..how many interesting cases..of evolutionary intermediacy.are concealed in the seeming definiteness..of the..TaxonomiC.. genus/species and subspecies designations."

If it were true..[that natural populations..could be tidily sorted into two categories,]..those that do interbreed and those that do not,..[the fact that various degrees of interbreeding..are conceivable would be irrelevant.].. However,

real pairs of populations..do exhibit a seemingly continuous spectrum of degrees..of..ONGOING interbreeding.7//This fact makes definitions in terms..of reproductive isolation..entirely arbitrary.

Although he sporadically..used biological definitions of species, as the occasion suited him,..Darwin was clearly aware the fertility of hybrids..was an impractical criterion.[..He reached this conclusion by comparing the results of Kölreuter..(1761-1766)and Gärtner/(1849), whose works..were at that time the primary sources.of information on hybridization in plants:

If we followed Kölreuter's simple rule..&.called all plants,..which were quite fertile together,]..varieties,..it might be thought that we should at least arrive at a decided result;..but this is not so, for we have seen..that the two most laborious..

EDITED

If we followed Kölreuter's simple rule careful experimentisers [Kölreuter and Gärtner] who ever lived, often come to a diametrically opposite conclusion on this head;..and this alone suffices to show that, practically, fertility will not serve to distinguish varieties from species.8

Indeed, Darwin was well aware..that the fertility of hybrids is a continuum,..varying from one type of cross to another.

Thus, he points out that,..With forms that must be ranked as undoubted species,.a perfect series exists from those which are absolutely sterile..when crossed,..[to those which are almost or completely fertile.]..The degrees of sterility..do not coincide strictly with..the degree of difference..between the parents in external structure or habits of life.9

Moreover,..even those who try to use them admit definitions based on reproductive isolation are limited in scope in comparison to morphological ones.

As Grant (1981: 64) points out,.The biological species concept applies to biparental organisms...[Uniparental organisms,..which do not form interbreeding groups,..are not embraced by this concept.].. Yet uniparental reproduction..is common in plants,..as well as in various groups in other kingdoms.

BUT..im wasting/my breath
http://www.macroevolution.net/reproductive-isolation.html

the etymology of the name Loki..has yet to be solved.
It may be related..to Old Norse luka, meaning.."close"

The first living being..[infinite/SPIRIT]..formed in the primeval chaos..CALLED the deep..[FINITE/MATTER]..out of the joining..of these two extreme forces..from either world..[in the great void]...MAY ENERGY..MANIFEST..or divest...[CHANGE STATE]..

THAT MATTER MAY DIVEST..ITS COLD/
AND SPIRIT MAY RADIATE..ITS WARMTH ..And when the rime and the blowing of the warmth..met*..so that it thawed and dripped,..[changed state]..there was..a quickening[life]..from these flowing drops[LIFE-FOEMS].due to the power..[APPLIED-ENERGY/..IN STASIS]..of the source of the heat,..and it..became the form.

the first..fORMS..WERE THE BEASTS
IN TIME//LOKI DID HIS THING..with the jotnar

the Jötnar..are given..some of..the most important..roles in the world.

Many giants..play..thus...greatly influence the natural world;
they could even..equate with..A WORKING Relationship with Nature..[edit]..AS THE nature..of their being..quantifying that inherent..of natures/nurture..as gods [beasts]..of nature.

ALONG COMES LOKI..Loki's relation..with the gods varies by source. Loki sometimes assists..the gods and sometimes causes problems for them...[Loki is a shape shifter..and in separate incidents he appears in the form of a salmon,..mare,..seal,..a fly,..[A PIG..]..and possibly an elderly woman.

Loki's positive relations..with the gods end with his role in engineering...the death of the god Baldr. Loki is eventually bound by the gods..[HUNG BY THE INTESTINES..OF HIS last miss creation]

this can be presumed..to have occurred pre the flood/when many of lokies..FALSE GODS CROSSED OVER...Loki is foretold..to slip free from his bonds..and to fight against the gods..among the forces of the jötnar,.at which time he will encounter..the good of Heimdallr and the two will ssss..lay each other...why?

its funny really..much we attributed..to gods creation
might well be due to loki...Calling the gods arrogant,..Loki asks why they are...unable to speak,..and demands that they assign him a seat and a place...for him at the feast,..or tell*..him to leave.

The gods declare that Loki..deserves a horrible death if he cannot find a scheme...that will cause.the builder..to forfeit his payment, and..threaten to attack him...

Loki,..afraid,..swears oaths..that he will devise..a scheme to cause the builder..to forfeit the payment,..REWARDS..whatever..it may cost..HIM/himself..[CONFOUND/..THE WISE][WITH..LOL...GODLESS SCIENCES]

HENCE..THE JESTER.
BUT HECK..WRITE Your own ending.
[im feeling..silly writing..to myself..YET AGAIN.]
http://www.macroevolution.net/reproductive-isolation.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loki

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=16038&page=0

Written for reason of self amusement..[WORDYWANK/mastication]

"Reproductive..isolation"..[inducing/fixed speciation..into genus]..is widely considered..an essential ingredient..[FACTOR/ Affirming/classifying..its taxon..into genus division]....thus..in defining the world.into specific..TAXON..genus/SPECIES.via infinite LINEAR Linus/taxonomi. species,..is itself vaguely and inconsistently defined.

Definitions of species..in terms of..reproductive isolation..[GENUS][homogeneous]..are called "biological Mono/Cultural memes."..The main intellectual motive*...for using biological..definitions has been.the widespread belief..that interbreeding populations..will blend together..

AND HOMOGENIZE...INTO New genus..[the taxo/genus division]..being breeding/breeding..viable kin..after their kind[....Ability OF FERTILE VIABLE OFFSPRING/THAT SURVIVE..passing on their life gifts/able to successfully reproduce/after iTS OWN KIND.

Darwin clearly thought..reproductive/isolation..is important in maintaining distinct populations...For example,.in the Origin he says "species within the same country.could hardly have kept distinct had they been capable.of crossing freely."1

Elsewhere/he writes.."indeed it is obvious..if all forms freely crossed,..nature would be a chaos."..The idea that reproductive isolation/is key in the production..and maintenance of distinct forms is certainly..emphasized in neo-Darwinian theory.

if one fails to observe*.interbreeding in a given case,...can one safely conclude that the organisms in question..are in a state of reproductive isolation?

It is always possible..that hybrids may exist.in some location other than those..that have already been searched. .Or they may occur in the same place at some other time...Surveys of natural populations are always of limited scope.

As Buffon once said,.regarding.the possibility
of natural-hybridization.among birds,

Who knows of every tryst in the depths of the wood?.Who can number the illegitimate pleasures..shared by creatures of separate species?

http://www.macroevolution.net/hybrid-hypothesis-section-6.html#at_pco=tcb-1.0&at_tot=20&at_ab=-&at_pos=10

These difficulties.have led to the practice/of treating morphologically distinct..forms as separate species..so long as they are not known to hybridize.[breed]..Once hybrids have been reported between two such forms,..however, their taxonomic treatmen.. is often changed.so that they are treated as subspecies.of the same species.

In other words,..they are no longer treated as separate..GENUS/species.

Many forms...treated..as distinct species..are now..known/to hybridize that once/were..not known to do so...Indeed,..in the writer's experience..several such pairs..are reported among birds..ALONE.

every month..It can therefore..be inferred that many/such pairs that are..not now..known to hybridize...will..be found to/do so..in the future..Thus,..forms are..typically treated..as species/y default when..their actual stasis/STATUS..with respect to..reproductive isolation is unknown...HOW.

neither of..the two primary types..of taxon/definitions usually offered for species..(neither..the morphological..nor the biological) succeeds..in clearly/stipulating..how and..when..the word's..should be applied.
http://www.macroevolution.net/hybrid-hypothesis-contents.html