OUG, you quote your "experts" thus: "<<..The GSS sequences were derived..from a project that involved mapping the chimp genome...In addition,..we are testing a variety of different alignment parameters."

DIFFERENT ALIGNMENT PARAMETERS? What are they doing here? Changing the rules so a different result emerges?

But let us examine your request for the taxonomic name of the very first single-celled animal. But why not revert to the very first self-replicating molecule? Living cells are a huge evolutionary advance on them. Those molecules gave rise to those cells but where does real "LIFE" begin? Taxonomy deals only in living things. Are self-replicating molecules alive or is their activity caused by simple chemical reactions? The sciences are very active in investigating these questions and in good time will provide a theory which best explains the evidence. Speculation beforehand is hardly ever productive and usually emanates from impatient infantile minds looking to establish a pre-existing prejudice.

I'll deal with what is a scientific theory later if you don't understand how it differs from the common interpretation applying at a mundane level.

Lift your game and post intelligibly or suffer my wrath and subsequent ignore.

OK..IT MIGHT HAVE TAKEN TWO POSTS..TO GET SOMETHING..FROM YOU
sure..its a question..but..only too happy to explain

<<..DIFFERENT ALIGNMENT PARAMETERS?..

YES YOU WIL.. RECALL THE THESIS..OF YOUR SIDE =..
IE/THAT..WE CAme from apes..BUT..once you look at the list of paraMETERS..[SEE GREEN LIST TO THE RIGHT..OF THE LINK/HALF DUPLICATED/HERE-UNDER]
http://www.macroevolution.net/human-origins-2.html

basically..it regroups..BY THE LISTED FEATURES
OF WHAT HERE-to/fore....was thought imposable..[fertile hybrid]
but..look at the list..and WEEP

<<..What are they doing here?>>..

THATS THE FOOL..CONFOUNDING THE WISE
sure you..got clever word education/
but lack.. the basic science/gnosis..underpinning..the science..[BIOLOGICAL /smarts]

BUT LETS REPEAT..YET AGAIN
GO TO
http://www.macroevolution.net/human-origins-2.html
LOOK AT THE..LIGHT GREEN BOX..PLEASE NOTE CAREFULLY..
THE WHY..of..THE NEW/INTRODUCED BY PIG HYBRID..REQUIRED DIFFERENT ALIGNMENT PARAMETERS?..[see under]

<..Changing the rules..so a different result emerges?>>

SCIENCE CLAIMS..ITS STRENGTH..IS IT ADAPTS..as the facts adapt
but clearly...those not wanting to know..hate how facts reveal they only had faith..

http://phys.org/news/2013-07-chimp-pig-hybrid-humans.html

ANYHOW..FOR..THYNE SAKE..I WILL LIST EM/..now..FOR YOU
A list of traits ..distinguishing*..humans from other primates

DERMAL FEATURES
Naked skin..(sparse pelage)
Panniculus adiposus...(layer of subcutaneous fat)
Panniculus carnosus..only in face..and neck

In "hairy skin" region:
-..Thick epidermis
-...Crisscrossing congenital lines on epidermis
- Patterned epidermal-dermal junction
Large content..of elastic fiber in skin
Thermoregulatory sweating

-Richly vascularized dermis
-Normal host for the human flea (Pulex irritans)
-Dermal melanocytes absent
-Melanocytes present in matrix..of hair follicle
-Epidermal lipids contain triglycerides..and free fatty acids

*FACIAL FEATURES

-Lightly pigmented..eyes common
-Protruding, cartilaginous..mucous nose
-Narrow eye opening
Short, thick upper lip
Philtrum/cleft lip
Glabrous mucous membrane bordering lips
--Eyebrows
-Heavy eyelashes
..Earlobes

FEATURES..RELATING TO BIPEDALITY
Short,..dorsal spines on first six cervical vertebrae
Seventh cervical vertebrae:
-..long dorsal spine
-..transverse foramens

Fewer floating and more non-floating ribs
More lumbar vertebrae
Fewer sacral vertebrae
More coccygeal vertebrae (long "tail bone")

Centralized spine
Short pelvis relative to body length
Sides of pelvis turn forward
Sharp..lumbo-sacral promontory

Massive gluteal muscles
Curved sacrum..with short dorsal spines
Hind limbs..longer than forelimbs

Femur:
- Condyles..equal in size
- Knock-kneed
-..Elliptical condyles
-..Deep intercondylar notch at lower end of femur
-..Deep patellar groove with high lateral lip
-..Crescent-shaped lateral meniscus with two tibial insertions
Short malleolus medialis

2B CTD

Dear Extropian,

<<Are self-replicating molecules alive or is their activity caused by simple chemical reactions? The sciences are very active in investigating these questions>>

That's very news to me:

I thought that the sciences only research the objective side of reality - while life is a subjective experience.

LIST OF non/sapian..COMMONALITY features..CONTINUES

edited

ORGANS

Diverticulum...at cardiac end of stomach
Valves of Kerkring..present in small intestines
Mesenteric arterial arcades
Multipyramidal..kidneys
Heart auricles level*

Tricuspid valve of heart
Laryngeal sacs absent
Vocal ligaments
Prostate encircles..urethra

*edited/for word limitations

CRANIAL FEATURES
Brain lobes:..frontal and temporal prominent
Thermoregulatory venous plexuses
Well-developed..system of emissary veins
Enlarged..protruding..nasal bones
Divergent eyes (interior of orbit visible from side)

Styloid process
Large occipital condyles
Primitive premolar
Large,..blunt-cusped./(bunodont) molars
Thick tooth enamel
Helical chewing

BEHAVIORAL*/PHYSIOLOGICAL

EDITED*/AGAIN

YEt..the pig has all of eM*..[HOW DID WE 'EVOLVE'..THEM..IN A MERE 100,000 YEARS..yet..[APES..UNCHANGED FOR MILLIONS OF YEARS.]

[BUT/WAIT..YOU got..more miss-directing]

note*..THYNe//non-reply/..quote..<<..But let us examine..your request..for the..taxonomic-name..of..the very first .single-celled animal...But[first/redirection]..why not..revert..to the very first..self-replicating..molecule?>>

nice..redirection..but/PLEASE,
ITS..DISTRACTION..,but/sURE..name..THIS..'better..than GOD'.
'self replicating/MOLECULE'..even god..couldn't do that...[OFF/TOPIC TROLL?..how sad]

I WANT..TO KNOW..why/...you avoid ..simply..naming THE FIRST LIFE
THAT..YOU IGNORE..BY TALKING..[ABOUT..SOME SELF*REPLICATING Molecule..][that's insanity..dear boy]

[SELF REPLICATING CELL/Sure]..but hey..name it.s..fIRST DEFINITIVE/LIVING..family/group/GENUS..PLEASE..be/a clever man.

BUT HECK..I WILL BITE..there is/no SUCH THING..IN NATURE..[self replicating..molecule]..AS EVERYTHING..HAS AN EXTERNAL CAUSE..[OR CATALYZING AGENT]..

BUT ITS CLEAR..YOUR A CLEVER/
WORD SMITH...name..it..name..names james.

NAME..THE FIRST Life
the first..GENUS..[Single cell/FLORA/FAUNA;life]

the first..Living/life..multi-cell..by genus
[in fact science..cant/even make..its own cell/mem-brain..but lets hear what the WORDS/Smith..comes up wit....MEANWHILE FROM LINK

pre-de/scribe.

Looking at a subset..of the listed traits,..it's clear that the other parent..in this hypothetical cross..that produced the first human would be an intelligent animal..with a protrusive,..cartilaginous nose,..a thick layer..of subcutaneous fat,.short digits,..and a naked skin.

It would be terrestrial,..not arboreal,..and adaptable to a wide range of foods..and environments...These traits may bring a particular creature to mind...

In fact,..a particular non-primate does have,..not only each of the few traits..just mentioned,..but every one of the many traits..listed in the sidebar..

[IE..OUR GRANDMA...GRANPA].
ready..to name names?..

FORGET TAXONOMY/..ITS REFUTED/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

looks like we got another runaway
the truth hurts..those who support the science man APE THESIS..TAKE IT ON faith..when FACED WITH SCIENCE THEY RUN AWAY..
http://www.macroevolution.net/dubious-assumptions.html
THEY CANT REFUTE IT..THUS THEY RUN..ITS SAD AND PATHETIC..they claim science/yet cant grasp THEIR OWN SCIENCE..ie they got faith..now finding..[OR RATHER AVOIDING THE FUNDING..their hero is a pig.

[by taxonomic lies..I HAVE REVEALED FOR YEARS..YOU CANT TRUST PHENOTYP
[or what the beast looks like/and thats what fossils..and taxonomy does/they lie..
http://www.macroevolution.net/phylogenies.html
its little better than judging humanity based ON EYE COLOR/or shape OF THEIR NOSE...[oR BUMPS ON THE NOGGIN]..or penis size..or penmanship...sentence construction..or literary ability
http://www.macroevolution.net/golden-rule.html#at_pco=tcb-1.0&at_tot=20&at_ab=per-101&at_pos=9
if you dont grasp the science
http://www.macroevolution.net/bats.html
you got faith

ITS FUNNY HOW Concepts frighten..some/people
yet makes others laugh..[in reading the lINKS]..I RECALL IN A PREVIOUS TOPIC....//PERCICULES/or ludwig]..introduced the concept of loki..that proved/revealingly VITAL..KNOWING..aT THAT time..

[anyhow..names and me dONT GELL/so i searched out this trickster]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trickster

who decieved the gods many times
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loki
[how much more easy..to fool a chimp..or a pig?
http://www.macroevolution.net/reproductive-isolation.html

anyhow/first..link

Modern African American literary criticism has turned the trickster figure into one example of how it is possible to overcome a system of oppression from within. For years, African American literature was discounted by the greater community of American literary criticism while its authors were still obligated to use the language and the rhetoric of the very system that relegated African Americans and other minorities to the ostracized position of the cultural "other."

The central question became one of how to overcome this system when the only words available were created and defined by the oppressors. As Audre Lorde explained, the problem was that "the master’s tools [would] never dismantle the master’s house."[6]

In his writings of the late 1980s, Henry Louis Gates, Jr. presents the concept of Signifyin(g). Wound up in this theory is the idea that the "master’s house" can be "dismantled" using his "tools" if the tools are used in a new or unconventional way.