This is more of a science question than anything else.
Eldar as a species that have existed unmolested and been kept anatomically identical for millions of years have far longer DNA sequence strands than humans do.
This has ups and downs. Gestation is far longer. And the species takes forever to show signs of age. Aging is caused by damage to the DNA strands over constant copying and thus, if there's far larger sequences, and the rate of copying is the same, it takes far longer for damage to occur. Whales are an earthbound example of these principles.
My question really is how did those sequences get so long? I've always assumed it happens over vast periods of time as more and more genotypes and phenotypes get mixed in and added on to the DNA sequence but I don't know for sure.
Can anyone help?
Whales do have longer DNA sequences than people do. This is known. They're just far larger, and have more to their biology. A lot of people attribute their slowed aging to better telomerase (the enzyme that repairs damaged DNA strands) control and/or adult stem cells. Problem is much much simpler animals like rock fish, and lobsters use these methods, and with such a complex animal (literally with organs within organs) these methods would begin to fail quite rapidly.
To elaborate on this: Mice without telomerase (and obviously without adult stem cells) were engineered and when exposed to Telomerase, their aging not only stopped, but reversed. They became fertile again. The same thing on humans? No notable effect.
Pretty much this. The old ones pretty much crated everything in some way or another. It bacially boils down to GOD did it.
That's not my question though.
Something as long living as the Eldar could possibly be produced under similar circumstances. My question is how does the most minute mechanic (DNA being lengthened as animal stays visually the same over eons) of this process (aging slowed at literally the most base level) occur?
I would like to cite that Orks are a fungus, this is a universe with Daemons and magic, the sentient fungus can make anything work by believing in it, and make it faster by painting it red, and the writers can't keep the difference between autoguns and stubguns. There are a lot more important things to rack your brains over man.
Eldar are a fictional race in a game with models. Let me ask, why are Elves immortal? Why do trolls turn to stone? Why do Dragons breathe fire in seven different kinds of ways? Why is Valerian steel better than other steel? What causes a Splicer to use a power he wasn't born with? How does a TIE fighter screech in the vacuum of space?
These are all made up things and taking them apart at such a ridiculously fine detail is ridiculous. So I'm going to say there's little hamsters that pooped on their DNA and now it doesn't deteriorate. Prove me wrong.
Let me re-elaborate:
The 40k clothing of this is only to introduce the concept to onlookers. It has no role in the question. Which is: How does it come to be that when animals remain visually similar for eons they end up having ABSURDLY long DNA sequences?
^I don't even....Well Hamster droppings haven't been shown to produce any effect on cellular division or DNA copy-pasting.......so go figure. I mean there are people who raise hamsters and come in contact with a lot of poo and they're not immortal.
I don't.
What I do know is that DNA sequence replication rate doesn't really have an effect on things animals encounter in daily life like breaking down food or healing wounds. It happens kind of a constant fact of life. Attempting to adapt at the most base level. Cells do this whether we like it or not. That's somewhat accurate but in really layman's terms.
IT MAY have an effect on developing muscles but as bulldogs have shown that can be a non issue if you naturally grow to be "Super Swole brah"
I believe that the eldar are believed to be descended from nonmammals, possibly reptiles. Reptiles have a extremely long life span compared to mammal counterparts. This could be a big factor in the longevity of eldar. Plus you know the extensive genetic modifications done by the old ones helps
Bafaltin wrote: I believe that the eldar are believed to be descended from nonmammals, possibly reptiles. Reptiles have a extremely long life span compared to mammal counterparts. This could be a big factor in the longevity of eldar. Plus you know the extensive genetic modifications done by the old ones helps
I knew it. The Eldar are the lizard people that run the Illuminati! Quick! Alert the local tin foil hat association!
Bookwrack wrote: Eldar aren't descended from anything. They were created by the old ones.
As a quick aside, this is actually not all that consistant.
I too have heard of eldar descending from reptiles. However they quite clearly have rapid metabolisms with their anime movement.
Eldar, whether they descended from an earlier species or not, were shaped and designed by the Old Ones. The Old Ones made the Eldar just as they wanted them to be. Everything about the Eldar physiology can be explained by "the Old Ones did it."
Bookwrack wrote: Eldar aren't descended from anything. They were created by the old ones.
They could very easily be descended from something and still have that be true. Think Eldar prototypes, or the Old Ones simply picking up a lizard they thought had potential and... transforming it into a space elf.
Pretty much this. The old ones pretty much crated everything in some way or another. It bacially boils down to GOD did it.
Isn't this how humans all over the world have explained things that science can't? Then when science does, either it was "god's will" or the religion magically changes its beliefs overnight.
SharkoutofWata wrote:Eldar are a fictional race in a game with models. Let me ask, why are Elves immortal? Why do trolls turn to stone? Why do Dragons breathe fire in seven different kinds of ways? Why is Valerian steel better than other steel? What causes a Splicer to use a power he wasn't born with? How does a TIE fighter screech in the vacuum of space?
These are all made up things and taking them apart at such a ridiculously fine detail is ridiculous. So I'm going to say there's little hamsters that pooped on their DNA and now it doesn't deteriorate. Prove me wrong.
ThePrimordial wrote:Let me re-elaborate:
The 40k clothing of this is only to introduce the concept to onlookers. It has no role in the question. Which is: How does it come to be that when animals remain visually similar for eons they end up having ABSURDLY long DNA sequences?
^I don't even....Well Hamster droppings haven't been shown to produce any effect on cellular division or DNA copy-pasting.......so go figure. I mean there are people who raise hamsters and come in contact with a lot of poo and they're not immortal.
Have either of you have much experience with miniature giant space hamsters? A lot of this would be explainable if you did.
ThePrimordial wrote: This is more of a science question than anything else.
Eldar as a species that have existed unmolested and been kept anatomically identical for millions of years have far longer DNA sequence strands than humans do.
More DNA doesn't mean superior. For example, an onion has around x12 times more DNA than a human.
This has ups and downs. Gestation is far longer. And the species takes forever to show signs of age. Aging is caused by damage to the DNA strands over constant copying and thus, if there's far larger sequences, and the rate of copying is the same, it takes far longer for damage to occur. Whales are an earthbound example of these principles.
The amount of DNA doesn't dictate the length of gestation of an organism.
Aging of an organism isn't purely down to damage of cell structure or DNA. It's only one facet that influences the rate of age.
Some organisms are able to regenerate cells and tissues. Some go further to 're-start' their programming to return to an earlier stage of cellular development.
DNA copying is rather quick in the grand scale of things.
My question really is how did those sequences get so long? I've always assumed it happens over vast periods of time as more and more genotypes and phenotypes get mixed in and added on to the DNA sequence but I don't know for sure.
Can anyone help?
Redundant DNA / Trash DNA sequences. I expect should an organism such as that exist, a lot of the traits will have been picked up through viral interaction. It's not too dissimilar to us - a lot of out genetic code is 'alien' to our species and was incorporated thanks to viruses.
Yeah that's what I meant. There would be more potential and trashed DNA sequences.
Automatically Appended Next Post: There's that one jellyfish that undergoes reverse puberty.
To my knowledge DNA degradation and Cellular deterioration are the primary causes of age abut according to you there are others. I know the actions of bacterial organisms can be a cause, as can constant stress and damage to the body. What are others.
ThePrimordial wrote: Seriously does anyone have an idea how DNA sequences end up lengthening?
Do you mean in actual real life? Because people have answered about the Eldar; the Old Ones created them (from scratch or an existing species) and so would've lengthened the DNA.
Pretty much this. The old ones pretty much crated everything in some way or another. It bacially boils down to GOD did it.
Isn't this how humans all over the world have explained things that science can't? Then when science does, either it was "god's will" or the religion magically changes its beliefs overnight.
No. Sorry but this really annoys me, because people constantly repeat it despite it being clearly false. The part of the Bible, for instance, devoted to explanations of natural phenomena is trivially small. The fact of the matter is that religions, instead of being some kind of science-substitute, have not actually cared much about such things at all.
Pretty much this. The old ones pretty much crated everything in some way or another. It bacially boils down to GOD did it.
Isn't this how humans all over the world have explained things that science can't? Then when science does, either it was "god's will" or the religion magically changes its beliefs overnight.
No. Sorry but this really annoys me, because people constantly repeat it despite it being clearly false. The part of the Bible, for instance, devoted to explanations of natural phenomena is trivially small. The fact of the matter is that religions, instead of being some kind of science-substitute, have not actually cared much about such things at all.
Thing is a large part of religion is explaining the unexplainable, as well as giving context to mundane life. I can't remember the fella's name, but I know an anthropologist put forward this idea for religion etc, and it's still largely seen as part of the answer
ThePrimordial wrote: This is more of a science question than anything else.
Eldar as a species that have existed unmolested and been kept anatomically identical for millions of years have far longer DNA sequence strands than humans do.
This has ups and downs. Gestation is far longer. And the species takes forever to show signs of age. Aging is caused by damage to the DNA strands over constant copying and thus, if there's far larger sequences, and the rate of copying is the same, it takes far longer for damage to occur. Whales are an earthbound example of these principles.
My question really is how did those sequences get so long? I've always assumed it happens over vast periods of time as more and more genotypes and phenotypes get mixed in and added on to the DNA sequence but I don't know for sure.
Can anyone help?
I will try to explain to you why this question is not a good question to ask. I'm sure the actual geneticist on the thread can do a better job of providing answers, as a physicist I'm not an expert on telomeres and the like. But the basic premise of your question is incorrect.
First, as a number of people have pointed out, assuming that a wholly alien biology that is strongly implied to be at least partly artificially designed should conform to the principles of evolution as we understand them from terrestrial history is not a good starting point. Unfortunately, all the organisms on earth that have been discovered so far share a common ancestor, so we only have one example of evolution to study.
Aging is not solely caused by "damage to the DNA strands over constant copying", this is an enormous oversimplification. To my knowledge, there is no widely accepted single cause of aging. Here is a discussion.
Subsequent posts suggest your real question is basically "how does DNA get longer over many generations?" As far as I am aware (and I am not an expert) it's the same basic process of random mutation and selection pressure that drives evolution in general. Most changes are irrelevant "garbage" DNA that don't affect viability and the amount of this is used as a clock to measure how long two different organisms have been evolving along divergent lines for. In principle, these meaningless extra bits of DNA can accumulate very quickly with no effect on speciation.
The length of DNA has nothing to do with what we would call an organism's complexity or longevity, however, and this is the fundamental problem with your question as posed. You assume that longer life = longer DNA strand, or even just longer telomeres, and that is not correct even on Earth, where metabolism for example plays a far more important role from one species to another.
ThePrimordial wrote: This is more of a science question than anything else.
Eldar as a species that have existed unmolested and been kept anatomically identical for millions of years have far longer DNA sequence strands than humans do.
This has ups and downs. Gestation is far longer. And the species takes forever to show signs of age. Aging is caused by damage to the DNA strands over constant copying and thus, if there's far larger sequences, and the rate of copying is the same, it takes far longer for damage to occur. Whales are an earthbound example of these principles.
My question really is how did those sequences get so long? I've always assumed it happens over vast periods of time as more and more genotypes and phenotypes get mixed in and added on to the DNA sequence but I don't know for sure.
Can anyone help?
There are two things, the amount of information in the code and the number of chromosones that that code is broken down into.
Often the breakdown in the code happens at the end of the code, so longer strands of info is good.
Most animal life on earth has the same length of code, but for humans it's broken into 26 chromosones, for fruit flies its stored in 4. For some insects it's stored in over 300.
That's just the main DNA codes, midocondria also have their own DNA.
Eldar and Humans are the same species, as seen with the number of Eldar-Human half-breeds that pop up in the fiction. Effectively, Eldar are a branch of hominid that reach the stars in pre-history. Or, Humans are Exodite Eldar that predate the Eldar galactic disporia.
jeffersonian000 wrote: Eldar and Humans are the same species, as seen with the number of Eldar-Human half-breeds that pop up in the fiction. Effectively, Eldar are a branch of hominid that reach the stars in pre-history. Or, Humans are Exodite Eldar that predate the Eldar galactic disporia.
SJ
When was the last time there was an Eldar Human hybrid..? Eldar were created by the Old Ones. Maybe from Humanity but I'm pretty sure they've been around far far longer than humanity has.
jeffersonian000 wrote: Eldar and Humans are the same species, as seen with the number of Eldar-Human half-breeds that pop up in the fiction. Effectively, Eldar are a branch of hominid that reach the stars in pre-history. Or, Humans are Exodite Eldar that predate the Eldar galactic disporia.
SJ
When was the last time there was an Eldar Human hybrid..? Eldar were created by the Old Ones. Maybe from Humanity but I'm pretty sure they've been around far far longer than humanity has.
my understanding was that Eldar and Humans were both created by the old ones. The eldar were just created first and had gotten to a finished stage of development where as men were kind of a work in progress that got cut short during the war in the heavens.
jeffersonian000 wrote: Eldar and Humans are the same species, as seen with the number of Eldar-Human half-breeds that pop up in the fiction. Effectively, Eldar are a branch of hominid that reach the stars in pre-history. Or, Humans are Exodite Eldar that predate the Eldar galactic disporia.
SJ
When was the last time there was an Eldar Human hybrid..? Eldar were created by the Old Ones. Maybe from Humanity but I'm pretty sure they've been around far far longer than humanity has.
my understanding was that Eldar and Humans were both created by the old ones. The eldar were just created first and had gotten to a finished stage of development where as men were kind of a work in progress that got cut short during the war in the heavens.
Yeah so Eldar didn't evolve from humans or vice versa, they were just both engineered by the same people.
jeffersonian000 wrote: Eldar and Humans are the same species, as seen with the number of Eldar-Human half-breeds that pop up in the fiction. Effectively, Eldar are a branch of hominid that reach the stars in pre-history. Or, Humans are Exodite Eldar that predate the Eldar galactic disporia.
SJ
When was the last time there was an Eldar Human hybrid..? Eldar were created by the Old Ones. Maybe from Humanity but I'm pretty sure they've been around far far longer than humanity has.
my understanding was that Eldar and Humans were both created by the old ones. The eldar were just created first and had gotten to a finished stage of development where as men were kind of a work in progress that got cut short during the war in the heavens.
Yeah so Eldar didn't evolve from humans or vice versa, they were just both engineered by the same people.
yes, so maybe the engineers used the same type of building blocks. I dont think there are any hybrids out there but eldar might have DNA.
Tyranids might not have DNA, they might have a different chemical chain that does the same thing.
I think they both do have DNA (but that depends how canon Xenology is considered, I don't actually know).
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Captyn_Bob wrote: Actually humans weren't made by the old ones. They evolved pretty much on their own, with a little help from the C'tan, who mixed in the pariah gene.
Oh okay yeah that is what I thought but I wasn't sure. So have Eldar human hybrids been in the fluff recently? I could see them being around in like rogue trader or whatever but it seems ridiculous that they'd be able to hybridise.
If I recall correctly, Tyranids do have DNA, which is how they're able to steal traits from species they encounter, and how genestealers are able to create hybrids with species they infiltrate. The odds that a species from outside our galaxy (much less outside our own planet) would have evolved to use the same genetic processes we do seem astronomically small. Since it was the Old Ones who seeded and shaped life around our galaxy (which explains why most things in 40k have similar traits and use DNA), I take this as support for my personal theory that after the Old Ones disappeared to somewhere else, they created the Tyranids and aimed them at our galaxy as a final F-U to the C'tan and Necrons.
ThePrimordial wrote: This is more of a science question than anything else.
Eldar as a species that have existed unmolested and been kept anatomically identical for millions of years have far longer DNA sequence strands than humans do.
This has ups and downs. Gestation is far longer. And the species takes forever to show signs of age. Aging is caused by damage to the DNA strands over constant copying and thus, if there's far larger sequences, and the rate of copying is the same, it takes far longer for damage to occur. Whales are an earthbound example of these principles.
My question really is how did those sequences get so long? I've always assumed it happens over vast periods of time as more and more genotypes and phenotypes get mixed in and added on to the DNA sequence but I don't know for sure.
Can anyone help?
Speaking as a geneticist, genetics in the fluff is fubar.
However, what is your source for Eldar genomes being bigger?
CalgarsPimpHand wrote: If I recall correctly, Tyranids do have DNA, which is how they're able to steal traits from species they encounter, and how genestealers are able to create hybrids with species they infiltrate. The odds that a species from outside our galaxy (much less outside our own planet) would have evolved to use the same genetic processes we do seem astronomically small. Since it was the Old Ones who seeded and shaped life around our galaxy (which explains why most things in 40k have similar traits and use DNA), I take this as support for my personal theory that after the Old Ones disappeared to somewhere else, they created the Tyranids and aimed them at our galaxy as a final F-U to the C'tan and Necrons.
Not a bad theory except Necrons seem to not have much to fear from Nids. Nids go after biomass which the Necrons have very little of. Don't they just avoid tomb planets generally?
CalgarsPimpHand wrote: If I recall correctly, Tyranids do have DNA, which is how they're able to steal traits from species they encounter, and how genestealers are able to create hybrids with species they infiltrate. The odds that a species from outside our galaxy (much less outside our own planet) would have evolved to use the same genetic processes we do seem astronomically small. Since it was the Old Ones who seeded and shaped life around our galaxy (which explains why most things in 40k have similar traits and use DNA), I take this as support for my personal theory that after the Old Ones disappeared to somewhere else, they created the Tyranids and aimed them at our galaxy as a final F-U to the C'tan and Necrons.
Not a bad theory except Necrons seem to not have much to fear from Nids. Nids go after biomass which the Necrons have very little of. Don't they just avoid tomb planets generally?
Necrons are terrified of the nids... They are going to destory all life in the galaxy, while the necrons grand plan is to transfer themselves back into organic bodies, once they rule everything.
CalgarsPimpHand wrote: If I recall correctly, Tyranids do have DNA, which is how they're able to steal traits from species they encounter, and how genestealers are able to create hybrids with species they infiltrate. The odds that a species from outside our galaxy (much less outside our own planet) would have evolved to use the same genetic processes we do seem astronomically small. Since it was the Old Ones who seeded and shaped life around our galaxy (which explains why most things in 40k have similar traits and use DNA), I take this as support for my personal theory that after the Old Ones disappeared to somewhere else, they created the Tyranids and aimed them at our galaxy as a final F-U to the C'tan and Necrons.
Not a bad theory except Necrons seem to not have much to fear from Nids. Nids go after biomass which the Necrons have very little of. Don't they just avoid tomb planets generally?
Necrons are terrified of the nids... They are going to destory all life in the galaxy, while the necrons grand plan is to transfer themselves back into organic bodies, once they rule everything.
Yeah but they don't actually scare Necrons as they are now as much as they will ruin what the Crons want to be right? I mean if the old ones had made the nids as a weapon against the Necrons they probably wouldn't exclusively focus on biomass is what I'm trying to say.
Which proves that different people have different opinions? Nastase is an example from GW, that has a model, a printed backstory, and fits the point I made that humans and Eldar are cousins within the same branch of hominid. Move the goal post all you want, but you can't disprove it.
Which proves that different people have different opinions? Nastase is an example from GW, that has a model, a printed backstory, and fits the point I made that humans and Eldar are cousins within the same branch of hominid. Move the goal post all you want, but you can't disprove it.
SJ
It proves that that fluff is from Rogue Trader, almost thirty years ago, and has no bearing on the fluff as it is today. It was basically a different game back then. The fluff has changed a lot.
Also I thing that model is a conversion, not official.
Which proves that different people have different opinions? Nastase is an example from GW, that has a model, a printed backstory, and fits the point I made that humans and Eldar are cousins within the same branch of hominid. Move the goal post all you want, but you can't disprove it.
SJ
I wasn't trying to. I just was curious about this bit 'o' fluff and happened along that site (which is very amusing, by the way!).
Which proves that different people have different opinions? Nastase is an example from GW, that has a model, a printed backstory, and fits the point I made that humans and Eldar are cousins within the same branch of hominid. Move the goal post all you want, but you can't disprove it.
SJ
Uh..
Rogue Trader fluff had Space Marines as all convicts, the Emperor actually able to walk around and talk to people, Female Orcs, and Chaos Androids.
Guess how many of these things are still correct fluff.
Technically, all Orks are self fertilizing females as they lack the male structures found with most plants.
As to "negating" RT era fluff due to age, that's called "moving the goal post". You would actually need to provide a counter argument to disprove the existence of characters like Nastase, such as recent fluff stacking that Eldar are a separate unique species that just so happens to look like humans, speak Galic, write Galic, and follow ancient human religious practices. Find that fluff, and you are golden! Keep moving the goal post all you want, but that does not count my argument at all.
jeffersonian000 wrote: Technically, all Orks are self fertilizing females as they lack the male structures found with most plants.
As to "negating" RT era fluff due to age, that's called "moving the goal post". You would actually need to provide a counter argument to disprove the existence of characters like Nastase, such as recent fluff stacking that Eldar are a separate unique species that just so happens to look like humans, speak Galic, write Galic, and follow ancient human religious practices. Find that fluff, and you are golden! Keep moving the goal post all you want, but that does not count my argument at all.
SJ
Eldar don't look human (humanoid, but suitably alien), and don't follow human religions. That much is in any Eldar fluff these days. I'm pretty sure they have their own language (they can probably speak Gothic but only when they're talking to humans) and their written language is all runes I believe.
And Orks are fungus, not plants. Male and female as far as I know doesn't apply to fungi.
Eldar Craftworlds are named after Celtic holidays. Many of their naming conventions are modified biblical names. Their name for humans is "Mon-Keigh".
Yes, the authors are human, and English. Yet, the authors also had a fascination with anthropology, archaeology, and world history, which shows in the fluff.
Again, my point is that the information exists in the 40k setting, and this is the extension of that information. Eldar are not Human, and Humans are not Eldar. However, that is the sane as Tigers not being Lions, and Lions not being Tigers: please meet the Liger. Nastase and the other Eldar-Human hybrids in the setting are "Ligers", so to speak. This means they are close enough in relation to be able to crossbreed, despite normally having no population interaction. The differences between Eldar and Humans are cosmetic at most, while they are anatomically close enough to produce the occasional child with aspects of both parents. From this we know that Eldar follow the same XX, XY chromosome paradygn that Humans do, and given morphology, Eldar are hominids closer to Homo Sapien Sapien than our next closest cousins, the Pan Troglodytes (Chimpanzee, Bonobo).
jeffersonian000 wrote: Eldar Craftworlds are named after Celtic holidays. Many of their naming conventions are modified biblical names. Their name for humans is "Mon-Keigh".
Yes, the authors are human, and English. Yet, the authors also had a fascination with anthropology, archaeology, and world history, which shows in the fluff.
Again, my point is that the information exists in the 40k setting, and this is the extension of that information. Eldar are not Human, and Humans are not Eldar. However, that is the sane as Tigers not being Lions, and Lions not being Tigers: please meet the Liger. Nastase and the other Eldar-Human hybrids in the setting are "Ligers", so to speak. This means they are close enough in relation to be able to crossbreed, despite normally having no population interaction. The differences between Eldar and Humans are cosmetic at most, while they are anatomically close enough to produce the occasional child with aspects of both parents. From this we know that Eldar follow the same XX, XY chromosome paradygn that Humans do, and given morphology, Eldar are hominids closer to Homo Sapien Sapien than our next closest cousins, the Pan Troglodytes (Chimpanzee, Bonobo).
SJ
Eldar are a much older race than humanity. Therefore, it only follows that they gave the Celts the names of their holidays (in order for Games Workshop to use them in 40k)
Wow. That's amazing. We've just proven that Eldar exist. Now to find them in the stars!
jeffersonian000 wrote: Technically, all Orks are self fertilizing females as they lack the male structures found with most plants.
As to "negating" RT era fluff due to age, that's called "moving the goal post". You would actually need to provide a counter argument to disprove the existence of characters like Nastase, such as recent fluff stacking that Eldar are a separate unique species that just so happens to look like humans, speak Galic, write Galic, and follow ancient human religious practices. Find that fluff, and you are golden! Keep moving the goal post all you want, but that does not count my argument at all.
SJ
The fact that the Eldar were present in the War in Heaven, as an extremely advanced, techno-psychic species, which ended 60 million years ago, indicates that they are not a human off-shoot, as the genetic structure that is humanity did not exist then. Their genetics also seem to be somewhat silicon-based, since they crystallize when they reach a certain stage in their lifecycle, which humans do not do.
jeffersonian000 wrote: Technically, all Orks are self fertilizing females as they lack the male structures found with most plants.
As to "negating" RT era fluff due to age, that's called "moving the goal post". You would actually need to provide a counter argument to disprove the existence of characters like Nastase, such as recent fluff stacking that Eldar are a separate unique species that just so happens to look like humans, speak Galic, write Galic, and follow ancient human religious practices. Find that fluff, and you are golden! Keep moving the goal post all you want, but that does not count my argument at all.
SJ
The fact that the Eldar were present in the War in Heaven, as an extremely advanced, techno-psychic species, which ended 60 million years ago, indicates that they are not a human off-shoot, as the genetic structure that is humanity did not exist then. Their genetics also seem to be somewhat silicon-based, since they crystallize when they reach a certain stage in their lifecycle, which humans do not do.
I've been saying Humans and Eldar share common ancestors, making Humans effectively a branch of Exodites, rather than Eldar being descended from Humans.
ImAGeek wrote: But that might have been the case in old fluff, but it isn't true any more.
Prove it. Nothing in current fluff disproves nor negates this bit of older fluff. Rather than stating its so, please prove its so.
I've been saying Humans and Eldar share common ancestors, making Humans effectively a branch of Exodites, rather than Eldar being descended from Humans.
While it's possible that there is some sort of protozoa that eventually became Humanity that was also involved in the creation of the Eldar, this would be little more than an accident of genetic history, rather than design.
Other than a single, half-elven character from a time when the game was Warhammer Fantasy... IN SPACE! there's no evidence to support a common ancestor for the two.
I've been saying Humans and Eldar share common ancestors, making Humans effectively a branch of Exodites, rather than Eldar being descended from Humans.
While it's possible that there is some sort of protozoa that eventually became Humanity that was also involved in the creation of the Eldar, this would be little more than an accident of genetic history, rather than design.
Other than a single, half-elven character from a time when the game was Warhammer Fantasy... IN SPACE! there's no evidence to support a common ancestor for the two.
In fantasy, Elves, Dwarves, Slaan, and Humans were all created by the old ones. Very different.
I've been saying Humans and Eldar share common ancestors, making Humans effectively a branch of Exodites, rather than Eldar being descended from Humans.
While it's possible that there is some sort of protozoa that eventually became Humanity that was also involved in the creation of the Eldar, this would be little more than an accident of genetic history, rather than design.
Other than a single, half-elven character from a time when the game was Warhammer Fantasy... IN SPACE! there's no evidence to support a common ancestor for the two.
So, other than the evidence, there is no evidence? Cool, I guess.
Btw, there are other examples, including a recent novel with an unamed female Human-Eldar hybrid, so Nastase is neither alone nor dated.
Nastase, as pointed out in the linked article earlier, doesn't really count in the new fluff, as he has been replaced by Tigurius,
But, knowing 40K and GW, this is unlikely to be canon, especially since Varro Tigurius is the Chief Librarian during the dates that Nastase supposedly also holds the same rank...
Also, in the same article, the Ultramarines of Macragge were said to be a chapter of the THIRD FOUNDING raised to replace the 13th Legion who had turned traitor and fled to the Eye of Terror, and this new chapter received all of the paraphernalia of the old legion. ULTIMATE HERESY *BLAM*
statu wrote: Nastase, as pointed out in the linked article earlier, doesn't really count in the new fluff, as he has been replaced by Tigurius,
But, knowing 40K and GW, this is unlikely to be canon, especially since Varro Tigurius is the Chief Librarian during the dates that Nastase supposedly also holds the same rank...
Also, in the same article, the Ultramarines of Macragge were said to be a chapter of the THIRD FOUNDING raised to replace the 13th Legion who had turned traitor and fled to the Eye of Terror, and this new chapter received all of the paraphernalia of the old legion. ULTIMATE HERESY *BLAM*
And what part of any of that negates the Human-Eldar hybrids in current GW fiction? All you are saying is because some of the fiction has been replaced, all of the fiction that hasn't been replaced should be ignored. Unfortunately, it doesn't work that way.
statu wrote: Nastase, as pointed out in the linked article earlier, doesn't really count in the new fluff, as he has been replaced by Tigurius,
But, knowing 40K and GW, this is unlikely to be canon, especially since Varro Tigurius is the Chief Librarian during the dates that Nastase supposedly also holds the same rank...
Also, in the same article, the Ultramarines of Macragge were said to be a chapter of the THIRD FOUNDING raised to replace the 13th Legion who had turned traitor and fled to the Eye of Terror, and this new chapter received all of the paraphernalia of the old legion. ULTIMATE HERESY *BLAM*
And what part of any of that negates the Human-Eldar hybrids in current GW fiction? All you are saying is because some of the fiction has been replaced, all of the fiction that hasn't been replaced should be ignored. Unfortunately, it doesn't work that way.
There is only one named hybrid so far in 40k lore, although a few are mentioned. One named character is all that matters, though, if you can't disprove that one character ... which you can't.
jeffersonian000 wrote: There is only one named hybrid so far in 40k lore, although a few are mentioned. One named character is all that matters, though, if you can't disprove that one character ... which you can't.
SJ
It already has been disproved. He was apparantly the chief librarian of the Ultramarines, but the dates it says he was, Tiberius was.
jeffersonian000 wrote: There is only one named hybrid so far in 40k lore, although a few are mentioned. One named character is all that matters, though, if you can't disprove that one character ... which you can't.
SJ
So that character is removed from the fluff, and replaced by someone else, meaning they don't exist, but that somehow means that said character hasn't been disproved? If you read Nastase's fluff it is completely inconsistent with the current fluff. He has been retconned out
He was appointed Chief of Macragge's Interstellar Communications in 965.M41, not Chief Librarian of the Ultramarine Chapter of Space Marines, which was already held by Varro Tigurius. Try again.
jeffersonian000 wrote:He was appointed Chief of Macragge's Interstellar Communications in 965.M41, not Chief Librarian of the Ultramarine Chapter of Space Marines, which was already held by Varro Tigurius. Try again.
SJ
ImAGeek wrote:Also, in Xenology, Eldar have a quintuple helix DNA, with 20 bases (compared to our 4), which would be incompatible with ours.
So Eldar/Human hybrids are a biological and chemical impossibility. How does that not disprove it.
SharkoutofWata wrote: Eldar are a fictional race in a game with models. Let me ask, why are Elves immortal? Why do trolls turn to stone? Why do Dragons breathe fire in seven different kinds of ways? Why is Valerian steel better than other steel? What causes a Splicer to use a power he wasn't born with? How does a TIE fighter screech in the vacuum of space?
These are all made up things and taking them apart at such a ridiculously fine detail is ridiculous. So I'm going to say there's little hamsters that pooped on their DNA and now it doesn't deteriorate. Prove me wrong.
This with less sarcasm.....
Since your a DNA expert. I ask you this. The Current Human DNA strand has the potential to hold vast amouts of genetic information, more than is seemingly used. So the old ones being so vastly intelligent could they not have programed all of the Eldar qualities in a smaller DNA strand?
Fantasy and Sci-fi of the Grimdark doen't translate well into real world science. It's what ever you'd like it to be. you'd be lucky if GW writers follow relativity and time dilation near blackholes, which is only theory.
Chief librarian astropath, but also, the imperium is massively xenophobic, how would he survive to be able to climb to that rank? From what I understand way back when the imperium was nothing like it is today, allowing for fun stuff like him to exist, in the modern imperium he would have been shot. Then there's the modern version they have of biology as ImAGeek pointed out. How can a double helix dna combine with a quintuple helix dna? Or what about the bases? They have 20, we have 4.
jeffersonian000 wrote:He was appointed Chief of Macragge's Interstellar Communications in 965.M41, not Chief Librarian of the Ultramarine Chapter of Space Marines, which was already held by Varro Tigurius. Try again.
SJ
ImAGeek wrote:Also, in Xenology, Eldar have a quintuple helix DNA, with 20 bases (compared to our 4), which would be incompatible with ours.
So Eldar/Human hybrids are a biological and chemical impossibility. How does that not disprove it.
The existence of the character proves it is not only biologically possible, it already biologically occured.
jeffersonian000 wrote:He was appointed Chief of Macragge's Interstellar Communications in 965.M41, not Chief Librarian of the Ultramarine Chapter of Space Marines, which was already held by Varro Tigurius. Try again.
SJ
ImAGeek wrote:Also, in Xenology, Eldar have a quintuple helix DNA, with 20 bases (compared to our 4), which would be incompatible with ours.
So Eldar/Human hybrids are a biological and chemical impossibility. How does that not disprove it.
The existence of the character proves it is not only biologically possible, it already biologically occured.
SJ
Xenology is newer and shows its biologically impossible, thus invalidating the old fluff.
jeffersonian000 wrote:He was appointed Chief of Macragge's Interstellar Communications in 965.M41, not Chief Librarian of the Ultramarine Chapter of Space Marines, which was already held by Varro Tigurius. Try again.
SJ
ImAGeek wrote:Also, in Xenology, Eldar have a quintuple helix DNA, with 20 bases (compared to our 4), which would be incompatible with ours.
So Eldar/Human hybrids are a biological and chemical impossibility. How does that not disprove it.
The existence of the character proves it is not only biologically possible, it already biologically occured.
SJ
Xenology is newer and shows its biologically impossible, thus invalidating the old fluff.
Xenology is newer, however, it does not show a biological impossibility. It shows a biological improbability. The existence of the character proves the possibility.
jeffersonian000 wrote:He was appointed Chief of Macragge's Interstellar Communications in 965.M41, not Chief Librarian of the Ultramarine Chapter of Space Marines, which was already held by Varro Tigurius. Try again.
SJ
ImAGeek wrote:Also, in Xenology, Eldar have a quintuple helix DNA, with 20 bases (compared to our 4), which would be incompatible with ours.
So Eldar/Human hybrids are a biological and chemical impossibility. How does that not disprove it.
The existence of the character proves it is not only biologically possible, it already biologically occured.
SJ
Xenology is newer and shows its biologically impossible, thus invalidating the old fluff.
Xenology is newer, however, it does not show a biological impossibility. It shows a biological improbability. The existence of the character proves the possibility.
jeffersonian000 wrote:He was appointed Chief of Macragge's Interstellar Communications in 965.M41, not Chief Librarian of the Ultramarine Chapter of Space Marines, which was already held by Varro Tigurius. Try again.
SJ
ImAGeek wrote:Also, in Xenology, Eldar have a quintuple helix DNA, with 20 bases (compared to our 4), which would be incompatible with ours.
So Eldar/Human hybrids are a biological and chemical impossibility. How does that not disprove it.
The existence of the character proves it is not only biologically possible, it already biologically occured.
SJ
Xenology is newer and shows its biologically impossible, thus invalidating the old fluff.
Xenology is newer, however, it does not show a biological impossibility. It shows a biological improbability. The existence of the character proves the possibility.
jeffersonian000 wrote:He was appointed Chief of Macragge's Interstellar Communications in 965.M41, not Chief Librarian of the Ultramarine Chapter of Space Marines, which was already held by Varro Tigurius. Try again.
SJ
ImAGeek wrote:Also, in Xenology, Eldar have a quintuple helix DNA, with 20 bases (compared to our 4), which would be incompatible with ours.
So Eldar/Human hybrids are a biological and chemical impossibility. How does that not disprove it.
The existence of the character proves it is not only biologically possible, it already biologically occured.
SJ
Xenology is newer and shows its biologically impossible, thus invalidating the old fluff.
Xenology is newer, however, it does not show a biological impossibility. It shows a biological improbability. The existence of the character proves the possibility.
SJ
How is it only a 'biological improbability'?
Because the character exists?
SJ
Not anymore. Because he can't, through biology, chemistry...
Species on earth can't even hybridise if they're too divergent and they all have the same double helix with the same four bases. It's impossile, biologically. They aren't genetically compatible. Let it go, you're basing your argument on fluff older than I am. Things change.
jeffersonian000 wrote:He was appointed Chief of Macragge's Interstellar Communications in 965.M41, not Chief Librarian of the Ultramarine Chapter of Space Marines, which was already held by Varro Tigurius. Try again.
SJ
ImAGeek wrote:Also, in Xenology, Eldar have a quintuple helix DNA, with 20 bases (compared to our 4), which would be incompatible with ours.
So Eldar/Human hybrids are a biological and chemical impossibility. How does that not disprove it.
The existence of the character proves it is not only biologically possible, it already biologically occured.
SJ
Xenology is newer and shows its biologically impossible, thus invalidating the old fluff.
Xenology is newer, however, it does not show a biological impossibility. It shows a biological improbability. The existence of the character proves the possibility.
SJ
How is it only a 'biological improbability'?
Because the character exists?
SJ
Ooh, wrong tense , he existed during first edition, but now he no longer does
jeffersonian000 wrote:He was appointed Chief of Macragge's Interstellar Communications in 965.M41, not Chief Librarian of the Ultramarine Chapter of Space Marines, which was already held by Varro Tigurius. Try again.
SJ
ImAGeek wrote:Also, in Xenology, Eldar have a quintuple helix DNA, with 20 bases (compared to our 4), which would be incompatible with ours.
So Eldar/Human hybrids are a biological and chemical impossibility. How does that not disprove it.
The existence of the character proves it is not only biologically possible, it already biologically occured.
SJ
Xenology is newer and shows its biologically impossible, thus invalidating the old fluff.
Xenology is newer, however, it does not show a biological impossibility. It shows a biological improbability. The existence of the character proves the possibility.
SJ
How is it only a 'biological improbability'?
Because the character exists?
SJ
The character existed in RT era / 1st ED, but has since become non-viable due to multiple changes to the lore which mean that he wouldn't exist, can't exist, or is totally unfeasible.
Is this seriously that hard for you to grasp? Do you need a letter stating "This character is no-longer cannon" personally signed by the offer before you'll accept it?
More likely than not you're just being difficult for the sake of being a pain in the ass, but I have to have at least a small amount of hope in humanity.
Is it seriously that had for you to grasp that GW has never once stated that any of their fluff is invalid, or superseded, unless they specifically do so? GW has stated that they do not recognize "canon", that all of their printed material is valid unless there is a specific conflict, in which case the more recent version is correct. Nastase has never been updated, nor has his backstory become invalidated by a more recent publication.
And while GW has further "fleshed out" Eldar biology in recent publications, they still continue to mention Eldar-Human hybrids in their other publications. So, regardless of the Eldar super-stack DNA, they can and have interbreed with humans in the published 40k universe. As such, and barrng a more specific explanation as to why, humans and Eldar must share a common ancestor at some point in their history, specifically less than 6,5 million years ago, and most likely within the last 50,000 to 100,000 years.
You cannot use the published biology of the Eldar to disprove the existence of a character that exists. You can disprove the existence of such a character by citing an article from GW telling us to ignore RT era fluff, or an updated published story to changes Nastase's parentage, or a retraction by GW stating that Eldar and Humans cannot interbreed despite the number of references to such in heir 30 years of publications.
TL;DR, you cannot prove Nastase does not exist when he has a printed backstory published by GW, along with a model. You can only attempt prove that his backstory was retracted, if it ever was. Citing the difference between Eldar and a Human biology makes no difference due to the existence of any hybrids in the 40k setting, of which there is one named, and at least one more that has gone unnamed.
statu wrote: How about then, you cite your proof for the other hybrids
The other unnamed female doesn't prove nor disprove anything, other than GW authors still entertain the subject. The fact that one named character does exist, and GW has not retracted, nor updated the character's backstory makes the one named character relevant.
As in, I don't have to cite more than one example, if you can't disprove that one example.
statu wrote: How about then, you cite your proof for the other hybrids
The other unnamed female doesn't prove nor disprove anything, other than GW authors still entertain the subject. The fact that one named character does exist, and GW has not retracted, nor updated the character's backstory makes the one named character relevant.
As in, I don't have to cite more than one example, if you can't disprove that one example.
SJ
As in if said other example is pre xenology, which disproves the idea of hybrids, then no they make no difference. If however that source is post xenology then they make a massive difference
statu wrote: How about then, you cite your proof for the other hybrids
The other unnamed female doesn't prove nor disprove anything, other than GW authors still entertain the subject. The fact that one named character does exist, and GW has not retracted, nor updated the character's backstory makes the one named character relevant.
As in, I don't have to cite more than one example, if you can't disprove that one example.
SJ
As in if said other example is pre xenology, which disproves the idea of hybrids, then no they make no difference. If however that source is post xenology then they make a massive difference
As I pointed out, the Xenology does not prove the impossibility of hybrids, it only demonstrates an improbability of hybrids. Since Nastase exists, and has not been retracted nor retconned, the improbability of his existence does not counter the fact that he does exist. Please cite a single line of text that states Humans and Eldar cannot interbreed naturally, and I will concede. Failure to cite such a line of text from GW will be accepted as you conceding the argument.
You really need GW to write 'Eldar and Humans cannot interbreed' or we've lost the argument..? Wow.
Xenology does prove the impossibility of hybridisation. Species on earth that are divergent for too long can't hybridise, and they share the same 4 organic bases and double helix DNA. So Eldar and Humans definitely can't hybridise if they have a quintuple helix DNA and 20 different organic bases. It isn't possible. That alone retcons Nastase's existence. If something is impossible, it cannot exist. Ergo, he doesn't exist any more.
ImAGeek wrote: You really need GW to write 'Eldar and Humans cannot interbreed' or we've lost the argument..? Wow.
Xenology does prove the impossibility of hybridisation. Species on earth that are divergent for too long can't hybridise, and they share the same 4 organic bases and double helix DNA. So Eldar and Humans definitely can't hybridise if they have a quintuple helix DNA and 20 different organic bases. It isn't possible. That alone retcons Nastase's existence. If something is impossible, it cannot exist. Ergo, he doesn't exist any more.
What you mean to say is that you cannot disprove the existence of a character that proves Eldar and Humans have a common ancestor close enough in time that they can still interbreed, so you will continue to go back to a false argument that Xenology proves impossibility when in fact it only proves improbability. Excellent! I accept your concession.
Tell you what mate, you go create a human fungi hybrid, and then you'll have proved there is a slight possibility this will work. If our dna will not work if one thing is slightly different, how do you propose it will work if there are loads of differences between human and Eldar? Xenology was the line saying it can't happen, so now it's on you to prove it can't occur, failure to provide an quote from GW fluff, post xenology, saying humans and Eldar can interbreed, will be considered you conceding that you have lost
Find me the line that says explicitly 'Humans and Eldar can interbreed' or I will take it as a concession. Apparantly that's how discussions work now...
My proof is easy to find (see the above post). Still waiting on counter evidence (which does not exist).
On the human-fungi hybrid, you must not be following recent science news. We can and have successfully spliced plant and insect DNA with mammal DNA, and can use viruses as a delivery method for genetic repair. Then there's the fact the unless you come from Subsaharan Africa, 1-3% of your DNA is Neanderthal, which last I check was a non-Human cousin to modern day Humans we co-existed with between 45,000 and 50,000 years ago.
Your 'proof' is massively out of date, I'm still waiting on some evidence it can happen
Oh don't start the whole Neanderthal debate, I'm a palaeoanthropologist, I'm well aware of that. Your dates are out for one. And yes it is possible that Homo sapiens sapiens and Homo neanderthalensis did interbreed, but they also had incredibly similar dna, which allowed it to occur. You can get hybrids in any species, but the DNA needs to similar enough for it to actually occur
3 things.
First, the OP was talking about prolonged life due to longer DNA, personally I think these are mutually exclusive. My five seconds of research seem to directly relate their life spans to their psyker potential. Also, saying "the old ones did it" doesn't help. They were scientists, everything they did is supposed to work by 40k's pseudo-science.
Second, the whole existence of human-eldar hybrids is an argument of the sciences and the neck beards. GW made a slip up. Their lore makes human-eldar hybrids impossible but never disproved that it happened. There is no debate, Both sides are right until GW actually fixes their fluff.
Third, and this is the only thing I actually know for sure, valyrian steel is better than normal steel because it is based on the real life wootz steel. The smelting process for wootz was slow and at low temperatures using high tungsten iron. The process created a natural damascus of hard and flexible steels with a few naturally occurring carbon nano-tubes making it the strongest steel of it's age.
ImAGeek wrote: There is no way quintuple helix DNA with 20 bases could hybridise with 2 helix DNA with 4 base pairs. It's impossible. Not improbable, impossible.
jeffersonian000 wrote: My proof is easy to find (see the above post). Still waiting on counter evidence (which does not exist).
On the human-fungi hybrid, you must not be following recent science news. We can and have successfully spliced plant and insect DNA with mammal DNA, and can use viruses as a delivery method for genetic repair. Then there's the fact the unless you come from Subsaharan Africa, 1-3% of your DNA is Neanderthal, which last I check was a non-Human cousin to modern day Humans we co-existed with between 45,000 and 50,000 years ago.
So, keep moving that goal post.
SJ
yeah... inter species breeding is more common then people think...
and while the two breeders being farther apart genetically will make it *less likely* for offspring to be produced, its still possible.
I'm going to take a fairly stringent view of the "successful" part of this question, and exclude some of the most obvious cases, where the first-generation hybrid is infertile or very poorly fertile (as in ligers, mules and hinnies).
I'm also going to exclude plants; I know there are many good examples in the plant kingdom, but I'm not very familiar with the field.
Even so there's quite a long list. Dogs, wolves, and coyotes are mostly interfertile. Dogs and wolves are arguably the same species, but coyotes are pretty distinct, yet coydogs and coywolves (including red wolves, according to some studies) are fairly successful. Dogs and jackals are interfertile (I don't know about coyotes and wolves with jackals, but it wouldn't surprise me).
Notoriously, "African Killer Bees" are interspecies hybrids -- the product of an African bee with the honeybee.
Wholphins (false killer whale x bottle-nose dolphin) are apparently fertile.
Cattle and bison interbreed quite well. "Beefalo" were pushed as a commercial breed (without much success); and I understand that almost all wild "bison" contain some cattle genes.
There are several successful crosses between domestic cats and wild felines, including the African Wild Cat -- this is actually a major threat to the viability of the wild population.
There are many bird species that are interfertile. Different species of Galapagos Finches, for example, can interbreed (and this has been implicated in at least some short-term evolutionary changes in the species -- See Peter and Rosemary Grant's work).
In reptiles, several cross-species crocodile offspring are fertile, and so are crosses within a number of snake genuses, such as different species of boas, pythons, and so on. (That is, not across the genus, but within them.)
There are probably dozens or hundreds of other examples.
As the 40K verse was wiped and remade with 3rd edition, nothing before then can be taken as canon simply as that really. Well if you follow GW and 40K at least.
Noir wrote: As the 40K verse was wiped and remade with 3rd edition, nothing before then can be taken as canon simply as that really. Well if you follow GW and 40K at least.
Please either back that statement up with a citation, or mark it as an opinion.
jeffersonian000 wrote: My proof is easy to find (see the above post). Still waiting on counter evidence (which does not exist).
On the human-fungi hybrid, you must not be following recent science news. We can and have successfully spliced plant and insect DNA with mammal DNA, and can use viruses as a delivery method for genetic repair. Then there's the fact the unless you come from Subsaharan Africa, 1-3% of your DNA is Neanderthal, which last I check was a non-Human cousin to modern day Humans we co-existed with between 45,000 and 50,000 years ago.
So, keep moving that goal post.
SJ
yeah... inter species breeding is more common then people think...
and while the two breeders being farther apart genetically will make it *less likely* for offspring to be produced, its still possible.
I'm going to take a fairly stringent view of the "successful" part of this question, and exclude some of the most obvious cases, where the first-generation hybrid is infertile or very poorly fertile (as in ligers, mules and hinnies).
I'm also going to exclude plants; I know there are many good examples in the plant kingdom, but I'm not very familiar with the field.
Even so there's quite a long list. Dogs, wolves, and coyotes are mostly interfertile. Dogs and wolves are arguably the same species, but coyotes are pretty distinct, yet coydogs and coywolves (including red wolves, according to some studies) are fairly successful. Dogs and jackals are interfertile (I don't know about coyotes and wolves with jackals, but it wouldn't surprise me).
Notoriously, "African Killer Bees" are interspecies hybrids -- the product of an African bee with the honeybee.
Wholphins (false killer whale x bottle-nose dolphin) are apparently fertile.
Cattle and bison interbreed quite well. "Beefalo" were pushed as a commercial breed (without much success); and I understand that almost all wild "bison" contain some cattle genes.
There are several successful crosses between domestic cats and wild felines, including the African Wild Cat -- this is actually a major threat to the viability of the wild population.
There are many bird species that are interfertile. Different species of Galapagos Finches, for example, can interbreed (and this has been implicated in at least some short-term evolutionary changes in the species -- See Peter and Rosemary Grant's work).
In reptiles, several cross-species crocodile offspring are fertile, and so are crosses within a number of snake genuses, such as different species of boas, pythons, and so on. (That is, not across the genus, but within them.)
There are probably dozens or hundreds of other examples.
Yeah except they're all based on the same DNA structure. I know hybridisation occurs, and I know there's a few cases that are successful. But they all have the same DNA structure. But you couldn't breed a lion and a.. Seal, for example, and get a result. So you couldn't breed a human and an Eldar, who has a massively different DNA structure, and get a result.
If he'd been created in a lab or something I could maybe see it but it says he was born to a human mother and Eldar father, which scientifically just wouldn't work.
statu wrote: Your 'proof' is massively out of date, I'm still waiting on some evidence it can happen
Oh don't start the whole Neanderthal debate, I'm a palaeoanthropologist, I'm well aware of that. Your dates are out for one. And yes it is possible that Homo sapiens sapiens and Homo neanderthalensis did interbreed, but they also had incredibly similar dna, which allowed it to occur. You can get hybrids in any species, but the DNA needs to similar enough for it to actually occur
Out of date proof is still proof, when nothing new has been found to retract or discount the proof. The cited Xenology example does not disprove the existence of a character in older fluff, because no mention was made to specifically tell us Nastase never existed or that he did exist yet his parentage did not include an Eldar father. The facts remain that GW did not retract this bit of fluff, did not retcon the fluff, nor did they state in the Xenology that it is impossible for Eldar and Humans to interbreed. It is improbable, not impossible.
By the way, you cannot state truly that something is impossible, because you cannot be all-knowing. You can say there are no Unicorns in Vietnam, but you would be wrong since Unicorns were found in Vietnam only a few years ago. You can say there are no Unicorns in Equador, but you have no way of proving there are no Unicorns in Equador. This is way I can say with certainty that just because Eldar have a quintuplet Helix and 20 base pairs, it is only improbable that a Human-Eldar hybrid could exist. The question of impossibility gets thrown out the moment a Human-Eldar hybrid exists, which at least one does as seen in the background of Ultramarine Chief Astropath Illiyan Nastase.
Being a palaeoanthropologist, I'm surprised you lack basic understanding of probabilities and debate. I'm just a lowly electronics engineer with degrees in robotics and semiconductor manufacturing, but at least I know the difference between the impossible and the improbable.
Out of date proof is still proof, when nothing new has been found to retract or discount the proof. The cited Xenology example does not disprove the existence of a character in older fluff, because no mention was made to specifically tell us Nastase never existed or that he did exist yet his parentage did not include an Eldar father. The facts remain that GW did not retract this bit of fluff, did not retcon the fluff, nor did they state in the Xenology that it is impossible for Eldar and Humans to interbreed. It is improbable, not impossible.
We know that 40k fluff is all from an 'unreliable narrator' (see quote below). For this reason you can't use any of it as definitive proof. If we fall back on actual science and understanding of genetics (which is what my doctorate is in) then we can see that human/eldar hybrids are for all intents and purposes impossible.
Using your defining of the word impossible into non-existence I can rephrase that as so highly improbable as to be discount-able. Improbable to the same level that it would be comparable to you phasing through the planet into the core right now. Its not a thing that can happen.
So this would suggest that a report from a known unreliable source of an impossible event should be treated as highly suspicious and probably discounted.
Marc Gascoigne wrote:
Here's our standard line: Yes it's all official, but remember that we're reporting back from a time where stories aren't always true, or at least 100% accurate. if it has the 40K logo on it, it exists in the 40k universe. Or it was a legend that may well have happened. Or a rumour that may or may not have any truth behind it.
Let's put it another way: anything with a 40K logo on it is as official as any Codex... and at least as crammed full of rumours, distorted legends and half-truths.
Marc Gascoigne
Publisher, The Black Library and Black Flame
jeffersonian000 wrote: By the way, you cannot state truly that something is impossible, because you cannot be all-knowing. You can say there are no Unicorns in Vietnam, but you would be wrong since Unicorns were found in Vietnam only a few years ago. You can say there are no Unicorns in Equador, but you have no way of proving there are no Unicorns in Equador. This is way I can say with certainty that just because Eldar have a quintuplet Helix and 20 base pairs, it is only improbable that a Human-Eldar hybrid could exist. The question of impossibility gets thrown out the moment a Human-Eldar hybrid exists, which at least one does as seen in the background of Ultramarine Chief Astropath Illiyan Nastase.
Being a palaeoanthropologist, I'm surprised you lack basic understanding of probabilities and debate. I'm just a lowly electronics engineer with degrees in robotics and semiconductor manufacturing, but at least I know the difference between the impossible and the improbable.
SJ
Being a person with a degree that is at least science related I am surprised that you don't understand the irrelevance of debate to science and have such a poor understanding of probability.
Also whilst I have no evidence of unicorns, I do have evidence of rhinos and the usefulness of horns. A species of horse developing a horn is unlikely, but nowhere near as unlikely as a human crossbreeding with an oak tree, which in turn is far more likely than a human crossbreeding with an Eldar. Therefore a unicorn example (sans magic) would be far mor plausible than that of which we are speaking.
The unicorn thing he was talking about is a species of deer/antelope they found in Vietnam, called the Asian Unicorn or something. I don't really understand his point there, they didn't find a magical horned horse, they found a deer that they happened to call a unicorn.
Have an exalt for that though Drager, as futile as I'm sure it was...
statu wrote: Your 'proof' is massively out of date, I'm still waiting on some evidence it can happen
Oh don't start the whole Neanderthal debate, I'm a palaeoanthropologist, I'm well aware of that. Your dates are out for one. And yes it is possible that Homo sapiens sapiens and Homo neanderthalensis did interbreed, but they also had incredibly similar dna, which allowed it to occur. You can get hybrids in any species, but the DNA needs to similar enough for it to actually occur
Out of date proof is still proof, when nothing new has been found to retract or discount the proof. The cited Xenology example does not disprove the existence of a character in older fluff, because no mention was made to specifically tell us Nastase never existed or that he did exist yet his parentage did not include an Eldar father. The facts remain that GW did not retract this bit of fluff, did not retcon the fluff, nor did they state in the Xenology that it is impossible for Eldar and Humans to interbreed. It is improbable, not impossible.
By the way, you cannot state truly that something is impossible, because you cannot be all-knowing. You can say there are no Unicorns in Vietnam, but you would be wrong since Unicorns were found in Vietnam only a few years ago. You can say there are no Unicorns in Equador, but you have no way of proving there are no Unicorns in Equador. This is way I can say with certainty that just because Eldar have a quintuplet Helix and 20 base pairs, it is only improbable that a Human-Eldar hybrid could exist. The question of impossibility gets thrown out the moment a Human-Eldar hybrid exists, which at least one does as seen in the background of Ultramarine Chief Astropath Illiyan Nastase.
Being a palaeoanthropologist, I'm surprised you lack basic understanding of probabilities and debate. I'm just a lowly electronics engineer with degrees in robotics and semiconductor manufacturing, but at least I know the difference between the impossible and the improbable.
SJ
Are you familiar with the concept of a "retcon"? It happens when the history or lore of a fictional world is changed or overwritten by new material. This is pretty obviously the case with this "Illiyan Nastase" character. He is depicted wearing Ultramarines power armour, despite being an astropath and not a space marine. He doesn't have the black carapace, so he would be unable to wear astartes power armour (not to mention that it wouldn't fit). His title is "Chief Librarian Astropath", a title which doesn't exist. As mentioned, he is an astropath and not an astartes so he cannot be a Librarian in the Ultramarines. He holds the position of Chief Librarian at a time when another individual (Tigurius) has subsequently been said to hold it. He is described as being "inducted into the Administratum as an Astropath" despite the fact that in current lore as an astropath he would belong to the Adeptus Astra Telepathica, which is a separate branch of the Adeptus Terra distinct from the Adeptus Administratum. Any one of these things would render this character non-existent, even ignoring the fact that he's not been mentioned for at least twenty years in published material.
Based on this evidence we can confidently conclude that this character is impossible and has been retconned out of existence. You asked for evidence, and there it is. This character is impossible under current lore. The lore that made him possible has been over-written. So he has been retconned out.
As pointed out, it would be a biological impossibility for humans and eldar to have offspring. As two species diverge, they first lose their ability to produce fertile offspring, like horses and donkeys or lions and tigers. They can breed but their offspring are usually incapable of reproducing any further. As generations pass and the genes become increasingly differentiated, the odds of producing viable offspring approach zero. Now, is it absolutely impossible for a dog and a shark to produce offspring together? Strictly speaking, no. But it is so vastly unlikely that you would have to try breeding them for many ages of the universe before you would see any success. So in science, the term "impossible" is used in this sense. The eldar have an enormously different genetic code from humans, including very different structure and base pairs. So yes, it would in fact be biologically impossible for humans and eldar to reproduce.
I'm glad Marc Glascoigne agrees with me, shows that I'm on the right track.
The unicorn was used as an example of impossibility versus improbability. No unicorns were harm in the example.
On science versus engineering, I'm pretty sure science is based on building an hypothesis on an observable phenomena, building tests to verify the hypothesis, repeat the tests to gain a larger data sample, and have peers review the hypothesis, tests, and data samples to find flaws. Engineering builds off of science by applying the data in a practical manner. What part of paeloanthropology envolves ignoring data that doesn't the fit the three legs of evidence, established history, and tradition? The tradition part, I would assume? Because scientific method would mean that any evidence should be examined and evaluated, tested by more than one group, peer reviewed, with the established history updated to include the new evidence if proven to be correct.
On retcon, yes, I not only understand what retroactive reconstruction is, I've pointed out that the Xenology does not retcon the Nastase fluff. If it did, we would be having a different discussion.
On the difference between the impossible and the improbable, the concept of impossibility is a falsehood based on making an uninformed decision that something which has not been seen therefore cannot exist. Improbability takes into account that while something which has not been seen most likely won't be seen, there is no way to know for sure. Disregarding the improbability of a superstack helix of DNA with 20 base pairs, and the vast improbability that an organism with such a genetic structure could reproduce with another organism that has double-helix DNA with 4 base pairs, the original background of the 40k universe included Eldar-Human crossbreeds, with a named character that had a Human mother and an Eldar father. Further development of the 40k universe has seen a shift away from Humans and Eldar being trading partners for over 20 millennia to the two races being beligerents in a 10,000 year dispute over real estate. Yet, while the culture and biology of the Eldar has become more defined, GW has chosen not to retract or replace the older background, they have instead proceeded to add bit and pieces to the puzzle that appear to contradict older sources while still claiming everything printed is equally valid. This means that Nastase was never retconned.
The unicorn was used as an example of impossibility versus improbability. No unicorns were harm in the example.
Except that they didn't find a unicorn. They found a species of bovine called a saola that happens to be nicknamed the "Asian unicorn". By no reasonable understanding of what a unicorn is does this qualify as a unicorn. Anyone that said "unicorns don't exist" would still find no evidence to contradict their assertion.
On science versus engineering, I'm pretty sure science is based on building an hypothesis on an observable phenomena, building tests to verify the hypothesis, repeat the tests to gain a larger data sample, and have peers review the hypothesis, tests, and data samples to find flaws. Engineering builds off of science by applying the data in a practical manner. What part of paeloanthropology envolves ignoring data that doesn't the fit the three legs of evidence, established history, and tradition? The tradition part, I would assume? Because scientific method would mean that any evidence should be examined and evaluated, tested by more than one group, peer reviewed, with the established history updated to include the new evidence if proven to be correct.
Sure. But in science you disregard evidence that doesn't fit the other evidence. If you have two pieces of evidence that are contradictory, you discard the one that you cannot duplicate as an artefact or an error. In practice, if you measure a different speed of light from everyone else, it's possible you've just overthrown the last hundred years of physics, but far more likely that one of your cables is loose.
However, the laws of the universe don't change. There's no retconning science. There is in fiction. So the approach is not directly applicable. Here, if we have two pieces of lore that contradict one another, we take the more recently written one as being "true".
On retcon, yes, I not only understand what retroactive reconstruction is, I've pointed out that the Xenology does not retcon the Nastase fluff. If it did, we would be having a different discussion.
On the difference between the impossible and the improbable, the concept of impossibility is a falsehood based on making an uninformed decision that something which has not been seen therefore cannot exist. Improbability takes into account that while something which has not been seen most likely won't be seen, there is no way to know for sure. Disregarding the improbability of a superstack helix of DNA with 20 base pairs, and the vast improbability that an organism with such a genetic structure could reproduce with another organism that has double-helix DNA with 4 base pairs, the original background of the 40k universe included Eldar-Human crossbreeds, with a named character that had a Human mother and an Eldar father. Further development of the 40k universe has seen a shift away from Humans and Eldar being trading partners for over 20 millennia to the two races being beligerents in a 10,000 year dispute over real estate. Yet, while the culture and biology of the Eldar has become more defined, GW has chosen not to retract or replace the older background, they have instead proceeded to add bit and pieces to the puzzle that appear to contradict older sources while still claiming everything printed is equally valid. This means that Nastase was never retconned.
SJ
So, first off, retcon is short for "retroactive continuity".
You're never going to have GW come out and say "the following parts of Rogue Trader are no longer true." But your assertion that GW hasn't replaced the older background is demonstrably false, and I've given you a half dozen examples of things just in that two-paragraph character summary that have since been replaced. He has very clearly been retconned out, by any reasonable standard short of an official announcement bulletin.
If you want to still believe in the story then good for you, I suppose, carry on. I'm not going to tell you that you're wrong. I don't know how you're going to reconcile any of it with current lore, but that's your business. The simplest solution, to me, is to accept that the character has been overwritten and think no more of it.
The unicorn was used as an example of impossibility versus improbability. No unicorns were harm in the example.
Except that they didn't find a unicorn. They found a species of bovine called a saola that happens to be nicknamed the "Asian unicorn". By no reasonable understanding of what a unicorn is does this qualify as a unicorn. Anyone that said "unicorns don't exist" would still find no evidence to contradict their assertion.
On science versus engineering, I'm pretty sure science is based on building an hypothesis on an observable phenomena, building tests to verify the hypothesis, repeat the tests to gain a larger data sample, and have peers review the hypothesis, tests, and data samples to find flaws. Engineering builds off of science by applying the data in a practical manner. What part of paeloanthropology envolves ignoring data that doesn't the fit the three legs of evidence, established history, and tradition? The tradition part, I would assume? Because scientific method would mean that any evidence should be examined and evaluated, tested by more than one group, peer reviewed, with the established history updated to include the new evidence if proven to be correct.
Sure. But in science you disregard evidence that doesn't fit the other evidence. If you have two pieces of evidence that are contradictory, you discard the one that you cannot duplicate as an artefact or an error. In practice, if you measure a different speed of light from everyone else, it's possible you've just overthrown the last hundred years of physics, but far more likely that one of your cables is loose.
However, the laws of the universe don't change. There's no retconning science. There is in fiction. So the approach is not directly applicable. Here, if we have two pieces of lore that contradict one another, we take the more recently written one as being "true".
On retcon, yes, I not only understand what retroactive reconstruction is, I've pointed out that the Xenology does not retcon the Nastase fluff. If it did, we would be having a different discussion.
On the difference between the impossible and the improbable, the concept of impossibility is a falsehood based on making an uninformed decision that something which has not been seen therefore cannot exist. Improbability takes into account that while something which has not been seen most likely won't be seen, there is no way to know for sure. Disregarding the improbability of a superstack helix of DNA with 20 base pairs, and the vast improbability that an organism with such a genetic structure could reproduce with another organism that has double-helix DNA with 4 base pairs, the original background of the 40k universe included Eldar-Human crossbreeds, with a named character that had a Human mother and an Eldar father. Further development of the 40k universe has seen a shift away from Humans and Eldar being trading partners for over 20 millennia to the two races being beligerents in a 10,000 year dispute over real estate. Yet, while the culture and biology of the Eldar has become more defined, GW has chosen not to retract or replace the older background, they have instead proceeded to add bit and pieces to the puzzle that appear to contradict older sources while still claiming everything printed is equally valid. This means that Nastase was never retconned.
SJ
So, first off, retcon is short for "retroactive continuity".
You're never going to have GW come out and say "the following parts of Rogue Trader are no longer true." But your assertion that GW hasn't replaced the older background is demonstrably false, and I've given you a half dozen examples of things just in that two-paragraph character summary that have since been replaced. He has very clearly been retconned out, by any reasonable standard short of an official announcement bulletin.
If you want to still believe in the story then good for you, I suppose, carry on. I'm not going to tell you that you're wrong. I don't know how you're going to reconcile any of it with current lore, but that's your business. The simplest solution, to me, is to accept that the character has been overwritten and think no more of it.
I bolded your false statement. Please feel free to re-post the 6 proofs you think you may have already mentioned.
I bolded your false statement. Please feel free to re-post the 6 proofs you think you may have already mentioned.
SJ
1. Title "Chief Librarian Astropath" does not exist. 2. An astropath cannot be a librarian. 3. An astropath cannot be an astartes. 4. A non-astartes cannot wear astartes power armour. 5. An astropath is not part of the administratum. 6. Varro Tigurius is the Chief Librarian of the Ultramarines in late M41.
And, as an added bonus, (these two are perhaps a matter of opinion but certainly violate the lore in my view)
7. The inquisition would execute any human/alien hybrid as heresy. 8. Such a creature would never be allowed to become an astropath, an astartes, or anything else.
I do not contend that this is irrefutable proof, obviously. It just makes the explanation that the character has been retconned out vastly, unspeakably more likely, in my (and most other people on the thread's) opinion.
jeffersonian000 wrote: On science versus engineering, I'm pretty sure science is based on building an hypothesis on an observable phenomena, building tests to verify the hypothesis, repeat the tests to gain a larger data sample, and have peers review the hypothesis, tests, and data samples to find flaws.
Actually you are mistaken, that is not how science works. A hypothesis is developed based on observable phenomena, then that hypothesis is tested by an attempt to disconfirm, this is done by experiment. If the experiment does not disconfirm the hypothesis it is tentatively accepted, but not taking it as proven. This is then submitted to a journal for peer review, a process in which the write up is checked to ensure that the process used to coem to the conclusion is sound. After this others may then retest and/or do a different test in an attempt to disconfirm the hypothesis. There is never a test to verify as that is not really possible.
The above is why you will often here scientists couch things in particular language (because we are trained to) such that definitive statements are avoided. 'The data suggests', 'There is a >99.9% probability that the effect did not occur by chance', 'The evidence shows that, based on the model...' etc.
By this method history and tradition are irrelevant and, where they have an effect, they are unwanted. Only evidence matters to science, if you are appealing to anything else you have departed from doing science. For this reason the scientific suggestion would be that the evidence indicates that Eldar/Human hybrids do not exist, as the evidence of their separate development, different genetics and such strongly indicate this. The only counterexample is hearsay from a source we know to be both fallible and dishonest. Doesn't seem that strong a case to me.
Again I would point to my earlier comment that the chances of a human breeding with an Eldar are lower than the chances of a human breeding with an oak tree. Do you think tree/human hybrids are possible?
All of this of course is discounting intervention from the warp, as magic makes all things possible, so I'll give you Eldar/Human and Human/Tree hybrids if a wizard did it. At that point though we have completely departed from asking about a natural occurrence, so its moot.
1. Title "Chief Librarian Astropath" does exist, it's right there in black and white.
2. Space Marine Astropathes are part of the Librarius, and are therefore Librarians.
3. See bullet point #2.
4. A non-astartes can wear astartes power armour, as seen in illustrations of different Inquisitors in power armour.
5. The Administratum has their own Astropathes, as noted in several 40k and HH novels.
6. Varro Tigurius is most definitely the Chief Librarian of the Ultramarines in late M41, while Illiyan Nastase has been the Chief of Macragge's Interstellar Communications Link since 965.M41.
7. The inquisition treat with aliens, treat with daemons, treat with mutants, and treat with witches, depending on the Ordo. Human/alien hybrids would be heresy to some, curiosities to others, or actual Inquisitors.
8. Such a creature did become an Astropath, may have become an Astartes (picture, model, and title seem to suggest this), and is still alive and in good health as of the current timeline.
I do not contend that this is irrefutable proof, either, just making the explanation that the character has not been retconned at all, just forgotten.
jeffersonian000 wrote: On science versus engineering, I'm pretty sure science is based on building an hypothesis on an observable phenomena, building tests to verify the hypothesis, repeat the tests to gain a larger data sample, and have peers review the hypothesis, tests, and data samples to find flaws.
Actually you are mistaken, that is not how science works. A hypothesis is developed based on observable phenomena, then that hypothesis is tested by an attempt to disconfirm, this is done by experiment. If the experiment does not disconfirm the hypothesis it is tentatively accepted, but not taking it as proven. This is then submitted to a journal for peer review, a process in which the write up is checked to ensure that the process used to coem to the conclusion is sound. After this others may then retest and/or do a different test in an attempt to disconfirm the hypothesis. There is never a test to verify as that is not really possible.
The above is why you will often here scientists couch things in particular language (because we are trained to) such that definitive statements are avoided. 'The data suggests', 'There is a >99.9% probability that the effect did not occur by chance', 'The evidence shows that, based on the model...' etc.
By this method history and tradition are irrelevant and, where they have an effect, they are unwanted. Only evidence matters to science, if you are appealing to anything else you have departed from doing science. For this reason the scientific suggestion would be that the evidence indicates that Eldar/Human hybrids do not exist, as the evidence of their separate development, different genetics and such strongly indicate this. The only counterexample is hearsay from a source we know to be both fallible and dishonest. Doesn't seem that strong a case to me.
Again I would point to my earlier comment that the chances of a human breeding with an Eldar are lower than the chances of a human breeding with an oak tree. Do you think tree/human hybrids are possible?
All of this of course is discounting intervention from the warp, as magic makes all things possible, so I'll give you Eldar/Human and Human/Tree hybrids if a wizard did it. At that point though we have completely departed from asking about a natural occurrence, so its moot.
Excellent response, and thank you for restating my point, but with greater detail. Not sure way it has become so common these days to disagree by agreeing, but I'll take it.
jeffersonian000 wrote: 1. Title "Chief Librarian Astropath" does exist, it's right there in black and white. 2. Space Marine Astropathes are part of the Librarius, and are therefore Librarians. 3. See bullet point #2. 4. A non-astartes can wear astartes power armour, as seen in illustrations of different Inquisitors in power armour. 5. The Administratum has their own Astropathes, as noted in several 40k and HH novels. 6. Varro Tigurius is most definitely the Chief Librarian of the Ultramarines in late M41, while Illiyan Nastase has been the Chief of Macragge's Interstellar Communications Link since 965.M41. 7. The inquisition treat with aliens, treat with daemons, treat with mutants, and treat with witches, depending on the Ordo. Human/alien hybrids would be heresy to some, curiosities to others, or actual Inquisitors. 8. Such a creature did become an Astropath, may have become an Astartes (picture, model, and title seem to suggest this), and is still alive and in good health as of the current timeline.
I do not contend that this is irrefutable proof, either, just making the explanation that the character has not been retconned at all, just forgotten.
1. There is no "Chief Librarian Astropath" in the Ultramarines chapter's order of battle or in a codex chapter's organization. The closest title is "Chief Librarian", which an astropath would be excluded from holding and which Tigurius holds anyway. 2. The Librarius lists the Chief Librarian, Epistolaries, Lexicaniums, Codiciers, and Acolytes. Twelve astropaths are listed under the Headquarters, among the 206 non space marine support and administrative staff. 3. An astropath cannot be an astartes. An astartes cannot be an astropath. Psykers that join the astartes become librarians, they do not undergo the soul-binding and they do not join the adeptus astra telepathica. 4. Non-astartes like inquisitors and sisters of battle wear different types of power armour, such as Ignatus power armour, which is specially made for them because they do not possess the black carapace. This armour does not bear ultramarines chapter heraldry. 5. The adeptus astra telepathica is a distinct branch of the adeptus terra from the administratum. He could not be "recruited into the administratum as an astropath", he would have to be attached or seconded from the Adeptus Astra Telepathica. 6. The title at the top of the character sheet says "Chief Librarian Astropath". As this title doesn't exist, a reasonable reading of it would be "Chief Librarian and Astropath". He cannot be the chief librarian as Tigurius is at this point.
Beyond this, you understand that a space marine must undergo rigorous indoctrination, training, screening, and massive genetic modification that can only be done properly in adolescence, right? You can't just run off and become a space marine, that's not how it works. You have to be less than full-grown when you receive the gene-seed, no more than twenty.
On the science side of things, and meaning no disrespect, you are attempting to argue far beyond your knowledge or expertise. And people have been pointing this out to you for about three pages now, but you remain obstinate. Your very first comment demonstrates that you don't understand the difference between a species and a genus, for example. You claim that nothing is impossible, but this is manifestly untrue. It is impossible for an electron to decay into a proton. This is an impossible thing. It is impossible to escape from inside the event horizon of a black hole. Your counterexample was that everyone thought unicorns don't exist and then they found a unicorn in Vietnam, which is patently untrue and also absurd.
You also don't really understand probabilities, it seems. Now, if you have a hundred non-interacting particles in a box, what are the odds of finding them all on the left hand side? About one in 10^30. If you check your box once every second, it will take you a million million ages of the universe before you expect to see it happen. Impossible? I'm going to say yes, for all practical purposes this qualifies as impossible. And that's only a hundred non-interacting particles. The human genome has tens of thousands of genes. So yes, by any reasonable standard, it is impossible for a human and an eldar to produce offspring.
It's extremely unlikely that humans and eldar have a common ancestor. All known life on earth has a common ancestor, all DNA is a double helix with four nucleobases. This has remained true for half a billion years; all of evolution has failed to diverge from this. So the idea that in a span of time not much greater than life on earth has existed that it could evolve a different basic structure is without precedent in science. By the above definition, I'll go with "also impossible".
I really suggest that you set your ego aside and try to understand the science behind all this (the title of the thread is "science question" after all - I presume we're not talking about "a wizard did it" nonsense). You've had quite a few people, many with expertise far more relevant to the question than your own in electrical engineering, try to enlighten you. I implore you to listen rather than stubbornly refuse to give ground.
You just wrote a wall of "it's not blue, it's cerulean, and since it's cerulean, it can't be blue".
The first thing of note is that you are trying to disprove the existence in a character with a printed biography in a 40k source book, art work, and a model. Effectively, you are saying the Starue of Liberty does not exist because the plaque at the statue's base say's it's name is the Statue of Liberty Enlightening the World. An interesting argument, to be sure.
Don't get me wrong, I do understand that you are attempting to demonstrate the the current version of 40k fluff retcons it out of existence Chief Librarian Astropath Illiyan Nastase, Ultramarine Chief of Macragge's Interstellar Communications Link, because the idea that a child of a Human mother and Eldar father flyers in the face of all you hold dear when it comes to the science of this fantasy universe. I however find it fascinating that in order for such a character to exist, Humans and Eldar must come from a common ancestry, which makes Eldar a branch of Hominid.
Our approaches are diametrically opposed, because while I note that GW considers Nastase's existence valid, you do not. Thankfully, you aren't GW or BL.
As to you other points, have you read any of the Horus Heresy novels? You know, the ones that have adults being inducted into the Legions? Not only did the Word Bearers and the Dark Angels do it, which included some heavy use of cybernetics, but the Space Wolves inducted two adult Fenrisian warriors into their Legion, one of which became a full Astartes without need of cyber augmentation, while the other turned into a Thunderwolf!
I'd love to see how you reconcile that.
Oh! And Hawking Radiation escapes the event horizon of black holes, an electron dropping back to its normal valence band will spawn a photon, the act of observing a quantum event will influence the event (which is why Einstein hated Quantum Mechanics), and thank you for admitting that a Human-Eldar hybrid is unlikely rather than your previous position that it was impossible. I know that last point was either a big step or a mis-step, but seeing you write it gave me a warm and fuzzy!
Kor Phaeron and Luther weren't Space Marines. They were cybernetically enhanced humans in powered armour. Different things.
And he HAD a model, art and was written about. It's more like you saying the Statue of Liberty still exists even though it's been knocked down and replaced with something else. It existed, sure. It doesn't now.
jeffersonian000 wrote: Oh! And Hawking Radiation escapes the event horizon of black holes, an electron dropping back to its normal valence band will spawn a photon, the act of observing a quantum event will influence the event (which is why Einstein hated Quantum Mechanics), and thank you for admitting that a Human-Eldar hybrid is unlikely rather than your previous position that it was impossible. I know that last point was either a big step or a mis-step, but seeing you write it gave me a warm and fuzzy!
SJ
He said PROTON note PHOTON, so I have no idea why you mentioned electrons and photons
Could you at lest admit that maybe, nastase is one of the legends the black library fella mentioned? That maybe that story has been distorted etc and is no longer right? A lot of the story surrounding him has changed, to the point he has been reconnect out to most people. Given all the changes that have occurred since then, are you certain he actually existed, and wasn't some sort of early 40k myth?
jeffersonian000 wrote: Oh! And Hawking Radiation escapes the event horizon of black holes, an electron dropping back to its normal valence band will spawn a photon, the act of observing a quantum event will influence the event (which is why Einstein hated Quantum Mechanics), and thank you for admitting that a Human-Eldar hybrid is unlikely rather than your previous position that it was impossible. I know that last point was either a big step or a mis-step, but seeing you write it gave me a warm and fuzzy!
SJ
He said PROTON note PHOTON, so I have no idea why you mentioned electrons and photons
Could you at lest admit that maybe, nastase is one of the legends the black library fella mentioned? That maybe that story has been distorted etc and is no longer right? A lot of the story surrounding him has changed, to the point he has been reconnect out to most people. Given all the changes that have occurred since then, are you certain he actually existed, and wasn't some sort of early 40k myth?
You seriously want me to admit that a character GW created, published, made art work for, displayed a model for, never actually existed? Is that your argument now? I accept your concession.
As to protons and photons, I could get into the formation of protons, anti-protons, electrons, and anti-electrons, as well as go off on a tangent discussing why our universe does not seem to want the produce the anti-spin variants in equal proportion, which may have to do with the creation of time, but I've already won the debate. Thanks for participating!
You just wrote a wall of "it's not blue, it's cerulean, and since it's cerulean, it can't be blue".
The first thing of note is that you are trying to disprove the existence in a character with a printed biography in a 40k source book, art work, and a model. Effectively, you are saying the Starue of Liberty does not exist because the plaque at the statue's base say's it's name is the Statue of Liberty Enlightening the World. An interesting argument, to be sure.
Don't get me wrong, I do understand that you are attempting to demonstrate the the current version of 40k fluff retcons it out of existence Chief Librarian Astropath Illiyan Nastase, Ultramarine Chief of Macragge's Interstellar Communications Link, because the idea that a child of a Human mother and Eldar father flyers in the face of all you hold dear when it comes to the science of this fantasy universe. I however find it fascinating that in order for such a character to exist, Humans and Eldar must come from a common ancestry, which makes Eldar a branch of Hominid.
Our approaches are diametrically opposed, because while I note that GW considers Nastase's existence valid, you do not. Thankfully, you aren't GW or BL.
As to you other points, have you read any of the Horus Heresy novels? You know, the ones that have adults being inducted into the Legions? Not only did the Word Bearers and the Dark Angels do it, which included some heavy use of cybernetics, but the Space Wolves inducted two adult Fenrisian warriors into their Legion, one of which became a full Astartes without need of cyber augmentation, while the other turned into a Thunderwolf!
I'd love to see how you reconcile that.
Oh! And Hawking Radiation escapes the event horizon of black holes, an electron dropping back to its normal valence band will spawn a photon, the act of observing a quantum event will influence the event (which is why Einstein hated Quantum Mechanics), and thank you for admitting that a Human-Eldar hybrid is unlikely rather than your previous position that it was impossible. I know that last point was either a big step or a mis-step, but seeing you write it gave me a warm and fuzzy!
SJ
Right, you've got a lot wrong here so let's get right to it. I'm not trying to disprove the existence of a mention of the character in a sourcebook, I have demonstrated that his existence is no longer consistent with the current fiction and that he has therefore been retconned out. As has been repeatedly explained to you, at great length, by several very patient people, appearing in a 40k sourcebook doesn't make something "true" or "canon", it just means that it exists as a story or legend within the universe. He doesn't have a model produced by GW and never has. Space marines must be adolescents to receive their implants: evidence here among many other places. Electrons still can't decay into protons, that's not how quantum chromodynamics works. The idea of an "observer effect" in quantum mechanics is a non-scientific misunderstanding of the (in my view discredited) Copenhagen interpretation. Hawking radiation doesn't involve anything crossing the event horizon of a black hole from the inside, virtual particle pairs are created near the event horizon, one falls in, the other flies away, and the black hole absorbs negative energy. If you understood differential geometry, quantum electrodynamics, or general relativity, you would know that, but this is the entire problem: you're trying to create arguments that are so far beyond your understanding that you can't see why they don't make sense.
You asked for a link to some evidence that you were wrong. I provided it. I gave you six points, you disagreed with them, and I showed that you were wrong. I don't know what more to say. You're wrong. You've been repeatedly proven wrong. You're playing the "It is raining, but I do not believe that it is raining" game. The existence of this character is inconsistent with other parts of the fiction, so one or the other has to be true, but both cannot be. We can keep Nastase and throw away all the lore since 2nd edition, or we can accept that he's been retconned out.
You still don't understand biology, so you (and only you, it seems) don't realize that you're not making any sense. I'm not an expert in biology or taxonomy, I am a physicist, but I know enough to know that phyla, families, geni, and species are classified according to the similarity of their genes, with similarity of appearance used only in cases where genetic information isn't available, such as fossils. By definition, eldar and humans are not the same species, same genus, same phylum, or same anything else. Eldar cannot be hominids, by the definition of what a hominid is. I'm sorry that you would rather protect your ego than actually learn something about biology, but your incorrect beliefs cannot change reality. This part has nothing to do with 40k, this is just how genetics works and how species are defined. If an alien species were discovered with 20 base-pairs and a quintuple helix, it could not, by definition, be a hominid, a primate, a mammal, or anything else related.
Remember, humans share a common ancestor with all life on earth. We share about 50% or our DNA with bananas. We are much more similar to bananas than we would be to a quintuple-helix, 20 base-pair alien. It's much more likely for a human and a banana to produce offspring than for a human and an eldar. It's about as likely as a human-eldar hybrid spontaneously assembling itself out of random proteins. If you want to call that "not impossible" then that is only because you simply don't understand genetics, thermodynamics, or statistics, unfortunately.
Please cite one instance where GW defined what is canon and what is not. Or, barring that, cite one instance where GW has told us to disregard older fluff. If you can do either, then you have a valid argument. If not, you literally have no argument.
jeffersonian000 wrote: Please cite one instance where GW defined what is canon and what is not. Or, barring that, cite one instance where GW has told us to disregard older fluff. If you can do either, then you have a valid argument. If not, you literally have no argument.
SJ
The newer fluff contradicts the older fluff
Also I never asked you to never admit he never existed, what I was suggesting in an apparently vain effort to end this pointless discussion that's just going round and round in circles because you can't seem to be able to understand or admit you are wrong, was that maybe the story existed, maybe even the guy existed, however many elements of it are no longer factual, this relating his story to the level of myth rather than fact
jeffersonian000 wrote: Please cite one instance where GW defined what is canon and what is not. Or, barring that, cite one instance where GW has told us to disregard older fluff. If you can do either, then you have a valid argument. If not, you literally have no argument.
SJ
So, you don't know what literally means either? I don't mean to be snide, I'm genuinely asking. Because an argument is a logical demonstration that certain conclusions follow from a premise. The premises are that 1) two mutually contradictory things cannot both be true simultaneously, and 2) that in the event of a contradiction in the fiction, the most recent material is taken as true. From these premises, we argue that the existence of an eldar-human astropath librarian astartes contradicts various more recent statements previously outlined and conclude that he is no longer considered a "current" character. This is, literally, an argument. You may disagree with the premises or deny the inference but you can't accurately claim that the argument doesn't exist.
The quote from Marc Gascoigne on the previous page states explicitly that while everything is official, not everything is true. Everyone else here contends that this character is an example of something that is no longer considered "true". He is relegated to the pile of rumours, legends, and half-truths. This is what is meant by "he does not exist".
The problem with the argument provided to counter my point is that no actual contradict has been put forth. Each point that has been brought up as being in conflict with newer fluff has been demonstrated to not b in conflict.
lit·er·al·ly
ˈlidərəlē,ˈlitrəlē/
adverb
in a literal manner or sense; exactly.
"the driver took it literally when asked to go straight across the traffic circle"
synonyms: exactly, precisely, actually, really, truly; More
Informal
used for emphasis or to express strong feeling while not being literally true.
"I have received literally thousands of letters"
Technically, I was using it informally while still using it as an adverb.
It has only been demonstrated to not be in conflict because you don't seem to be able to understand that such a conflict exists. It seems to me that to you everything ever put out is true unless it has been explicitly said it is false, even if there are sufficient contradictions to show that it is not necessarily wholly true anymore
statu wrote: It has only been demonstrated to not be in conflict because you don't seem to be able to understand that such a conflict exists. It seems to me that to you everything ever put out is true unless it has been explicitly said it is false, even if there are sufficient contradictions to show that it is not necessarily wholly true anymore
Incorrect. My point has only been that nothing can said to be impossible, only improbable. The fact that GW included Human-Eldar hybrids in the setting shows a common origin of the two races. Current fluff versus older fluff has not invalided that one point in the fluff, although it does make it exceedingly rare of an occurance. The attempt to demonstrate a conflict between this bit of RT fluff with the most recent Xenology failed because it does does not disprove the existence of something that exists, it simply shows how rare the occurance is. The attempt to disprove the character's existence in the current continuity fails because GW did not retract the character, nor retcon the character. They actually appear to have either forgotten the character (and created Tigurius to fill the gap), or decided to just not go down that path for now while still supporting the entire body of work.
I happen to agree with the GW and BL policy of supporting all of their fluff equally, calling it lies, propaganda, and misinformation. That way, they can tell epic tales of future mythology without need to retract or redact older publication with newer additions don't fit, and I can boldly state that when you say it can't happen, that it's impossible, or that it's different now, you are in fact in error because it did happen, it was possible, and it nothing changed, we just got a different version form a different source.
jeffersonian000 wrote: The problem with the argument provided to counter my point is that no actual contradict has been put forth. Each point that has been brought up as being in conflict with newer fluff has been demonstrated to not b in conflict.
Spoiler:
lit·er·al·ly ˈlidərəlē,ˈlitrəlē/ adverb in a literal manner or sense; exactly. "the driver took it literally when asked to go straight across the traffic circle" synonyms: exactly, precisely, actually, really, truly; More
Informal used for emphasis or to express strong feeling while not being literally true. "I have received literally thousands of letters"
Technically, I was using it informally while still using it as an adverb.
SJ
Definition of literally: Fair enough. Contradictions: yes they have. And you've been given links explaining why. You said astropaths are part of the librarius, so I linked you the ultramarines order of battle for this period of 40k "history", showing that they are not. Therefore his title is a contradiction. That's just one example, but the others all still hold as well.
If you don't understand that Xenology makes a human-eldar hybrid impossible, that is because you don't understand genetics, thermodynamics, or what constitutes a possible thing. Human-eldar hybrids produced by biological reproduction are not possible. They are not "rare", they are impossible. Even by the strictest, most literal definition of "impossible" as "excluded from occurring by a law of the universe", this is impossible. Again, I'm unhappy for you that your grasp of science isn't sufficient to understand this point, but that's your business. As long as nobody reading your posts comes away misunderstanding science it's fairly harmless, so I try to point out why you're wrong. I don't think you'll change your mind, I just want everyone else to know how things actually work, because you're badly misrepresenting both thermodynamics and statistics as well as biology and genetics.
As to the lore status of the Nastase character, dude, if you think it's the coolest thing ever and you want to have him in your army or universe, I'm not going to try to stop you. Have fun. You're not wrong - 40k is a make-believe world, and it is what you want to make it. The rest of us think he's inconsistent with the lore, for the many, many reasons enumerated over the last four or five pages of forum posts. But we're content to resolve this by saying "retcon" or, if you prefer, "he was just a story someone made up one time, probably while drunk, and shortly before being executed for heresy over it". If you like him and think he's awesome, go nuts. The rest of us don't like him and think he's a poor idea for a character that's inconsistent with the current fiction, so we accept that he doesn't exist.
statu wrote: So it's possible nastase is now just a story then?
It's all a story, or did you think it's real? Your Xenology is just as much fiction as Nastase, both just as valid, and neither contradicting the other.
The wall of text in the post above has already been addressed, no need for me to repeat what's already been repeated.
jeffersonian000 wrote: My proof is easy to find (see the above post). Still waiting on counter evidence (which does not exist).
On the human-fungi hybrid, you must not be following recent science news. We can and have successfully spliced plant and insect DNA with mammal DNA, and can use viruses as a delivery method for genetic repair. Then there's the fact the unless you come from Subsaharan Africa, 1-3% of your DNA is Neanderthal, which last I check was a non-Human cousin to modern day Humans we co-existed with between 45,000 and 50,000 years ago.
So, keep moving that goal post.
SJ
Neanderthal did in fact breed with Homo sapiens. Other than that, not a single thing you mentioned is anything like a hybrid, evidence a hybrid could work, or even in the same ball park as hybridization through breeding. DNA is a collection of tools designed to do certain things. Putting insect DNA into a mammal is akin to taking a screw from a classic Cadillac and using it inside a new computer. You have not made a Cadillac/computer hybrid.
What breeding is doing is taking a blueprint and combining it with another blueprint. You can use a fish tool or insect tool in a mammal blueprint sometimes, but if you try to cross the blueprints the whole thing will be a jumbled disaster that cannot work. It is impossible to crossbreed a fish and a man. Within the same genus (homo sapien with Neanderthal, Tigers with lions, etc.) a crossbreed is possible, but that is in no way evidence of any crossbreed being possible. A wolf and a dog are building the same kind of thing using essentially the same tools, so a cross can work.
As completely impossible as cross breeding a fish and a man would be, it would be even more impossible to crossbreed and a man and an eldar with a completely different genetic structure as written in the later source. Not improbable, not unlikely, not a miracle of modern medicine, but impossible. The early reference to a human-eldar crossbreed has been ruled out by the fluff.
If you have your heart set on the idea, say the eldar used their vast tech to manage to create something that could pass for a crossbreed using genes from both. That sounds next to impossible too, but at least it is not physically impossible. We are dealing with fiction, after all. Hell, if you want your personal warhammer universe to have human-eldar hybrids and blue Orks and a race of weaponized saltine crackers then feel free.
statu wrote: So it's possible nastase is now just a story then?
It's all a story, or did you think it's real? Your Xenology is just as much fiction as Nastase, both just as valid, and neither contradicting the other.
The wall of text in the post above has already been addressed, no need for me to repeat what's already been repeated.
SJ
Sorry that's my bad, I thought, when I said something like he's a story, not fact etc, you'd realise I was talking in universe, sorry about that, I should have been clearer
I wrote a lot earlier on in this thread a short, simplified snippet based on genes. I am a qualified geneticist who is changing field to focus on genetics in organisms other than bacteria.
The fact I've not been replying to many of the posts based on the hybridisation should really speak volumes (but as many of you don't know me or the potential other people with similar skills on this site,I don't expect it has been noticed).
Everyone has to appreciate this is Science Fiction with a loose scattering of Science to make it sound at least vaguely plausible for the whole scenario to work.
In this case, the early writers of the 40K universe were refining the ideas. Those they liked they developed, those they didn't fell by the wayside. They didn't go back to officially remove those characters, they just ignored their existence and focussed on developing the themes people wanted to read. This is why each codex recycles text from the previous - they omit the pieces that no longer 'exist' or are relevant and carry across those pieces that are.
This hybrid wasn't deemed as a good idea (likely due to the xenophobic attitude of the Imperium they were developing and the animosity between them and the Eldar). So they didn't develop him further. They took the ideas of Astropath and Librarian though and separated them and refined them.
As for the whole 'science' aspect of this. We really shouldn't be taking a literal view on this. I mean - gene seed implants? Come on... If we took the same literal scientific approach, most of the fluff would be wrong and non-existent.
So, I'll be short with my answer from now: You can have convergent evolution where similar traits are developed in separate species that are unrelated. They won't be able to reproduce but they will look similar.
You could argue that the 'Old Ones' used their super-froggy Slaan techno-magic to make the two species using a similar blueprint and say 'they made them compatible somehow' but as previously stated, this is Science Fiction and not literally possible if there are such differences in the basic code.
Remember guys, it's Science Fiction that uses Scientific words but not literal Science fact. If you want to imagine hybrids exist, then do so - it's an imaginary universe and you know what, make it yours and enjoy it. If you don't, then don't and enjoy it all the same. Let's not tell others how to think as it doesn't actually effect the rules of the game (we can already ally Orks and Space Marines so there's an opening right there for nonsense shenanigans)
(Disclaimer: This post is neither in defence of, or attacking either of the views expressed by both sides. I'm posting my view, independently. I'm also not bothered if you question my qualifications - as someone who writes dull reports about genes (specific genes used for industry, not the whole genome) I don't mind if randomers on the internet say 'prove it'. Either take this post as honesty, or decide to ignore it. I don't feel like I have to prove anything by this post so it's up to you what you think).
jeffersonian000 wrote:You seriously want me to admit that a character GW created, published, made art work for, displayed a model for, never actually existed?
Something I've just learnt by looking around the internet it that GW never made a model for him, and that the one in the wiki article etc, was actually made by a dakkadakka member a few years a go
jeffersonian000 wrote:You seriously want me to admit that a character GW created, published, made art work for, displayed a model for, never actually existed?
Something I've just learnt by looking around the internet it that GW never made a model for him, and that the one in the wiki article etc, was actually made by a dakkadakka member a few years a go
I've seen the photos of the model in GW material, noted as a fan made conversion, hence why I wrote "displayed" rather than "created". GW rarely display non-GW conversions and scratch builds these days, but they use to.
As to our resident geneticist and resident paleoanthropologist, won't it be more interest to postulate how the weird stuff in the 40k universe could be, rather than attempt to use in game information to counter other in game information? Wouldn't it be more interesting to apply our current understanding of systems to figuring out how a character like Nastase could exist, or why Orks exist (a humanoid species of fungus that creates and uses human technology, bleeds red blood, and speaks city English). Or how about the scientific explanation on how Geneseed could work, or how Psykers could work, or using the history of folklore to explain how daemons work?
What we had here in this thread was a break down on Eldar genetics (but not a detailed break down), on Marine ranks within the Librarius (but not positions held within the Librarius), on Geneseed (and how people view Geneseed rather than how GW views Geneseed), and on the meaning of canon in a setting the ignores the concept of canon. All facinating to me, and probably to others. The OP asked about the lengthening of DNA versus the lengthening of life spans, as seen with the Eldar, to which healthy debate ensued.
For the record, I'm the one that sides with the material as written working within the guidelines of the setting, be it rules or fluff. An argument that something doesn't work or is broken within the rules or setting in my eyes requires extraordinary reasoning to determine why it is broke or doesn't work. My claim that humans and Eldar must share a common ancestry is backed by at least one named character in the setting. The counter argument needs to prove that such characters no longer exist within the setting, or no never existed within the setting, by citing the passage or passages retracting or retconning the existence of the character in question. The fact remains that the character exists, has not been retracted, and has not been retconned despite several other factors in the character's back ground having been retconned.
Roboute Gilliman is no longer an Imperial Guard Lord Commander uplifted to Primarch status as a reward for his service, with the 3rd Chapter of the 10th Founding of Space Marines crafted from his Geneseed. Gilliman is now one of the 20 Primarch crafted by the Emperor, with the 13th Legion founded from his Geneseed. Thankfully, none of that retracts nor retcons Nastase's existence.
Chief Librarian of the Ultramarine chapter of Space Marinrs is Varro Tigurius, while Chief Librarian Astropath Illiyan Nastase is Chief of Macragge's Interstellar Communications Link. Seems to be two different positions held by two different people, both of which also hold the highest formal rank within the Librarius. No retraction or retcon here, either.
Eldar as distinctly alien humanoids that can pass as Human due to superficial similarities to Humans. Eldar have a complex DNA structure of a five-sided helix composed of amino acids in 20 base pairs. Oh, and they can interbreed with Humans, as seen in RT era fluff which includes the character Ultramarine Chief Librarian Astropath Illiyan Nastase. Wouldn't it be facinating to discuss how such hybrids could exist, rather than waste thread space debating whether or not a specific example did exist?
I'm sorry, I don't want to be condescending when I say this: The level of background reading and research to prove or disprove the possible existence of a fantasy character is an utter waste of time. I'm simply not bothered by it. That's why I said something along the lines of 'if you like him, use him. If you don't like him, then don't, either way read the fluff how you like' because you'll have more fun that way.
statu wrote: So it's possible nastase is now just a story then?
It's all a story, or did you think it's real? Your Xenology is just as much fiction as Nastase, both just as valid, and neither contradicting the other.
The wall of text in the post above has already been addressed, no need for me to repeat what's already been repeated.
SJ
You addressed it, but you were wrong about just...everything, really. Basic science, advanced science, the way randomness works, physics, genetics, taxonomy, pretty much the whole lot of it. All you've shown in your attempts at addressing the scienceis that you don't understand any of it. Again, that's your business. I just don't want anyone to read your posts and think that you're saying true things, because you aren't. You obviously think that you understand statistics, which is unfortunate for you personally. As long as nobody comes away wrongly believing what you're saying, that statistical thermodynamics suggests that "any probability, no matter how miniscule, is worth considering," rather than what it actually says, which is "something that will never happen in a billion billion billion ages of the universe must be excluded from consideration," then you're not hurting anyone else at least.
statu wrote: So it's possible nastase is now just a story then?
It's all a story, or did you think it's real? Your Xenology is just as much fiction as Nastase, both just as valid, and neither contradicting the other.
The wall of text in the post above has already been addressed, no need for me to repeat what's already been repeated.
SJ
You addressed it, but you were wrong about just...everything, really. Basic science, advanced science, the way randomness works, physics, genetics, taxonomy, pretty much the whole lot of it. All you've shown in your attempts at addressing the scienceis that you don't understand any of it. Again, that's your business. I just don't want anyone to read your posts and think that you're saying true things, because you aren't. You obviously think that you understand statistics, which is unfortunate for you personally. As long as nobody comes away wrongly believing what you're saying, that statistical thermodynamics suggests that "any probability, no matter how miniscule, is worth considering," rather than what it actually says, which is "something that will never happen in a billion billion billion ages of the universe must be excluded from consideration," then you're not hurting anyone else at least.
That's okay, I doubt you problem solving skills and education, mostly from what seems to be a lack of understanding when reading for content. Thankfully, my doubts do not require proofs on your part. What does require proof are yours and my arguments. I proved my argument as soon as it was questioned. We're on page 5 of you attempting to prove your argument.
jeffersonian000 wrote: Please cite one instance where GW has told us to disregard older fluff. If you can do either, then you have a valid argument. If not, you literally have no argument.
jeffersonian000 wrote: Roboute Gilliman is no longer an Imperial Guard Lord Commander uplifted to Primarch status as a reward for his service, with the 3rd Chapter of the 10th Founding of Space Marines crafted from his Geneseed. Gilliman is now one of the 20 Primarch crafted by the Emperor, with the 13th Legion founded from his Geneseed.
I guess I should just let you keep posting for a bit and eventually you'll start refuting your own arguments for me? Fair enough.
jeffersonian000 wrote: Chief Librarian of the Ultramarine chapter of Space Marinrs is Varro Tigurius, while Chief Librarian Astropath Illiyan Nastase is Chief of Macragge's Interstellar Communications Link. Seems to be two different positions held by two different people, both of which also hold the highest formal rank within the Librarius. No retraction or retcon here, either.
Except that astropaths aren't part of the Librarius.
jeffersonian000 wrote: Wouldn't it be facinating to discuss how such hybrids could exist, rather than waste thread space debating whether or not a specific example did exist?
They could write in the fluff that eldar can run faster than the speed of light, and it would still be scientifically impossible, and no, it wouldn't be fascinating to debate why. It would be tiresome.
Later on, Xenology was published genetic information about the Eldar, proving that a hybrid could not be formed. Thus, it retconned the existence of the said half-eldar.
jeffersonian000 wrote:You seriously want me to admit that a character GW created, published, made art work for, displayed a model for, never actually existed?
Something I've just learnt by looking around the internet it that GW never made a model for him, and that the one in the wiki article etc, was actually made by a dakkadakka member a few years a go
I've seen the photos of the model in GW material, noted as a fan made conversion, hence why I wrote "displayed" rather than "created". GW rarely display non-GW conversions and scratch builds these days, but they use to.
I mentioned that only cause it was someone on dakkadakka that made it, not to try and prove you wrong
Just to put this bed, could you admit that maybe in universe he is just a story? I'll admit maybe xenology could be wrong and as such causing loads of issues, I don't think it is but it could be. Are you willing to do the same worth nastase?
Just to throw a spanner in the works, given that the the WD article uses the term 'an unknown Eldar mercenary', and the fact that Corsair bands are known to interact, hire, and associate with humans, is it a reasonable assumption to assume they meant 'an Eldar-hired human?'
Just, you know, trying to interject an alternate opinion.
Speaking as someone who has a background in evolutionary biology and genetics, there is no sense in trying to fit actual science within the world of 40K.
Remember the fluff was written by artists and writers with a quasi-understanding of science at best, not to mention our knowledge base and understanding of genetics has exponentially increased in the last 30 years, so things written on the genetic heritage of 40K races in the early editions would be totally incorrect even if they were based on the science of the day.
Overall I omit that part of the fluff in my headcannon and go on to enjoy the game without taking it's science too seriously. (i mean, demons exist in the 40K universe after all)
As to protons and photons, I could get into the formation of protons, anti-protons, electrons, and anti-electrons, as well as go off on a tangent discussing why our universe does not seem to want the produce the anti-spin variants in equal proportion, which may have to do with the creation of time, but I've already won the debate. Thanks for participating!
@statu - It would ease my mind somewhat to know that you know that none of what he said above makes any sense. It is a big jumble of impressive words devoid of meaning. I don't know what he's talking about with the universe not wanting to "produce anti-spin variants" in equal proportion, there's no such thing as anti-spin. Possibly he's garbled the chirality of neutrinos and thinks it applies to protons and electrons? Or maybe he's thinking of matter-antimatter imbalance? But antimatter doesn't have "anti-spin", that doesn't even make sense. The "formation of time" part is just as meaningless - exotic symmetry breaking mechanisms in high energy physics can (and do) lead to things like an excess of particles over anti-particles (ie we're made of matter and not anti-matter, although the mechanism is still undiscovered), but this has nothing to do with the "formation" of time, which is not even a concept in physics.
I don't know, to be honest, there's really nothing here that makes enough sense to try to decipher a meaning. As Pauli would have said, this is "not even wrong".
It bothers me when I see people throw around big technical words that they don't understand just to confuse people and make themselves sound more knowledgeable than they are. You were right to question him, and the answer he gave you was gibberish.
@statu - It would ease my mind somewhat to know that you know that none of what he said above makes any sense. It is a big jumble of impressive words devoid of meaning. I don't know what he's talking about with the universe not wanting to "produce anti-spin variants" in equal proportion, there's no such thing as anti-spin. Possibly he's garbled the chirality of neutrinos and thinks it applies to protons and electrons? Or maybe he's thinking of matter-antimatter imbalance? But antimatter doesn't have "anti-spin", that doesn't even make sense. The "formation of time" part is just as meaningless - exotic symmetry breaking mechanisms in high energy physics can (and do) lead to things like an excess of particles over anti-particles (ie we're made of matter and not anti-matter, although the mechanism is still undiscovered), but this has nothing to do with the "formation" of time, which is not even a concept in physics.
I don't know, to be honest, there's really nothing here that makes enough sense to try to decipher a meaning. As Pauli would have said, this is "not even wrong".
It bothers me when I see people throw around big technical words that they don't understand just to confuse people and make themselves sound more knowledgeable than they are. You were right to question him, and the answer he gave you was gibberish.
Anti-Spin means he trying to bring in a concept from a Anime (Cartoon Network just wrapped the Anime up), doesn't really help his view. As I never heard the concept in a real world text only cartoons.
As to protons and photons, I could get into the formation of protons, anti-protons, electrons, and anti-electrons, as well as go off on a tangent discussing why our universe does not seem to want the produce the anti-spin variants in equal proportion, which may have to do with the creation of time, but I've already won the debate. Thanks for participating!
@statu - It would ease my mind somewhat to know that you know that none of what he said above makes any sense. It is a big jumble of impressive words devoid of meaning. I don't know what he's talking about with the universe not wanting to "produce anti-spin variants" in equal proportion, there's no such thing as anti-spin. Possibly he's garbled the chirality of neutrinos and thinks it applies to protons and electrons? Or maybe he's thinking of matter-antimatter imbalance? But antimatter doesn't have "anti-spin", that doesn't even make sense. The "formation of time" part is just as meaningless - exotic symmetry breaking mechanisms in high energy physics can (and do) lead to things like an excess of particles over anti-particles (ie we're made of matter and not anti-matter, although the mechanism is still undiscovered), but this has nothing to do with the "formation" of time, which is not even a concept in physics.
I don't know, to be honest, there's really nothing here that makes enough sense to try to decipher a meaning. As Pauli would have said, this is "not even wrong".
It bothers me when I see people throw around big technical words that they don't understand just to confuse people and make themselves sound more knowledgeable than they are. You were right to question him, and the answer he gave you was gibberish.
He's just talking about anti-matter, but said anti-electron rather than Positron which is the commonly used term (both are correct though). I'm not sure why though, unless you work at CERN or are employed as a theoretical physicist (heh, employed) it's not really something many people would know or think about unless they Google search it. Everything you need to know you can Google so I'm not sure what he's trying to prove there with that comment
He's just talking about anti-matter, but said anti-electron rather than Positron which is the commonly used term (both are correct though). I'm not sure why though, unless you work at CERN or are employed as a theoretical physicist (heh, employed) it's not really something many people would know or think about unless they Google search it. Everything you need to know you can Google so I'm not sure what he's trying to prove there with that comment
The anti-electron part isn't the part that's nonsense, it's the "anti-spin" and the "formation of time" that are meaningless gibberish.
I'll try not to take the "heh, employed" part personally...*mutter**it is to a real job**sob*
Why does everyone hate us chemists? I would much rather cuddle the cuttlefish then die to it.
To stay on topic I'll say something related, I don't know, science and fluff are contradictory, rogue trader has fluff that doesn't work with more recent developments, blah? I feel like the debate kinda ran itself into the dirt.
I can't believe people are still debating / arguing / trying to convince this guy. It's pretty blatant he's just trolling.. Or has a brain made of rock. One or the other.
jeffersonian000 wrote: On science versus engineering, I'm pretty sure science is based on building an hypothesis on an observable phenomena, building tests to verify the hypothesis, repeat the tests to gain a larger data sample, and have peers review the hypothesis, tests, and data samples to find flaws.
Spoiler:
Actually you are mistaken, that is not how science works. A hypothesis is developed based on observable phenomena, then that hypothesis is tested by an attempt to disconfirm, this is done by experiment. If the experiment does not disconfirm the hypothesis it is tentatively accepted, but not taking it as proven. This is then submitted to a journal for peer review, a process in which the write up is checked to ensure that the process used to coem to the conclusion is sound. After this others may then retest and/or do a different test in an attempt to disconfirm the hypothesis. There is never a test to verify as that is not really possible.
The above is why you will often here scientists couch things in particular language (because we are trained to) such that definitive statements are avoided. 'The data suggests', 'There is a >99.9% probability that the effect did not occur by chance', 'The evidence shows that, based on the model...' etc.
By this method history and tradition are irrelevant and, where they have an effect, they are unwanted. Only evidence matters to science, if you are appealing to anything else you have departed from doing science. For this reason the scientific suggestion would be that the evidence indicates that Eldar/Human hybrids do not exist, as the evidence of their separate development, different genetics and such strongly indicate this. The only counterexample is hearsay from a source we know to be both fallible and dishonest. Doesn't seem that strong a case to me.
Again I would point to my earlier comment that the chances of a human breeding with an Eldar are lower than the chances of a human breeding with an oak tree. Do you think tree/human hybrids are possible?
All of this of course is discounting intervention from the warp, as magic makes all things possible, so I'll give you Eldar/Human and Human/Tree hybrids if a wizard did it. At that point though we have completely departed from asking about a natural occurrence, so its moot.
Excellent response, and thank you for restating my point, but with greater detail. Not sure way it has become so common these days to disagree by agreeing, but I'll take it.
SJ
Its interesting how you ignore the majority of the substance of my posts. I've bolded the main bit you got wrong about how science works, that is the opposite of what is done and a common misconception (one that can lead to erroneous application of scientific understanding).
So you are saying that while science is based on testing, science does not test? I can only assume you are referring to Christian Science, not actual science.
Woah there, leave religion bashing out of this. My best friend is christian and one of the darn smartest people I know. Leave your racism out of this dumb flame war.
jeffersonian000 wrote: So you are saying that while science is based on testing, science does not test? I can only assume you are referring to Christian Science, not actual science.
SJ
Good job twisting what he said. He was pointing out that you claiming that science creates a hypothesis and designs experiments to prove it is wrong. The tests are designed to try and disprove the hypothesis
jeffersonian000 wrote: So you are saying that while science is based on testing, science does not test? I can only assume you are referring to Christian Science, not actual science.
SJ
Good job twisting what he said. He was pointing out that you claiming that science creates a hypothesis and designs experiments to prove it is wrong. The tests are designed to try and disprove the hypothesis
Of course it isn't. Creating an experiment to try and prove a hypothesis is useless, any one can manage it and doesn't actually do anything to help prove your point. If you have an experiment that is designed to disprove it and fails it actually adds some weight to the hypothesis
Edit, that's worded incredibly poorly, have the concept in my head but can't word it
statu wrote: Of course it isn't. Creating an experiment to try and prove a hypothesis is useless, any one can manage it and doesn't actually do anything to help prove your point. If you have an experiment that is designed to disprove it and fails it actually adds some weight to the hypothesis
Edit, that's worded incredibly poorly, have the concept in my head but can't word it
I know what you mean. Then, I did from the other post too, because it was clear what you meant. Co'tor Shas pointed out that what I wrote was wrong but he explained it pretty well anyway.
That isn't fully right as well. When you have a hypothesis you conduct an experiment (although for real scientific proof it's often dozens, or even hundreds), and see if the results support you hypothesis or not. If so, keep testing to improve your hypothesis, if not a new hypothesis based on the evidence, and keep testing.
Basically, tests have no bias to prove or dis-prove, they just do (or don't).
Co'tor Shas wrote: That isn't fully right as well. When you have a hypothesis you conduct an experiment (although for real scientific proof it's often dozens, or even hundreds), and see if the results support you hypothesis or not. If so, keep testing to improve your hypothesis, if not a new hypothesis based on the evidence, and keep testing.
Basically, tests have no bias to prove or dis-prove, they just do (or don't).
Yes the experiment itself has no bias, but when it is designed, the person designing it will be utilising it to try and disprove
Co'tor Shas wrote: That isn't fully right as well. When you have a hypothesis you conduct an experiment (although for real scientific proof it's often dozens, or even hundreds), and see if the results support you hypothesis or not. If so, keep testing to improve your hypothesis, if not a new hypothesis based on the evidence, and keep testing.
Basically, tests have no bias to prove or dis-prove, they just do (or don't).
I don't completely agree with this. The idea is to test the hypothesis, so it has to have a failure condition. The sort of gold standard for a theory, and the standard it must meet to be considered scientific, is for it to be falsifiable; that is, to predict something that can be proven untrue. If the theory is true, it should withstand any such attacks. The test has to be designed in such a way that it is possible for the theory to fail; in this sense, the objective of a test is to be able to prove the theory false.
The researchers themselves must be unbiased, and the experiment should be designed in such a way that any biases they have cannot affect the outcome of the measurement, but the design of the experiment itself should be done in a way that can it disprove the hypothesis.
It's based on so much more than that, but I don't think you're ever gonna care enough to actually try and understand this point, so I'm not going to bother trying to explain it
jeffersonian000 wrote: So your argument against my statement is based on semantics? Interesting.
SJ
Yeah, no offense dude, but I'm sort of done trying to explain basic science to you. We've explained why you're wrong, you don't want to listen, so...what more is there to say? You're the only one that still doesn't understand even what science actually does, and pretty well every statement you've made has been false. When you're just going to respond to being corrected by stating untrue things, well, what's the point?
You've explained that my statement reguarding building tests to prove an hypothesis is wrong because in fact you build tests to disprove an hypothesis. The semantics is that succeeding at proving is the same as failing to disprove, while succeeding at disproving is the same as failing to prove. Of the two of us, I at least understand how to write an argument.
Example hypothesis: plants need beer to grow
To set out to prove this I give plants beer
The plants continue to grow with the addition of beer
Therefore I've proven plants require beer to grow
That is why you don't set out to prove and why it is more that a semantics thing.
Fancy explaining how it is you manage to take something said against you, and somehow twist it so that to you it reinforces what you say? Cause I'm pretty impressed with it
jeffersonian000 wrote: You've explained that my statement reguarding building tests to prove an hypothesis is wrong because in fact you build tests to disprove an hypothesis. The semantics is that succeeding at proving is the same as failing to disprove, while succeeding at disproving is the same as failing to prove. Of the two of us, I at least understand how to write an argument.
@statu - see, again, when he's this wrong, what's the point in arguing? You're not going to teach him anything. He's been pretty impervious to facts so far, and this is what I mean - he responds to being corrected by saying nonsensical or untrue things.
Like "proving is the same as failing to disprove"...just nonsense. If "failing to disprove" were the same thing as "proving" science would fall apart. You can never prove a theory, you can only test it. Newtonian gravity was never "true", it works in most cases but it's a special case of general relativity. If we'd considered it proved every time we verified one of its predictions, we'd have some trouble explaining the precession of the perihelion of Mercury, wouldn't we? Likewise "succeeding at disproving is the same as failing to prove" - again obviously untrue, you could fail to prove a thing without disproving it. All you ever do is fail to disprove things (ie, they pass the test) without ever proving them either.
He doesn't understand the difference between designing an experiment to falsify something as opposed to designing one to verify it, and he's unwilling to learn anything new. If you want to bang your head against the brick wall, man, go nuts, but you're not going to break through. You'll just get a headache.
I'm not the one that keeps making falsifiable statements, but that's okay. I'll let you sciency types go about your testing without testing, and get back to actual application of science via engineering. Have fun!
jeffersonian000 wrote: I'm not the one that keeps making falsifiable statements, but that's okay. I'll let you sciency types go about your testing without testing, and get back to actual application of science via engineering. Have fun!
So, by your own reasoning, because you have failed to prove your argument, you've disproved it?
jeffersonian000 wrote: I'm not the one that keeps making falsifiable statements, but that's okay. I'll let you sciency types go about your testing without testing, and get back to actual application of science via engineering. Have fun!
So, by your own reasoning, because you have failed to prove your argument, you've disproved it?
I accept your concession
My argument was sustained a few pages back, when I accepted your concession. But reading for content has been a noticeable issue for you this entire thread, so it's not a surprise you missed that, too.
jeffersonian000 wrote: I'm not the one that keeps making falsifiable statements, but that's okay. I'll let you sciency types go about your testing without testing, and get back to actual application of science via engineering. Have fun!
So, by your own reasoning, because you have failed to prove your argument, you've disproved it?
I accept your concession
My argument was sustained a few pages back, when I accepted your concession. But reading for content has been a noticeable issue for you this entire thread, so it's not a surprise you missed that, too.
Okay:
1) Humans and Eldar hybrid using REAL Science to answer it: no, never happen
2) Humans and Humans and Eldar hybrid using PSEUDO-40K Science to answer it: a) Yes in Rogue Trader b) No by today's fluff standards
3) Does it matter?: No, you can still imagine the existence if it makes you happy
4) A hypothesis is a proposed idea or explanation based on what little evidence you have on a situation. The experiment is done to figure out how much of that original hypothesis is correct / incorrect. The only bias is that the experiment is focussed on that area of the subject and may miss out parts of the bigger picture (you test variable A, B and C but it turns out variable Z is also a limiting factor which you didn't test)
A positive result or a negative result is still useful data.
Other people then test the hypothesis using the same experimental method (that's why methods are written down) to see if the data is reproducible. If it is, then it adds more evidence to support the initial hypothesis as correct. If the results are different, then either the original, or repeat, or both are inaccurate. Indeed it could be that both are correct but for an unseen reason.
So it's repeated again, and again and again.
Can we maybe close this thread as some of these posts are just turning into a petty 'you proved me right, you're stupid, you can't read, allow me to correct you blah blah blah' slanging match.
Wrong. There is no room for them in the hominid family tree.
humans and Eldar are cousins within the same branch of hominid
Wrong. No hominid creatures had or could have evolved 5-stranded DNA with 20 base pairs in the roughly 14 million years since our most recent common ancestor.
From this we know that Eldar follow the same XX, XY chromosome paradygn that Humans do
Nope. Not science, but if we're talking about a hypothetical alien race and its biology then it's worth noting that they wouldn't have what we understand as sex chromosomes.
given morphology, Eldar are hominids closer to Homo Sapien Sapien than our next closest cousins, the Pan Troglodytes
Wrong. By that reasoning, whales are closer to sharks than to cows, when in reality whales and sharks diverged ~400 million years ago, while whales and cows diverged about 50 Mya. Morphology is not relevant to genetic proximity in this context.
Xenology is newer, however, it does not show a biological impossibility. It shows a biological improbability.
Wrong It is biologically impossible for creatures with different DNA structures and base-pairs to interbreed.
We can and have successfully spliced plant and insect DNA with mammal DNA
You can say there are no Unicorns in Vietnam, but you would be wrong since Unicorns were found in Vietnam only a few years ago
Just...no. Wrong. They found a bovid resembling an antelope. Notably, it has two horns.
Eldar have a quintuplet Helix and 20 base pairs, it is only improbable that a Human-Eldar hybrid could exist
Wrong. Still not possible for two creatures with different DNA structures to interbreed.
double-helix DNA with 4 base pairs
Wrong. Human DNA has four nucleobases, but only two base pairs.
the concept of impossibility is a falsehood
Wrong. Anything which violates a law of the universe is impossible. Statistically speaking certain extremely unlikely events, like a broken glass reassembling itself, do not technically violate the laws of physics (conservation of energy etc) but are in practice so improbable that the line between impossible and improbable becomes blurred. However, this does not apply to intermixing of different DNA structures, wherein there are actual laws and mechanisms preventing it from happening that render it impossible.
Hawking Radiation escapes the event horizon of black holes
Wrong. Virtual particles are created at the edge of the event horizon but do not cross it.
the act of observing a quantum event will influence the event
Wrong. Also irrelevant. You can affect the eigenstates of a system if you choose your measurement poorly, but this is a misunderstanding of the uncertainty principle, which does not depend on an actual physical measurement.
As to protons and photons, I could get into the formation of protons, anti-protons, electrons, and anti-electrons, as well as go off on a tangent discussing why our universe does not seem to want the produce the anti-spin variants in equal proportion, which may have to do with the creation of time
I can't even link anything to refute this, because it is gibberish. It makes no sense, there is no such thing as anti-spin or "the formation of time".
I hope this serves to clear up any confusion that has been created by all the arguing and misinformation!
I think there are several reasons why an animal may have a huge genome:
1: Lots of complicated bodily processes
2: Having evolved from an ancestor who had a lot of complicated processes (the genes get switched off, but are still there)
3: Accumulation of defective but harmless junk DNA or mutations
Humans have 3,200,000,000 base pairs in their genome. Protopterus aethiopicus (marbled lungfish) has 130,000,000,000, about 40 times as many. It may be a very cool fish, but it's we who rule the planet.
Per the tenets of the forum, just saying someone is wrong is against forum policy. You need to back up your position by proving the statements wrong.
The reason why I doubt your educational claims is because your word usage and lack of a formed thought in your arguments point to a high school or early college level of writing, not post-graduate or career path level of writing.
So, don't say "you are wrong", say "this is the reason why your statement is wrong".
SJ
PS - Forgot to mention, your links support my position, not yours.
Not adding this to argument, just hoping to do a little reaching here, I just noticed that some people here, didn't bother looking at the names so it could be anyone or a group, have been doing species names as Genus Species, this is not the correct way of writing this out, and while a minor point does bug me a bit. It should be Genus species, and where possible should be italicised, which for obvious reasons isn't always feasible. Again not adding into any arguments here cause I'm bored of it all, but hopefully someone might read this and learn something
jeffersonian000 wrote: Per the tenets of the forum, just saying someone is wrong is against forum policy. You need to back up your position by proving the statements wrong.
The reason why I doubt your educational claims is because your word usage and lack of a formed thought in your arguments point to a high school or early college level of writing, not post-graduate or career path level of writing.
So, don't say "you are wrong", say "this is the reason why your statement is wrong".
SJ
PS - Forgot to mention, your links support my position, not yours.
Funnily enough, we've already disputed and proven your statements wrong, many times over. You just refuse to accept it.
Clearly at this stage he's obviously trolling (I hope that's what it is anyway) and we all should obviously just leave it now.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
statu wrote: Not adding this to argument, just hoping to do a little reaching here, I just noticed that some people here, didn't bother looking at the names so it could be anyone or a group, have been doing species names as Genus Species, this is not the correct way of writing this out, and while a minor point does bug me a bit. It should be Genus species, and where possible should be italicised, which for obvious reasons isn't always feasible. Again not adding into any arguments here cause I'm bored of it all, but hopefully someone might read this and learn something
Yeah I remember that from biology. If you can't italicise (ie if you're handwriting it) aren't you meant to underline it? I think that's what I was taught.
jeffersonian000 wrote: Per the tenets of the forum, just saying someone is wrong is against forum policy. You need to back up your position by proving the statements wrong.
The links speak for themselves, but very well. Edited.
The reason why I doubt your educational claims is because your word usage and lack of a formed thought in your arguments point to a high school or early college level of writing, not post-graduate or career path level of writing.
I apologize for not busting out my academic prose for a forum discussion, but frankly, at this point I'm not trying to convince you. I'm trying to convince anyone that might be misled by you. Credentials are irrelevant, this is a logical fallacy called "appeal to authority". This is why I'm not saying "you're an engineer, you're not qualified to have an opinion", I'm saying "the things that you are saying are untrue."
PS - Forgot to mention, your links support my position, not yours.
Can you point to where it says that particles cross the event horizon? Or explain what anti-spin is? Or where in (for example) causal dynamical triangulation models baryon asymmetry is linked to the emergence of 3+1 dimensions? Or maybe a branch of the hominid family that has more than a double helix DNA? Or more than four nucleobases? How about an example of an animal mating with a plant and producing viable hybrid offspring? How about a most recent common ancestor for humans and an alien species with quintuple-helix DNA? An example of unicorn, maybe? How about a cup spontaneously reassembling itself after shattering?
I have no interest in being right. Being proven wrong is how I learn new things. If you can prove me wrong, I will have learned something about biology and I will thank you for it.
statu wrote: Not adding this to argument, just hoping to do a little reaching here, I just noticed that some people here, didn't bother looking at the names so it could be anyone or a group, have been doing species names as Genus Species, this is not the correct way of writing this out, and while a minor point does bug me a bit. It should be Genus species, and where possible should be italicised, which for obvious reasons isn't always feasible. Again not adding into any arguments here cause I'm bored of it all, but hopefully someone might read this and learn something
Yeah I remember that from biology. If you can't italicise (ie if you're handwriting it) aren't you meant to underline it? I think that's what I was taught.
Yeah where possible you should do that, just something to make it look different
Except for the 1d4Chan article, each of your links support my counters to your initial argument trying to disprove the existence of a published character. The 1d4Chan article is mostly gibberish, and is an opinion piece, so doesn't really support anything beyond Eldar having crystalline fecal matter, though the statement at the end that Eldar and Humans either share a common ancestor (which supports my argument) or are both the product of genetic engineering (an argument you did not put forth) leans more to my camp than yours. Did you even read the articles before linking them?
The articles on most recent common ancestor, hominidae, and hybridization are exactly the points I made, which is why I pointed this out to you the first time you brought it up.
Misquoting me on my examples on how we are using gene splicing to add non mammalian DNA to mammals to prove you point just showed another failure to understand written word, especially when you link an article that restates the original point that you misquoted.
On my error of stating 4 base pairs, you got me there. I was thinking amino acids and wrote 4 instead of 2. That one was a legitimate error on my part. Of course, it makes zero difference to the argument, as we have no idea how a quintouple helix DNA would work beyond the mechanics we can currently apply to how double helix DNA. If the 20 base pairs of the Eldar DNA is related to the additional sides of the helix, if at least one side matches Human base pairs, and if it only requires matching one side of the super stack to human DNA, there would no reason to assume that genetic transfer of information could not happen. But be that as it may, the structure of Eldar DNA versus the Structure of Human DNA only highlights why such a creature as Illiyan Nastase could be so comparitivrly rare, it does not disprove his existence. First off, the character exists. Secondly, because the character exists, there exists a mechanic that allows the character to exist. Per your linked article on what defines a species, the fact that Eldar and Humans did interbreed supports my statement that Humans and Eldar are the same species, with makes Eldar Hominidae per the current system of classification we use.
At this point, I'd recommend you actually read the articles you linked.
jeffersonian000 wrote: Except for the 1d4Chan article, each of your links support my counters to your initial argument trying to disprove the existence of a published character. The 1d4Chan article is mostly gibberish, and is an opinion piece, so doesn't really support anything beyond Eldar having crystalline fecal matter, though the statement at the end that Eldar and Humans either share a common ancestor (which supports my argument) or are both the product of genetic engineering (an argument you did not put forth) leans more to my camp than yours. Did you even read the articles before linking them?
The articles on most recent common ancestor, hominidae, and hybridization are exactly the points I made, which is why I pointed this out to you the first time you brought it up.
Misquoting me on my examples on how we are using gene splicing to add non mammalian DNA to mammals to prove you point just showed another failure to understand written word, especially when you link an article that restates the original point that you misquoted.
On my error of stating 4 base pairs, you got me there. I was thinking amino acids and wrote 4 instead of 2. That one was a legitimate error on my part. Of course, it makes zero difference to the argument, as we have no idea how a quintouple helix DNA would work beyond the mechanics we can currently apply to how double helix DNA. If the 20 base pairs of the Eldar DNA is related to the additional sides of the helix, if at least one side matches Human base pairs, and if it only requires matching one side of the super stack to human DNA, there would no reason to assume that genetic transfer of information could not happen. But be that as it may, the structure of Eldar DNA versus the Structure of Human DNA only highlights why such a creature as Illiyan Nastase could be so comparitivrly rare, it does not disprove his existence. First off, the character exists. Secondly, because the character exists, there exists a mechanic that allows the character to exist. Per your linked article on what defines a species, the fact that Eldar and Humans did interbreed supports my statement that Humans and Eldar are the same species, with makes Eldar Hominidae per the current system of classification we use.
At this point, I'd recommend you actually read the articles you linked.
SJ
This is just going to keep going on and on until everyone stops posting, for the sake of just ending this, could you admit that maybe Nastase and his eldar origins may possibly be a story, and could everyone else admit maybe Xenology is possibly maybe all lies. Talking in universe for both of them points? That way everyone carries on thinking as they want to, no one admits they are wrong, and we all get to put this behind us
jeffersonian000 wrote: On my error of stating 4 base pairs, you got me there. I was thinking amino acids and wrote 4 instead of 2. That one was a legitimate error on my part. Of course, it makes zero difference to the argument, as we have no idea how a quintouple helix DNA would work beyond the mechanics we can currently apply to how double helix DNA. If the 20 base pairs of the Eldar DNA is related to the additional sides of the helix, if at least one side matches Human base pairs, and if it only requires matching one side of the super stack to human DNA, there would no reason to assume that genetic transfer of information could not happen.
This is nonsense. That is not how DNA works.
But be that as it may, the structure of Eldar DNA versus the Structure of Human DNA only highlights why such a creature as Illiyan Nastase could be so comparitivrly rare, it does not disprove his existence. First off, the character exists.
A make-believe character doesn't disprove real science. Scientifically, such a creature cannot exist. In the make-believe world, if different rules apply, then anything is possible. But in real world science, it's not possible.
Secondly, because the character exists, there exists a mechanic that allows the character to exist. Per your linked article on what defines a species, the fact that Eldar and Humans did interbreed supports my statement that Humans and Eldar are the same species, with makes Eldar Hominidae per the current system of classification we use.
Besides the gibberish nomenclature (Eldar Hominidae? It would have to be Homo eldar, since homo is the genus, not "hominidae", and the species goes after the genus name, not before) that is...not at all what the article says about species classification. Discounting genetic differences for just a moment, at the bare minimum, one would need to demonstrate that such a creature was itself capable of producing offspring. If one existed, which it could not. The problem is the misuse of the word "species". Humans and chimpanzees are different species, and we share about 95% of our genes. We share about 50% of our genes with bananas. Humans and quintuple-helix, 20-base-pair aliens share at MOST 10% of our genes, if every human gene is included in the alien genome. These are not the same species.
Scientifically, the question is "let's assume an alien species were discovered with 20 base-pair, quintuple helix DNA, that was already in its anatomically modern form at least 60 million years ago. What could we know about it?" Among the things we could know about it is that it would be unable to interbreed with humans, it could not be a hominid, it couldn't have a common ancestor with life on earth, etc.
You still have quite a few errors:
You're wrong about Hawking radiation.
The bit about anti-spin and the formation of time is still gibberish.
There are still no unicorns.
Gene-splicing is still not the same as inter-breeding.
You still don't understand the uncertainty principle.
Species are still defined by genetic similarity, precluding the possibility of a creature with radically different DNA from being included in a species with life on earth.
Morphology still doesn't tell you about evolutionary proximity when it runs counter to genetic evidence.
It is still impossible for species with radically different DNA to interbreed.
There is such a thing as "impossible".
And again, you miss the entire point. I'll try to use smaller words. Because Nastase exists in the 40k fluff, Humans and Eldar are the same species due to how we define a species. Attempting to disprove Nastase is useless, because the character was published, and has not yet been retracted nor retconned. Despite the Xenology detailing a completely alien concept on biology, the Xenology does not make the blanket statement that Eldar cannot interbreed with Humans, hence the reason why the Xenology has zero bearing on the argument.
Sorry, guess I couldn't stay with a primary school vocabulary.
jeffersonian000 wrote: And again, you miss the entire point. I'll try to use smaller words. Because Nastase exists in the 40k fluff, Humans and Eldar are the same species due to how we define a species. Attempting to disprove Nastase is useless, because the character was published, and has not yet been retracted nor retconned. Despite the Xenology detailing a completely alien concept on biology, the Xenology does not make the blanket statement that Eldar cannot interbreed with Humans, hence the reason why the Xenology has zero bearing on the argument.
Sorry, guess I couldn't stay with a primary school vocabulary.
SJ
They're not necessarily the same species, we define a species as organisms that can produce fertile offspring, as we have no evidence he truly did exist, remember by the black library fella's own admission he could be a story, and assuming he did we have no information on whether or not he was fertile, there is insufficient evidence to claim they are the same species
You still have quite a few errors:
You're wrong about Hawking radiation.
Hawking attempts to explain how Black Holes lose mass via "Hawking Radiation". His math is sound, still waiting on observable proof. We do, however, observe X-ray shooting out of the poles of Black Holes, although the effect is not the same as the radiation Hawking proposes. So yeah, I actually do understand what Hawking Radiation is. Can you even point out what part you think I'm wrong about?
The bit about anti-spin and the formation of time is still gibberish.
Well, time and space are related, and one of the current thoughts on the origin of time and why it seems to move in one direction is that expansion of the universe is causing time to flow in the one direction the is observable. On my spin comment, I'll just quote Wikipedia:
"In particle physics, antimatter is material composed of antiparticles, which have the same mass as particles of ordinary matter but have opposite charge and other particle properties such as lepton and baryon number, quantum spin, etc."
There are still no unicorns.
Prove it.
Gene-splicing is still not the same as inter-breeding.
I never said otherwise, but you probably didn't both to read what I actually said ... twice.
You still don't understand the uncertainty principle.
I do understand the uncertainty principle, probably better than you do, since you seem to have confused my reference to the Observer Effect for the Uncertainty Principle. As Wiki states:
"In science, the term observer effect refers to changes that the act of observation will make on a phenomenon being observed."
Species are still defined by genetic similarity, precluding the possibility of a creature with radically different DNA from being included in a species with life on earth.
I'll let your own linked Wiki article shed light:
"A species is often defined as the largest group of organisms capable of interbreeding and producing fertile offspring. While in many cases this definition is adequate, the difficulty of defining species is known as the species problem."
While a commend you for attempting to use the species problem to disprove the existence of Nastase, you did not follow up in logical manner that might have lent more weight you argument.
Morphology still doesn't tell you about evolutionary proximity when it runs counter to genetic evidence.
I never said it did, although I'm sure you didn't actually read what I said, which made no mention of morphology. Your the one that mentioned morphology.
It is still impossible for species with radically different DNA to interbreed.
It is improbable for two different organisms with radically different DNA to interbreed. Yet, when two organisms do interbreed, we call that a species.
It is improbable for two different organisms with radically different DNA to interbreed. Yet, when two organisms do interbreed, we call that a species.
When fertile offspring are produced, eg lions and tigers are separate species, yet they can interbreed and produce offspring. Even then though it isn't as simple as that
Assume we can clone a Neanderthal, and grow it in a Human woman. Without being able to time travel, which from my very limited physics knowledge is nigh on impossible, and maybe only possible to time zones where there is a receiver, admittedly I could be wrong there, it is impossible for us to be able to find out if the Neanderthal child we created has developed as a Neanderthal, or if being raised by humans has caused it to develop differently
jeffersonian000 wrote: On the human-fungi hybrid, you must not be following recent science news. We can and have successfully spliced plant and insect DNA with mammal DNA
What part of this am I misquoting? You imply that splicing genes is evidence that human-fungi hybridization is possible, which only shows that you don't know what a hybrid is, and is irrelevant to the question of interbreeding.
given morphology, Eldar are hominids closer to Homo Sapien Sapien than our next closest cousins, the Pan Troglodytes...
You brought it up first? Right here? Remember?
A species is a subcategory of a phylum, which is defined by genetic proximity. If two creatures aren't part of the same phylum, they are by definition not part of the same species, regardless of whether they can interbreed. It just happens that we've never seen a creature that can interbreed with a member of a different phylum, so the "species defined by breeding fertile offspring" rule of thumb works for every example so far.
If eldar are a subspecies of Homo sapiens, or a species of the genus Homo, at what point did they diverge from our most recent common ancestor, that shared 90% of our genes and less than 10% of an eldar's genes? The answer is that a creature that shares fewer genes with us than we do with bananas is obviously not a member of the same species. Anyone that disagrees is welcome to try to draw a cladogram to demonstrate otherwise.
Hawking radiation doesn't cross the event horizon of a black hole, a fact obvious to anyone that actually understands quantum mechanics. Nor do x-ray bursts or gamma ray bursts.
Anti-particles don't have "anti-spin", obviously. The only thing I can think of that might make sense here is the helicity of neutrinos and anti-neutrinos, but that isn't called anti-spin anywhere and it applies only to neutrinos, not positrons etc.
Unicorns: the onus of proof is on the person making the claim. The claim that unicorns exist in Vietnam is unsubstantiated, and presumed false until demonstrated otherwise.
office_waaagh wrote: A species is a subcategory of a phylum, which is defined by genetic proximity. If two creatures aren't part of the same phylum, they are by definition not part of the same species, regardless of whether they can interbreed. It just happens that we've never seen a creature that can interbreed with a member of a different phylum, so the "species defined by breeding fertile offspring" rule of thumb works for every example so far..
Every living example, to my knowledge. I'm sure I attended a lecture once whereby Prof. Chris Stringer mentioned that there are examples that don't fit this model, but I can't remember what they were. An extinct example would be us and the Neanderthals, separate species, and yet possibly maybe did interbreed, and as some genes that probably started in them are still knocking about in modern humans, they must have been able to produce fertile offspring.
jeffersonian000 wrote: On the human-fungi hybrid, you must not be following recent science news. We can and have successfully spliced plant and insect DNA with mammal DNA
What part of this am I misquoting? You imply that splicing genes is evidence that human-fungi hybridization is possible, which only shows that you don't know what a hybrid is, and is irrelevant to the question of interbreeding.
Or it's an example of your not knowing what the word hybridization means. Should I have used the word Chimera, instead? Would you have even understood that term?
given morphology, Eldar are hominids closer to Homo Sapien Sapien than our next closest cousins, the Pan Troglodytes...
You brought it up first? Right here? Remember?
Yep, that was my response to your post on morphology. Remember?
A species is a subcategory of a phylum, which is defined by genetic proximity. If two creatures aren't part of the same phylum, they are by definition not part of the same species, regardless of whether they can interbreed. It just happens that we've never seen a creature that can interbreed with a member of a different phylum, so the "species defined by breeding fertile offspring" rule of thumb works for every example so far.
I agree completely, which is why I've stated that Eldar and Humans are the same species. See? Round and round we go!
If eldar are a subspecies of Homo sapiens, or a species of the genus Homo, at what point did they diverge from our most recent common ancestor, that shared 90% of our genes and less than 10% of an eldar's genes? The answer is that a creature that shares fewer genes with us than we do with bananas is obviously not a member of the same species. Anyone that disagrees is welcome to try to draw a cladogram to demonstrate otherwise.
Not sure where you are getting 90% same, 10% different. Is that from 40k fluff? Or is that your wild guess? Chimpanzees and Humans share 94% of the same DNA, most Humans share 97% of the same DNA, so unless GW has published a guesstimate on Eldar DNA to Human DNA, we can safely say that Nastase shows Eldar and Humans sharing at least 95% similarity, which places their most common ancestor at less than 6 million years, probably closer to 50,000 years or so.
Do you know what world Eldar originated on? Or when they added Terra to their Webway? We know they had a presence on Earth within the last 40-50 thousand years, we know that Humanity was a common trading partner of the Eldar during the Golden Age of Technology, and we know that the Humans of Sol (but not the Emperor) seem to have lost knowledge of the Eldar during the Long Night.
You can't actually say that Humans and Eldar do not share a common ancestor, without knowing more about their origins than what is currently in print. You can, however, say you doubt any connection between the two Races. It's good to have an opinion.
Hawking radiation doesn't cross the event horizon of a black hole, a fact obvious to anyone that actually understands quantum mechanics. Nor do x-ray bursts or gamma ray bursts.
So, how do Black Holes evaporate, ie, lose mass?
Anti-particles don't have "anti-spin", obviously. The only thing I can think of that might make sense here is the helicity of neutrinos and anti-neutrinos, but that isn't called anti-spin anywhere and it applies only to neutrinos, not positrons etc.
Check out Baryogenesis. If you understand what you read, we might have a meaningful discussion on that point.
Unicorns: the onus of proof is on the person making the claim. The claim that unicorns exist in Vietnam is unsubstantiated, and presumed false until demonstrated otherwise.
Unsubstantiated? You linked an article detailing the unicorn found in Vietnam, or did you forget that?
jeffersonian000 wrote: On the human-fungi hybrid, you must not be following recent science news. We can and have successfully spliced plant and insect DNA with mammal DNA
What part of this am I misquoting? You imply that splicing genes is evidence that human-fungi hybridization is possible, which only shows that you don't know what a hybrid is, and is irrelevant to the question of interbreeding.
Or it's an example of your not knowing what the word hybridization means. Should I have used the word Chimera, instead? Would you have even understood that term?
given morphology, Eldar are hominids closer to Homo Sapien Sapien than our next closest cousins, the Pan Troglodytes...
You brought it up first? Right here? Remember?
Yep, that was my response to your post on morphology. Remember?
A species is a subcategory of a phylum, which is defined by genetic proximity. If two creatures aren't part of the same phylum, they are by definition not part of the same species, regardless of whether they can interbreed. It just happens that we've never seen a creature that can interbreed with a member of a different phylum, so the "species defined by breeding fertile offspring" rule of thumb works for every example so far.
I agree completely, which is why I've stated that Eldar and Humans are the same species. See? Round and round we go!
If eldar are a subspecies of Homo sapiens, or a species of the genus Homo, at what point did they diverge from our most recent common ancestor, that shared 90% of our genes and less than 10% of an eldar's genes? The answer is that a creature that shares fewer genes with us than we do with bananas is obviously not a member of the same species. Anyone that disagrees is welcome to try to draw a cladogram to demonstrate otherwise.
Not sure where you are getting 90% same, 10% different. Is that from 40k fluff? Or is that your wild guess? Chimpanzees and Humans share 94% of the same DNA, most Humans share 97% of the same DNA, so unless GW has published a guesstimate on Eldar DNA to Human DNA, we can safely say that Nastase shows Eldar and Humans sharing at least 95% similarity, which places their most common ancestor at less than 6 million years, probably closer to 50,000 years or so.
Do you know what world Eldar originated on? Or when they added Terra to their Webway? We know they had a presence on Earth within the last 40-50 thousand years, we know that Humanity was a common trading partner of the Eldar during the Golden Age of Technology, and we know that the Humans of Sol (but not the Emperor) seem to have lost knowledge of the Eldar during the Long Night.
You can't actually say that Humans and Eldar do not share a common ancestor, without knowing more about their origins than what is currently in print. You can, however, say you doubt any connection between the two Races. It's good to have an opinion.
Hawking radiation doesn't cross the event horizon of a black hole, a fact obvious to anyone that actually understands quantum mechanics. Nor do x-ray bursts or gamma ray bursts.
So, how do Black Holes evaporate, ie, lose mass?
Anti-particles don't have "anti-spin", obviously. The only thing I can think of that might make sense here is the helicity of neutrinos and anti-neutrinos, but that isn't called anti-spin anywhere and it applies only to neutrinos, not positrons etc.
Check out Baryogenesis. If you understand what you read, we might have a meaningful discussion on that point.
Unicorns: the onus of proof is on the person making the claim. The claim that unicorns exist in Vietnam is unsubstantiated, and presumed false until demonstrated otherwise.
Unsubstantiated? You linked an article detailing the unicorn found in Vietnam, or did you forget that?
SJ
Once again, not necessarily the same species, please stop claiming they are. Assuming he was real in universe, for all we know he was sterile, meaning they are different species. And even if he was fertile that does not mean they are the same species
See, this is why there's really no point in discussing anything with you. The only person that doesn't realize that you have no idea what you're talking about is you. You respond to being corrected by stating things that are either untrue or gibberish. You don't know enough about spacetime or baryogenesis to talk meaningfully about either, you're just relying on nobody else knowing enough to call you on it. It's unfortunate for you that you don't understand taxonomy, biology, or physics, but it's pretty clear that nobody here really thinks that you understand the things you're saying or agrees with any of it, so no harm done in the grand scheme.
Frankly, at this point, just letting people re-read your posts is sufficient to demonstrate the lack of any meaningful science content.
I do want to make a point though, with regard to speciation. Genetically, differences are used as sort of a "clock" to determine how long different populations have been reproductively isolated for. So the more different the genomes are, the longer it's been since they shared a common ancestor. Now, even humans and bananas share about 50% of our genes, and our most recent common ancestor was hundreds of millions of years ago. Obviously, we are not the same species as bananas. The definition of "species" as "creatures that can produce offspring" presupposes sufficient genetic similarity that all members of the species share a common ancestor that was substantially genetically similar to all of them. Once different groups have been reproductively isolated for long enough, their genes will "drift" and they will eventually lose the ability to interbreed successfully.
Obviously, creatures with 20 base-pair DNA in a quintuple helix cannot interbreed with creatures with a double helix with two base pairs. I think there is no disagreement on this point with any basis in reality. Therefore, obviously, such creatures could not be the same species. Any common ancestor would have to predate the separation of humans and bananas, by many orders of magnitude. So again, such creatures would not belong to the same phylum, much less the same genus or species.
Cannot wait for yet another "Thank you for agreeing with me" post
jeffersonian000 wrote:
If eldar are a subspecies of Homo sapiens, or a species of the genus Homo, at what point did they diverge from our most recent common ancestor, that shared 90% of our genes and less than 10% of an eldar's genes? The answer is that a creature that shares fewer genes with us than we do with bananas is obviously not a member of the same species. Anyone that disagrees is welcome to try to draw a cladogram to demonstrate otherwise.
Not sure where you are getting 90% same, 10% different. Is that from 40k fluff? Or is that your wild guess? Chimpanzees and Humans share 94% of the same DNA, most Humans share 97% of the same DNA, so unless GW has published a guesstimate on Eldar DNA to Human DNA, we can safely say that Nastase shows Eldar and Humans sharing at least 95% similarity, which places their most common ancestor at less than 6 million years, probably closer to 50,000 years or so.
2 Base pairs (human) compared to 20 (Eldar). 2 is 10% of 20. Therefore the maximum amount of identical DNA in an Eldar (assuming they have all of the Human DNA plus all their extra) is 10% similarity. By pure abundance of all their other base pairs there is no way they can breed.
See, this is why there's really no point in discussing anything with you. The only person that doesn't realize that you have no idea what you're talking about is you. You respond to being corrected by stating things that are either untrue or gibberish. You don't know enough about spacetime or baryogenesis to talk meaningfully about either, you're just relying on nobody else knowing enough to call you on it. It's unfortunate for you that you don't understand taxonomy, biology, or physics, but it's pretty clear that nobody here really thinks that you understand the things you're saying or agrees with any of it, so no harm done in the grand scheme.
Frankly, at this point, just letting people re-read your posts is sufficient to demonstrate the lack of any meaningful science content.
I do want to make a point though, with regard to speciation. Genetically, differences are used as sort of a "clock" to determine how long different populations have been reproductively isolated for. So the more different the genomes are, the longer it's been since they shared a common ancestor. Now, even humans and bananas share about 50% of our genes, and our most recent common ancestor was hundreds of millions of years ago. Obviously, we are not the same species as bananas. The definition of "species" as "creatures that can produce offspring" presupposes sufficient genetic similarity that all members of the species share a common ancestor that was substantially genetically similar to all of them. Once different groups have been reproductively isolated for long enough, their genes will "drift" and they will eventually lose the ability to interbreed successfully.
Obviously, creatures with 20 base-pair DNA in a quintuple helix cannot interbreed with creatures with a double helix with two base pairs. I think there is no disagreement on this point with any basis in reality. Therefore, obviously, such creatures could not be the same species. Any common ancestor would have to predate the separation of humans and bananas, by many orders of magnitude. So again, such creatures would not belong to the same phylum, much less the same genus or species.
Except that GW included the possibility of Humans and Eldar interbreeding by having at last one named character that is the result of a Human and an Eldar intercourse. GW also created the odd genetics of the Eldar without specifically retracting, redacting, or retconning their previous stance on Human-Eldar crossbreeds. Which means that when we apply real world science to this example of biology in the 40k universe, we arrive at Humans and Eldar sharing a common ancestor.
If eldar are a subspecies of Homo sapiens, or a species of the genus Homo, at what point did they diverge from our most recent common ancestor, that shared 90% of our genes and less than 10% of an eldar's genes? The answer is that a creature that shares fewer genes with us than we do with bananas is obviously not a member of the same species. Anyone that disagrees is welcome to try to draw a cladogram to demonstrate otherwise.
Not sure where you are getting 90% same, 10% different. Is that from 40k fluff? Or is that your wild guess? Chimpanzees and Humans share 94% of the same DNA, most Humans share 97% of the same DNA, so unless GW has published a guesstimate on Eldar DNA to Human DNA, we can safely say that Nastase shows Eldar and Humans sharing at least 95% similarity, which places their most common ancestor at less than 6 million years, probably closer to 50,000 years or so.
2 Base pairs (human) compared to 20 (Eldar). 2 is 10% of 20. Therefore the maximum amount of identical DNA in an Eldar (assuming they have all of the Human DNA plus all their extra) is 10% similarity. By pure abundance of all their other base pairs there is no way they can breed.
Nah, you were just using bad math and a poor understanding of biology.
If eldar are a subspecies of Homo sapiens, or a species of the genus Homo, at what point did they diverge from our most recent common ancestor, that shared 90% of our genes and less than 10% of an eldar's genes? The answer is that a creature that shares fewer genes with us than we do with bananas is obviously not a member of the same species. Anyone that disagrees is welcome to try to draw a cladogram to demonstrate otherwise.
Not sure where you are getting 90% same, 10% different. Is that from 40k fluff? Or is that your wild guess? Chimpanzees and Humans share 94% of the same DNA, most Humans share 97% of the same DNA, so unless GW has published a guesstimate on Eldar DNA to Human DNA, we can safely say that Nastase shows Eldar and Humans sharing at least 95% similarity, which places their most common ancestor at less than 6 million years, probably closer to 50,000 years or so.
2 Base pairs (human) compared to 20 (Eldar). 2 is 10% of 20. Therefore the maximum amount of identical DNA in an Eldar (assuming they have all of the Human DNA plus all their extra) is 10% similarity. By pure abundance of all their other base pairs there is no way they can breed.
They might have a completely different set as well, their 20 bases might not even include our 4. In which case there's no compatibility even between the odd bases in the gene. And then they might not have a triplet code, it might be quintuplets or God knows what.
Also humans and chimps share 99% DNA. 99.9% with other humans (iirc). Not sure where the 94 and 97 are from.
That's a conclusion you may draw, but it is not the only one. If we assume that they can somehow hybridise, which to be clear I don't think they can, that doesn't prove they share a common ancestor. It is possible, if incredibly unlikely, that it is a case of convergent evolution, where by they have developed similar enough traits without being genetically related in any way.
Hawking radiation doesn't cross the event horizon of a black hole, a fact obvious to anyone that actually understands quantum mechanics. Nor do x-ray bursts or gamma ray bursts.
So, how do Black Holes evaporate, ie, lose mass?
Either the particles are formed just outside the event horizon, or it's quantum tunnelling which doesn't care about potential barriers. Take your pick.
Anti-particles don't have "anti-spin", obviously. The only thing I can think of that might make sense here is the helicity of neutrinos and anti-neutrinos, but that isn't called anti-spin anywhere and it applies only to neutrinos, not positrons etc.
Check out Baryogenesis. If you understand what you read, we might have a meaningful discussion on that point.
Anti-particles do not have anti-spin. They have the same value of spin that the normal particle does. It can be in a different direction (the actual direction spin can never be fully defined, however) but that doesn't make it "anti-spin". (Hint: Google anti-spin and all you find is table tennis pages).
Unicorns: the onus of proof is on the person making the claim. The claim that unicorns exist in Vietnam is unsubstantiated, and presumed false until demonstrated otherwise.
Unsubstantiated? You linked an article detailing the unicorn found in Vietnam, or did you forget that?
SJ
That was not a Unicorn. Considering that stories of unicorns existed in western european mythology long before the people of those countries ever got to Vietnam. Also, the Saola is bovine, not equine. So it can't be a Unicorn as defined in mythology.
The original reporting of 99% the same between Chimps and Human was found to be in error, with 94% the correct value. Not sure why you don't know that, given you reported background in biology.
As to 97% similarity across Humanity, not all Humans have Neanderthal DNA, which can account for 1-3% of most Humans, except for those from Africa, which still has the most differentiate DNA amount Human groups. Why do you not know that, either?
Now, you are 99.5% similar to those in your community, and 99.9% similar to those in your immediate family. At this point, I have no idea what it is you do know.
jeffersonian000 wrote: The original reporting of 99% the same between Chimps and Human was found to be in error, with 94% the correct value. Not sure why you don't know that, given you reported background in biology.
As to 97% similarity across Humanity, not all Humans have Neanderthal DNA, which can account for 1-3% of most Humans, except for those from Africa, which still has the most differentiate DNA amount Human groups. Why do you not know that, either?
Now, you are 99.5% similar to those in your community, and 99.9% similar to those in your immediate family. At this point, I have no idea what it is you do know.
SJ
I never claimed to have a background in biology. I have a C in A Level biology, no where did I claim anything more. I have a decent grasp on how DNA works however, which is all I need to know Eldar Human hybrids are biologically impossible. And there's no need for 'I have no idea what it is you do know'. That's uncalled for, frankly.
jeffersonian000 wrote: The original reporting of 99% the same between Chimps and Human was found to be in error, with 94% the correct value. Not sure why you don't know that, given you reported background in biology.
As to 97% similarity across Humanity, not all Humans have Neanderthal DNA, which can account for 1-3% of most Humans, except for those from Africa, which still has the most differentiate DNA amount Human groups. Why do you not know that, either?
Now, you are 99.5% similar to those in your community, and 99.9% similar to those in your immediate family. At this point, I have no idea what it is you do know.
SJ
Our DNA is different but it is still 98.5% of the same gene sequences. They got a lower number by looking at different things (indels) which have only been found in non-functioning sections of the genome.
While the results confirmed that single nucleotide substitutions did account for roughly 1.4 percent of the differences, in accordance with previous estimates, Britten also found that indels account for a further 3.9 percent of divergence. This gives a rough estimate of five percent difference, he said.
"There seems to be a deep interest in this question," of how genetically similar we are with chimpanzees, said Britten. "Increasing the number is mostly a technical matter though; we are still the same distance away as we were before, and that is about five million years," he said.
The new estimate could be a little misleading, said Saitou Naruya, an evolutionary geneticist at the National Institute of Genetics in Mishima, Japan. "There is no consensus about how to count numbers or proportion of nucleotide insertions and deletions," he said.
Indels are common in the non-functional sections of the genome, said Peter Oefner, a researcher at Stanford's Genome Technology Center in Palo Alto, California. Scientists estimate that up to 97 percent of DNA in the human genome has no known function. However, he added, indels are extremely rare in gene sequences.
"We haven't observed a single indel in a [gene] to date between human and chimp," said Oefner. Therefore, the revised estimate doesn't alter the amount of DNA that holds information about our species. Humans and chimps still differ by about one percent in gene sequences, he said.
So either you didn't understand what you read, or chose to be deliberately misleading.
I never claimed to have a background in biology. I have a C in A Level biology, no where did I claim anything more. I have a decent grasp on how DNA works however, which is all I need to know Eldar Human hybrids are biologically impossible. And there's no need for 'I have no idea what it is you do know'. That's uncalled for, frankly.
Our functional genes are still 98.5% identical. The lower figure comes from counting indels (deletions or insertions of nucleotides or DNA sequences into existing sequences), which are common in non-functioning sections of the genome.
So far we haven't found any indels in any of the genes which actually carry genetic information.
I never claimed to have a background in biology. I have a C in A Level biology, no where did I claim anything more. I have a decent grasp on how DNA works however, which is all I need to know Eldar Human hybrids are biologically impossible. And there's no need for 'I have no idea what it is you do know'. That's uncalled for, frankly.
Our functional genes are still 98.5% identical. The lower figure comes from counting indels (deletions or insertions of nucleotides or DNA sequences into existing sequences), which are common in non-functioning sections of the genome.
So far we haven't found any indels in any of the genes which actually carry genetic information.
Thanks. So basically; the important genes are still nearly the same, but the useless stuff isn't as close, and they worked that out by counting the indels? And that brings the actual total amount down?
This topic is a bit like a scab on the roof of your mouth that would go away if only you could just leave it alone.
It's hypnotic watching all this 'quoting' of Internet sources as if they were somehow reliable. The brinkmanship with sources and proclaiming to know these amazing aspects of science in the same level of detail as the leading minds in those fields.
I work in genetics and you guys are going on about stuff that frankly I don't remember or know because it's no use to man nor beast. But you treat each other as somehow inferior for not knowing this essentially useless knowledge. Now I'm wondering why I'm posting this and return to my earlier analogy
jeffersonian000 wrote: I'm not the one that keeps making falsifiable statements, but that's okay. I'll let you sciency types go about your testing without testing, and get back to actual application of science via engineering. Have fun!
SJ
You make me ashamed to be in an engineering program.
Okay:
1) Humans and Eldar hybrid using REAL Science to answer it: no, never happen
2) Humans and Humans and Eldar hybrid using PSEUDO-40K Science to answer it: a) Yes in Rogue Trader b) No by today's fluff standards
3) Does it matter?: No, you can still imagine the existence if it makes you happy
4) A hypothesis is a proposed idea or explanation based on what little evidence you have on a situation. The experiment is done to figure out how much of that original hypothesis is correct / incorrect. The only bias is that the experiment is focussed on that area of the subject and may miss out parts of the bigger picture (you test variable A, B and C but it turns out variable Z is also a limiting factor which you didn't test)
A positive result or a negative result is still useful data.
Other people then test the hypothesis using the same experimental method (that's why methods are written down) to see if the data is reproducible. If it is, then it adds more evidence to support the initial hypothesis as correct. If the results are different, then either the original, or repeat, or both are inaccurate. Indeed it could be that both are correct but for an unseen reason.
So it's repeated again, and again and again.
Can we maybe close this thread as some of these posts are just turning into a petty 'you proved me right, you're stupid, you can't read, allow me to correct you blah blah blah' slanging match.
This. 40k=/=RT. Kill the thread. I feel bad for the OP. He probably didn't intend to cause this much of a peeing contest.
Fluff wise, RT could almost be a different universe, that much has changed in the 25 years or whatever it's been. RT is older than me, it's hardly gospel these days.
And 40K wouldn't exist without Warhammer. And warhammer wouldn't exist without D&D, and D&D wouldn't exist without Tolkein etc.
Considering that, in the fluff concerning Nastase:
1) The Ultramarines were a third founding chapter raised to replace the 13th Legion which turned traitor (Retconned) 2) He was Chief Librarian of the Ultramarines in the year 987 (Retconned, Tigurius was chief librarian then) 3) He was the chief librarian of the Ultramarines without actually being a space marine (Retconned, the only people in the Ultramarines who are not full space marines are Scouts)
He no longer exists. He's just yet another myth from the Rogue Trader era. He was the only one they wrote about and all of his character and achievements have basically been retconned away.
As an addendum, any common ancestor between humans and aliens with 20 base pairs and quintuple helix DNA would have to predate all life on earth, be extraterrestrial in origin, and be single-celled. Only the descendants that had our base pairs and structure would have made it to Earth, since all life on earth has the same double-helix structure and the same base pairs.
It is not possible that a sub-order of primates evolved to have different base pairs and different DNA structure, and certainly not within the 50 million years that primates have existsed, when the genome of all life on earth has changed by much less than that in 500 million years.
If you extrapolate backwards based on the average change in the genome, any common ancestor would have to predate the origins of the universe by several orders of magnitude at least (and thus couldn't exist), but this extrapolation is extremely speculative as we have no data on extraterrestrial evolution. We can only really speak with confidence about terrestrial evolution within the last billion years or so.
Considering that, in the fluff concerning Nastase:
1) The Ultramarines were a third founding chapter raised to replace the 13th Legion which turned traitor (Retconned)
Correct. No argument from me.
2) He was Chief Librarian of the Ultramarines in the year 987 (Retconned, Tigurius was chief librarian then)
Incorrect. Nastase was never Chief Librarian of the Ultramarines, although he did attain the rank of Chief Librarian, an Astropath, and the Chief of the Macragge Interstellar Communication Link. There is no conflict with the character of Varro Tigurius.
3) He was the chief librarian of the Ultramarines without actually being a space marine (Retconned, the only people in the Ultramarines who are not full space marines are Scouts)
This one's an odd one, I admit. While Nastase is never mentioned to be an Astartes, he is displayed in Astartes armor and noted as being an Ultramarine. We know he was an adult before working for the Dark Angel as an Astropath Primis, so most likely became an Astartes after being assigned to the Ultramarines. Guess they felt he was a keeper? (Pun intended)
He no longer exists. He's just yet another myth from the Rogue Trader era. He was the only one they wrote about and all of his character and achievements have basically been retconned away.
He's still there, in the future mythology, his fluff has nothing to do with the Ultramarine fluff beyond being one.
office_waaagh wrote: As an addendum, any common ancestor between humans and aliens with 20 base pairs and quintuple helix DNA would have to predate all life on earth, be extraterrestrial in origin, and be single-celled. Only the descendants that had our base pairs and structure would have made it to Earth, since all life on earth has the same double-helix structure and the same base pairs.
It is not possible that a sub-order of primates evolved to have different base pairs and different DNA structure, and certainly not within the 50 million years that primates have existsed, when the genome of all life on earth has changed by much less than that in 500 million years.
If you extrapolate backwards based on the average change in the genome, any common ancestor would have to predate the origins of the universe by several orders of magnitude at least (and thus couldn't exist), but this extrapolation is extremely speculative as we have no data on extraterrestrial evolution. We can only really speak with confidence about terrestrial evolution within the last billion years or so.
Actually, the Eldar fluff includes genetic manipulation by the Old One. Who here can say that the Eldar did not start off as Hominidae on Earth, where uplifted by the Old Ones, and used as soldiers in the war versus the Necrons? In order for the Eldar to still reproduce, their original DNA was left intact, which millions of years later still allow them to occasionally produce an offspring with their distant cousins from Earth? You don't know, I don't, but it is possible.
office_waaagh wrote: As an addendum, any common ancestor between humans and aliens with 20 base pairs and quintuple helix DNA would have to predate all life on earth, be extraterrestrial in origin, and be single-celled. Only the descendants that had our base pairs and structure would have made it to Earth, since all life on earth has the same double-helix structure and the same base pairs.
It is not possible that a sub-order of primates evolved to have different base pairs and different DNA structure, and certainly not within the 50 million years that primates have existsed, when the genome of all life on earth has changed by much less than that in 500 million years.
If you extrapolate backwards based on the average change in the genome, any common ancestor would have to predate the origins of the universe by several orders of magnitude at least (and thus couldn't exist), but this extrapolation is extremely speculative as we have no data on extraterrestrial evolution. We can only really speak with confidence about terrestrial evolution within the last billion years or so.
Actually, the Eldar fluff includes genetic manipulation by the Old One. Who here can say that the Eldar did not start off as Hominidae on Earth, where uplifted by the Old Ones, and used as soldiers in the war versus the Necrons? In order for the Eldar to still reproduce, their original DNA was left intact, which millions of years later still allow them to occasionally produce an offspring with their distant cousins from Earth? You don't know, I don't, but it is possible.
SJ
Pretty sure Eldar predate humanity, by quite a while, no?
Ashiraya wrote: The Eldar shaped worlds a while humanity's ancestors crawled out of the sea.
Yeah, they were first.
I never said Humans were first. Why would you assume that?
SJ
You said that the Eldar might be genetically altered hominids. But the Eldar existed before even the dinosaurs, so that is impossible.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
jeffersonian000 wrote: Actually, the Eldar fluff includes genetic manipulation by the Old One. Who here can say that the Eldar did not start off as Hominidae on Earth, where uplifted by the Old Ones, and used as soldiers in the war versus the Necrons? In order for the Eldar to still reproduce, their original DNA was left intact, which millions of years later still allow them to occasionally produce an offspring with their distant cousins from Earth? You don't know, I don't, but it is possible.
Actually, if you check my previous posts on this subject, I always stated Humans are decendents of Eldar Exodites. It was only been on this thread that I've pondered Eldar origins on Earth. The fact that all life on Earth has to same genetic origin can be explained by Eldar terraforming just as easily as it can explain Eldar being a branch of the Hominid tribe. The Eldar super stack DNA is a red herring, because it's inclusion is irrelevant since Human-Eldar offspring does occur, and can be directly explain from the Eldar fluff via Old One tampering.
jeffersonian000 wrote: Actually, if you check my previous posts on this subject, I always stated Humans are decendents of Eldar Exodites. It was only been on this thread that I've pondered Eldar origins on Earth. The fact that all life on Earth has to same genetic origin can be explained by Eldar terraforming just as easily as it can explain Eldar being a branch of the Hominid tribe. The Eldar super stack DNA is a red herring, because it's inclusion is irrelevant since Human-Eldar offspring does occur, and can be directly explain from the Eldar fluff via Old One tampering.
SJ
Except there is only one instance of it ever being mentioned as having occurred. And that has effectively been retconned by all of the changes to fluff which have come since.
Can we all agree there are multiple ways of interpreting the fluff,
1. That xenology is lies and eldar dna is the same as ours, and as such hybrids
2. Nastase is just a legend and might not exist, or have full human parentage
3. Xenology is right, but 40k not science means hybrids are possible
jeffersonian000 wrote: Actually, if you check my previous posts on this subject, I always stated Humans are decendents of Eldar Exodites. It was only been on this thread that I've pondered Eldar origins on Earth. The fact that all life on Earth has to same genetic origin can be explained by Eldar terraforming just as easily as it can explain Eldar being a branch of the Hominid tribe. The Eldar super stack DNA is a red herring, because it's inclusion is irrelevant since Human-Eldar offspring does occur, and can be directly explain from the Eldar fluff via Old One tampering.
SJ
Except there is only one instance of it ever being mentioned as having occurred. And that has effectively been retconned by all of the changes to fluff which have come since.
Except that one example has not been retconned, retracted, nor redacted.
In the first edition of a setting, a writer talks about a wanderer who lives in a desert, a human who walks the wastes and survives by moving from oasis to oasis.
Many years later the setting has exploded in size and the author's retcons and new decisions have changed a lot of the old facts. In one of his new stories, he details the previously mentioned desert, and explains that the desert is extremely hot (over 600 degrees celsius). He also explains that the desert is effectively entirely consisting of quicksand, and any attempts to enter it would be disastrous.
The existence of the first wanderer has not been explicitly retconned, however, the only logical conclusion to draw is to consider him as such. The author did not say 'the wanderer no longer exists', but he did provide other data whose existence is not compatible with a previous iteration of the story.
In a similar vein, the existence of the Half-Eldar has not been explicitly retconned. However, the changes in the setting (such as details on Eldar genetics and Imperial xenophobia, the absence of his position in the complete lists of Ultramarine membership ranks, and so on) are incompatible with his existence. As said changes are more numerous, more recent and more consistent, it is only rational to assume that they take precedence in this canon conflict.
Not so difficult, now was it?
When canon conflicts, the oldest, least consistent with the rest of the setting, and least common part really should not be used outside of headcanon.
jeffersonian000 wrote: Are you sure the Wanderer hasn't continued to survive in the desert because of his environmental suit and local knowledge of the terrain?
SJ
There is no suit that can withstand 600 degrees celsius. That is hotter than Venus, the hottest planet in our solar system, that is hot enough to melt Lead. At that temperature it would never rain, water would instantly evaporate if it came up from the ground and so he would not be able to drink. And what terrain? It is all quicksand. All of it.
jeffersonian000 wrote: Are you sure the Wanderer hasn't continued to survive in the desert because of his environmental suit and local knowledge of the terrain?
SJ
There is no suit that can withstand 600 degrees celsius. That is hotter than Venus, the hottest planet in our solar system, that is hot enough to melt Lead. And what terrain? It is all quicksand. All of it.
The waste-recycling still suit, of course. You know, the one designed to collect human waste and waste water, respiration, and recycle it to keep the wearer alive? And the terrain is the subterranean tubes running under the surface from oasis to oasis.
Does everyone except the one guy that doesn't know any science or logic agree that the character has been retconned and doesn't exist, that eldar aren't the same species as humans taxonomically speaking, and that creatures with double-helix DNA can't interbreed with creatures with quintuple-helix DNA?
Really? Everyone? Nobody takes him seriously? Excellent.
I think we're done here then. Let's all stop feeding the troll before he subjects my beloved sciences to any further abuse.
If anyone likes science as much as I do and wants to actually talk about it, I'm happy to have that discussion. There was a neat article published recently about horizontal gene transfer, or animals absorbing genes from distant species into their own genome by eating them. So maybe the Kroot aren't as scientifically implausible as I've been assuming. I think that's kind of cool.
office_waaagh wrote: Does everyone except the one guy that doesn't know any science or logic agree that the character has been retconned and doesn't exist, that eldar aren't the same species as humans taxonomically speaking, and that creatures with double-helix DNA can't interbreed with creatures with quintuple-helix DNA?
Really? Everyone? Nobody takes him seriously? Excellent.
I think we're done here then. Let's all stop feeding the troll before he subjects my beloved sciences to any further abuse.
If anyone likes science as much as I do and wants to actually talk about it, I'm happy to have that discussion. There was a neat article published recently about horizontal gene transfer, or animals absorbing genes from distant species into their own genome by eating them. So maybe the Kroot aren't as scientifically implausible as I've been assuming. I think that's kind of cool.
If I wasn't afraid of flamewars I'd start a thread on that, that's pretty cool sir.
I believe I understand Jeffersons view on this character (correct me if I'm wrong). It boils down to: There has been no literal writing that states such a character cannot exist since it's first publication. Because he was created but then not been stated as non-existent in actual writing, then he persists as a character that just wasn't developed further. I can see this point but I disagree with it for the following reason:
Each time the codex is re-written, I see it as re-write, a re-freshing of the history. It's not cumulative with previous codex fluff, it's a re-write that obliterates the previous one (in effect). Therefore, if this character is not included, he then does not exist. The timeline has not progressed at all when you look at the codex.
It basically just boils down to a point of pedency
jeffersonian000 wrote: Are you sure the Wanderer hasn't continued to survive in the desert because of his environmental suit and local knowledge of the terrain?
SJ
There is no suit that can withstand 600 degrees celsius. That is hotter than Venus, the hottest planet in our solar system, that is hot enough to melt Lead. And what terrain? It is all quicksand. All of it.
The waste-recycling still suit, of course. You know, the one designed to collect human waste and waste water, respiration, and recycle it to keep the wearer alive? And the terrain is the subterranean tubes running under the surface from oasis to oasis.
SJ
And how does said still suit survive 600 degrees celsius?
I believe I understand Jeffersons view on this character (correct me if I'm wrong). It boils down to: There has been no literal writing that states such a character cannot exist since it's first publication. Because he was created but then not been stated as non-existent in actual writing, then he persists as a character that just wasn't developed further. I can see this point but I disagree with it for the following reason:
Each time the codex is re-written, I see it as re-write, a re-freshing of the history. It's not cumulative with previous codex fluff, it's a re-write that obliterates the previous one (in effect). Therefore, if this character is not included, he then does not exist. The timeline has not progressed at all when you look at the codex.
It basically just boils down to a point of pedency
A valid point. Unfortunately, Games Workshop, Forge World, and the Black Library do not share this view. As has been stated before, GW does not recognize "canon" within their body of work, and have specifically stated that all of the 40k background should be seen as lies, propaganda, and Mythology. As such, any bit of fluff that is not directly contradicted by a newer entry is equally as valid as any other entry, while conflicting entries are technically both correct, although the more detailed version is probably the more interesting one (but not necessarily more valid).
This is why using one bit of GW fluff to "negate" another bit of GW fluff does not work, while referencing a more detailed version of the same lore has more weight than the less detailed version.
In the example of Illiyan Nastase, the character has a background that does not conflict with current publications, even though it does seem odd and out of place. Yet, when we look at Roboute Gilliman, we see a drastic difference between his older fluff and the many novels than have recently been published. Do these conflicting bits of lore invalidate one or the other? Per GW, no, they do not. The fact that contradictory fluff exists creates even more detail of the setting, forcing us the readers to question what we are being told. Some many see that as bad writing. Others, like myself, see that as part of what makes the setting epic.
jeffersonian000 wrote: Are you sure the Wanderer hasn't continued to survive in the desert because of his environmental suit and local knowledge of the terrain?
SJ
There is no suit that can withstand 600 degrees celsius. That is hotter than Venus, the hottest planet in our solar system, that is hot enough to melt Lead. And what terrain? It is all quicksand. All of it.
The waste-recycling still suit, of course. You know, the one designed to collect human waste and waste water, respiration, and recycle it to keep the wearer alive? And the terrain is the subterranean tubes running under the surface from oasis to oasis.
SJ
And how does said still suit survive 600 degrees celsius?
It doesn't. He's under the surface, avoiding the unsurvivable heat and pressure by traveling along lava tubes from oasis to oasis. Did you not read the story?
It doesn't. He's under the surface, avoiding the unsurvivable heat and pressure by traveling along lava tubes from oasis to oasis. Did you not read the story?
SJ
Ah, so you changed the story, putting in information that was not present (the suit which is apparently 100% efficient (impossible), the lava tubes, the underground rivers etc.), in order to force the new fluff to still include the old.
So he couldn't survive the story as told so you had to change it.
It doesn't. He's under the surface, avoiding the unsurvivable heat and pressure by traveling along lava tubes from oasis to oasis. Did you not read the story?
SJ
Ah, so you changed the story, putting in information that was not present (the suit which is apparently 100% efficient (impossible), the lava tubes, the underground rivers etc.), in order to force the new fluff to still include the old.
So he couldn't survive the story as told so you had to change it.
In the first edition of a setting, a writer talks about a wanderer who lives in a desert, a human who walks the wastes and survives by moving from oasis to oasis.
Many years later the setting has exploded in size and the author's retcons and new decisions have changed a lot of the old facts. In one of his new stories, he details the previously mentioned desert, and explains that the desert is extremely hot (over 600 degrees celsius). He also explains that the desert is effectively entirely consisting of quicksand, and any attempts to enter it would be disastrous.
The existence of the first wanderer has not been explicitly retconned, however, the only logical conclusion to draw is to consider him as such. The author did not say 'the wanderer no longer exists', but he did provide other data whose existence is not compatible with a previous iteration of the story.
In a similar vein, the existence of the Half-Eldar has not been explicitly retconned. However, the changes in the setting (such as details on Eldar genetics and Imperial xenophobia, the absence of his position in the complete lists of Ultramarine membership ranks, and so on) are incompatible with his existence. As said changes are more numerous, more recent and more consistent, it is only rational to assume that they take precedence in this canon conflict.
Not so difficult, now was it?
When canon conflicts, the oldest, least consistent with the rest of the setting, and least common part really should not be used outside of headcanon.
So actually yes, you did change it. You added stuff that had not previously been mentioned. That is changing the story.
No, he changed the story in his example in an attempt to demonstrate how a character can exist at first, and then be overlooked when the setting of the story changes to make the character's background conflicting with the present narrative. I pointed out via narrative how he character's background does not conflict with the new narrative.
jeffersonian000 wrote: No, he changed the story in his example in an attempt to demonstrate how a character can exist at first, and then be overlooked when the setting of the story changes to make the character's background conflicting with the present narrative. I pointed out via narrative how he character's background does not conflict with the new narrative.
SJ
Except it does as the only way to make it fit is to alter the newer fluff to introduce these never before mentioned tunnels and a never before mentioned 100% efficient suit which conserves and purifies all of his waste products.
jeffersonian000 wrote: No, he changed the story in his example in an attempt to demonstrate how a character can exist at first, and then be overlooked when the setting of the story changes to make the character's background conflicting with the present narrative. I pointed out via narrative how he character's background does not conflict with the new narrative.
SJ
Except it does as the only way to make it fit is to alter the newer fluff to introduce these never before mentioned tunnels and a never before mentioned 100% efficient suit which conserves and purifies all of his waste products.
Nothing was mentioned in your narrative, which can mean that there is nothing to mention, or that there is more to mention. Assuming there is nothing is poor storytelling. I'm guessing you don't do narrative writing?
jeffersonian000 wrote: No, he changed the story in his example in an attempt to demonstrate how a character can exist at first, and then be overlooked when the setting of the story changes to make the character's background conflicting with the present narrative. I pointed out via narrative how he character's background does not conflict with the new narrative.
SJ
Except it does as the only way to make it fit is to alter the newer fluff to introduce these never before mentioned tunnels and a never before mentioned 100% efficient suit which conserves and purifies all of his waste products.
Nothing was mentioned in your narrative, which can mean that there is nothing to mention, or that there is more to mention. Assuming there is nothing is poor storytelling. I'm guessing you don't do narrative writing?
SJ
I'm saying that if the Ring of Power was described as a plain gold band you can't just then add in a load of gems to make it fit some previous story written where it had included a Silmaril.
jeffersonian000 wrote: No, he changed the story in his example in an attempt to demonstrate how a character can exist at first, and then be overlooked when the setting of the story changes to make the character's background conflicting with the present narrative. I pointed out via narrative how he character's background does not conflict with the new narrative.
SJ
Except it does as the only way to make it fit is to alter the newer fluff to introduce these never before mentioned tunnels and a never before mentioned 100% efficient suit which conserves and purifies all of his waste products.
Nothing was mentioned in your narrative, which can mean that there is nothing to mention, or that there is more to mention. Assuming there is nothing is poor storytelling. I'm guessing you don't do narrative writing?
SJ
I'm saying that if the Ring of Power was described as a plain gold band you can't just then add in a load of gems to make it fit some previous story written where it had included a Silmaril.
Yet heating the plan gold band in a fire won't reveal the inscription on the inner surface? Looking at the plan gold band through a prism won't reveal the mind gems studding its circumference? Removing the gem setting won't reveal that the plan gold band underneath was the Ring of Power the whole time?
You need to read more.
statu wrote: So you added stuff to make it fit what you wanted?
The point I was, rather poorly, trying to make, was that your suit etcetera may not actually be possible within this story. It could be set in on earth in 2015 where by a bomb or something has created the 600oC desert. Therefore any speculation cannot be presented as this is what happened, as it is impossible to know what happened, or how it happened, or why it happened. The only person to know 100% what happened is the guy that writes it. Therefore any guess at what has happened, because for all you know within this story your additions are impossible, must be presented as this may be what happened etc, which you didn't do. You presented an idea you had as the only way it was possible, adding in stuff that you felt needed to be added in
statu wrote: The point I was, rather poorly, trying to make, was that your suit etcetera may not actually be possible within this story. It could be set in on earth in 2015 where by a bomb or something has created the 600oC desert. Therefore any speculation cannot be presented as this is what happened, as it is impossible to know what happened, or how it happened, or why it happened. The only person to know 100% what happened is the guy that writes it. Therefore any guess at what has happened, because for all you know within this story your additions are impossible, must be presented as this may be what happened etc, which you didn't do. You presented an idea you had as the only way it was possible, adding in stuff that you felt needed to be added in
You just invalidated your own argument ... and probably still don't understand why.
statu wrote: How do you think I managed to invalidate my argument then?
Let me mark it for you:
statu wrote: The point I was, rather poorly, trying to make, was that your suit etcetera may not actually be possible within this story. It could be set in on earth in 2015 where by a bomb or something has created the 600oC desert. Therefore any speculation cannot be presented as this is what happened, as it is impossible to know what happened, or how it happened, or why it happened. The only person to know 100% what happened is the guy that writes it. Therefore any guess at what has happened, because for all you know within this story your additions are impossible, must be presented as this may be what happened etc, which you didn't do. You presented an idea you had as the only way it was possible, adding in stuff that you felt needed to be added in
GW not only has not retconned nor removed Nastase, both GW and the Black Library have stated that there is no canon, that all of their writing is equally valid. Your argument has been that more recent changes invalidate older fluff. In your example, you the author wrote a story, then rewrote the story with more detail that might conflict with the original story, yet when a fan attempts to explain parts of the setting not covered, you the author tell the fan that their addition doesn't fit the narrative. If we replace "you the author" with GW, and "the fan" with you, we have the dialog on this thread about GW's Nastase background versus GW's Xenology, you stating the Xenology invalidates Nastase, and GW stating all of their writing is valid.
GW not only has not retconned nor removed Nastase, both GW and the Black Library have stated that there is no canon, that all of their writing is equally valid. Your argument has been that more recent changes invalidate older fluff. In your example, you the author wrote a story, then rewrote the story with more detail that might conflict with the original story, yet when a fan attempts to explain parts of the setting not covered, you the author tell the fan that their addition doesn't fit the narrative. If we replace "you the author" with GW, and "the fan" with you, we have the dialog on this thread about GW's Nastase background versus GW's Xenology, you stating the Xenology invalidates Nastase, and GW stating all of their writing is valid.
That's okay, I'll wait while your head explodes.
SJ
If there is no canon then Nastase is not canon. Therefore he is just a myth in the setting, considering eldar-human hybrids have never ever been mentioned ever again and Tigurius was the Chief Librarian when Nastase was claimed to have that position (Notice Chief Librarian Astropath):
The inability to understand what's written is astounding with you guys. 9 pages of you not reading, me pointing out what you would see if you actually bothered to read, followed by more of your not reading. I would give up at this point, but I'm too stubborn to let the ignorant succeed via annoyance.
Why is it, desire black library fella saying everything could be lies, propaganda or a legend, you are incapable of admitting that nastase might fit one of these categories, regardless of your personal opinion on the matter? It astounds me you seem to be completely incapable of admitting that maybe he might not have actually existed in the universe and was just a story, again in universe
statu wrote: Why is it, desire black library fella saying everything could be lies, propaganda or a legend, you are incapable of admitting that nastase might fit one of these categories, regardless of your personal opinion on the matter? It astounds me you seem to be completely incapable of admitting that maybe he might not have actually existed in the universe and was just a story, again in universe
See? There you go not actually reading. I did state that it is all fiction. Guess you won't read this post, either.
SJ
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Wulfmar wrote: I wonder what 1D4Chan has to say on the matter
Why assume eldar have DNA that works structurally like earth based DNA? For all anyone knows eldar have a completely different method of encoding genetic information. That answer works as well as any other.
statu wrote: Why is it, desire black library fella saying everything could be lies, propaganda or a legend, you are incapable of admitting that nastase might fit one of these categories, regardless of your personal opinion on the matter? It astounds me you seem to be completely incapable of admitting that maybe he might not have actually existed in the universe and was just a story, again in universe
See? There you go not actually reading. I did state that it is all fiction. Guess you won't read this post, either.
SJ
Admittedly yes you did, but only when you were using it to try and belittle me, by making out that I thought this was all real
Rumbleguts wrote: Why assume eldar have DNA that works structurally like earth based DNA? For all anyone knows eldar have a completely different method of encoding genetic information. That answer works as well as any other.
They do, according to Xenology. Quintuple helix with 20 bases.
The attitude is based on the context of the posts of my three main attackers, to which I've lumped all three together due to the arguments being identical. The compleat lack of reading comprehension on the part of all three of you is where the ire comes from. If each of you just took a moment to actually read the source material, read those links, and read GWs stance on their own material, this thread would have been one on how the weird biology of 40k works, rather than the constant attempts to invalidate the material based on the inability of each of you to see the bigger picture.
Wouldn't the discussion be more fascinating if we were talking about how a quintouple Helix with 20 base pairs could even work? Or how it is that Eldar could have effected Human development in pre-history? Or the relationship Eldar and Humanity had before the Fall?
Those would have been much topics than you guys saying "newer fluff makes old fluff invalid" when none of you seem to have even bothered to read the older fluff you think is invalid. It's like you are refusing to believe the U.S. dropped two atomic bombs on Japan because your history book says the U.S. dropped one bomb on Korea (not a made up example, U.S. high schools did print such an error in the early 90's, something we can thank the Texas Board of Education for).
I have never once stated the any of this was fact, or canon, or irrefutable. I have stated that GW's position on their own fluff is that it is all equally valid, to which they have said they treat it all as lies, propaganda, and legends. My pointing out that the existence of Human-Eldar hybrids in the older fluff means a closer relationship between the two races is just as valid as your argument that it should be impossible for Eldar biology to be compatible with Human biology. If the counter arguments weren't so ignorant, I would not need to keep pointing out why the counter arguments are so ignorant.
jeffersonian000 wrote: The attitude is based on the context of the posts of my three main attackers, to which I've lumped all three together due to the arguments being identical. The compleat lack of reading comprehension on the part of all three of you is where the ire comes from. If each of you just took a moment to actually read the source material, read those links, and read GWs stance on their own material, this thread would have been one on how the weird biology of 40k works, rather than the constant attempts to invalidate the material based on the inability of each of you to see the bigger picture.
Wouldn't the discussion be more fascinating if we were talking about how a quintouple Helix with 20 base pairs could even work? Or how it is that Eldar could have effected Human development in pre-history? Or the relationship Eldar and Humanity had before the Fall?
Those would have been much topics than you guys saying "newer fluff makes old fluff invalid" when none of you seem to have even bothered to read the older fluff you think is invalid. It's like you are refusing to believe the U.S. dropped two atomic bombs on Japan because your history book says the U.S. dropped one bomb on Korea (not a made up example, U.S. high schools did print such an error in the early 90's, something we can thank the Texas Board of Education for).
I have never once stated the any of this was fact, or canon, or irrefutable. I have stated that GW's position on their own fluff is that it is all equally valid, to which they have said they treat it all as lies, propaganda, and legends. My pointing out that the existence of Human-Eldar hybrids in the older fluff means a closer relationship between the two races is just as valid as your argument that it should be impossible for Eldar biology to be compatible with Human biology. If the counter arguments weren't so ignorant, I would not need to keep pointing out why the counter arguments are so ignorant.
SJ
I've been on neither side of this debate.
- in fact, some of my posts were the most concessionary towards your view.
This post by you has changed my opinion, not of the argument, but about you. You have been rude to me for no good reason (and I don't care if it was because the others irked you).
Anything and nothing is canon, and anything can just be rumours or propaganda. Nastase is mentioned 1 time. Imperium's extreme xenophobia (more than enough to keep any Xeno out of Imperial elite forces) has a lot more mentions - let's say 75ish explicit mentions of Imperial alien-hate, and far more implications (we'll be nice and exclude those, but don't forget them). Then we have a couple of lists showing every member of the UM chapter, where Nastase and his rank is absent. Then, Xenology. If any of those are true, they disprove Nastase's existence. Let's say 80ish in total, between novels, codices, rulebooks etc.
This estimation is quite generous in Nastase's favour, but the odds are still against him - every last one of the above mentions must turn out to be rumours, and Nastase's must turn out to be true. If even one of them is true, Nastase becomes automatically disproved since they are incompatible. Thus, the odds of Nastase actually existing in the 'real' 40k are something like 80^2, or 1 in 6400.
I don't see any problems with flat out disregarding him when the odds are that extreme.
Edit: Actually it is one in 6561, since not only must all evidence disproving his existence be rumours, the article that says he exists at all must also not be a rumour.
This calculation also disregards the fact that more consistent 40k facts are more likely to be true simply because they are consistent, not because they are numerous. In addition, Nastase's fluff is more likely to be non-canon simply because it is old and a greater percentage of older background fluff is obsolete. Therefore the actual odds would probably be even lower than 1 in 6561, but I'll be even nicer and disregard that too.
Of course, 80 was just a given number. It could be even more.
jeffersonian000 wrote: The attitude is based on the context of the posts of my three main attackers, to which I've lumped all three together due to the arguments being identical. The compleat lack of reading comprehension on the part of all three of you is where the ire comes from. If each of you just took a moment to actually read the source material, read those links, and read GWs stance on their own material, this thread would have been one on how the weird biology of 40k works, rather than the constant attempts to invalidate the material based on the inability of each of you to see the bigger picture.
Wouldn't the discussion be more fascinating if we were talking about how a quintouple Helix with 20 base pairs could even work? Or how it is that Eldar could have effected Human development in pre-history? Or the relationship Eldar and Humanity had before the Fall?
Those would have been much topics than you guys saying "newer fluff makes old fluff invalid" when none of you seem to have even bothered to read the older fluff you think is invalid. It's like you are refusing to believe the U.S. dropped two atomic bombs on Japan because your history book says the U.S. dropped one bomb on Korea (not a made up example, U.S. high schools did print such an error in the early 90's, something we can thank the Texas Board of Education for).
I have never once stated the any of this was fact, or canon, or irrefutable. I have stated that GW's position on their own fluff is that it is all equally valid, to which they have said they treat it all as lies, propaganda, and legends. My pointing out that the existence of Human-Eldar hybrids in the older fluff means a closer relationship between the two races is just as valid as your argument that it should be impossible for Eldar biology to be compatible with Human biology. If the counter arguments weren't so ignorant, I would not need to keep pointing out why the counter arguments are so ignorant.
SJ
Ahh, if you'd have added a might in there, that would have been almost beautiful. All it needed was to read, 'might mean a closer relationship between', without its just as ignorant as you claim everyone else's position is. As if is, it reads 'no one knows for sure what anything is, so all positions are equally valid, but mines more valid'
I am aware of what the words actually said, but what they actually say, and how they are read and interpreted are two completely different things.
And just a point as I've been having a look through some of the earlier pages of this, I actually asked how eldar and human DNA would interact, hoping we'd be able to talk about it. Instead of replying to it, you decided to ignore that, and move on to another comment. So the point I'm adding here, that I really don't want to discuss, is that if you think it would have been so much more interesting to have that conversation, why did you ignore a chance to have it?
Edit-In fact the more of the old posts I read, the more it becomes apparent you just wanted a fight here. Numerous times people asked you a question, or made a point, being quitereasonable with you, and just got ignored, or had you act quite rudely. Is it actually any real surprise this seems to have gone completely downhill as a result?
The attitude was a result of the content directed towards me. My apologies. I have attempted a number times to redirect the thread back to an additive dialog.
Which proves that different people have different opinions? Nastase is an example from GW, that has a model, a printed backstory, and fits the point I made that humans and Eldar are cousins within the same branch of hominid. Move the goal post all you want, but you can't disprove it.
SJ
So what was the content here then? Some guy who hadn't actually said anything on that topic up until that point posted a link to an article about him, for those that know nothing about it, and you attack him for it
He's Chief Librarian Astropath Illiyan Nastase of the Ultramarines (third founding chapter raised to replace the traitorous 13th legion who fled to the Eye of Terror).
Also, he says he would be one example, kind of implying there are others...
jeffersonian000 wrote: There are others, including an unnamed character in a recent novel, a female half-Eldar.
SJ
If I remember and understand correctly, it is never actually said that female one is a hybrid, its alluded to being one from what I understand. However I've not encountered it myself so I have no idea.
jeffersonian000 wrote: There are others, including an unnamed character in a recent novel, a female half-Eldar.
SJ
If I remember and understand correctly, it is never actually said that female one is a hybrid, its alluded to being one from what I understand. However I've not encountered it myself so I have no idea.
It's fan service for RT fans, when Half-Eldar were a mentioned thing.
