A Test?

[Singing Bush]

Another question out of mostly curiosity. Humans share some of the same nonfunctional transposons with some primates in some of the exact same places. We share some of the same nonfunctional genes with some primates that are nonfunctional for the exact same reasons. We share some of the same retroviruses inserted into the exact same places in our DNA as some primates. This is less and less true w/ other species of animals further away from us on the alleged evolutionary tree. How do creationists see this?

Is this God testing our faith? An amazing coincidence? Something else?

And don't worry, I aint planning on jumping on you guys. Can't guarantee that from anyone else though...

 

[TwinCrier]

It's evidence of a single creator, nothing more.

On this subject, I saw a television show about these two men who were identical twins separated at birth. The main point of the show was how simular these two mens' lives were dispite being raised differently. Some of the silly things they used to prove that nature (genetics) is more inportant than enviroment (nurture) was that both men became truckers, wore a beard and maried women named Jane. Now most twins do not marry spouses with the same name, go into the same occupation or wear their hair the same, at least not as adults. These were just cute coincidences. Mankind's admiration for the ape because it has an opposing thumb and no tail isn't proof of evolution anymore than twins marrying wives with the same name prrove that your choice of spouse is genetic.

 

[Tenacious-D]

It's evidence of a single creator, nothing more.

On this subject, I saw a television show about these two men who were identical twins separated at birth. The main point of the show was how simular these two mens' lives were dispite being raised differently. Some of the silly things they used to prove that nature (genetics) is more inportant than enviroment (nurture) was that both men became truckers, wore a beard and maried women named Jane. Now most twins do not marry spouses with the same name, go into the same occupation or wear their hair the same, at least not as adults. These were just cute coincidences. Mankind's admiration for the ape because it has an opposing thumb and no tail isn't proof of evolution anymore than twins marrying wives with the same name prrove that your choice of spouse is genetic.

What a terrible analogy. Don't submit this for peer review. Talk about apples and oranges.

 

[herev]

Interesting topic, but let's remember to play nice

 

[California Tim]

Now, a comparison of dolphin and human chromosomes shows that the genetic make-up of dolphins is amazingly similar to humans. http://www.crystalinks.com/bioanimals.html

You all can send Christmas cards to your relatives in the upper canopy of the rain forests if you'd rather. As for me - just call me "Flipper".

 

[Vance]

Douglas Adams said that we are embarrassed about our ape relatives and so rarely invite them over for dinner.

The problem with the common design idea is (among other things) that it doesn't explain all the different commonalities. Why a retrovirus? This is not a "design" issue, but a retention issue. Why so many atrophied and no longer usable traits in one species which is useful in another? Why does the degree of these connections correspond so tightly into a set of nested heirarchies? Why two dramatically different designs for species who live in water, one being mammal and the other fish? Where they have similar, but not identical mechanisms for getting around (because they work), but with one group having all these similarities with land mammals? Why not one design for sea creatures and one for land creatures? Why are some flyers birds and some rodents with their wings made up of skin stretched between the five fingers of a hand? And in the past we had flying reptiles with an entirely different design for flying. Does this not point to an adaptation of existing form to accomplish the great benefit of flight more than the idea of a common design?

All of these, and a myriad of other factors (literally more than could be listed in a dozen posts) all point so strongly to evolutionary development which, when added to the fact that we have observed such the mechanisms of such change actually happening all the way to the creation of new species, the evidence is just too overwhelming for me to deny.

Especially since it does not contradict Scripture.

 

[California Tim]

Especially since it does not contradict Scripture.

Of course we disagree on this. On the brighter side, the acceptance of the literal creation account appears to have little to do with one's salvation, or else Christ would likely have made it an issue or condition. So while I will look forward to the day we meet in Heaven, I promise at that time I will not rub this issue in your face and say "I told you so". Our enemy is not a fool, but a crafty one capable of even "deceiving the elect" according to the Bible . In the meantime, I'll continue to pray for wisdom for my brothers and sisters in Christ who are so easily led astray from the truth and reliability of the written Word.

 

[Vance]

Oh, me too! I pray that same prayer every day! :0)

Oh, and I am not a gloater, either, by nature. But it may be hard on this point not to feel a little smug over having gotten it right!

 

[Singing Bush]

You all can send Christmas cards to your relatives in the upper canopy of the rain forests if you'd rather. As for me - just call me "Flipper".

Hmm... rather lacking in the details. I find it interesting that it states, "dolphins have more in common with us genetically than cows, horses or pigs." Notice how it doesn't say apes. I am not sure about this as I am no expert on the alleged evolutionary trees of most mammals, but I imagine that we're roughly equally distant in our evolution from the dolphin's common ancestor as we are cows', horses', and pigs'.

It all kind of ignores the original question though. As stated in it, we share retroviruses (that serve no functional purpose) in the exact same places with only apes. Why don't we share this relationship w/ dolphins as well (unless you got an article for that in which case feel more than free to share.) Why do we share transposons (that usually serve no functional purpose) in the exact same places with only apes? Ect. ect...

Question make more sense now or were you just ignoring it from the beginning?

 

[Singing Bush]

It's evidence of a single creator, nothing more.

Thanks for the direct reply. I appreciate it.

 

[TwinCrier]

Of course we disagree on this. On the brighter side, the acceptance of the literal creation account appears to have little to do with one's salvation, or else Christ would likely have made it an issue or condition. So while I will look forward to the day we meet in Heaven, I promise at that time I will not rub this issue in your face and say "I told you so". Our enemy is not a fool, but a crafty one capable of even "deceiving the elect" according to the Bible . In the meantime, I'll continue to pray for wisdom for my brothers and sisters in Christ who are so easily led astray from the truth and reliability of the written Word.

If all else fails, the Lord will set them straight.

 

[TwinCrier]

Oh, me too! I pray that same prayer every day! :0)

Oh, and I am not a gloater, either, by nature. But it may be hard on this point not to feel a little smug over having gotten it right!

Funny, since you're totally wrong. maybe when Adam explains it to you you'll understand.