Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Endogenous Retroviruses and Human Evolution v. 2
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Loudmouth" data-source="post: 68689260" data-attributes="member: 11790"><p>You don't read just fine.</p><p></p><p>"It's one of evolutionist's arguments they share common decent because they target specific sites."--Justatruthseeker</p><p></p><p>They don't target specific sites. The references we have given you state that they don't target specific sites. The references you tried to use also say that they don't target specific sites.</p><p></p><p>We all make mistakes. It's ok to fess up with you make a mistake. However, your use of bald face lies to cover up these mistakes does not make you look good.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The insertion only happened once in a common ancestor. That is why it is found at the same spot, because it was vertically inherited from a common ancestor. It is the same reason that you and your siblings were born with the same exact ERVs at the same exact spots in your genomes, because you vertically inherited them from your parents.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yes, from a single insertion that happened just once in a common ancestor. No one is arguing that these shared ERV's are from many independent insertions by a target specific retrovirus. In fact, we are arguing against that explanation.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p><img src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-2DBYr_Z1hfg/TzQEMQoSCpI/AAAAAAAAC7U/adKEI54v0zY/s320/IronyMeter1.gif" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></p><p></p><p>The website you are quoting and what I am saying are one in the same. Learn to read.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Loudmouth, post: 68689260, member: 11790"] You don't read just fine. "It's one of evolutionist's arguments they share common decent because they target specific sites."--Justatruthseeker They don't target specific sites. The references we have given you state that they don't target specific sites. The references you tried to use also say that they don't target specific sites. We all make mistakes. It's ok to fess up with you make a mistake. However, your use of bald face lies to cover up these mistakes does not make you look good. The insertion only happened once in a common ancestor. That is why it is found at the same spot, because it was vertically inherited from a common ancestor. It is the same reason that you and your siblings were born with the same exact ERVs at the same exact spots in your genomes, because you vertically inherited them from your parents. Yes, from a single insertion that happened just once in a common ancestor. No one is arguing that these shared ERV's are from many independent insertions by a target specific retrovirus. In fact, we are arguing against that explanation. [img]http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-2DBYr_Z1hfg/TzQEMQoSCpI/AAAAAAAAC7U/adKEI54v0zY/s320/IronyMeter1.gif[/img] The website you are quoting and what I am saying are one in the same. Learn to read. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Endogenous Retroviruses and Human Evolution v. 2
Top
Bottom