The Truth and Lies about Chimp DNA/fossils.

[SkyWriting]

True as far as it goes, indeed most mutations are neutral because they don't effect how things function.

Pure fact, and pure speculation. Just because we consider some changes neutral has absolutely no bearing on if they actually are neutral or not.
Not knowing is the fact. Ignorance about DNA function is the norm.

 

[mark kennedy]

Lego's have similar characteristics.
Small changes may or may not cause mayhem.

Well, I don't think DNA is stacked, it's linked horizontally and vertically. When a reading frame is disrupted due to a copy error is results in disease and disorder the vast majority of the time. Don't get me wrong, that is not to say that all changes are deleterious.

Pure fact, and pure speculation. Just because we consider some changes neutral has absolutely no bearing on if they actually are neutral or not.
Not knowing is the fact. Ignorance about DNA function is the norm.

I think not, there is perhaps an unseen effect from mutations in Alu elements but as long as they are not evident they are neutral. There is a lot about DNA that is unknown, not the least of which is the so called 'junk DNA'.

 

[Papias]

SW wrote:

Pure fact, and pure speculation. Just because we consider some changes neutral has absolutely no bearing on if they actually are neutral or not.
Not knowing is the fact. Ignorance about DNA function is the norm.

mark's statement is not only consistent with what the experts say, it is also shown to be correct by the fact that we have many expamples to see.

MM- If you like, I can list some of them (not to make a point - since we aready agree they exist - just in case you are interested).

Short post because I have to help get the kids (and me) ready for church-

Papias

PS - also, the general topic of beneficial mutations is a little off-topic for this thread (the OP is pretty specific). Yes, I was part of setting this tangent, so maybe we (any of us) should start a new thread? I didn't mean to contribute to hijacking a thread.

 

[mark kennedy]

I started the thread in order to organize what I have collected over the years debating on the forum. Since I'm saving the thread for future reference I wanted to make, what will hopefully be, my last formal debate on the subject.

ERVs put chimp/human common ancestry beyond any reasonable doubt.

This is one of those enigmatic arguments that evolutionists become obsessed with and I've never really understood why. Viral infections in the early stages of development would kill any chance of the newly formed organism actually surviving. They would have you believe that 8% of the human genome is the result of these rare and highly lethal viral infections. It is, quite possibly, the worst homology argument I have ever seen and yet they parade it around as if it were definitive proof.

One of the viruses they like to use to research ERVs is HIV, it has a lot in common with what they believe is the germline variety. It reminds me of the old abiogenesis arguments, you know, life from non-living, random, molecular fragments. It's just fascinating that they would rather believe that a viral infection is a better explanation for such a major element of the human genome then God doing something purposeful.

At any rate, just adding it here so that I have a complete set of notes.

Grace and peace,
Mark