- Mar 16, 2004
- 22,024
- 7,364
- 60
- Faith
- Calvinist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Yes, profoundly more dangerous.Why? If the virus inserts in the gametes, it makes it more dangerous somehow?
Upvote
0
Yes, profoundly more dangerous.Why? If the virus inserts in the gametes, it makes it more dangerous somehow?
I have dealt with it and there isn't anything there but a criteria that is hopelessly biased. I've seen the evidence and it's anecdotal at best. You take a handful of mutations and make them into a homology argument which abandons all real evidence for or against.
Already did.Care to support that?
I'm talking about germline invasions.You do know that ERVs were originally horizontally transferred, right?
It's the same thing, a mutation in the same point in a comparison of two species couldn't have happened independently. That's a homology argument.Once again, a phylogeny argument, not a homology argument. There is a significant difference.
I'm talking about germline invasions.
Now that being said, as I have read about 50 or more articles and studies on this subject
WOW~!!!! 50???? You must be like the total expert! I do wonder - how many such studies you had read prior to erroneously claiming that cladograms show a hierarchical series of ancestor descendant relationships....
Madalina Barbulescu in, “A HERV-K Provirus in Chimpanzees, Bonobos, and Gorillas, but Not Humans,” Current Biology 11 (May 2001): 779–83, doi:10.1016/S0960-9822(01)00227-5, tells us that SOME of the ERVs found in chimps, bonobos, and gorillas, are not present in humans and many in humans are not found in any of the others (also see Chris T. Yohn et al., “Lineage-Specific Expansions of Retroviral Insertions within the Genomes of African Great Apes but Not Humans and Orangutans,” PLoS Biology 3, April 2005: e110, 10.1371/journal.pbio).
So none of these can be used in an argument for common descent and may indicate the exact opposite.
Speaking of M.O.s...Misrepresentation, insult, diversion (typical)???
The reliable predictable TAS mo...be ready folks for when he starts quoting himself, or selects one or two instances out of 100s he can use to continue to misrepresent, insult, and divert...watch an see...
Not sure where your underlined quote comes from, because it isn't in the paper you cited. Further, that paper does not seem to imply anything like the "re-thinking" you say it does. In the conclusion, it even says the results were "not unexpected."
Dr. Roberts is a creationist. In the article from which your quote comes, she also says, " Some elements are found in chimps, bonobos, and gorillas, but are absent in humans."
1. The ERV you mentioned in the first paper you cited is the ONLY KNOWN EXAMPLE OF THIS. So her statement is misleading.
2. The source she cites for this statement has nothing to do with ERVs.
She goes on to say: "Others are present in chimps and great apes but not in humans and orangutans."
1. She gives no source for this claim.
2. The footnote for this claim talks about something OTHER than ERVs.
Notice the wording she uses in a paragraph that is purportedly about ERVs. She says "ELEMENTS are found in chimps...." not "ERVs are found in chimps..." This leaves her free to be technically correct when she supports her statements in her footnotes, despite the fact that, you know, it's a bait and switch, cause the footnotes have nothing to do with ERVs.
Nice catch. Such dishonesty is rarely seen in those that understand evolution, but it seems commonplace in the Christian creationist. Odd...It's very dishonest not only to plagiarize several paragraphs from a webpage and not cite it, but to do so apparently to hide the fact that the person making the assertion is an Old Earth Creationist.
A Common Design View of ERVs Encourages Scientific Investigation
Welcome to my ignore list.Oh, Mark... You just can't help being you...
Welcome to my ignore list.
Thats OK - other people catch you plagiarizing and bluffing, too. I will keep exposing you, and you ignoring it will be just fine, for everyone else will see it.See I warned everyone and there it is...yeah I will put him on my ignore list as well.
It's very dishonest not only to plagiarize several paragraphs from a webpage and not cite it, but to do so apparently to hide the fact that the person making the assertion is an Old Earth Creationist.
A Common Design View of ERVs Encourages Scientific Investigation