Coccyx - tale of a creationist disinformation post

[Bible Research Tools]

View attachment 231062 I like to see any YEC creationists( try to) explain this vertical wall with Dinosaur tracks

I'll take a wild guess: the footprints were made in soft limestone by dinosaurs fleeing rising flood waters, followed later by tectonic uplift of the area.

In the same sandy limestone layer are found the fossils of turtles, fish, snails, bivalves, and crocodiles. Those fossils, plus the preservation of the dino footprints, points to a rapid covering by rising flood waters.

Dan

 

[pitabread]

In the same sandy limestone layer are found the fossils of turtles, fish, snails, bivalves, and crocodiles. Those fossils, plus the preservation of the dino footprints, points to a rapid covering by rising flood waters.

Why is that no recent mammals seem to ever caught in these "rising flood waters" along with the dinosaurs? Why no elephants, hippos or manatees?

 

[Bible Research Tools]

What sort of definition of "Darwinism" are you using here?

I only know of one Darwinism: the theory that taught people to question the Word of God.

Because if you're referring to Darwinian evolution as originally proposed by Charles Darwin, that has absolutely nothing to do with separation of church and state as mandated by your own countries' Constitution. Especially considering the 1st Amendment was adopted in 1791; whereas Darwin's On the Origin of Species wasn't published until 1859.

The United States Constitution does not mandate separation of church and state, except to restrict the congress from passing laws supporting one Christian denomination over another, or from passing laws restricting the states and the people from practicing their Christian faith.

So-called separation of church and state is a man-made construct invented by anti-God communists at the ACLU, and forced into law by a corrupt judiciary who usurped that power from the states and the people.

You have probably never heard that before.

Dan

 

[Brightmoon]

You have the floor. Please explain how and when Dr. Menton was lying about the so-called Tiktaalik fossils. I am more than curious how you will respond.

Dan

I’m looking for when and where one of these creationists actually told the truth or even reported something accurately

 

[Skreeper]

 

[Brightmoon]

I'll take a wild guess: the footprints were made in soft limestone by by dinosaurs fleeing rising flood waters, followed later by tectonic uplift of the area.

In the same sandy limestone layer are found the fossils of turtles, fish, snails, bivalves, and crocodiles. Those fossils, plus the preservation of the dino footprints, points to a rapid covering by rising flood waters.

Dan

what makes you think that a global flood thatcompletely covered the land is going to preserve footprints. Try again !

 

[pitabread]

I only know of one Darwinism: the theory that taught people to question the Word of God.

Ah, so it's a private definition you are using. Gotcha.

The United States Constitution does not mandate separation of church and state, except to restrict the congress from passing laws supporting one Christian denomination over another, or from passing laws restricting the states and the people from practicing their Christian faith.

The First Amendment isn't specific to Christianity. You do also know there are other religions besides Christianity, right?

So-called separation of church and state is a man-made construct invented by anti-God communists at the ACLU, and forced into law by a corrupt judiciary who usurped that power from the states and the people.

I thought we were talking about "evolutionists". Now it's "anti-God communists"? It's so hard to keep up with who the villains are in this...

You have probably never heard that before.

Of course I have. You think this is the first time I've had a conversation with a Christian fundamentalist conspiracy theorist?

 

[Job 33:6]

I'll take a wild guess: the footprints were made in soft limestone by by dinosaurs fleeing rising flood waters, followed later by tectonic uplift of the area.

In the same sandy limestone layer are found the fossils of turtles, fish, snails, bivalves, and crocodiles. Those fossils, plus the preservation of the dino footprints, points to a rapid covering by rising flood waters.

Dan

According to kurt wise, this locality was deposited by a single giant wave, as this formation is found in the middle of a megasequence. So, these animals wouldnt have two seconds to even think about fleeing, let alone would they have been able to, had a global flood actually deposited that formation. Also, the animals are going in all different directions, and there is no indication in the spacing of their footprints that they are all speeding around running for their lives in random directions.

Your response above really just doesnt make any sense.

 

[Bible Research Tools]

One of the most damaging impacts on Western culture has been the arrogant, self-centred belief of a proportion of Americans that their nation is Western Culture.

That is a bizarre statement. Perhaps you should read up on western civilization. A good place to start is the Annenberg Learner which has a 52 course series on the Western Tradition, taught by the late UCLA professor Eugen Weber. It is a real eye-opener to those who have brainwashed by the post 1960's public school system:

Resource: The Western Tradition​

Of course they do. They also care about chimpanzees.

Understanding the evolutionary relationship between all life on the planet encourages a caring and empathetic attitude to all. Your suggestion that it is otherwise is both ignorant and offensive. However, since I always stand ready to proven wrong, simply provide a citation to a bona fide study that supports your otherwise unsupported assertion.

If they cared about our children they would support the teaching of the tenants of the New Covenant.

Irrelevant. I agree they were thugs, probably psychopaths. That condition had nothing to do with Darwinism. It is rather silly to suggest it did.

I am pretty certain that the power-hungry lunatics Marx and Engels were Darwinists; and there is little doubt that many power-hungry Nazis' were also Darwinists.

You really are intent on being seriously offensive. How dare you suggest that I lack the integrity to behave in a moral fashion? How dare you suggest that I require the fear of a post-death judgement to keep me in line? Like many, probably all, of the atheists and agnostics on this forum I seek to behave in a moral fashion, with respect for my fellows, because it is the right thing to do, not because I fear punishment. I suggest you offer an apology now to all of those who you have potentially offended by your remarks.

Let me quote that part again, so everyone will know why you are so morally indignant:

"No free society can remain free, if it can even survive. without the belief by both citizens and leaders that they will be held accountable in the afterlife for their sins (which they will!)"​

There is nothing out of the ordinary in that statement. That is what American Christian's have traditionally believed. Do you not like American Christians? Do you despise our tradition?

Why did you leave out this part?

"Our nation's Founding Fathers recognized that fact -- that our nation could not survive absent a moral and religious citizenry."

Quotes from the Founding Fathers, on the Importance of a Moral Society!​

Dan

 

[PsychoSarah]

I only know of one Darwinism: the theory that taught people to question the Word of God.

Pfft, people have been doubting the words of various religious texts from the day people communicated them. Even the bible mentions "doubters". I sincerely don't see how Darwin or any scientific theories are relevant when doubting religious dogma predates the scientific method.
Plus, people don't need to be taught to doubt things, they do that on their own.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I wish it were a conspiracy theory, rather than usurpation of power, which is tyranny.

Dan

What you are describing is a conspiracy theory.

 

[Bible Research Tools]

And I showed you that they weren't Haeckel's drawings. Even Luskin had to say "based on" Haeckel's drawings.

That is not what he said.

"Thus, what follows are examples of textbooks that: (1) Show embryo drawings that are either Haeckel’s originals or highly similar or near-identical versions of Haeckel’s illustrations — drawings that downplay and misrepresent the differences among early stages of vertebrate embryos;"
​

I see no problem with claiming that developmental similarities evidence common ancestry.

Which developmental similarities are you referring to, Jimmy?

Woah, steady on! I'm not going there!
There is no more futile an exercise than attempting to "prove" things to creationists.

Especially when there is no proof of common ancestry.

I'm happy for you to believe what you like, my issue was with your slanderous assertions, which I feel have been dealt with.

Who did I slander, Jimmy? The only ones I have seen slandered on this board are creation scientists.

Dan

 

[Bible Research Tools]

Except that very idea of the separation of church and state was already in the first draft of the constitution. You know, this little line: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...

Who exactly is the Congress, and why were they disallowed from making laws that prohibited the free exercise of religion? The reason is, the power over religion belonged to the states and the people. The federal government, under the umbrella of judicial tyranny, usurped that power from the states and the people, and thus turned the first amendment on its head. It was only a matter of time before they would usurp the other powers from the states and the people. Have you not read the 10th Amendment?

Not a single person in history has been able to show how 'Darwinism' can be linked to any of those monsters in history apart from in their own, and by extension your own, sordid little ideas.

To the contrary. This is from Mein Kampf:

"Whatever survives these hardships of existence has been tested and tried a thousandfold, hardened and renders fit to continue the process of procreation; so that the same thorough selection will begin all over again. By thus dealing brutally with the individual and recalling him the very moment he shows that he is not fitted for the trials of life, Nature preserves the strength of the race and the species and raises it to the highest degree of efficiency. - p.113

"The stronger must dominate and not mate with the weaker, which would signify the sacrifice of its own higher nature. Only the born weakling can look upon this principle as cruel, and if he does so it is merely because he is of a feebler nature and narrower mind; for if such a law did not direct the process of evolution then the higher development of organic life would not be conceivable at all. – pp.222-23

"Nature supplies this by establishing rigorous conditions of life to which the weaker will have to submit and will thereby be numerically restricted; but even that portion which survives cannot indiscriminately multiply, for here a new and rigorous selection takes place, according to strength and health. - p.223

"Only after subjugated races were employed as slaves was a similar fate allotted to animals, and not vice versa, as some people would have us believe. At first it was the conquered enemy who had to draw the plough and only afterwards did the ox and horse take his place. Nobody else but puling pacifists can consider this fact as a sign of human degradation. Such people fail to recognize that this evolution had to take place in order that man might reach that degree of civilization which these apostles now exploit in an attempt to make the world pay attention to their rigmarole. - p.230

"Unconsciously his instinct will submit to the knowledge that the preservation of the species, even at the cost of the individual life, is a primal necessity and he will protest against the fantasies of pacifist ranters, who in reality are nothing better than cowardly egoists, even though camouflaged, who contradict the laws of human development. For it is a necessity of human evolution that the individual should be imbued with the spirit of sacrifice in favour of the common weal, and that he should not be influenced by the morbid notions of those knaves who pretend to know better than Nature and who have the impudencc to criticize her decrees. - p.234

"In our case this term has no meaning. Because everyone who believes in the higher evolution of living organisms must admit that every manifestation of the vital urge and struggle to live must have had a definite beginning in time and that one subject alone must have manifested it for the first time. It was then repeated again and again; and the practice of it spread over a widening area, until finally it passed into the subconscience of every member of the species, where it manifested itself as 'instinct.'- p.344

"It is in this activity on the part of the membership body, guaranteed by the process of natural selection, that we are to seek the prerequisite conditions for the continuation of an active and spirited propaganda 445 and also the victorious struggle for the success of the idea on which the movement is based. - p.445

"National Socialist workers and employers are both together the delegates and mandatories of the whole national community. The large measure of personal freedom which is accorded to them for their activities must be explained by the fact that experience has shown that the productive powers of the individual are more enhanced by being accorded a generous measure of freedom than by coercion from above. Moreover, by according this freedom we give free play to the natural process of selection which brings forward the ablest and most capable and most industrious. - p.459"

[Adolf Hitler, "Mein Kampf." Hurst and Blackett Ltd., 1939]​

I would say Adolf was a devout Darwinist.

At the time of the writing of the Constitution, it was considered quite easily that black people were inferior to white people. Morals and views change, with or without the guidance of religion.

The abolitionists were typically Christian.

Dan

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Who exactly is the Congress, and why were they disallowed from making laws that prohibited the free exercise of religion? The reason is, the power over religion belonged to the states and the people. The federal government, under the umbrella of judicial tyranny, usurped that power from the states and the people, and thus turned the first amendment on its head. It was only a matter of time before they would usurp the other powers from the states and the people. Have you not read the 10th Amendment?

You said that the separation for church and state did not exist for the first 150 years of the existence of America. Yet it CLEARLY DID. So you're lying.

To the contrary. This is from Mein Kampf:

"Whatever survives these hardships of existence has been tested and tried a thousandfold, hardened and renders fit to continue the process of procreation; so that the same thorough selection will begin all over again. By thus dealing brutally with the individual and recalling him the very moment he shows that he is not fitted for the trials of life, Nature preserves the strength of the race and the species and raises it to the highest degree of efficiency. - p.113

"The stronger must dominate and not mate with the weaker, which would signify the sacrifice of its own higher nature. Only the born weakling can look upon this principle as cruel, and if he does so it is merely because he is of a feebler nature and narrower mind; for if such a law did not direct the process of evolution then the higher development of organic life would not be conceivable at all. – pp.222-23

"Nature supplies this by establishing rigorous conditions of life to which the weaker will have to submit and will thereby be numerically restricted; but even that portion which survives cannot indiscriminately multiply, for here a new and rigorous selection takes place, according to strength and health. - p.223

"Only after subjugated races were employed as slaves was a similar fate allotted to animals, and not vice versa, as some people would have us believe. At first it was the conquered enemy who had to draw the plough and only afterwards did the ox and horse take his place. Nobody else but puling pacifists can consider this fact as a sign of human degradation. Such people fail to recognize that this evolution had to take place in order that man might reach that degree of civilization which these apostles now exploit in an attempt to make the world pay attention to their rigmarole. - p.230

"Unconsciously his instinct will submit to the knowledge that the preservation of the species, even at the cost of the individual life, is a primal necessity and he will protest against the fantasies of pacifist ranters, who in reality are nothing better than cowardly egoists, even though camouflaged, who contradict the laws of human development. For it is a necessity of human evolution that the individual should be imbued with the spirit of sacrifice in favour of the common weal, and that he should not be influenced by the morbid notions of those knaves who pretend to know better than Nature and who have the impudencc to criticize her decrees. - p.234

"In our case this term has no meaning. Because everyone who believes in the higher evolution of living organisms must admit that every manifestation of the vital urge and struggle to live must have had a definite beginning in time and that one subject alone must have manifested it for the first time. It was then repeated again and again; and the practice of it spread over a widening area, until finally it passed into the subconscience of every member of the species, where it manifested itself as 'instinct.'- p.344

"It is in this activity on the part of the membership body, guaranteed by the process of natural selection, that we are to seek the prerequisite conditions for the continuation of an active and spirited propaganda 445 and also the victorious struggle for the success of the idea on which the movement is based. - p.445

"National Socialist workers and employers are both together the delegates and mandatories of the whole national community. The large measure of personal freedom which is accorded to them for their activities must be explained by the fact that experience has shown that the productive powers of the individual are more enhanced by being accorded a generous measure of freedom than by coercion from above. Moreover, by according this freedom we give free play to the natural process of selection which brings forward the ablest and most capable and most industrious. - p.459"

[Adolf Hitler, "Mein Kampf." Hurst and Blackett Ltd., 1939]​

I would say Adolf was a devout Darwinist.

And that's just your own reading and yet there's no evidence of Hitler being a 'Darwinist'. So lie #2.

The abolitionists were typically Christian.

Dan

As were the vast majority, if not all, of the slave holders in the US at the time as well.

 

[Brightmoon]

I only know of one Darwinism: the theory that taught people to question the Word of God.



The United States Constitution does not mandate separation of church and state, except to restrict the congress from passing laws supporting one Christian denomination over another, or from passing laws restricting the states and the people from practicing their Christian faith.

So-called separation of church and state is a man-made construct invented by anti-God communists at the ACLU, and forced into law by a corrupt judiciary who usurped that power from the states and the people.

You have probably never heard that before.

Dan

The United States has never allowed a formal religion to be involved with the government . I don’t know who told you otherwise but they were wrong . america doesn’t have an official religion and is FORBIDDEN to form one.

That is a bizarre statement. Perhaps you should read up on western civilization. A good place to start is the Annenberg Learner which has a 52 course series on the Western Tradition, taught by the late UCLA professor Eugen Weber. It is a real eye-opener to those who have brainwashed by the post 1960's public school system:

Resource: The Western Tradition​

If they cared about our children they would support the teaching of the tenants of the New Covenant.



I am pretty certain that the power-hungry lunatics Marx and Engels were Darwinists; and there is little doubt that many power-hungry Nazis' were also Darwinists.



Let me quote that part again, so everyone will know why you are so morally indignant:

"No free society can remain free, if it can even survive. without the belief by both citizens and leaders that they will be held accountable in the afterlife for their sins (which they will!)"​

There is nothing out of the ordinary in that statement. That is what American Christian's have traditionally believed. Do you not like American Christians? Do you despise our tradition?

Why did you leave out this part?

"Our nation's Founding Fathers recognized that fact -- that our nation could not survive absent a moral and religious citizenry."

Quotes from the Founding Fathers, on the Importance of a Moral Society!​

Dan

If hitler understood evolution he would have known that humans are a single species and he wouldn’t have misused evolution to destroy the people he did

 

[Bible Research Tools]

Please provide a citation in support of your first statement. "Complete bioturbation of layers is rare." I should imagine that it is. Bioturbation, on the other hand is not unusual in a variety of sediments (while unusual or absent in others).

I have already provided one by Kurt Wise in his video on the Sedimentology of the Flood; but I believe the one below is the first time he mentioned it in a journal article in which he was encouraging creation scientists to focus on the more readily observable issues:

"The Flood was a global, diluvial catastrophe — explaining the commonness of fossils, the rarity of extensive bioturbation, the high species preservability, and the first-order randomness of the first appearance of higher taxa;" [Kurt P. Wise, "Towards a Creationist Understanding of Transitional Forms." CEN Technical Journal, 1995]​

Here is a couple more, though the second is somewhat more reserved:

"Recent laboratory experiments document that the bioturbation of marine sediments can occur over a short period of time depending on the type and population density of trace makers. For uniformitarians, the lack of any stirred sediment requires that they appeal to punctuated catastrophic events. Such events do not eliminate their reliance on deep time assumptions—the vertical rock record should exhibit layers of intense bioturbation interrupted by nonbioturbated sedimentary events followed by intense bioturbation. However, this is not typically found in the actual rock record." [Carl R. Froede Jr., "Sediment bioturbation experiments and the actual rock record." Creation Ministries International, 2009] ​

"The issue of bioturbation highlights another uniformitarian dilemma—why the bulk of all sedimentary rocks are not completely bioturbated, since the process is observed to occur rapidly. This seems contrary to the principle of actualism. The extent of bioturbation in sedimentary rocks can be explained by the Flood. Fluctuations in the rate of sedimentation during the Flood may explain why some rocks have been reworked and others have not." [Michael J. Oard, "Fossil range extensions continue." Creation Ministries International, 2013] ​

Individual layers, i.e. individual laminae, are not deposited over millions of years. Thick sequences of such layers are deposited over millions of years. Individual layers may be deposited in an hour, a day, a week, a year, depending upon the sedimentary environment. That environment will determine whether it is suitable for lifeforms and the duration of the sedimentary process and character of the lifeforms will determine the extent of bioturbation. What we would therefore expect is a specturm of bioturbation form wholly absent to complete, with everything in between. And that is exactly what we do see.

The flood model appears to explain it very well.

Dan

 

[sfs]

I personally do not know one way or the other about Darwin's views on race. Many say he was opposed to slavery and was concerned about the poor, which I do not dispute, and which I believe to be a Christian attribute.

But there is little doubt that white supremacy was commonplace in his day and age. The "Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex", which focused on our species, should have cleared up any misconceptions about Darwin's views on race; or at least those which he wished to publicize at the time.

How do you interpret these passages?

"The sense of smell is of the highest importance to the greater number of mammals—to some, as the ruminants, in warning them of danger; to others, as the carnivora, in finding their prey; to others, again, as the wild boar, for both purposes combined. But the sense of smell is of extremely slight service, if any, even to the dark coloured races of men, in whom it is much more highly developed than in the white and civilised races." [Charles Darwin, "The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex." John Murray, 2nd Ed, 1888, Chap I, pp.17-18]
"At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes, as Professor Schaaffhausen has remarked, will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla." [Charles Darwin, Affinities and Genealogies, "The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex." John Murray, 2nd Ed, 1888, Chap VI, p.156]
"With savages, the weak in body or mind are soon eliminated; and those that survive commonly exhibit a vigorous state of health. We civilised men, on the other hand, do our utmost to check the process of elimination; we build asylums for the imbecile, the maimed, and the sick; we institute poor-laws; and our medical men exert their utmost skill to save the life of every one to the last moment. There is reason to believe that vaccination has preserved thousands, who from a weak constitution would formerly have succumbed to small-pox. Thus the weak members of civilised societies propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man." [Charles Darwin, Civilised Nations, "The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex." 1981, Chap V, p.168]
One thing I am certain of is the removal of Christian doctrine from the halls of our schools -- at the behest of atheists and evolutionists, as well as the voluntary removal from our media and entertainment, has led to a cultural rot in western civilization that will be difficult to repair.

This is a pretty good historical analysis of the situation, titled "Darwinism and the teaching of racism and eugenics in biology textbooks":

https://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j18_1/j18_1_65-70.pdf

All completely irrelevant.You implied that the "favoured races" in the title of On the Origin of Specieshad something to do with human races and racism. That implication was wrong. Like every other creationist I've seen make that connection, you haven't withdrawn your statement. You have demonstrated convincingly your degree of intellectual integrity.

 

[sfs]

You know the old saying, Stephen, "garbage in, garbage out".

Sure do. So when you wrote, "There simply does not seem to have been enough time (enough generations) for the many millions of differences to have become fixed," you were what, deliberately trotting out garbage? Having a little laugh at the thought that someone might take your words for a claim that you believed and could support?

 

[Brightmoon]

I personally do not know one way or the other about Darwin's views on race. Many say he was opposed to slavery and was concerned about the poor, which I do not dispute, and which I believe to be a Christian attribute.

But there is little doubt that white supremacy was commonplace in his day and age. The "Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex", which focused on our species, should have cleared up any misconceptions about Darwin's views on race; or at least those which he wished to publicize at the time.

How do you interpret these passages?

"The sense of smell is of the highest importance to the greater number of mammals—to some, as the ruminants, in warning them of danger; to others, as the carnivora, in finding their prey; to others, again, as the wild boar, for both purposes combined. But the sense of smell is of extremely slight service, if any, even to the dark coloured races of men, in whom it is much more highly developed than in the white and civilised races." [Charles Darwin, "The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex." John Murray, 2nd Ed, 1888, Chap I, pp.17-18] ​

"At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes, as Professor Schaaffhausen has remarked, will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla." [Charles Darwin, Affinities and Genealogies, "The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex." John Murray, 2nd Ed, 1888, Chap VI, p.156]​

"With savages, the weak in body or mind are soon eliminated; and those that survive commonly exhibit a vigorous state of health. We civilised men, on the other hand, do our utmost to check the process of elimination; we build asylums for the imbecile, the maimed, and the sick; we institute poor-laws; and our medical men exert their utmost skill to save the life of every one to the last moment. There is reason to believe that vaccination has preserved thousands, who from a weak constitution would formerly have succumbed to small-pox. Thus the weak members of civilised societies propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man." [Charles Darwin, Civilised Nations, "The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex." 1981, Chap V, p.168] ​

One thing I am certain of is the removal of Christian doctrine from the halls of our schools -- at the behest of atheists and evolutionists, as well as the voluntary removal from our media and entertainment, has led to a cultural rot in western civilization that will be difficult to repair.

This is a pretty good historical analysis of the situation, titled "Darwinism and the teaching of racism and eugenics in biology textbooks":

https://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j18_1/j18_1_65-70.pdf​

Dan

. Darwin thought that the differences between the races was due to education. He thought of hunter gathers in general as savages likened to animals

 

[Bible Research Tools]

Their existence.

Can I assume from that statement you do not have any evidence for pseudogenes?

This is from a recent article that included portions on pseudogenes (the URL follows):

"Common design, in fact, takes up only about three paragraphs in this lengthy chapter. But the subject becomes the major focus of [Denis] Lamoureux's response. He wants to know why a designer would re-use defective 'pseudogenes' in different organisms. This doesn't sound like a good example of 'common design.' Well, assuming that pseudogenes truly are non-functional, here he's right and the authors of the book never said otherwise.

"In fact, in Chapter 15, Ann Gauger, Ola Hössjer, and Colin Reeves discuss this point — they review the very argument that Lamoureux makes:

"Pseudogenes. Because pseudogenes appear to make defective protein, or none at all, they have been thought to be 'junk,' remnants of the evolutionary process. Because they tend to be located in the same place and have the same 'errors' in humans and in chimpanzees, they are taken as evidence for common descent, for example by Francis Collins and Denis Alexander. (p. 497)" ​

Note that the last statement could be in reference to Stephen Schaffner's research. Continuing. . .

"That's pretty much exactly what Lamoureux is saying — yet he doesn't recognize that the Theistic Evolution book appreciates his point. So what is the response from an ID perspective? It's that pseudogenes are not necessarily established as non-functional. From the same chapter:

"Pseudogenes have not received much attention in the scientific literature because they are assumed to be 'junk.' But that is changing rapidly. Where pseudogenes have been carefully studied, they are often found to be functional, and in some nonstandard ways. Part of the problem is that a pseudogene may be active in specific tissues only during particular stages of development, making identification of their functions difficult. Nonetheless, researchers in the field are confident that continued research will yield more evidence of functionality. As one group states, 'We believe that more and more functional pseudogenes will be discovered as novel biological technologies are developed in the future …. definitely, the so-called pseudogenes are really functional, not to be considered any more as just 'junk' or 'fossil' DNA. Surely, many functional pseudogenes and novel regulatory mechanisms remain to be discovered and explored in diverse organisms.
"There are several ways in which pseudogenes have been found to work so far. They can fuse with adjacent genes to form 'chimeras' that produce either coding or noncoding RNAs, and they can form RNARNA duplexes with their 'parental' gene and prevent its expression or signal its degradation.

"One sign pointing toward their likely functionality is that their sequence is very similar in many different species. There are more than eight thousand processed pseudogenes in the human genome; 60 percent are very similar in mouse and human. The fact that their sequences are so similar means that they are likely to have a sequence-dependent essential function, so that their sequence cannot be changed without harm. That degree of similarity is not something that would be expected if pseudogenes served no biological function. (p. 497-498)"​

[On Hominid Fossils and Universal Common Ancestry, Denis Lamoureux Distorts." Evolution News & Science Today, 2018]

https://evolutionnews.org/2018/06/o...sal-common-ancestry-denis-lamoureux-distorts/​

I guess you can see why I am skeptical of any claims that "pseudogenes" are non-functional, or that they provide "evidence" of common ancestry.

Dan