- Jul 16, 2003
- 4,157
- 297
- 57
- Faith
- Anglican
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- UK-Labour
This is very adequately explained at this link: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section4.html#retroviruses
To go into more detail: suppose I send out a dozen identical copies of a 1 megabyte text file. Due to a server malfunction, one of those text files has few letters inserted in the middle of the file.
Now, each recipient copies their copy of the file, and forwards it to another groups of people, and so on. Gradually, the number of insertions due to copying and transmission errors will increase.
Suppose I find two versions on two different computers, both of which specifically have the insertion of the string "hgyse" at the 245,342th character position. Would it not be reasonable to guess that these two are both derived from an earlier mis-copy where that particular insertion took place, which has then been replicated in each future copy?
Would it not also be agreed that we would be able to gradually create a family tree of versions based on shared insertions like this?
This is exactly what happens with retro-viral insertions. Given the fact that the virus could insert its code virtually anywhere, it's remarkable that any two organisms should share several such insertions; it's even more remarkable that the family trees one can derive from this evidence match both the family trees derived from functional DNA similarities AND morphological analogous features.
A more parsimonious creationist explanation for the observations is again invited.
To go into more detail: suppose I send out a dozen identical copies of a 1 megabyte text file. Due to a server malfunction, one of those text files has few letters inserted in the middle of the file.
Now, each recipient copies their copy of the file, and forwards it to another groups of people, and so on. Gradually, the number of insertions due to copying and transmission errors will increase.
Suppose I find two versions on two different computers, both of which specifically have the insertion of the string "hgyse" at the 245,342th character position. Would it not be reasonable to guess that these two are both derived from an earlier mis-copy where that particular insertion took place, which has then been replicated in each future copy?
Would it not also be agreed that we would be able to gradually create a family tree of versions based on shared insertions like this?
This is exactly what happens with retro-viral insertions. Given the fact that the virus could insert its code virtually anywhere, it's remarkable that any two organisms should share several such insertions; it's even more remarkable that the family trees one can derive from this evidence match both the family trees derived from functional DNA similarities AND morphological analogous features.
A more parsimonious creationist explanation for the observations is again invited.