-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
Evidence for human evolution
- Thread starter LadyShea
- Start date
JohnR7
Well-Known Member
Why does that not surprise me that you have disappointments in life
Smile. If you were to live by faith in God, then there would be no disappointments at all. Because you would know that God will work everything out for the best. So you would have nothing to worry about, nothing to fear, you could just be happy!We can be content in whatever situation we find ourselves in, because it comes from God and works on the inside of us. So we do not have to worry about anything around us being the source of our contentment and happiness.
Upvote
0
Wow John, so Christians are never dissapointed by other people? Give me a break there, my friend.
Now, as I have asked in this thread that we not go off topic, do you have any response to the evidence presented?
Now, as I have asked in this thread that we not go off topic, do you have any response to the evidence presented?
Upvote
0
Smilin
Spirit of the Wolf
- Jun 18, 2002
- 5,650
- 244
- 59
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Married
Today at 01:30 PM JohnR7 said this in Post #42 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=677465#post677465)
Why does that not surprise me that you have disappointments in life
We can be content in whatever situation we find ourselves in, because it comes from God and works on the inside of us. So we do not have to worry about anything around us being the source of our contentment and happiness.
John,
Instead of analyzing LadyShea,
How about commenting on the evidence she's presented?
You're dodging again....
HEY..I'D BET MONEY YOU WERE DODGEBALL CHAMPION IN SCHOOL!
Upvote
0
lucaspa
Legend
To reinforce Jerry's point, that 98% similarity comes from analysis of non-coding pseudogenes. In one case it was a pseudogene for hemoglobin. Looking at the coding region, chimps and humans are over 99% similar.
The Alu motif, a non-coding repeat of 300 base pairs, is repeated hundreds of thousands of times in human DNA and comprises 2% of the genome.
Now, in a laboratory experiment on speciation using natural selection -- G Kilias, SN Alahiotis, and M Pelecanos. A multifactorial genetic investigation of speciation theory using drosophila melanogaster Evolution 34:730-737, 1980 -- the investigators got new species of fruit flies after 5 years on different diets and temperatures. Looking at the DNA through the differences in amino acids of the protein produced, they found a 3% difference between the species. That is, in the coding regions, they were able to see more than three times the genetic difference between chimps and humans. So much for macroevolution never being observed.
Upvote
0
lucaspa
Legend
Got some more evidence, Lady Shea.
http://www.newgenevacenter.org/biography/aristotle2.htm
Look at that line about SM4 being "intermediate between earlier and later forms". Here you have another transistional individual.
http://www.newgenevacenter.org/biography/aristotle2.htm
Look at that line about SM4 being "intermediate between earlier and later forms". Here you have another transistional individual.
Upvote
0
lucaspa
Legend
LOL!! Nice joke, John. Because you couldn't possibly mean that
"Today at 01:30 PM JohnR7 said this in Post target=_blank>#42
If you were to live by faith in God, then there would be no disappointments at all. Because you would know that God will work everything out for the best. So you would have nothing to worry about, nothing to fear, you could just be happy! " falsifies evolution.
Upvote
0
While there is positive scientific evidence for human evolution, the use of negative theological arguements are, by definition non-scientific.
Naturalistic explanations rule out the supernatural, so the use of
negative theological arguements show a different intent for their use.
Here are the statements which really prove nothing.
"It does leave some questions open about why, exactly, God would want His "prized creation" to have so much in common (function-wise) with His "lesser" creations, but that can be chalked up to God working in mysterious ways."
"Now, if God had designed humans and other primates to require vitamin C from their food, he could just as well have left out this gene (and others involved in the synthesis of vit C). Clearly, similar genes for similar functions fails the creationist on this count. But! We could rescue the idea by postulating that God created humans and apes and all the other critters with a functioning LGGLO gene and, due to the curse, humans became vulnerable to mutations that damaged that gene."
"No one believes that God created humans or any other animal with the copies of RNA viruses already embedded in their genomes."
"Or maybe (just maybe), there was no fusion or fission (breaking apart) - maybe we were just created with similar DNA for similar functions, but God decided to put more of it together on one chromosome for us."
The statement that humans and chimp DNA is 98.5% identical is an estimate not a fact. The only fact is that this esimate has been repeated enough, that people accept this as fact.
That estimate was based on measuring the temperature at which matching DNA of two species comes apart. The developer of that technique, Roy Britten of Caltech, had second thoughts about the often quoted figure, and checked it out with new methods, now that the chimpanzee genome has been published.
Comparing insertions and deletions yields a figure three times bigger, over 5% difference, and that only after comparing about three hundredths of a percent of the genome.
His paper is published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. At the conclusion he states, One interesting observation is that the sequence divergence between chimp and human is quite large, in excess of 20% for a few regions. Some of the larger gaps are broken by regions within them that align with appropriate segments of the other species DNA sequence but only have distant similarity. These observations suggest that complex processes, presumably involving repeated sequences and possible conversion events, may occur that will require detailed study to understand"
An article titled "Jumbled DNA Separates Chimps and Humans" in
Science Now states:
For almost 30 years, researchers had assumed that the DNA of humans and chimps is at about 98.5% identical. Now a closer look has revealed previously undiscovered nips and tucks in equivalent sections of DNA. The DNA sliced out of--or into--these genomes could explain some of the differences between humans and our closest primates cousins.
Although the true significance of the new differences between chimps and humans is unclear, "these kinds of things are really exciting," says Michael Conneally, a human geneticist at Indiana University Medical Center in Indianapolis. With this research, "we can really find out so much more about evolution."
How can something unclear help find out much more about evolution?
Because the DNA is a linear array of the four bases: A, G, C ant T, only four possibilities exist at any specific point in a DNA sequence.
This means two unrelated DNA sequences will be 25 percent identical.
Even if all human genes which code for proteins were different from those of a chimpanzee, the DNA could still be 98.5 percent similiar if the non-coding DNA of humans and chimps was identical.
No matter what the genetic finding are, evolutionists will still believe that humans evolved from an ape like ancestor. They will just adapt the theory to whatever non cooperative data is presented.
Naturalistic explanations rule out the supernatural, so the use of
negative theological arguements show a different intent for their use.
Here are the statements which really prove nothing.
"It does leave some questions open about why, exactly, God would want His "prized creation" to have so much in common (function-wise) with His "lesser" creations, but that can be chalked up to God working in mysterious ways."
"Now, if God had designed humans and other primates to require vitamin C from their food, he could just as well have left out this gene (and others involved in the synthesis of vit C). Clearly, similar genes for similar functions fails the creationist on this count. But! We could rescue the idea by postulating that God created humans and apes and all the other critters with a functioning LGGLO gene and, due to the curse, humans became vulnerable to mutations that damaged that gene."
"No one believes that God created humans or any other animal with the copies of RNA viruses already embedded in their genomes."
"Or maybe (just maybe), there was no fusion or fission (breaking apart) - maybe we were just created with similar DNA for similar functions, but God decided to put more of it together on one chromosome for us."
The statement that humans and chimp DNA is 98.5% identical is an estimate not a fact. The only fact is that this esimate has been repeated enough, that people accept this as fact.
That estimate was based on measuring the temperature at which matching DNA of two species comes apart. The developer of that technique, Roy Britten of Caltech, had second thoughts about the often quoted figure, and checked it out with new methods, now that the chimpanzee genome has been published.
Comparing insertions and deletions yields a figure three times bigger, over 5% difference, and that only after comparing about three hundredths of a percent of the genome.
His paper is published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. At the conclusion he states, One interesting observation is that the sequence divergence between chimp and human is quite large, in excess of 20% for a few regions. Some of the larger gaps are broken by regions within them that align with appropriate segments of the other species DNA sequence but only have distant similarity. These observations suggest that complex processes, presumably involving repeated sequences and possible conversion events, may occur that will require detailed study to understand"
An article titled "Jumbled DNA Separates Chimps and Humans" in
Science Now states:
For almost 30 years, researchers had assumed that the DNA of humans and chimps is at about 98.5% identical. Now a closer look has revealed previously undiscovered nips and tucks in equivalent sections of DNA. The DNA sliced out of--or into--these genomes could explain some of the differences between humans and our closest primates cousins.
Although the true significance of the new differences between chimps and humans is unclear, "these kinds of things are really exciting," says Michael Conneally, a human geneticist at Indiana University Medical Center in Indianapolis. With this research, "we can really find out so much more about evolution."
How can something unclear help find out much more about evolution?
Because the DNA is a linear array of the four bases: A, G, C ant T, only four possibilities exist at any specific point in a DNA sequence.
This means two unrelated DNA sequences will be 25 percent identical.
Even if all human genes which code for proteins were different from those of a chimpanzee, the DNA could still be 98.5 percent similiar if the non-coding DNA of humans and chimps was identical.
No matter what the genetic finding are, evolutionists will still believe that humans evolved from an ape like ancestor. They will just adapt the theory to whatever non cooperative data is presented.
Upvote
0
joe, you still can't explain the shared urate oxidase pseudogenes that are 98 percent homologous between human and chimp and which have premature stop codons in a pattern that correlates precisely with primate phylogeny
that cannot be explained
that cannot be explained
Upvote
0
First of all,
It saddens me to think that a "christian" could believe in evolution. God clearly states in Genesis 1 that he created the world in 6 days. The Hebrew work 'yom' used in this passage means a 24 hour day, not a period of millions of years. Also, Romans 8:19-22 tells us that there was no death or blood shed until Adam's sin. How, therefore, could organisms have lived and died for millions of years if Adam had not yet sinned, and there was no death?
If you are not a christian, how can you support all of the fallacies of evolution? What explanation is there for the inconsistencies of carbon dating or the missing links of evolution? It is time to realize that evolution is a dying theory. How long will secular scientists try to keep it alive to save their pride? In the end, science always points to God.
It saddens me to think that a "christian" could believe in evolution. God clearly states in Genesis 1 that he created the world in 6 days. The Hebrew work 'yom' used in this passage means a 24 hour day, not a period of millions of years. Also, Romans 8:19-22 tells us that there was no death or blood shed until Adam's sin. How, therefore, could organisms have lived and died for millions of years if Adam had not yet sinned, and there was no death?
If you are not a christian, how can you support all of the fallacies of evolution? What explanation is there for the inconsistencies of carbon dating or the missing links of evolution? It is time to realize that evolution is a dying theory. How long will secular scientists try to keep it alive to save their pride? In the end, science always points to God.
Upvote
0
its time to realise wasp, that you haven't a clue really about the state of evolution as a theory
it ain't dying at all, creationists have tried to reanimate their corpse of a theory, but the scientific community have seen the death certificate
it ain't dying at all, creationists have tried to reanimate their corpse of a theory, but the scientific community have seen the death certificate
Upvote
0
Well what about the coconino sandstone formation in the grand canyon? It covers 250,000 km and is 100 m thick. The large scale cross-bedding shows that it was laid down by water in a matter of days. Do secular scientists have an answer for that?
Upvote
0
Wasp. Go read a book on evolution (thats not written by a creationist) then come back here.
Upvote
0
At last, a creationist who's got some guts! That's what we need Wasp, I am impressed. Plus, to support the 6-day fact, what if Jonah was in the whale for 3 thousand/million/insert-long-time-here years? And what about the other places where day is mentioned?
Upvote
0
Mechanical Bliss
Secrecy and accountability cannot co-exist.
Cross bedding of this sort does not indicate that it was a sedimentary layer that formed in a matter of days. It does indicate the erosion of large sand dunes that have been lithified, however. That takes more than a few days for sand dunes to form. Also, this does not indicate that it was deposited by water, but rather wind. This stratum and internal data (e.g., trace fossils) indicate a desert depositional environment.
In addition, I'd like to point out that we observe numerous sedimentary structures created by organisms/trace fossils: burrows and reptilian tracks. How does a flood explain these?
Furthermore, you are pointing out one stratum out of several in the Grand Canyon. They do not all share the same geologic characteristics.
What about the other features in the Grand Canyon listed in another thread (unconformities, sharp meanders, igneous intrusions, non-marine strata, etc.)? Do creationists have answers for those?
Upvote
0
Similar threads
