Greetings Ready to Debate Evolution!

[DNAunion]

RufusAtticus: Fellowship (or DNAUnion),

Can you please answer my questions?

How many species or types of organisms are related to humans by common ancestry?

DNAunion: I would say that all life is related through a common ancestor from the distant past.

RufusAtticus: In other words, what criteria do you use to determine if organism X and organism Y are related by common descent or not?

DNAunion: I feel the evidence for common ancestry of vastly different organisms is compelling. Take for example fruit flies and humans. The “universals” of life apply: both are composed of cells, each carries its genetic information in DNA, both use the same genetic code, both synthesize proteins using ribosomes with mRNA carrying the information from DNA to ribosome, etc. In addition, the “universals” of eukaryotes apply to both: both fruit flies and humans have mitochondria, both have one or more nuclei in each of their cells, with their DNA arranged with histones and other proteins into discrete linear chromosomes, the somatic cells undergo mitosis, etc. In addition, both humans and fruit flies have the "universal" mitochondrial genome, both reproduce sexually, each employs the same hox gene – Pax-6 or one of its analogs – to direct eye development, and the genetic cascades of eye development in both contain many other corresponding genes in the same sequence of activation.

 

[RufusAtticus]

DNAunion, thanks for your responce. I figured you'd agree with IDists like Behe about universal common descent. Now I wonder what Fellowship thinks. . . .

 

[SLP]

Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook
RufasAtticus Greetings,

Thank you for your question!

I accept common descent within "species" or kinds. Another way to phrase this is to say that I accept the genetic diversity demonstrated within the confines of micro-evolution.

How is it that you have determined the limits of the 'kind' such that you can claim that evolution only occurs within it?

Please provide verifiable documentation.

Thanks.

I further hold to the view that all life was "Designed" "Purposefully" with allowances for genetic variety within species.

Thank you for your question, I hope this reply gave you perspective of my views.

With Tremendous Respect,

Fellowship

You may hold that position, but do you have evidence ofr it sufficient that a skeptic would find reason to join you in such a belief?

 

[SLP]

Originally posted by DNAunion
DNAunion: I don't have that book by Dembski, so I can't say what he does or does not say in it. Seems a bit irrelevant to me anyway since the term and its usage are Behe's, not Dembski's (if it does differ from Behe's original, does Dembski's usage in No Free Lunch have Behe's approval?).



DNAunion: If I remember correctly, in his reply to Shanks and Joplin, Behe does not redefine what it means to be an IC system; he switches to talking about IC pathways.

All such definitions, as they pertain to biology, are just post hoc apologia...

 

[DNAunion]

D. Scarlatti: Now which of William Dembski's philosophical/theological/political arguments (since he doesn't do biology) would you like to address?

DNAunion: That wasn't addressed to me, but how about his LSP - Law of Small Probabilities?