Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
"If ENCODE is right then Evolution is wrong"
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="sfs" data-source="post: 71666854" data-attributes="member: 8727"><p>Asserting that they are facts doesn't make them facts.</p><p></p><p>Fine. Soft tissue also doesn't falsify evolution. The scientist who found the tissue (or rather, the remains of tissue) -- and who is a Christian, by the way -- also uncovered the mechanism by which it can be preserved. Who do you think knows more about the soft tissue, you or her? </p><p></p><p>Which doesn't mean that junk DNA was a prediction of evolution -- wasn't. What's true is that the <em>observed mutation rate</em> is inconsistent with all of the genome being functional. Since no one has presented even a shred of evidence that mutations in most of the genome harm humans, there's nothing troubling about that fact. The best estimate we have of the fraction of the genome that would give rise to harmful mutations is around 10%; it comes from the ENCODE project.</p><p></p><p>No, some of us actually read the ENCODE papers and understood what they said.</p><p></p><p>Sorry, but it continues to be the case that none of your "facts" was actually true.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="sfs, post: 71666854, member: 8727"] Asserting that they are facts doesn't make them facts. Fine. Soft tissue also doesn't falsify evolution. The scientist who found the tissue (or rather, the remains of tissue) -- and who is a Christian, by the way -- also uncovered the mechanism by which it can be preserved. Who do you think knows more about the soft tissue, you or her? Which doesn't mean that junk DNA was a prediction of evolution -- wasn't. What's true is that the [I]observed mutation rate[/I] is inconsistent with all of the genome being functional. Since no one has presented even a shred of evidence that mutations in most of the genome harm humans, there's nothing troubling about that fact. The best estimate we have of the fraction of the genome that would give rise to harmful mutations is around 10%; it comes from the ENCODE project. No, some of us actually read the ENCODE papers and understood what they said. Sorry, but it continues to be the case that none of your "facts" was actually true. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
"If ENCODE is right then Evolution is wrong"
Top
Bottom