Viruses that prove common descent

[Barry Desborough]

Hi guys,

Here's my FAQ on endogenous retroviruses (ERVs). They provide some of the best evidence for common descent. They show that you, me, and Charlie the chimp are cousins.

Now I'm a lifelong atheist (67 years), and I don't care whether you believe in God or not. What I do care about is the fact that evolution-denial is an impediment to our understanding of human nature. See the second link regarding this.

Questions/comments welcome.

Veritas: Endogenous Retroviruses - Frequently Asked Questions

Veritas: ERV FAQ: Aren't you just a plagiarist? Why don't you attribute your sources? And who are you anyway?

 

[Jimmy D]

I do care about is the fact that evolution-denial is an impediment to our understanding of human nature.

I agree Barry, I look forward to the responses.

 

[AV1611VET]

They provide some of the best evidence for common descent.

Big deal.

Evolutionists were claiming 'best evidence for common descent' long before ERVs came along.

They show that you, me, and Charlie the chimp are cousins.

For every one piece of "best evidence," how many pieces are rejected because they show otherwise?

 

[Jimmy D]

Big deal.

Evolutionists were claiming 'best evidence for common descent' long before ERVs came along.

That's because there's a lot of evidence.

For every one piece of "best evidence," how many pieces are rejected because they show otherwise?

You tell us chief, how many are there?

 

[Barry Desborough]

Big deal.

Evolutionists were claiming 'best evidence for common descent' long before ERVs came along.For every one piece of "best evidence," how many pieces are rejected because they show otherwise?

Inadequate response. Address the facts and the reasoning, a summary of which can be found @ Veritas: ERV FAQ: What is the "case for common descent" from ERVs?

 

[xianghua]

Inadequate response. Address the facts and the reasoning, a summary of which can be found @ Veritas: ERV FAQ: What is the "case for common descent" from ERVs?

the fact is that the erv argument is base about belief. we cant prove that those are indeed a viral insertions for instance. how do you know that the opposite is true?

 

[Barry Desborough]

the fact is that the erv argument is base about belief. we cant prove that those are indeed a viral insertions for instance. how do you know that the opposite is true?

See Veritas: ERV FAQ: Why do virologists and geneticists think that ERVs come from retroviruses? Isn't that just supposition on their part?

 

[AirPo]

Big deal.

Evolutionists were claiming 'best evidence for common descent' long before ERVs came along.For every one piece of "best evidence," how many pieces are rejected because they show otherwise?

Then EVRs were discovered/studied and became the best. Sort of like Tom Brady winning his 5th super bowl.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Hi guys,

Here's my FAQ on endogenous retroviruses (ERVs). They provide some of the best evidence for common descent. They show that you, me, and Charlie the chimp are cousins.

Now I'm a lifelong atheist (67 years), and I don't care whether you believe in God or not. What I do care about is the fact that evolution-denial is an impediment to our understanding of human nature. See the second link regarding this.

Questions/comments welcome.

Veritas: Endogenous Retroviruses - Frequently Asked Questions

Veritas: ERV FAQ: Aren't you just a plagiarist? Why don't you attribute your sources? And who are you anyway?

Actually they show just the opposite. They are foreign invaders known to bring genomes from one species into another. What you take to be common descent is merely when they invaded the host and inserted that foreign genome which the host uses to produce proteins.

Retrovirus - Wikipedia

"A retrovirus is a single-stranded positive-sense RNA virus with a DNA intermediate and, as an obligate parasite, targets a host cell."

"The host cell then treats the viral DNA as part of its own genome, translating and transcribing the viral genes along with the cell's own genes, producing the proteins required to assemble new copies of the virus. It is difficult to detect the virus until it has infected the host. At that point, the infection will persist indefinitely."

Obligate parasite - Wikipedia

"An obligate parasite or holoparasite, is a parasitic organism that cannot complete its life-cycle without exploiting a suitable host. "

You have simply mistaken an infection of a parasitic organism into meaning common descent.

Expression of foreign genes from retroviral vectors in mouse teratocarcinoma chimaeras.

Use of a Retroviral Vector for Expression of a Foreign Gene - Springer

No, they simply mistake the insertion point of those foreign genomes as meaning common descent, when no such conclusion is warranted, since all of those foreign genomes are in fact associated only with retroviruses, which are known to be capable of allowing foreign genome transfer from dissimilar hosts.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982211001011

"Those who study the phenomenon are still struggling to quantitatively assess LGT as a process or processes and accommodate its implications for how patterns in nature should be represented — such as the existence of definable species or a meaningful universal Tree of Life. But all agree that the exchange of genetic information across species lines — which is how we will define LGT in this primer — is far more pervasive and more radical in its consequences than we could have guessed just a decade ago."

They just have not yet accepted the full implications, but one day will be left with no choice as science advances.

 

[Barry Desborough]

Actually they show just the opposite. They are foreign invaders known to bring genomes from one species into another. What you take to be common descent is merely when they invaded the host and inserted that foreign genome which the host uses to produce proteins.

Retrovirus - Wikipedia

"A retrovirus is a single-stranded positive-sense RNA virus with a DNA intermediate and, as an obligate parasite, targets a host cell."

"The host cell then treats the viral DNA as part of its own genome, translating and transcribing the viral genes along with the cell's own genes, producing the proteins required to assemble new copies of the virus. It is difficult to detect the virus until it has infected the host. At that point, the infection will persist indefinitely."

Obligate parasite - Wikipedia

"An obligate parasite or holoparasite, is a parasitic organism that cannot complete its life-cycle without exploiting a suitable host. "

You have simply mistaken an infection of a parasitic organism into meaning common descent.

Expression of foreign genes from retroviral vectors in mouse teratocarcinoma chimaeras.

Use of a Retroviral Vector for Expression of a Foreign Gene - Springer

No, they simply mistake the insertion point of those foreign genomes as meaning common descent, when no such conclusion is warranted, since all of those foreign genomes are in fact associated only with retroviruses, which are known to be capable of allowing foreign genome transfer from dissimilar hosts.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982211001011

"Those who study the phenomenon are still struggling to quantitatively assess LGT as a process or processes and accommodate its implications for how patterns in nature should be represented — such as the existence of definable species or a meaningful universal Tree of Life. But all agree that the exchange of genetic information across species lines — which is how we will define LGT in this primer — is far more pervasive and more radical in its consequences than we could have guessed just a decade ago."

They just have not yet accepted the full implications, but one day will be left with no choice as science advances.

Way to miss the essential point. ERVs are remnants of retroviral integrations into germline DNA. Retroviruses cannot target specific DNA loci, yet closely related species exhibit these remnants in exactly corresponding loci. The only explanation for this is that they integrated in ancestral organisms and have been duplicated via reproduction ever since. - Unless you have another explanation for common loci?

 

[Barry Desborough]

Then EVRs were discovered/studied and became the best. Sort of like Tom Brady winning his 5th super bowl.

As Abbie Smith said, even if there was no theory of evolution, the discovery of commonly located ERVs would smack us round the side of the head like a sack of doorknobs, forcing us to conclude common descent - but for pseudo-religious superstition.

http://scienceblogs.com/erv/

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

They show that you, me, and Charlie the chimp are cousins.

You know this is false science, right ?

 

[ImAllLikeOkWaitWat]

I guess this just killed the God of Abraham, the only remaining God left. Congrats atheists you win. Or if that is not your point then what does this really matter.

 

[sfs]

You know this is false science, right ?

I guess you weren't reading this thread, right?

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Abraham, Father of Faith!

Good Example, Perfect in God's Plan, Purpose and Redemption of some men.

Excerpt from the last week somewhere online:

"Abel, Enoch, Noah, all three worshipped God. Abraham did not; he worshipped idols. Things had gone from bad to worse, until the men in Ur of the Chaldees and in all the other cities around them were idolaters. And Abraham and Nahor and their father Terah were no different: `they served other gods’ (Joshua 24. 2). By himself Abraham was not morally the equal of any of those three men who went before him, Noah, Enoch or Abel. By nature he was on the same level as Adam after his fall, or as Cain. Yet he was the startingpoint for divine recovery.

Through none of those who preceded Abraham did God set Himself to deal with the situation created by sin. Abraham was the first through whom He did this."

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

I guess you weren't reading this thread, right?

No need to.
When anything contradicts YHWH the CREATOR, it is false.

 

[Barry Desborough]

You know this is false science, right ?

What makes you say that?

 

[sfs]

I guess this just killed the God of Abraham, the only remaining God left. Congrats atheists you win. Or if that is not your point then what does this really matter.

It doesn't really matter to Christianity -- so why do so many Christians insist on denying good, fundamental science? It makes us look like idiots.

 

[Barry Desborough]

Abraham, Father of Faith!

Good Example, Perfect in God's Plan, Purpose and Redemption of some men.

Excerpt from the last week somewhere online:

"Abel, Enoch, Noah, all three worshipped God. Abraham did not; he worshipped idols. Things had gone from bad to worse, until the men in Ur of the Chaldees and in all the other cities around them were idolaters. And Abraham and Nahor and their father Terah were no different: `they served other gods’ (Joshua 24. 2). By himself Abraham was not morally the equal of any of those three men who went before him, Noah, Enoch or Abel. By nature he was on the same level as Adam after his fall, or as Cain. Yet he was the startingpoint for divine recovery.

Through none of those who preceded Abraham did God set Himself to deal with the situation created by sin. Abraham was the first through whom He did this."

 

[sfs]

When anything contradicts YHWH the CREATOR, it is false.

It doesn't contradict YHWH the CREATOR. Lots and lots of Christians are perfectly happy worshipping their creator while still accepting common descent.