That's true, it is only a small part, but it is what is distinctly human biologically speaking.
Thanks Chet
Paul
Upvote
0
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.
I think that in the light of Project ENCODE's discovery of millions of gene-control switches, many located in places of our genome that have been called junk, the entire "humans are X% similar to chimps" idea needs to be reevaluated.
Apparently, our genes are only a small part of what makes us human. It's the switches, far outnumbering the genes, that are just as important.
Until we actually map the 80% of our genome that is active, and compare it to chimps, I think any statement saying "humans are X% similar to chimps" is unfounded.
Do you believe in God?
What is God by your definition (if you believe there is a God)?
Did God create the Universe (or was Jesus a liar)?
If not, how did it come about (or is it eternal)?
Thanks, I'd love to hear 46and2's response as well...
Paul
The simple point is because the many agree on something does not mean it is correct,
Like the neo-Darwinian interpretation of what the alleged junk DNA means
I believe in one God,Do you believe in God?
What is God by your definition (if you believe there is a God)?
Did God create the Universe (or was Jesus a liar)?
It has been reported elsewhere that humans have three dozen unique protein coding genes no apes contain, and now we find that of the 244 newly discovered (last year) microRNA genes, 10% are unique to humans (not found in any other organism). Chimps also have their own unique microRNA genes not found in any humans
Until we actually map the 80% of our genome that is active, and compare it to chimps, I think any statement saying "humans are X% similar to chimps" is unfounded.
What I'm saying is that Project ENCODE has revealed that most of the human genome, which was thought of as junk, appears to be doing something. We don't yet even know what it may or may not be doing. Until we do, and perform the equivalent of Project ENCODE on chimps, and compare the two results, any claim that "humans are X% the same as chimps" is without substance.But comparisons of percentages in and of themselves are not nearly as important as the NESTED HIERARCHIES within the genomes. That is the slam-dunk of the evidence for evolution.
And in all of these years I have NEVER been able to get a young earth creationist evolution-denier to explain how nested hierarchies make sense under COMMON DESIGN. (They make complete sense and are even predicted within COMMON DESCENT.)
True. But it is also true that right ideas often take time to be accepted. For the idea of the earth going around the sun, it took over 200 years. For evolution, we are mostly there after 150.
Maybe start a thread on it. Do you know of the term "Gish Gallop"? That's when a creationist is repeatedly shown to be wrong, and each time they are, they just switch the subject instead of admitting it. We saw in the strata discussion above that 46and2 graciously explained a lot to you, yet I didn't see agreement from you, and now you've proposed new topics repeatedly since that.
Well aside from you resorting to calling me names, I enjoyed his posts but I do not buy it all...and questions are a good thing.
___________________________________________
I'll answer these, but they seem off-topic, especially when we have faith Icons appearing by our name on every post.
I believe in one God,
the Father, the Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all that is, seen and unseen.
God is the trinitarian god described in the Nicene creed and the 73 books of holy scripture that most Christians the world over accept.
Of course God created the Universe. God is the creator of all things (seen and unseen).
That's like asking "Is the mustard seed the smallest of all seeds, or was Jesus a liar?"
No it is not like that at all...if one does not believe God created then they would have to believe Jesus is either delusional, ignorant, or a liar, but thanks for sharing your view it was good to hear it from you and I can see you do not believe any of these...46and2 must however believe one of them (but as he said he does not even know whether or not Jesus said any of these words)
___________________________
If you think this (or other evidence you posted, such as the Science article) is in any way evidence against common descent, then you simply don't understand common descent nor the papers posted.
Well here you are just incorrect...
And calling an article on an archive supported by huge numbers of top scientist "really weak", when you don't even have a basic understanding in any related field sounds awfully arrogant, especially when that last fact is abundantly clear in those same posts.
I do believe the initial article before the links was purely opinion and I most certainly do have an understanding of the theory (and that is all it is)...
But thanks for the honesty...
Paul
What I'm saying is that Project ENCODE has revealed that most of the human genome, which was thought of as junk, appears to be doing something. We don't yet even know what it may or may not be doing. Until we do, and perform the equivalent of Project ENCODE on chimps, and compare the two results, any claim that "humans are X% the same as chimps" is without substance.
...46and2 must however believe one of them (but as he said he does not even know whether or not Jesus said any of these words)
...if one does not believe God created then they would have to believe Jesus is either delusional, ignorant, or a liar, .....46and2 must however believe one of them (but as he said he does not even know whether or not Jesus said any of these words)
I do believe the initial article before the links was purely opinion
and I most certainly do have an understanding of the theory (and that is all it is)...
No I don't. That's why I said it was a false dichotomy. I can think of several examples where 1) God did not create the earth AND 2) Jesus is not a liar.
I don't have to pick one or the other (God made the earth, or Jesus is a liar) because there are multiple hypothetical scenarios in which neither one of them is true. For example:
1. God did not create the earth, but the authors of the Bible lied about what Jesus claimed
2. God did not create the earth, but the authors misunderstood what Jesus said.
3. God did not create the earth, but Jesus believed that he did, and was therefore not lying.
4. God did not create the earth, but scribes in the early church interpolated Jesus' claim that he did.
5. God did not create the earth, Jesus did not claim that he did, and the authors wrote oral legends down as scripture.
Jesus was a Creationist
I do know what the definition of a theory is
For instance. Gandhi saw Brahmin as a member of the Hindu Trinity. Since Gandhi wasn't delusional, ignorant, or a liar, Hinduism is true. Einstein rejected Christianity. repeat. Etc.
There is one huge difference. Jesus did not claim to "know" the truth as Einstein or Gandhi may have. Jesus claimed to be the Truth.
Many can be mistaken. Jesus said He was God.
It's a one of a kind claim that only deranged humans will make.
So Jesus was who he claimed, or he was a banana.
Paul wrote:
You listed a bunch of different definitons. Which do you think is meant when a scientific theory is being discussed, such as Germ Theory, Evolutionary Theory, Gravitational Theory, etc., and how do you think that relates to facts?
Papias
What I'm saying is that Project ENCODE has revealed that most of the human genome, which was thought of as junk, appears to be doing something. We don't yet even know what it may or may not be doing. Until we do, and perform the equivalent of Project ENCODE on chimps, and compare the two results, any claim that "humans are X% the same as chimps" is without substance.
I didn't mention junk DNA. Just that the amount of human/chimp genome we need to compare to make a substantiated "humans and chimps are X% similar" statement has increased, thanks to Project ENCODE, to perhaps as much as 80% of our genome."Junk DNA" is one of the most misunderstood terms in this entire debate. I've watched fascinating debates on the Amazon forums while actual scientists who work in the relevant fields explained to the wanna-be apologetists and evolution deniers how they were abusing the terms. (Dr. Wells to distract the choir with the "junk DNA" noise because he knows it is irrelevant but it gives the followers hope that there is some sort "magic bullet" to kill the theory of evolution. There isn't. God created it. God said it by means of the evidence within his creation. I believe it. And that settles it.)
But in any case, "junk DNA" has NO IMPACT on the irrefutable mountains of evidence for COMMON DESCENT. Indeed, that DNA is yet another CONFIRMATION of it.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?