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 don't know what you guys are talking about... want to explain please??
I haven't read the whole thread. Just wanted to interject: isn't like 80% of the human genome called "junk DNA", meaning it has no known function. That to me makes a statement that we don't know everything there is to know about the human genome.
I haven't read the whole thread. Just wanted to interject: isn't like 80% of the human genome called "junk DNA", meaning it has no known function. That to me makes a statement that we don't know everything there is to know about the human genome.
Could you maybe do the research for us since you thought of the question?
Why not take some other less controversial lineage, like say the domestic cow. There are a number of related species, such as our American bison.
There are bound to be studies that could be looked up easily enough.
Or do you feel that bison and domestic cattle are each the product of a unique creation?
possible, but scientists do know what the human genome looks like regardless its 100% mapped, and based on that pattern, our DNA came from a common ancestors of chimps. This is because of ERV. we have virus ?rna? in our dna that was passed down from our ancestors. The only alternative is God created both us and the ancestors of chimps with RNA built into our dna to make it appear we are related.
I have developed an interest in the subject over the years, I'm especially interested in arctic wildlife. I found a website that told of a polar bear/grizzly offspring. Apparently even though they don't care for one another, they can still interbreed.
I'll buy bisons and cows, that's no issue for me. My guess is that cows have a strong tendancy to return to the original ancestral form probably more like the bison then the domestic cow. That's because there is a strong tendancy to revert back to the wild type. One of the biggest problems with these hybrids is infertility, Darwin called it the bane of horticulture....any hoot.
Now the reason human evolution from apes is virtually my only issue with TOE is because it's the only one that really crosses a doctrinal Rubicon. Adam and Eve being our first parents is clear as day in the New Testament, cows and bison simply are not an issue for me.
Why do evolutionists continue to make the same fallacious arguments. For one thing the ERVs are actually pretty striking evidence of independant lineage. Look at the comparison of the Class I ERVs.
With more than 100 members, CERV 1/PTERV1 is one of the most abundant families of endogenous retroviruses in the chimpanzee genome. (Genome Biol. 2006). They can be found in African great apes but not in humans. What is more the ERV virus is nearly extinct in the human genome with only a couple that actually work. The only thing that ERVs are proof of is the lengths evolutionists will go to to conflate and confuse the evidence.
For almost half a century it was believed that Chimpanzee and Human DNA was virtually identical. This is now known to be false. The Comparison of Human Chromosome 21 and Chimpanzee Chromosome 22 revealed that 83% of the 231 coding sequences, including functionally important genes, show differences at the amino acid sequence level. These included gross structural changes affecting gene products far more common than previously estimated (20.3% of the PTR22 proteins) (Nature, 27 May 2004).
I have encountered these arguments so many times and found them to be so utterly false its hard to take them seriously.
That's because there is a strong tendancy to revert back to the wild type.
One more thing if you dont mind. I wonder what is your explanation for this tendency to revert to wild type.
Mark has read the research, he just hasn't got sufficient knowledge to accurately report it to others and draw accurate conclusions from it. I'll try to get a post up on the things he quotes this evening, but have to get to my salsa classes firstHas anyone but you found them to be false? This is largely a research u and people take falsification pretty seriously. They dont just prattle on with obsolete nonsense.
Has anyone but you found them to be false? This is largely a research u and people take falsification pretty seriously. They dont just prattle on with obsolete nonsense.
Seems easy to get past that just be accepting the Adam and Eve story as metaphorical.
If you are going to take it all literally then you have to accept that rivers can clap their hands. Or that god would have hands, for that matter.
And you will have to accept that Pi=3.0, despite considerable evidence to the contrary. So it seems to me; why not?
For me, if scripture blatantly contradicts reality, or seems to, maybe a person is just reading it wrong. Sorta like spell check or something.
They used to talk about stars falling. We now know that is not reasonable. So ok that was metaphorical.
I could deal with Christianity, maybe believe in it. if that is the way it works. That a person can think and figure out what is metaphorical.
I know some thoughtful intelligent Christians who express it pretty much like that. Others who feel the opposite. I'm still studying this.
I am really interested in arctic wildlife too. I wish I were at the Univ of Alaska. I want to see muskoxen and etc. i heard they have some right on campus there! Why are you interested? Ever been up north? So far my furthest north is North Dakota.
That should have teen a capital U. As in University.
Dont give me "that obviously you dont understand stuff ok? If you have something you dont need to be condescending.
IF you have something valid, then publish it and be famous. Your ideas are indisputable. so it should not be a problem.
Who are "they" who you say knowingly perpetuate a falsehood over the decades?
I trust you are not going to offer an ad hom against the world scientific community and claim that you know better than them all.
Genetics is the undiluted, genuine article of science and causes no conflict with Christian conviction whatsoever.[/B] Darwinian evolution is based on false naturalistic assumptions that defines science as if it were essentially atheistic which is absurd.
The Chimpanzee Genome Consortium concluded the indels accounted for 2% to 3% of the divergence and I quoted, cited and linked the source. The OP is obvious wrong about it being 98%, Time magazine and Nature's web site called Web focus also said it was 98% when the paper clearly says it is 96% at best. Would you like the citations and links?
Creationists don't get published in scientific journals.
Darwinians like Louise Leaky who created the myth of stone age apemen in Kenya. There was Auther Keith who based his carrier on Piltdown hoax and then since the discovery of DNA they have pushed this homology argument but refuse to accept the inverse logic.
Here's the thing, read what they publish not was they speculate about, they'll get it accurate in print. Other times they fabricate statistics and can't be trusted to make objective statements. Now I'm not accusing anyone of anything here, I'm not hostile to TOE and I'm a little better read and scientificlly literate then the flame artists on here would ever admit. Genetics is the undiluted, genuine article of science and causes no conflict with Christian conviction whatsoever. Darwinian evolution is based on false naturalistic assumptions that defines science as if it were essentially atheistic which is absurd.
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?