" There are already DNA markers that point us clearly at a common origin to many animals."
That is an opinion advanced only by those whose minds are so warped that they can't see the use of modular design by our creator. Why would he not use the same method to do the same job in most of his creatures? Your statement is utterly anti-god at it's foundation.
So you nail your qualifications someone who knows nothing of any life sciences or one who is on the fringes.
" There are already DNA markers that point us clearly at a common origin to many animals."
That is an opinion advanced only by those whose minds are so warped that they can't see the use of modular design by our creator.
I didn't know God programmed in PL/1.
Why would he not use the same method to do the same job in most of his creatures?
You have the effrontery to challenge why God decided how he built the Universe? Why do mosquitoes bite? Why are there black hole singularities? Your arrogance is overwhelming.
Your statement is utterly anti-god at it's foundation.
Yeah -- me and all the rest of the scientific community.
And I respect God enough to use His name properly.
As a practical matter, given the ubiquitous nature of DNA (et al) if you had Arcturans using Earth as a Zoo, or a dumping ground for unsuitible "new models", you really would have a hard time differentiating those critters from the ones already here.
It's like the idea that GRAVITY WORKS EVERYWHERE THE SAME ~ in this case, it's LIFE USES THE SAME CHEMISTRY AND PROCESSES EVERYWHERE.
Evos tend to reject the idea that exobiology has any relevance to anything already on Earth. They stick to the "little Earth" idea like the "young earther" crowd stick to their narrow idea of Creation.
editor-surveyor: That is an opinion advanced only by those whose minds are so warped that they can't see the use of modular design by our creator. Why would he not use the same method to do the same job in most of his creatures? Your statement is utterly anti-god at it's foundation.
Please explain the "modular design" that makes people and the other apes incapable of synthesizing ascorbic acid (Vitamin C). The fact is, that if a single base pair were added to your genome, you'd never need vitamin C again. Every thing's present, except that one base pair.
The interesting thing is, the exact same base pair, inserted in the right place in the chimp or gorilla genome, would let them make ascorbic acid.
The standard biology explanation for this state of affairs is obvious.
The ID or creationist explanation ... well, the hypothetical designer could have done a better job of quality control.
I Mean, what exactly is the point of reusing the same defective part in a dozen or more species? It pays to perform unit testing if you're doing modular construction!
Actually, there is another creationist hypothesis:
[Garden of Eden, Adam just 'fessed up]
The Lord: So you like fruit, eh! I'll fix it so you'll have to eat some every day!
< zapp !>
Er, sorry about that Mr. Ape, ...