[Virginia-American]

Hmm, your sources did not mention the guinea pigs did they? Guess man and chimp descended from guinea pigs? Are guinea pigs the missing link? Seems evo 'scientists' are very selective.

Yes of course I mentioned it. The guinea pig has a different mutation than we and the other apes do. Christian discussion of this issue See section 5. or other studies or another discussion that mentions guinea pigs and primates

Guess man and chimp descended from guinea pigs? Are guinea pigs the missing link?

Mocking it won't make it go away

First of all, it is not just men and monkeys

Monkeys can; it's the great apes, including people, that can't.

(an inactivated Vitamin C synthesis gene) has been found in one human so far and no apes

The claim here is that one person has been found who doesn't require vitamin C?

from the same source

4. Maybe the Lord inserted those similarities for a reason we do not understand. They could even have been inserted as tests of our faith. The Lord does not force any to believe, but gives opportunity to doubt for those who are seeking it.

5. Another possibility is that the Lord, when he cursed Adam and Eve after the fall, also cursed all life by introducing errors into the DNA. One could expect that similar species were cursed in a similar way, out of fairness.

OK, similar species were cursed in the same way out of a sense of fairness: did some chimp taste the forbidden fruit? This has to be the silliest thing I've seen in a while.

if primates closely related to humans have the SAME crippling mutations in their LGGLO pseudogenes as we see in the human pseudogenes, this finding would support the evolutionary model. As I pointed out, the data on this question are not yet available for the LGGLO pseudogenes, but in other shared pseudogenes identical crippling mutations clearly favor evolution

OK, so the other genetic details, DO favor evolution?!

Somehow, I had a feeling that you would bring this up again. Evolutionists have a way of continuing to use 'evidence' which has already been disproven

Where exactly was what disproven? The claim is that there is a shared mutation in the great apes, specifically a missing base pair in the LGGLO gene necessary for ascorbic acid synthesis. Is there or not?

...the moth fraud ...

What fraud? Was there or was there not a change in the colour of moths in industrialized Britain? The claim that mounting light and dark moth specimems on bark, to show the difference that the bird predators saw, somehow amounts to fraud is ludicrous - the original science was done by counting the number of light and dark insects, and by releasing light and dark insects, and seeing how many were eaten.

Where exactly is the fraud?

are still claimed as proof of evolution

Proof? No, just confirmation. There is a difference.

[gore3000]

Your entire post does not contradict anything. My post had the author of this lie discussing, what others at one time or another said, is irrelevant. YOu are just going around the internet looking for something to contradict the real discussion.

Neither the chimp's nor the guinea pig's genome has been sequenced as of yet. The statements about the mutation in either are totally made up like almost everything in TO. Let's see a real article, from a real legitimate source showing that this so called mutation is in the exact same place in man and chimp and different in the guinea pig. You will not find it because the whole thing was a lie from the start.