Replies

Everything evolved from single celled organisms, and yet there are still single celled organisms. Why? Because the ecological niche that supported those organisms is still there. We evolved due to genetic recombination that moved along a little at at a time. Just because one member of a species mutates doesn't mean that all will mutate. Some of the population will stay the same, and provided that niche still remains, the original species will as well. The intermediate steps along the chain from apes to humans either interbred or were outcompeted by modern humans. There are arguments for each case.

I am a scientist working in biochemistry. We mutate small sections of DNA, insert that fragment into a circular piece of DNA called a plasmid, and then insert that plasmid into a variety of cells and observe the results. We often use antibiotic resistance genes to select for bacteria which have taken up the plasmid. These resistance genes themselves illustrate random evolution and how genetic recombination can produce a more competitive organism. Also, I am a Christian and I believe that God created life and mapped out the whole thing.

Good post.

Also, I am a Christian and I believe that God created life and mapped out the whole thing.

Welcome to the club!

It's also nice to have someone actually working in the field add their comments to the "discussion".

Everything evolved from single celled organisms, and yet there are still single celled organisms. Why? Because the ecological niche that supported those organisms is still there. We evolved due to genetic recombination that moved along a little at at a time. Just because one member of a species mutates doesn't mean that all will mutate.

But likewise it doesn't mean that all except for this one mutuation that resulted in us WON'T mutate either.

Some of the population will stay the same, and provided that niche still remains, the original species will as well. The intermediate steps along the chain from apes to humans either interbred or were outcompeted by modern humans. There are arguments for each case.

But wouldn't there still be some members of the ape species that would continue to evolve? Just because these others were "outcompeted" doesn't mean that the tendencies toward mutation and evolution are suddenly "afraid" to come out from that point on -- unless somehow both apes and humans developed genes that miraculously bred these tendencies to mutate out of both species. In other words, given the great lengths of time we're talking about, it follows that there was plenty of time for other mutations and species to evolve after these groups were "outcompeted" by the modern human, would they not?

Also, I am a Christian and I believe that God created life and mapped out the whole thing.

I do too, and it's quite possible that "evolution" is the means God chose for creation. With minor differences, the story in Genesis very closely parallels the sequence of the appearance of the various life forms that is conventional wisdom among biologists. I don't subscribe to the earth being 6,000 years old. After all, God, being the inventor of time itself, is by definition no slave to time and is therefore not in any kind of "hurry".

I do believe there was a Garden of Eden and that it really was perfect, and I hypothesize that the effect of Original Sin was retroactive in time, turning the original peaceful creatures into violent carnivores with flesh-tearing teeth, etc.