Replies

The genome data confirm our close kinship with chimps: We differ by only about 1% in the nucleotide bases that can be aligned between our two species

Why is this evidence of evolution? From an ID perspective, this is evidence that chimps and humans have the same designer, and that much of the same proven design that went into the chimp was also applied to humans. But, of course, an evolutionist's conclusions are going to be colored by his own bias.

A friend of mine who's a plant geneticist tells me that about 85% of the human DNA is identical to that of the pumpkin. I know a number of people who certainly qualify as mellonheads, but doesn't mean we and the squash are descended from the same parents.

From an ID perspective, this is evidence that chimps and humans have the same designer, and that much of the same proven design that went into the chimp was also applied to humans.

Yes, but if they were vastly different that would also be evidence of a designer, as the designer was making clear distinctions between seperate works. For ID, any potential observation can be called "evidence" because there's no falsification criteria.

The conclusions regarding evolution aren't merely based upon the percentage of similarity, but also in how the similarities occur, such as identical broken Vitamin C synthesis genes and identical inserted ERV code at the same points in the DNA.

A friend of mine who's a plant geneticist tells me that about 85% of the human DNA is identical to that of the pumpkin.

So? You ID'ers are always trying to wreck stuff for me. I'm a freakin' DINOSAUR!!!

COWER BEFORE ME, WEAKLY HUMAN!!!

AND CHECK OUT THE CHICK I'M GONNA MAKE IT WITH!

Owl_Eagle

(If what I just wrote makes you sad or angry,

it was probably sarcasm)

From an ID perspective, this is evidence that chimps and humans have the same designer, and that much of the same proven design that went into the chimp was also applied to humans.

So, lobsters were built by a different working team?

Honestly, if the evidence supports a theory that works without introducing an un-named "designer" (wink, wink, nudge, nudge), why do you find it necessary to do so?

Why is this evidence of evolution? From an ID perspective, this is evidence that chimps and humans have the same designer

This article oversimplifies the evidence.

The significant evidence recently discovered are the Endeogenous Retro Virus (ERV) DNA sequences common in chimp, human, and several other primate species.

What makes this significant is that we know how these sequences got there. ERV type viruses inject their DNA into the host cell DNA and turn it into a virus machine. In very very rare occurances, the infection goes bad, and the cell survives, and it happens to be a reproductive cell that then gives that ERV sequence to all ancestors.

Since ERV sequences insert themselves randomly in host cells, and since these discovered sequences are in exactly the same location, with exactly the same "errors" that allowed the original infection to fail, then this is proof that these ERV sequences in chimps, humans, new world monkeys and others came from an ancient ancestor, a single individual, that passed his genes to all these species.

Doubting evolution in light of this is about the same as doubting whether OJ did it.

The genome data confirm our close kinship with chimps: We differ by only about 1% in the nucleotide bases that can be aligned between our two species

Try that in Family Court some time: "Your Honor, the similarity in DNA between me and the plaintiff's child just shows that we have the same designer. It has nothing to do with whether or not that child is related to me."