What creationists need to show to break this link is a highly functional sequence that is not conserved between members of closely related lineages.
But creationists are completely dependent upon actual biological scientists to collect this data, because creationists don't actually do any real science, they just write ignorant hokum about actual science, and pay GGG to post this drivel on Free Republic.
==What creationists need to show to break this link is a highly functional sequence that is not conserved between members of closely related lineages.
Modular DESIGN explains highly conserved functional sequences far better than Darwin’s fanciful creation myth. At the same time, Creation also explains non-conserved functional sequences. No matter which way you slice it, Creation provides the better explanation...hands down.
Wrong!
What broke evolution beyond repair was the discovery of the DNA molecules. DNA is there to prevent evolution, and carry out God's plan for each and every creature on Earth.
Too Bad Satan, your evolution failed coming out the gate!
But doesn't there have to be a fairly large amount of functional information in DNA that differentiates the macro-level body features of even closely related species? Or do you believe that essentially all DNA within a species group is essentially the same, but with some small mutations in regulatory areas that account for the difference? If so, it seems unlikely that complex macro-level differences can be accounted for by simple DNA differences.
Pretty serious charge. Any corroborating evidence for that? If so, how much $$$?