Posted on 07/13/2009 9:55:26 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Human-Chimp Similarities: Common Ancestry or Flawed Research?
by Jeffrey Tomkins, Ph.D.*
In 2003, the human genome was heralded as a near-complete DNA sequence, except for the repetitive regions that could not be resolved due to the limitations of the prevailing DNA sequencing technologies.[1] The chimpanzee genome was subsequently finished in 2005 with the hope that its completion would provide clear-cut DNA similarity evidence for an ape-human common ancestry.[2] This similarity is frequently cited as proof of man's evolutionary origins, but a more objective explanation tells a different story, one that is more complex than evolutionary scientists seem willing to admit...
(Excerpt) Read more at icr.org ...
If you had in fact personally refuted the entire field of phylogeny based upon ERV sequence then one might presume you would be PROUD to present such a stunning argument.
But all you can do is scream and stop your feet that you already refuted it, like a petulant little child.
*Spoken like a true liberal. Can’t hope to win the debate, so just shut it down.*
So is that why you keep calling your opponents liberals in an attempt to have them banned?
It was you and yours who try to get those they disagree with banned as soon as they say something you don’t like.
Meet the kettle.
This isn’t high school so why are you debating like it is?
I know it is a common technique for one illequiped to discuss matters at hand to change the subject
______
Kind of like one who, in a discussion about the origin of the species (evolution) and brings up abiogenesis as an attempt to derail a discussion about evolution.
See: “Alinskys Rules for Creationists”
(also “Top 10 stupid liberal debate tricks”)
Like I said, Dropout, I’m not going to recreate the arguments that defeated your lame, outdated, Temple of Darwin ERV “arguments”. It’s not my fault you are too intellectually challenged to realize when you have been totally and utterly defeated. I’ll tell you what, why don’t you go back to our ERV debates and post the parts you didn’t understand, and I’ll re-explain them to you without all the big words.
You are making my point exactly.
The reason I believe in the creation of Adam is that Jesus speaks of him directly IIRC. If there was a literal Adam, why would I assume that the rest is metaphore?
Now, there are those that will argue that there was no creation of people prior to Adam, I do not find that in the Bible. I also do not see any biblical limitation in how those created before Adam were created.
God went out of his way to tell us about a the circumstances of our creation, he goes on to exposit how that creation affects our relationship to him now. I see no reason not to believe it. I also do not see any physical evidence to deny it.
I know that I am not doing a good job explaining what I am trying to say. I am someone that loves studying evolution, old earth science and still believes that at some point, God started over and created the human race. I am even open to there being some residual hominids existing at the time of our creation. Who know, the Bible does not clearly say, but it may relate to the sons of god and daughters of man passage, maybe.
I find joy in science and religion and I do not think they have to be segregated, Genesis is not threatened by men in labcoats.
Sorry Gutless. You have been shown repeatedly for what you are, an ignorant blowhard who thinks that he single handedly refuted the entire field of phylogeny based upon ERV data but is unwilling and unable to either state the theory or your refutation of it.
Now if you were actually proud of your single handed vanquishing of an entire field of study, you might want to actually present your argument.
But no. You just stamp your feet like a child crying that they already washed their hands before supper, even though anyone can all see the fetid slime caked upon their mitts.
DO tell, how many times did you come into contact with evolution, or any other science related topic in graduate level "administration" classes?
Agreed. I believe a lot of the interpretation is being done by those who have not studied the Bible in Greek and Hebrew, which, if they had, would give them a much clearer picture of what the Bible actually says.
“God gave you a brain - use it. You don’t have to surrender reason to interpret the Bible in the light of current science.”
You most certainly must surrender reason. How else do you explain faith? How else do you explain Christ dying and rising from the dead?
==DO tell, how many times did you come into contact with evolution, or any other science related topic in graduate level “administration” classes?
All the time. My religious studies professors were almost all atheists hostile to religion (especially Christianity), and were bringing up evolution every chance they got. Evolution was also brought and discussed (in a positive light) in several of my admin. classes.
which implies there were many.
Add to that the books of the Apocrypha conveniently left out after the council of Mycenae, two of which directly address the concept and validity of evolution (within the understanding of the times)... 1000 years before Darwin.
Reason and faith are not necessarily congruent.
Poor dreamer, he can’t put up, and he can’t shut up. You remind me a lot of that goat. You woudn’t by any chance have rectangular pupils?
Anyway, the point of ERV data is that the idiot who wrote this idiotic article didn't even mention some of the strongest evidence for common descent.
Your defense of this is that YOU PERSONALLY already destroyed this argument. Is the author aware of your supposedly stunning victory Gutless?
Right....and we talked about Creation in all my immunology and epidemiology and biostats classes. Must’ve been so tough going to religous studies classes already being the master.
So why do you walk around talking about the sciences with your chest puffed up like you know the science of what you’re linking to when you have no training of any kind in ANY of it? Not a very good tactic to boast about a graduate degree that has nothing to do with any topic at hand.
Ya notice, I don’t talk of the Bible much because, although I’ve read it a few times, I have no training in Bible studies......unlike you, I will not pretend to know it.
Of course, ya don’t need education on ANY matter if you just plan on claiming “I debunked that numerous times and won’t waste my time.” like Hillary Clinton does......”Oh ha ha ha (/Hillary laugh)....we’ve been through all this before.”
B.S. in Biology UMASS Boston
Sc.D. in IID.....HSPH (Yeah....tell me again how HIV does not cause AIDS....that’s a good one)
.....and the irrelevant to any topic at hand 8 years Army infantry.
I have never, ever claimed that the arguments are unique to me. I am merely going out and finding the scientists who have falsified an “entire field” of EVO study because the evos are too lazy and/or gutless to do it themselves. So get it straight. Yes, a non scientist (namely, me) went out and found and summarized the work that has been done by Creation, ID, and Temple of Darwin approved scientists that refutes the silly and outdated arguments that Mr. Dropout (that would be you) is too lazy or gutless to go find himself.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.