Image from article.
Posted on 04/24/2013 8:27:32 AM PDT by fishtank
Image from article.
God put “engineered adaptability” into His creatures.
I remember asking evolutionists how exactly we’ve evolved through so many years, and I’ve never had an answer. What happened to our tails? Why aren’t we so hairy anymore? Things like that, never answered by them.
You have a tail. It’s your coccyx. We don’t swing from trees anymore, so having a tail was not a selective advantage, and over millions of years the now useless appendage atrophied like it did in chimps and gorillas. Our ancestors were savannah apes, and lived in a hot climate, a mutation of less hair gave a selective advantage, so over time we became less hairy.
That answer your deep insight?
Science, indeed, marches on.
I sincerely doubt that the 19th-century biologist Darwin, if asked if it would be impossible, someday, in light of more-refined scientific tools and a greater body of data, to improve upon and perfect his theory, would have answered in the negative.
I pity the theists who take this "revelation" as evidence supporting a belief in any invisible sky friend (Vishnu, Odin, Allah, Yahweh, etc.).
Regards,
Why proteins coded for by DNA. DNA that changes due to natural selection.
Female Lions have an epigenetic signal that blunts the male Lions epigenetic signal to make a massive baby. When you cross a male Lion with a female Tiger that doesn't have the same epigenetic signal - you get a huge Liger. When you cross a male Tiger that doesn't have the signal with a female Lion - you get a stunted Tigon.
Exactly what one would expect if epigenetic signals were involved in evolution. This same pattern emerges in any number of different species; where there is high promiscuity the males want to signal the baby to be large and the females want to blunt that signal - where there is low promiscuity those signals are not there.
Yep= in high school I learned that FERNS are just about the same they were eons ago [millions?]
But the teacher said nothing for my “WHY haven`t they evolved??”
.
Problem is apes have more chromosomes then humans. There is no known cases where plants and animals evolve and lose chromosomes.
You can't use that argument, else you are not qualified to discussed science!!
(sarc)
Turn on the light and what scurries around to escape!?
See how they run!!!
The fact that apes have more chromosomes than Humans is a perfect example of a case of an animal evolving and losing chromosomes. Actually we didn’t lose any, chromosomes 2 and 3 fused and we can see exactly where the fusion happened. It has been mapped. The new chromosome has two centromeres, with one now being inactive and an extra set of telomeres.
When I first heard about DNA, it sounded very much like a computer program. And then, as scientists learned more about how it functions it struck me that DNA was like COBOL and what this article discusses is like JCL.
It’s actually quite fascinating, and the more we know about it, the more it looks like somebody designed it.
In the article the author states that the DNA has not changed. Then how can anyone say evolution has occurred?
“over millions of years the now useless appendage atrophied like it did in chimps and gorillas”
Since you have no evidence of any ancient chimps, gorillas, or humans with tails, you are just assuming they existed, and then assuming they atrophied in response to environmental stimuli which you must also assume caused the atrophy. Another evolutionist “just-so story”.
Because they didn’t have to. That’s how evolution works, it favors that which works. Ferns do a great job filling their niche, no need for further change. Sharks and alligators haven’t changed much either, for the same reason.
A review of the common claim that the human and chimpanzee (chimp) genomes are nearly identical was found to be highly questionable solely by an analysis of the methodology and data outlined in an assortment of key research publications. Reported high DNA sequence similarity estimates are primarily based on prescreened biological samples and/or data. Data too dissimilar to be conveniently aligned was typically omitted, masked and/or not reported. Furthermore, gap data from final alignments was also often discarded, further inflating final similarity estimates. It is these highly selective data-omission processes, driven by Darwinian dogma, that produce the commonly touted 98% similarity figure for human–chimp DNA comparisons. Based on the analysis of data provided in various publications, including the often cited 2005 chimpanzee genome report, it is safe to conclude that human–chimp genome similarity is not more than ~87% identical, and possibly not higher than 81%. These revised estimates are based on relevant data omitted from the final similarity estimates typically presented.
Jeffrey Tomkins and Jerry Bergman
Logic not allowed in evolution/ sarc
many organisms have not “evolved”, actually none in the sense, they evolved from common ancestor.
i.e “evolved” as in ape to human.
or better yet, non-life to life.
Just because an evolutionist says we had a tail, doesn’t mean we did.
Ignore trite answers.
Listen to their (non)answers.
Please don’t bother trying to convince them with facts, they are happy being confused with ignorance.
I have never understood the reason some folks feel there is a conflict between evolution and theology. There isn’t.
Only folks who are literal interpreters of every word of the Bible have issue with the theory of evolution.
The core belief of Theology that God created man is not trumped by evolution, after all, according to first mover theory, change by its very existence is proof of God’s existence.
I see this entire debate as silliness to the Nth degree, its like watching a monty python skit.
The Panthera cats lack a hyoid bone at the back of the tongue, compared to Felis. Acinonyx has the hyoid, but lacks the ability to retract its claws. So the differences between the cats could have arisen through loss of genetic information due to mutations (loss of the bone; loss of claw retraction). Note that this has nothing to do with molecules-to-man evolution, which requires the addition of new information, not loss of information (which is to be expected in a fallen world as things tend to ‘fall apart’).
-Don Batten
“it was the best of times it was the worst of times”
“sit was the best of times it was the worst of times”
itwasthebestoftimesitwastheworstoftimes
sitwasthebestoftimesitwastheworstoftimes
Do the two differ by 100%? Or do they differ by 2.5%?
It depends upon how you want to match them up - or insure that they don’t match up at all.
The fact is that chimpanzees and humans differ in genetic DNA by less than 2%. You can compare all known genes in both genomes and arrive at that figure yourself, the information is public access.
Any analysis, over the entire genome, or just genetic DNA, shows that humans and chimpanzees are closer in DNA than either is to a gorilla.
As far as species go, humans and chimpanzees are quite similar in DNA. A mouse and a rat differ by a greater amount in DNA.
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.