Posted on 10/07/2001 2:22:11 AM PDT by dbbeebs
pr99 9/17/2001 - Press Release: Creationists Wrong Again
CREATIONISTS WRONG AGAIN
Once again, the creationists have blundered when it comes to science, this time presenting misinformation about the universality of the genetic code.
The latest creationist attack on the public understanding of science comes in connection with a new 8-hour PBS series that will greatly expand the public’s understanding of a fundamental scientific theory, evolution. Two years in the making, Evolution, produced by WGBH-Boston and Clear Blue Sky Productions, will be shown nationwide on the PBS network on four consecutive nights beginning September 24, for two hours each evening.
“Although virtually every reputable scientist in the world agrees that evolution is good science,” said Eugenie C. Scott, executive director of the National Center for Science Education, “some people still refuse to accept it, mainly because they regard it as incompatible with their religious beliefs. So it is no surprise that there is a creationist backlash against the PBS series.”
The first example of bad science came from the Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture, the creationist arm of the Discovery Institute, a policy organization based in Seattle, Washington. On September 10, the CRSC distributed their PBS Press Release #1, quoting two of their Discovery Institute Senior Fellows, biochemist Michael Behe and biologist Jonathan Wells.
Behe stated that, "The supposed 'fact' of the universal genetic code is based on outdated science that has been invalidated by more recent research.”
Added Wells, "Back in the early 1970s, evolutionary biologists did think that a given piece of DNA specified the same protein subunit in every living thing, and that the genetic code was thus universal. This was unlikely to have happened by chance, so it was interpreted as evidence that every organism had inherited its genetic code from a single common ancestor. In 1979, however, exceptions to the code were found in mitochondria, the tiny energy factories inside cells. Biologists subsequently found exceptions in bacteria and in the nuclei of algae and single-celled animals. It is now clear that the genetic code is not the same in all living things, and that it does not provide 'powerful evidence' that all living things 'evolved on a single tree of life.'"
Reports of the demise of this particular piece of evidence for evolution, however, are premature. James Hanken, Professor of Zoology and Curator in Herpetology at the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard University, told NCSE that the claims of Behe and Wells that the genetic code does not provide evidence for the tree of life were “so bizarre as to be almost beyond belief,” and added that they “fly in the face of well established and accepted facts."
The reason? As explained by Dr. Norman Pace, Professor in the Department of Molecular, Cellular and Developmental Biology at the University of Colorado and member of the National Academy of Sciences:
A few of the 64 code-words can occur as slight variants in a very few organisms. Those exceptions, however, are known to have derived from organisms that had the standard code. Thus, the code is historically universal. Even in those organisms with the occasional exceptional code-word, the rest of the code is the same as in all other organisms. More important, even, is the fact that the complex machine that interprets the code and carries out protein synthesis, the ribosome, is fundamentally the same in all life forms. The common heritage of all life on Earth is proven beyond doubt [emphasis added].As if the CRSC’s misinformation were not enough, the Florence, Kentucky young-earth creationist organization, Answers in Genesis, promises to post daily responses to each program on their web site. The responses will be written by AIG staffer Jonathan Sarfati, who in his book Refuting Evolution claims that there is strong scientific evidence for Noah’s Ark and that geological evidence indicates that the earth is only a few thousand years old.
The question was creationism. Get the facts straight, or dont bother to respond to my statements. Doing so, only cheapens any argument you may wish to make, and frankly, its rude. The sad attempt at a straw man dismissal wont work.
And Where exactly in my post did I say that you HAD? You need to get YOUR facts straight, or don't bother responding.
Here is the part of my post you refered to:
I do not see how one can accept See? This implies that you DO accept Christ, thus my confusion the substitutionary death of Christ and reject the concept of the fall as described in Genesis. (Of course if you "you" in the generic sense. Perhaps, for those of you who are easily confused, it should say "If ONE rejects Christ..." reject Christ, them you have no problem)
I can debate, and have, the intellectual fallicies of Evolution...but I have found that is adherents have such strong faith that no amount of debate will sway them, so I won't bother. But I fail to see how one can place there faith in Christ and reject the reasoning behind the necessity of his death.
Again, in the last sentence, I imply that I accept that you (both you personnaly, and the generic "you"- whomever it might be- who says "I believe in Christ but I reject Adam")proffess Christ...if I did not accept that, there would be no source for my confusion.
Leviticus 15:29 And on the eighth day she shall take unto her two turtles, or two young pigeons, and bring them unto the priest, to the door of the tabernacle of the congregation.
Lev 15:30 And the priest shall offer the one for a sin offering, and the other for a burnt offering; and the priest shall make an atonement for her before the LORD for the issue of her uncleanness.
I don't know what scientists you are referring to who reject the theory of evolution. Every scientist of any stature that I have ever listened to takes evolution as a given. That a handful of scientists or wannbe scientists question various aspect of evolution is much like most things in science and politics. When you say more and more scientists reject evolution, it is you again who is being absurd. Only in your own deluded mind is this true. Facts are hard to ignore. Take a trip to your local museum and if you can't use your brain please try to use your eyes.
Just put "To: crevo_list" in the search block and most of the conversations should pop up. They're routinely indexed as such.
...all intelect---intelligence---WILL ALL PASS AWAY--DIE...
-----vs.-----
---"TRUTH-LOVE builds--will remain/pass the test of time-Eternity"!
You are full of it...projecting your biass---you are the zealot-taliban-pope evo-religion-ELITE...bashing-hating God...the anti-truth science-nazis!
And your authority--credentials are bogus too!!
You think Truth is poll driven determined by popularity or fashion??
The Bible says God will be true--right and all men will be liars--that will never change!
All of your pride--knowledge, if it isn't the Glory--Truth of the Creator, it is garbage-EVIL and it will burn itself up!
Evolution is a 100% liberal disease--plague
Did you ever see the James Garner movie where he is abducted during the second world war by the Germans to find out the details of the D-day invasion? He "wakes" up in a fake American hospital run by American speaking Germans and supposedly he is told he was in a coma and the war has been over for months and there is no need for secrecy...but just two days before he was abducted on his finger he had a paper cut that remained and the whole plot fell apart and he escaped without divulging the invasion plans.
That's what you need--a paper cut big time to remind you of your immortality--stupidity-BLINDNESS--deception that you are buried under!
WAKE UP...there's no nice alternative to eternity--no 2nd place--only first--righteousness--GOD!!
Because 3+3=6, 4+2=6, 5+1=6!!!!!!
Dude, you are missing the point, probably intentionally. The underlying premise of evolution is that we can prove how we were made. There are idiots out there, including the guy I responded to, that are calling evolution FACT. My point is that it can't be a fact (or even true) if you can't explain the most basic thing about it: how it started. Further, it isn't that it is imperfect (another straw man argument); its incomprehensible, though it's underlying premise assumes that everything is ultimately comprehensible. In other words, if evolution is true, that would prove that human kind has the ability to know everything (whether we know it NOW or not). Yet, no one has even bothered to try and explain eternity or viable alternatives in an evolution context.
I can't answer it because I don't agree with it, and I doubt most who support evolution do.
Huh?
Your gravity and other scientific examples are irrelevent. We see a rock hit your foot when you drop it. Therefore, we know gravity is true. There is no serious dispute there. With evolution, there is serious dispute.
You contradict yourself there. If something cannot be true unless we can explain how it started, then gravity can't be true, because no one knows how it started. We do, however, know that it's true, because we see it happening. Same with evolution; we don't know how the first life form started, but we do see (both in the wild and in the fossil record) that organisms change over time.
TOKE-SHOOT--UP...reality--TRUTH is avoidable--painful!!
Very good--the definition of evil--SATAN...
How about you?
Thanks for pointing out the "leap of faith" aspect to the origins discussion. Evolution "scientists" are blinded by their own arrogance. They can't see that believing something comes from nothing and order arises from chaos is ABSOLUTE FAITH.
Are you sure there is no creator? Then why do you fear death?
LOL! Because I'm sure there is no creator, silly!
If I were a believer, then I'd rejoice at death (if the person dying was a believer too), wouldn't I? After all, they've just met God. (Not to mention 72 virgins, or else an alien ship hiding behind Hale-Bopp, etc., depending on the religion.)
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.