[DannyTN]

"Therefore, the ability to form proteins without the presence of vitamin C may have been an advantage to these primates if this nutrient was missing from the diets regularly, or from time to time. "

"If" true, then once again we see "devolution" in progress. An ancient ability was to form proteins was loss.

And once again, this is going in the OPPOSITE direction of evolution.

[orionblamblam]

Uh... HELLO! This was a process needed when vitamin C wasn't available. Vitamin C is now largely available. Thus, it's an unecessary process.

Evolution wins another one. And ID takes it in the shorts *again*.

[RadioAstronomer]

And once again, this is going in the OPPOSITE direction of evolution.

There is no "opposite". Evolution is evolution. Evolution is not some linear direction.

[Ichneumon]

["Therefore, the ability to form proteins without the presence of vitamin C may have been an advantage to these primates if this nutrient was missing from the diets regularly, or from time to time. "]

"If" true, then once again we see "devolution" in progress. An ancient ability was to form proteins was loss. And once again, this is going in the OPPOSITE direction of evolution.

Danny, many times in the past I have suggested that you really should try to learn something about biology before you attempt to pontificate upon it, and I must unfortunately do so again now.

Your lack of education on this subject -- and your creationist bias -- has yet again led you astray and caused you to misunderstand what you're reading. The article does not say that "An ancient ability was to form proteins was loss [sic]." On the contrary, it says that the human/chimp/orangutan clade EVOLVED a new and better form of the pre-existing protein, by gaining the ability to form it more efficiently in the face of shortages of Vitamin C -- a shortage faced by all primates.

Why don't you go learn something about the subject before you try to critique it? Your current lack of understanding causes you to keep getting stuff consistently wrong.

[VadeRetro]

"If" true, then once again we see "devolution" in progress. An ancient ability was to form proteins was loss.

This is just willful blindness. It's no loss to lose the need for something upon which you cannot rely. The loss of a vulnerability to malnutrition is a gain. At any rate, there's a gain of an ability to form a new protein. The net ability to synthesize proteins is unchanged.

[FastCoyote]

"If" true, then once again we see "devolution" in progress. An ancient ability was to form proteins was loss.

And once again, this is going in the OPPOSITE direction of evolution.


Danny, you are so full of it. No ability to form proteins was lost, the ability to form a protein in an environment short of vitamin C was gained.