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 ...
Once one decides that they will hold to a particular interpretation of scripture despite any and all evidence, then one may as well just go whole hog and be a Geocentrist.
And one species which evolves into another can not change back. As a matter of fact, there is a evolutionary law that an organ once lost or modified, can't return to its original state.
For instance. Snakes are believed to have evolved from a burrowing lizard type reptile which was on the way to losing its eyesight as many fossorial animals have. In the process of losing its eyesight, the ability to focus on objects at different distances was lost. When snakes later evolved back into terrestrial animals, they had lost the ability to focus their eyes as all other vertebrates do - by changing the shape of their lens. So they developed another way to do so by changed the POSTION of the lens with respect its distance from the retina. They are the only vertebrates which do this. It was impossible for them to “re-evolve” the lost method of focusing their eyes.
Well we certainly don’t have any characteristics similar to chimps.
We look and act more like fungi than chimps.
Evolution doesn’t speak as to the existence of a higher power. I can’t believe you don’t know this.
These people truly are anachronisms.
Just don’t call them inqusitors as inqusitors were Catholic and these people find that insulting.
Well, actually, I guess they have a right to express their flawed opinions as long as we can try and refute them.
Who knows, discussions like this might - just might - make some of them stop and think and realize that not all, or proabably even MOST evolutionsts are atheists and you can a Bible believing Christian WITHOUT flying the face of scientific facts.
==Then then leap to ANOTHER unrelated conclusion - that Chimps and Humans have no connection evolutionarily.
It is the Evos who leap to make the evolutionary connection, even though there are zero transitionals.
==They would have us believe that ALL the chemical, osteological, genetic, behavioral, etc. similarities between all living organism is a mere matter of chance and there is no biological connection between the bodies of humans and other living organisms.
Not at all. Creationists posit the far more obvious and plausible explanation, namely that all the similarities you mentioned are the product of a common designer rather than common descent.
==But like other people in the past who attacked things like the heliocentric theory of the solar system based on flawed and biased interpretations of scripture, the more data that is generated on the subject, the more flawed and unbelievable your claims are.
Wrong again. Galileo’s main enemies were the Aristotelian/Ptolemaic scientific establishment, not the Catholic Church. Indeed, the Catholic Church was quite friendly to heliocentrism. May I suggest you read the following before making similar comments in the future:
http://creation.com/the-galileo-affair-history-or-heroic-hagiography
Maybe in ‘chat/personal’, but why waste the ‘news/activism’ topic forum space on this drivel.
AND... it seem to be the only thing that GGG is capable of posting... simply to start flame wars.
If an evolutionist attempts to use the belief that “chance” mutations eliminate the existence of a Deity, they are straying from Science into Theology and Philosophy - separate disciplines.
Few men can serve two masters.
If you believe in God and evolution as I do, you believe that God is the ultimate source of the biological and physical laws which run the Universe and creation, including evolutionary laws. If you believe that, then you also believe that what appears to be mere chance to finite eyes, is, ulimately, in God's hands.
==But this idiotic article fails to address the “slam dunk” evidence of Endogenous retrovirus, and repeatedly conflates genetic DNA comparisons with genomic DNA comparisons.
Are you having short term memory problems, dreamer? Your so-called slam dunk ERV arguments have been utterly destroyed many times, and yet you keep on using it.
==The fact is that a human gene and a chimp gene are around 98% the same...The fact is that over the entire genome we line up with chimps over 90%.
Well seeing how even Richard Dawkins admits that biological organisms give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose, it makes far more sense that similarities between biological organisms point to a common designer, rather than Darwin’s fanciful random processes plus survival fairytale.
ERV data is used to establish phylogeny of common descent.
Your idiotic claims to the contrary notwithstanding, you do not even understand ERV data enough to refute it GGG.
Darwin himself documented a bird that had changed its beak shape and size in a few years. I think it was NOVA that found the same bird had changed back.
Sorry, evolution is to iffy for me to believe in.
But despite the fact that the cause for the case against Galileo was really personal and political, the reason the accusation had legs, as it were, was because the bulk of the populace and a good proportion of the clergy DID believe that to question the geocentric theory was heresy.
If it was purely a matter of politics and not philosophy, a guy named Copernicus would never have required that his work on the heliocentric nature of the solar system not be published until his death.
I draw an analogy between geocentrists and anti-evolutionists - I think “creationist” is inappropriate as as an evolutionist, I do NOT discount the hand of God in creating the laws of evolution - because like the geocentrists, they use scriptural statements which are related to theological points as a basis for drawing scientific conclusions.
Well, in science, “impossible” and “never” are always bad terms to employ (there I go again!!!)
See “allmendream”’s comments and my response.
Science is always changing due to discoveries of new facts. Its almost as hard to get a firm handle on as the Internet at times. But its based on observations and tests and not on faith.
Religion is based on faith. Science is based on observations and tests.
There is solid proof that smart conservatives can devolve into really stupid ones in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
Starting with the creation story.
It is also a liberal leftists fondest dream, because the chaos requires no input from them, but still provides the desired results.
I’m afraid the shoe is entirely on the other foot, Dreamer. I have demonstrated over and over, using Creation, ID, and Temple of Darwin approved sources, that ERVs are not reliable indicators of common descent. Do you really want to go down this road again?
Humans are 95% the same as the Atlantic Ocean.
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.