Evidence for Common Ancestry Going the way of the Dodos
-
That's right it looks like the evidence for Common Ancestry is turning out not to be such good evidence after all.
This is summed up rather neatly in two posts by Jonathan M over on Uncommon Descent. (and here)
Chromosomal fusion, ALU and ERV arguments bite the dust. The 1-2% difference in genomes- chimp and human- is bogus because it only dealt with DNA sequences that are similar- similar DNA sequences are 98-99% similar. No one has done a complete side by each comparison. But even that won't help because of overlapping genes and alternative gene splicing.
Knowledge is not a good thing for the theory of evolution. The more we know the more the evidence goes the way of the dodo.
That's right it looks like the evidence for Common Ancestry is turning out not to be such good evidence after all.
This is summed up rather neatly in two posts by Jonathan M over on Uncommon Descent. (and here)
Chromosomal fusion, ALU and ERV arguments bite the dust. The 1-2% difference in genomes- chimp and human- is bogus because it only dealt with DNA sequences that are similar- similar DNA sequences are 98-99% similar. No one has done a complete side by each comparison. But even that won't help because of overlapping genes and alternative gene splicing.
Knowledge is not a good thing for the theory of evolution. The more we know the more the evidence goes the way of the dodo.
posted by Joe G @ 9:01 PM
7 Comments:
At 11:35 PM,
Ghostrider said…
LOL! JoeTard, you're too funny!
One of the IDiots at UncommonlyDense writes up a hand waving dismissal of decades of solid scientific evidence and you get a teeny little boner.
Oh well, whatever floats yer boat.
At 6:56 AM,
Joe G said…
You are the fucking idiot thortard.
The essays by Jonathan M presented solid scientific evidence you freaking imbecile.
But I understand it hurts your little brain to try to think about it.
At 6:58 AM,
Joe G said…
And BTW it is very telling that you can't present any scientific evidence that supersedes the scientific evidence he presented.
Oh that's right his scientific evidence is the latest and greatest!
Go figure....
But thanks for coming here with your little panties all in a knot and spewing more nonsensical garbage.
At 2:47 PM,
Unknown said…
Joe, the articles Jonathan M. posted were mostly comprised of rephrased information and copy/pasted quotes from others. In addition, they mostly contained misrepresentations of the research or were simply restatements of the arguments I refuted in my article that he was supposedly responding to.
You can read all about this in my response to his blog posts:
http://www.evolutionarymodel.com/evolutionnews.htm
At 2:53 PM,
Unknown said…
My apologies, Joe. My previous comment was directed at the wrong article. Disregard this clearly invalid post.
At 12:08 PM,
David said…
Has anyone responded to this gentleman's rebuttal of Jonathan's ERV material? Curious:
http://www.evolutionarymodel.com/evolutionnews.htm
At 1:22 PM,
Joe G said…
Not that I am aware of.
Has anyone shown that common ancestry can account for the patterns of alleged ERVs?
Has anyone ever given any thought to what had to have happened in order to get ONE ERV fixed in a population, let alone many?
Post a Comment
<< Home