0 Votes
Evidence Mounting in Evolution's Corner
The Washinton Post is reporting today that scientists from the Broad Institute of Harvard and MIT have used the chimpanze genome to prove some central tenets of evolutionary theory. ‘Using a mathematical formula that emerges from evolutionary theory, [scientists] should be able to predict the number of harmful mutations in chimpanzee DNA by knowing the number of mutations in a different species’ DNA and the two animals’ population sizes.’ After the testing was performed, the number fit!
How serious a blow is this to the intelligent design arguement?
Similarly tagged OmniNerd content:
- Government Officials' Profile, by Jackson over 2 years ago
- First human 'infected with computer virus', by Brandon almost 3 years ago
- A Collaborative 3D Encyclopedia, by gnifyus over 4 years ago
- What Direction Does Your Cow Point?, by wyldeling over 4 years ago
Print Friendly
Write an Article
A few problems... by Rhodizzle
Their analysis was just the latest of many in such disparate fields as genetics, biochemistry, geology and paleontology that in recent years have added new credence to the central tenet of evolutionary theory: That a smidgeon of cells 3.5 billion years ago could — through mechanisms no more extraordinary than random mutation and natural selection — give rise to the astonishing tapestry of biological diversity that today thrives on Earth. ~ Washington Post
This is in direct conflict with our current fossil record, which displays a trend exactly the opposite of what evolution states. Evolution, as I’m sure we’re aware, states that all living beings evolved from the same single-celled organism. The problem is that the fossil record shows an explosion of species in the Pre-Cambrian period, that has since dwindled. The article linked there states of course that this was a period where evolution suddenly kicked into high gear and was churning out species like Japan does cars, the problem is transitional forms. There is almost no evidence showing the transition, all you have is original and end.
The fossil record that is currently possessed from the period that humans were allegedly evolving from apes fits inside a small box, which from a scientific viewpoint just isn’t enough evidence to say we came from apes. The DNA can be similar, but the genes that matter are obviously what differs us from chimps. How can they acertain that humans came from chimps when they still don’t know the purpose of ~90% of the human genome?
cheap pop by LordDilly
Not that I’m bitter that all of my news items have gotten only 3 or 4 posts, but I’m thinking that someone saw the huge amounts of responses to news items concerning the evolution/ID debate, and decided to keep fanning the flames, so to speak, so they could laugh at me and say "HA! My news post got mega responses! You suck LordDilly! You suck!!" Not that I’m bitter, mind you.
Further problems... by Rhodizzle
Another issue is that the evolution community has a tendency to design experiments with specific results in mind. Example given is the Miller-Urey Experiment. The materials used in the original experiemnt were used in order to get the specific results, and were not chosen to accurately represent the atmosphere of the early Earth.
Another example is Carbon Dating. It is a common practice in the carbon dating circle to throw out dates that are not within the pre-determined date of the person submitting the test. Not to mention that this method of dating is only accurate on objects a few thousand years old.
Explain this... by DrMeyer
If you don’t believe in evoluation, how in the world do you explain resistant bacteria or chemotherapy-resistant cancer?