BREAKTHROUGH OF THE YEAR: Evolution in Action

Science ^ | December 2005 | Elizabeth Culotta and Elizabeth Pennisi

[Right Wing Professor]

That pretty much kills the "all living things come from a single common ancestor" theory doesn't it?

All human mitochondria come from a single common ancestor. Do you think this means that the human race required only one individual to survive?

They did cover the birds and the bees in whatever school you attended, right?

[DX10]

Thanks. For now I am just trying to understand the positions taken by evolutionists without any Bible appealations as there is no basis for agreement there. But the fact is that of the clean beasts and birds they were seven and seven male and female. Of the unclean just male and female. And God brought the animals to Noah, not as some suggest that Noah had to round them up. For most folks, their God is too small. I suspect there is a lot of subjectivity at work on both sides of this issue. Regards.

[narby]

But the fact is that of the clean beasts and birds they were seven and seven male and female. Of the unclean just male and female.

I'm not a Bible scholar, but I believe that it depends on which version of Noah you read. Like the creation stories in Gen 1:1 and 2:4, there are two versions of Noah that are slightly different. Yes, they can be rationalized, but I continue to be amazed that it's possible for people to rationalize two different stories in the Bible, but not rationalize the Bible with the reality we find in nature around us.

[Echo Talon]

Your original claim in post 31 was "ALL animals and humans are so symmetrical." Now that you have seen this is not the case (see also sponges, coral, most gastropods, and the digestive tracts and cardiovascular systems of ALL amphibians, reptiles, fish, birds and mammals), we have a new universal law about artists. How many other generalizations do you plan to toss out (and just as quickly abandon) in your haste to establish "design?"

Those 2 creatures you posted look pretty symmetrical to me for the most part.

and the digestive tracts and cardiovascular systems

And all of these complex systems stemmed from a single cell organism? Oh what faith you have...

[Condorman]

Those 2 creatures you posted look pretty symmetrical to me for the most part.

I posted no creatures.

And all of these complex systems stemmed from a single cell organism? Oh what faith you have...

I always smile to see anti-evolutionists use "faith" as a pejorative. That aside, am I really needed for this pretend conversation you're having? I was pointing out that all animals and humans aren't as symmetrical as you seem to think. But you seem to be having fun, so let me know when you're done supplying my half of the argument for me.

[Condorman]

He lives in a world that never fails to "prove" his beliefs. This seems to be rather primitive theology, but he's happy with it.

He's also happy pretending that I have to read from the script in his head. It saves me some time, at any rate.

I grow ever fonder of my new tag.

[darbymcgill]

Do you think this means that the human race required only one individual to survive?

Do you remember this?

Yes, most evolutionary biologists believe all life has a common ancestor, although because that ancestor was a prokaryote, and prokaryotes exchange genes with each other, it might be more correct to speak of a population of common ancestors.

They did cover the birds and the bees in whatever school you attended, right?

Would classify a prokaryote as a bird or a bee?

[Right Wing Professor]

Would classify a prokaryote as a bird or a bee?

Prokaryotes exchange genetic material, just like we do. Maybe you should crack a biology book.

[darbymcgill]

So has the requirement for survivability of a species now gone from 8 pairs to 8 individuals?

Or since there was no other living organisms to attack the prokaryotes, was genetic diversity not a requirement for their survival? Thus the rule of 8 pairs kicks in later on down the evolutionary tree and is not applicable to our single common ancestor?

[Right Wing Professor]

Or since there was no other living organisms to attack the prokaryotes, was genetic diversity not a requirement for their survival? Thus the rule of 8 pairs kicks in later on down the evolutionary tree and is not applicable to our single common ancestor?

Right. I wouldn't call it a 'rule', anyway.

[Virginia-American]

A true scientist welcomes challenges to their pet theories--indeed, they should be challenging those theories themselves, rather than attacking those who do. That's how scientific knowledge moves forward.

Indeed. But is a high school class the place for these challenges?

If, (a really big if), ID finds a place in biology someday, then it belongs in a science class. But not before.

It is fundamentally dishonest claim that ID is somehow cutting-edge science when, eg, Dembski has never submitted a paper on his "law of conservation of information" to any math or statistics journal, or even gotten his university to publish a monograph on it.

Or Behe calling ten-minute phone calls, without a manuscript present, better than standard peer review. It could have saved him a lot of grief if he had been aware ot the fact that the evolution of blood clotting had been researched years before he published his (nontechnical) book.

And don't claim that the establishment's censorship is the culprit here. That's why academic tenure is valuable. Aren't there any retired professors who could carry the ID torch with no fear of reprisal at all?

[shuckmaster]

That pretty much kills the "all living things come from a single common ancestor" theory doesn't it?

Whether an individual species ultimately survives has absolutely nothing to do with the single common ancestor they shared with the surviving species'.

[DX10]

http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2194

For your consideration. Regards.