Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why Darwin was wrong about the tree of life (Creationists have been saying this for decades!)
New Scientist ^ | January 21, 2009 | Graham Lawton

Posted on 02/24/2009 6:37:38 AM PST by GodGunsGuts

...

The tree-of-life concept was absolutely central to Darwin's thinking, equal in importance to natural selection...Without it the theory of evolution would never have happened. The tree also helped carry the day for evolution.

...

For much of the past 150 years, biology has largely concerned itself with filling in the details of the tree. "For a long time the holy grail was to build a tree of life," says Eric Bapteste, an evolutionary biologist at the Pierre and Marie Curie University in Paris, France. A few years ago it looked as though the grail was within reach. But today the project lies in tatters, torn to pieces by an onslaught of negative evidence. Many biologists now argue that the tree concept is obsolete and needs to be discarded. "We have no evidence at all that the tree of life is a reality," says Bapteste. That bombshell has even persuaded some that our fundamental view of biology needs to change...

(Excerpt) Read more at newscientist.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: atheisticmorons; christianmythology; christianmyths; creation; creeation; evolution; goodgodimnutz; intelligentdesign; mythology; myths; religiousmyths; superstition; treeoflife
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-202 next last
To: dangus

What the heck are you talking about?

http://www.upi.com/Science_News/2008/04/26/Dinosaur_DNA_linked_to_chickens_ostriches/UPI-68371209184694/

The current paper builds on work by a team headed by John Asara and Lewis Cantley of Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School.

“We determined that T. rex, in fact, grouped with birds — ostrich and chicken — better than any other organism that we studied,” Asara said. “We also showed that it groups better with birds than modern reptiles, such as alligators and green anole lizards.”


51 posted on 02/24/2009 7:49:10 AM PST by allmendream ("Wealth is EARNED not distributed, so how could it be redistributed?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Cedric
Dr. W.R. Thompson

1872. Your dear Dr. has not seen the subsequent 140 years of evidence. Who knows what he might say now.

52 posted on 02/24/2009 7:49:30 AM PST by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: ColdWater
I love the "God created man in his image" part.

REALLY??

Which "man" was created in God's image?

....because Homo habilis was one "U-G-L-Y you ain't got no alibi" UGLY dude.

Ah yes....that part was written before the discovery of early "man's" existence.

53 posted on 02/24/2009 7:49:35 AM PST by ElectricStrawberry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Cedric

Why do you feel the need to misrepresent the education background of the lawyer Norman Macbeth?


54 posted on 02/24/2009 7:50:11 AM PST by allmendream ("Wealth is EARNED not distributed, so how could it be redistributed?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: ElectricStrawberry

55 posted on 02/24/2009 7:53:46 AM PST by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: allmendream; Cedric
Why do you feel the need to misrepresent ...

I think it is genetic.

56 posted on 02/24/2009 7:54:56 AM PST by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

>> The Creation Scientists have been pointing to far more than just DNA evidence. But come to think of it, they have been pointing to the DNA evidence for quite some time now as well. <<

Actually, the work involved showing that phylogenic lines aren’t what would be expected from genetic relationships was, to my knowledge, not only NOT done by Creation Scientists, but rests on several notions incompatible with Creation Science.


57 posted on 02/24/2009 7:57:38 AM PST by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: demshateGod
Evolution is not compatible with Christianity...

Evolution is not compatible with some sects of Christianity... (fixed).

58 posted on 02/24/2009 8:00:39 AM PST by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

Thanks for the ping!


59 posted on 02/24/2009 8:05:43 AM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ColdWater

God created man in His own image out of dust—that is already created components. What a strange and impossible world would it be if its steward, bore no commonality with his charges; man must be similar, but also superior, in what is most important, to all other animals—as the one animal made like God. All creation is also currently frustrated and subject to decay—that is all resultant of the Fall.

I think the evidence would show—if it is available—actual de-evolution in humans...in that genetically, and in almost all other respects, human beings were superior thousands of years ago, than we are now. Yes, our collection of knowledge is far greater—hence we live more comfortable, and by in large, a more enlightened existence, but the whole concept of progress, and social Darwinism, was an industrial-era notion, as living conditions radically improved starting 200 years ago. My own notion here, for certain, but not without a philosophical and biblical basis.

As to corrupt notion of God thinking so little of man, you should repent.


60 posted on 02/24/2009 8:08:24 AM PST by AnalogReigns
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
You remind me of a poster from quite a while back. His moniker was "Willie Green". I do not know what became of him.

The reason you remind me of "Willie Green" is that nearly every day, for about two years straight, Willie would post an article or opinion piece relating to his pet cause in life. In his case, it was "High Speed Magnetically Levitated Trains". (He should be happy, the Porkulus bill apparently has billions for one)

Every day, he would post. He would cite the same studies. He would point to the same sources. He would have PRECISELY THE SAME arguments with THE SAME PEOPLE over and over again. He would convince NO ONE. NO ONE would convince him. He would have his cheering section shouting "AMEN!". He would have the same detractors shouting "IDIOT!" Each and every thread was a near carbon copy of all the others.

Now, as I read the purpose of Free Republic in its mission statement, it is for the disemmination of political information and events, with discussions to aid in the promotion of of the conservative principles laid down in our Founding Documents.

I come here to keep abreast of current political events, read analysis and opinion about the actions of our as well as other governments, and learn what might be happening that could affect the liberties and freedoms I cherish about the good ol' U.S. of A. I am sure that a fairly high percentage of Free Republic members and lurkers do the same.

When I am interested in some other topic, say "Comic Books" for example, I might visit another site, such as SuperHeroHype, where they discuss COMICS and not POLITICS.

It simply occurs to me that you might find your time better spent, and your postings better received, on a site that primarily concerns itself with religious matters.

If your purpose in repeatedly posting essentially the same arguments over and over is to "convert" any heathens reading them, you might find a more receptive audience at a site for people seeking religious answers, and not political information. If your purpose is to hear your ideas cheered by others, again you will get a better response at forums exclusively devoted to religous matters.

No, I am not yelling at you, "HEY! DON'T POST HERE!" You are free to do what you want, as long as your postings do not upset the folks running Free Republic (they have the final say as to who has posting privilages here, not me). What I am asking is that in all honesty, is this the best forum for the topic you seem to hold so dear? Do you not feel even the slightest pang of pointless repetition when you post the same thing over and over?

With regards to POLITICS and GOVERNMENT, a 4 billion year old earth and a 6000 year old earth affects Obama's stimulus package how? A 4 billion year old earth leads to the inevitable conclusion that you need Gun Control? Is that how it works? A 6000 year old earth implies that Federal income taxes should be bracketed in three tiers?

Just seems a tad off topic for daily postings on a POLITICAL forum.
61 posted on 02/24/2009 8:10:51 AM PST by Rebel_Ace (Tags?!? Tags?!? We don' neeeed no stinkin' Tags!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AnalogReigns
I think the evidence would show—if it is available—actual de-evolution in humans...in that genetically, and in almost all other respects, human beings were superior thousands of years ago, than we are now.

Since we have remains from those thousands of years ago, you should be able to show definitely that these earlier men were superior .....

62 posted on 02/24/2009 8:11:21 AM PST by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: allmendream

Well, I was referring to percent matches of DNA among Crocodillia, Anura, Aves, and a Dinosaur DNA sample found in the 1980s. Anura and Aves were found to be the closest. This was when I was studying biology, but I am no longer in that field, and don’t have access. Incidentally, it was not a study which asserted Birds and Frogs were closely related, but merely charted the percentage of amino acids that various groups had in common with each other. I just happened to notice the very high correlation. This makes looking for it under a subject search very difficult. At the time, I had found other papers which questioned whether modern lissamphibians were even directly descended from stem amphibians at all, so it had grabbed my interest.

I don’t know whether the paper you cite was in part spurred by what I referred to. (Did someone say, “Hey, let’s see if they really ARE so closely related?”) I do notice that their research doesn’t seem to indicate that they measured relations to frogs, or any other amphibians at all. SO what you wrote may either be a later proof that the earlier indications were wrong, or it may be a complete non-sequitur.

In any event, if you read my original posting, my clear intent was to prompt further research into using genetics to establish phylogenies, not to champion young-earth creationism.

(My take on young-earth creationism: If the earth isn’t old, God sure wanted to make it look like it was!)


63 posted on 02/24/2009 8:12:41 AM PST by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: allmendream
Why do you feel the need to misrepresent

This from an Evo, that's precious.

64 posted on 02/24/2009 8:13:22 AM PST by Cedric
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: ColdWater

Yeah, you’re right, the ones who actually read the Bible.


65 posted on 02/24/2009 8:14:00 AM PST by demshateGod (The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: allmendream; Cedric

Darwinist A.S. Wilkins, editor of the journal BioEssays:

“While the great majority of biologists would probably agree with Theodosius Dobzhansky’s dictum that ‘nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution,’ most can conduct their work quite happily without particular reference to evolutionary ideas. Evolution would appear to be the indispensable unifying idea and, at the same time, a highly superfluous one.”


66 posted on 02/24/2009 8:14:01 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: AnalogReigns
My own notion here, for certain, but not without a philosophical and biblical basis.

At least you are honest in that you acknowledge that you do not let facts get in your way of your opinion.

67 posted on 02/24/2009 8:14:30 AM PST by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: demshateGod
Yeah, you’re right, the ones who actually read the Bible.

Are you accusing the Pope of not reading the Bible?

68 posted on 02/24/2009 8:15:27 AM PST by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: ColdWater
I think the evidence would show...human beings were superior thousands of years ago, than we are now.

Your comments provide abundant evidence.

69 posted on 02/24/2009 8:16:21 AM PST by Cedric
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Rebel_Ace

In case you haven’t noticed, the battle between creationists, IDers and the Evos is quite political. When Creationists and IDers break the government sanctioned Darwinist stranglehold on the ideology of science (and, increasingly, morals) we will ride off into the sunset. Until then, it’s all hands on deck.


70 posted on 02/24/2009 8:18:10 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Cedric

Why do you think you are exempt from your human devolution theory?


71 posted on 02/24/2009 8:19:17 AM PST by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: allmendream

And what was Darwin’s educational background?


72 posted on 02/24/2009 8:23:36 AM PST by Cedric
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: ColdWater
I am the exception to many rules which govern inferior beings, such as erstwhile, laid-off, atomic power plant radioactivity testers, who are willing to work really cheap but still can't hold a job.

I also have the authority to promote scholars, posthumously.

73 posted on 02/24/2009 8:29:27 AM PST by Cedric
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Cedric

Part of Darwin’s education:

Christ’s College, Cambridge, for a Bachelor of Arts degree as the first step towards becoming an Anglican parson.[15] ...He became a close friend and follower of botany professor John Stevens Henslow and met other leading naturalists who saw scientific work as religious natural theology, becoming known to these dons as “the man who walks with Henslow”. When exams drew near, Darwin focused on his studies and was delighted by the language and logic of William Paley’s Evidences of Christianity.[16] In his final examination in January 1831 Darwin did well, coming tenth out of a pass list of 178.[17]


74 posted on 02/24/2009 8:31:31 AM PST by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Cedric
I also have the authority to promote scholars, posthumously.

You mean 'to misrepresent your evidence' ...

75 posted on 02/24/2009 8:32:16 AM PST by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: ColdWater

Quotations are not evidence, dufus.


76 posted on 02/24/2009 8:33:19 AM PST by Cedric
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Cedric
No but your posts are evidence of your mispresentations.
77 posted on 02/24/2009 8:34:14 AM PST by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: AnalogReigns
God created man in His own image out of dust

Why did God use dust?

78 posted on 02/24/2009 8:35:54 AM PST by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

The thing I find so interesting is how evolutionists say that ID advocates are not “scientists”. Yet, in the face of actual scientific discovery which is helping to crumble the theory of evolution, they ignore the science themselves in order to so desperately hang on to a theory they WANT to be true.


79 posted on 02/24/2009 8:37:04 AM PST by conservativebabe (awaiting inspiration for a new tagline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Cedric
Darwin never needed to lie about his education background. Why do you feel the need to misrepresent the education background of the lawyers you cite for scientific judgments?
80 posted on 02/24/2009 8:37:32 AM PST by allmendream ("Wealth is EARNED not distributed, so how could it be redistributed?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: ColdWater

“I myself am convinced that the theory of evolution, especially to the extent that it’s been applied, will be one of the greatest jokes in the history books of the future.”

Dr. Emeritus
Malcolm Muggeridge


81 posted on 02/24/2009 8:37:40 AM PST by Cedric
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: conservativebabe

The Temple of Darwinistic Materialism is a religion, not science. That is what people need to wake up to, especially conservative Christians!


82 posted on 02/24/2009 8:39:34 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: allmendream

“Scientists concede that their most cherished theories are based on embarrassingly few fossil fragments and that huge gaps exist in the fossil record.”

Dr. Time Magazine
Nov. 7, 1977


83 posted on 02/24/2009 8:41:02 AM PST by Cedric
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: ColdWater
When did Mr. NM get promoted to DR?

Same school as the huckster got his DR. at probably. LOL

84 posted on 02/24/2009 8:41:22 AM PST by org.whodat (Auto unions bad: Machinists union good=Hypocrisy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Cedric
“I myself am convinced that the theory of evolution, especially to the extent that it’s been applied, will be one of the greatest jokes in the history books of the future.”

Dr. Emeritus
Malcolm Muggeridge ... SOCIALIST.

85 posted on 02/24/2009 8:43:18 AM PST by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: DManA
The "tree of life" has always been just a metaphor to assist in explaining Darwin's ideas, not his core idea. The article argues that it is too simple and reality is much more complicated.

But what if species also routinely swapped genetic material with other species, or hybridised with them? ....We now know that this is exactly what happens.

This is even more of a problem than the tree of life for those who treat the Bible as a science book.

But then you could not attack it with a simple lie.

86 posted on 02/24/2009 8:43:31 AM PST by org.whodat (Auto unions bad: Machinists union good=Hypocrisy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Cedric
Dr. Time Magazine

No such animal.

87 posted on 02/24/2009 8:44:17 AM PST by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Cedric

I love that guy. Here’s another one of my favorites by him. If nothing else, it definitely sums up the anti-Creationist/ID/Palin RINOs who run the Republican Party right now:

“A ruling Class which is on the run, as ours is, is capable of every fatuity. It makes the wrong decisions, chooses the wrong people, and is unable to recognize its enemies-if it does not actually prefer them to its friends.”

MALCOM MUGGERIDGE, Tread Softly for You Tread on My Jokes.


88 posted on 02/24/2009 8:44:43 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: ColdWater

I gotta go.

Need to get a bigger hook and heavier test line.


89 posted on 02/24/2009 8:46:55 AM PST by Cedric
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
I love that guy. Here’s another one of my favorites by him. If nothing else, it definitely sums up the anti-Creationist/ID/Palin RINOs who run the Republican Party right now:

“A ruling Class which is on the run, as ours is, is capable of every fatuity. It makes the wrong decisions, chooses the wrong people, and is unable to recognize its enemies-if it does not actually prefer them to its friends.”

MALCOM MUGGERIDGE, SOCIALIST Tread Softly for You Tread on My Jokes.

90 posted on 02/24/2009 8:47:08 AM PST by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Cedric
Need to get a bigger hook and heavier test line.

And a little education ...

91 posted on 02/24/2009 8:47:45 AM PST by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: js1138

There was/is a study of the subject on discovery a little while back, showed that a chicken had a tail.


92 posted on 02/24/2009 8:48:05 AM PST by org.whodat (Auto unions bad: Machinists union good=Hypocrisy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
love that guy. Here’s another one of my favorites by him. If nothing else, it definitely sums up the anti-Creationist/ID/Palin RINOs who run the Republican Party right now:

“A ruling Class which is on the run, as ours is, is capable of every fatuity. It makes the wrong decisions, chooses the wrong people, and is unable to recognize its enemies-if it does not actually prefer them to its friends.”

MALCOM MUGGERIDGE, Tread Softly for You Tread on My Jokes.

FR is not the place to go around saying that you love socialists and post their anti-capitalist quotes. You might just lose some credibility?

93 posted on 02/24/2009 8:50:22 AM PST by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Rebel_Ace

BINGO!@!!


94 posted on 02/24/2009 8:50:25 AM PST by org.whodat (Auto unions bad: Machinists union good=Hypocrisy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Cedric
Wow. 1977. The science of evolution is not dependent upon fossils. DNA evidence and the evidence of evolution in experimental populations is plenty of support.

So now you just want to ignore your misrepresentation of the credentials of the lawyer you sourced?

Do you claim it was a simple mistake?

Or are we to assume that you were trying to “pull a fast one”?

Why do you seem to feel the need to lie about the education background of the lawyers you source for their views on the state of science?

95 posted on 02/24/2009 8:54:02 AM PST by allmendream ("Wealth is EARNED not distributed, so how could it be redistributed?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Rebel_Ace
Well Ace, I for one am glad GGG posts what he does and posts it here. I argue for some things he says or posts and I argue against the same, I argue with GGG and he with me. (Most of the time I'm right)

But evidently there is enough interest to generate hundreds of comments pro,con, in between, which is what a forum does.

If you'll let me know who forcing you to pay attention to these forums I will happily ask them to stop so you won't be distracted from the cosmically/comically important political tripe of the day such as the death of Bill Clinton's cat.

96 posted on 02/24/2009 8:55:50 AM PST by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

Oh, I know it was a different tree. I meant the tree of life in Genesis (Genesis 3:24).


97 posted on 02/24/2009 8:56:49 AM PST by vladimir998 (Ignorance of Scripture is ignorance of Christ. St. Jerome)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

The thing I try to figure out is the WHY.

I have my own thoughts on it, but I’m curious of yours.

Why is it so important to evolutionists to be correct?


98 posted on 02/24/2009 8:57:06 AM PST by conservativebabe (awaiting inspiration for a new tagline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: ColdWater

You have no idea what you’re talking about. MALCOM MUGGERIDGE began as a socialist, converted to Christianity, and then became a staunch conservative and anti-communist.


99 posted on 02/24/2009 9:06:39 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

I know you know. I was just using your comment as an opportunity to bring up the creationist prediction re: the Orchard of Life :o)


100 posted on 02/24/2009 9:08:10 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-202 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson