Does Genome Evidence Support Human-Ape Common Ancestry? - Casey Luskin - March 13, 2014 (references on page) Excerpt: (1) Dr. Venema argues that high human-chimp genetic similarity is at least 95%, and that this shows common our ancestry. Response: Dr. Venema overstates the degree of human-chimp similarity and seems to disregard the obvious the possibility of common design for human-chimp functional genetic similarities.,,, (2) Dr. Venema argues that redundancy in codon-use (e.g., reuse of synonymous codons) is far in excess of what is required for functionality, suggesting common ancestry. Response: Dr. Venemas argument depends on the standard evolutionary presumption that synonymous mutations are phenotypically equivalent. This is a good example of how evolutionary biologists use molecular biology that is outdated; while synonymous codons do encode the same amino acids, they can have different, and important phenotypic or functional effects relating to gene expression.,,,, (3) He argues that the highly similar spatial organization of the genes (synteny) across different species suggests common ancestry. Response: Again, Dr. Venemas molecular biology is outdated. He assumes the ordering of genes (or chromosomal structure) is functionally unimportant, but molecular biology has discovered that nothing could be further from the truth. As the revolution in epigenetics has taken hold, molecular biologists now know that the structure of chromosomes, and their 3-dimensional arrangement(s) within a cell, are important parts of genomic regulation.,,, (4) Dr. Venema argues that shared pseudogenes suggest common ancestry. Response: Here Dr. Venema is assuming that what we dont understand is functionless. in this case, we have lots of evidence that many pseudogenes -- including pseudogenes that are prominent examples used by ID-critics -- are likely functional.,,, in each of these four areas, Dr. Venemas argument depends on the presumption that the similarity between humans and chimps (whether [1] protein sequence or overall genome similarity; [2] similar use of synonymous codons; [3] synteny; and [4] shared pseudogenes) is functionally unimportant--i.e., its a junk property of the genome. And in each of these four areas, the latest findings of molecular biology show that the property is not junk or unimportant, but in fact represents newly discovered important functional elements of molecular biology. As time goes on, IDs predictions are being confirmed. Meanwhile, Darwinian presumptions -- that many aspects of genomes exist for no reason other than they were put there by unguided evolutionary mechanisms -- are turning out to be wrong. evolutionnews.org/2014/03/does_genome_evi083181.html
Posted on: Thu, 13 Mar 2014 13:55:35 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015