One approach creationists use to reject genetic similarities is the idea a designer would reuse a lot. So, yes, apes and humans share similar genes because a good designer would reuse such genes if youre building something roughly similar. An interesting counter to this is a shark and a dolphin are highly similar. A dolphin and shark are very dissimilar from a wolf. A creationist might predict dolphins and sharks are closer genetically than a dolphin and a wolf. But evolution says a dolphin and a wolf are both mammals and had a much more recent common ancestor than a dolphin and a shark and hence should have more genetically in common. And sure enough dolphins and wolves are more genetically similar than dolphins and sharks. pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/change/family/ Also, whats important is the similarity in genetic copying errors. If we assume humans, chimps, and wolves had perfect genetics before the fall and then after the fall their genes mutated from generation to generation, theres no good reason the shared genes a good designer put in place before the fall should also have similar errors and these errors should be more similar in species with more recent common ancestors. So a pseudo gene shared between humans, chimps, and wolves, a human and chimp should have more similar errors and the wolf should have considerably different copying errors in the shared pseudo gene. The odds humans, chimps, and wolves would all have the same copying errors and the pattern of these errors should match the relatedness evolution predicts is way less than zero.
Posted on: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 17:45:28 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015