RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (58) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   
  Topic: Evolution of the horse; a problem for Darwinism?, For Daniel Smith to present his argument< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
jeannot



Posts: 1200
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 24 2007,16:38   

Quote
Big deal.  Things that are alike are built alike - even at the molecular level.

If you're going to argue for "common design" as we see you coming, you'll have to explain why closely related species share homologies at synonymous or neutral sites, which have nothing to do with "design".
For instance, why do all primates share a non-functional copy of a gene normally involved in the production of vitamin C? And why do the phylogeny of this useless pseudo-gene reflects phylogenies of coding regions?

And also, why are we more genetically close to the coelacanth than it is close to the trout?
The irony is that the fossil record, which according to you disproves the ToE, predicted that.

  
  1733 replies since Sep. 18 2007,15:27 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (58) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]