A substantial proportion of the human genome is relic DNA from retroviruses - genetic code which became fixed in our germline DNA from infections millions of years ago. By comparing our genome with that of other species, we can see that some of these insertions are relatively recent (within the last 5 million years) and so are only found in humans. Others which occurred longer ago are found in the same place in both human and chimpanzee DNA, demonstrating that the incorporation happened in a common ancestor before the evolutionary divergence of chimps and humans. Others occurred tens of millions of years earlier still, and are present in old world monkeys and apes (including humans), but not in new world monkeys, demonstrating that the virus found its way into the genes after old and new world monkeys diverged but before apes evolved.
How do creationist folks account for this kind of evidence without conceding that all organisms including humans are related by common descent?
2007-10-20 15:34:07 · 27 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Zero Cool: Your earlier question and added details was excellent - thanks for the link!
2007-10-20 15:41:51 · update #1
The hierarchy of retroviral insertions matches the phylogenetic tree of the species which carry them. The only conceivable way this could be true is if all the species are related by common descent, i.e. that they are the products of evolution.
2007-10-20 15:50:43 · update #2
Hinds feet: You're half right. Bones don't (except extremely rarely) survive for millions of years. Fossils, however, do, because they're not generally the original bones, but rock which has taken the shape of the original bones.
2007-10-20 15:53:26 · update #3
Creationism can explain the existence of the whole Universe. It was created by God in six literal days. This is the truth.
2007-10-20 15:37:23 · answer #1 · answered by unfit_commander 5 · 3⤊ 20⤋
Probably the same way that they account for the human appendix. By providing an intentionally vague description of a hypothetical function that has little or no evidence to back it up. Creationists can be so... erm... creative.
I almost hated doing this, because it may actually encourage some of them to do exactly what I've mentioned above.
2007-10-20 22:45:08 · answer #2 · answered by Anthony Stark 5 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Wow, the excuses some people will come up with to deny the evidence you are throwing right at them. You'd have to be extremely imaginative and gullible to take some of these answers seriously.
From my observation, it's gone from ignorance to complete denial. It doesn't matter what we find to support evolution, people will still find ways to pass it off to god.
Take the guy above me for example: he completely sidestepped the question and instead picked and poked at something completely irrelevant.
2007-10-20 23:39:29 · answer #3 · answered by Uliju 4 · 5⤊ 1⤋
The creationist answers are so silly that it borders on frightening...it's like these people live in the dark ages and want to avoid scientific literacy in the process. Scary thing is that most humans are dependent on science for their everyday lives, but choose to remain ignorant of how it works.
2007-10-20 22:54:58 · answer #4 · answered by Dalarus 7 · 5⤊ 1⤋
Science is only a theory that can change at any time.Provided is an example of this.I have to wonder how many students lost points on their test when they said Pluto was not a planet.
NEWS HOMEANIMAL NEWSANCIENT WORLDENVIRONMENT NEWSCULTURES NEWSSCIENCE & SPACE NEWSWEIRD NEWS
Pluto Not a Planet, Astronomers Rule
Mason Inman
for National Geographic News
August 24, 2006 (Updated 3:30 p.m. ET)
Pluto has been voted off the island.
The distant, ice-covered world is no longer a true planet, according to a new definition of the term voted on by scientists today.
RELATED
Virtual Solar System
"Whoa! Pluto's dead," said astronomer Mike Brown, of the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, as he watched a Webcast of the vote. "There are finally, officially, eight planets in the solar system."
PS> I AM SO THANKFUL THAT THE ONE WHO DID CREATE ALL OF THIS HASN"T CHANGED.
Look at all of these thumbs down.JUST GOES TO SHOW THAT THESE PEOPLE ARE NOT REALLY INTO THE FACTS AFTER ALL...................................
2007-10-20 23:28:29 · answer #5 · answered by don_steele54 6 · 0⤊ 5⤋
I'd be happy to answer this question as soon as you can reign in your "friends" and get them to stop referring to creationists as "silly, scientifically illiterate, ignorant, living in the dark ages, confused, crying, angry, intentionally vague, wildly active imagination, horrendously gullible, and in denial."
Until the name calling stops, there can be no discussion on these matters. If it's insulting you guys want, I can make some arrangements to take care of your problem. You can insult me in person, and I'll give you a response.
If you want answers, act like it. If you want your face punched in, keep up the insults. You don't get answers to these questions not because there aren't any, but because of your behavior.
This Monday I am going to meet with a friend who is designing a satellite at Lawrence Livermore Labs to detect dark energy, so that they can take measurements and run calculations to figure out the apparent "anti-gravity" that appears to be accelerating matter on the outskirts of the universe. You'll forgive me for wanting to expend my mental energy on a conversation with him in a couple of days, and not participating in a Q&A session where there are more insults than real discussion.
icarus62, I thank you for your courteous question, I hope your courtesy rubs off on your friends. I have 4 other issues that I would add to the answer I gave to Zero Cool. Each deserving of it's own question, but until the insults stop, I'll save my discussions for a more polite and intelligent forum.
2007-10-21 00:18:17 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 3⤋
Most people who can read and understand this question are not going to be creationists.
You're confusing people with your made up words like retrovirus, genome, relic, germline, divergence, tens of millions of years ect.
Stop it or you will go to Hell.
2007-10-20 22:48:40 · answer #7 · answered by Herschel Krustofski 2 · 9⤊ 2⤋
God is deliberately tricking us to accept evolution by planting similar DNA to various types of monkeys and apes depending on close they are in terms of common ancestry to us!
I can't you believe you haven't figured this out!
Stupid evolutionists!!
God obviously created everything 6000 years ago, then there was a flood then Noah put the millions of species in one boat then all the dinosaurs died. I ain't evolutioned from no monkey!
-atheist
2007-10-20 22:41:49 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 9⤊ 2⤋
Yes. However it is a very weak explanation easily disarmed by Occam's razor.
2007-10-21 02:23:04 · answer #9 · answered by bondioli22 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Why do you suppose a common ancestor was infected rather than the separate species themselves? How do you tell a difference?
2007-10-20 23:25:26 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
Easy - God PUT all those hundreds of busted retroviruses in there, because he likes to provide us atheists with evidence for evolution!
He must do - there's so much of it.
Go on - now tell 'em about our chromosome 2!
CD
2007-10-20 22:41:04 · answer #11 · answered by Super Atheist 7 · 11⤊ 2⤋