|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Creationists STILL Think that Evolution is a Ladder | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10073 Joined: Member Rating: 5.2
|
In another thread a creationist posted material from a creationist website that made my jaw hit the floor. It read . . .
quote: I expect less knowledgeable creationists to make this rather obvious mistake, but here is Creation Ministries International just embarrassing themselves. For those who don't understand just how mistaken CMI is, here is a simple picture to clear things up:
All modern species are equally evolved. All modern species are at the tips of the branches, not at the fork in the branches. A fish shouldn't have DNA more like that of a bacteria. A fungus should not have DNA more like that of a bacteria. Why? The answer is simple. Just ask what the common ancestor of two species should be, and then see if it is the same common ancestor. What is the common ancestor of bacteria and humans?What is the common ancestor of bacteria and fish? What is the common ancestor of bacteria and yeast? What is the common ancestor of bacteria and wheat? The answer to every one of those questions is the same. The common ancestor in every case is the same exact common ancestor, the common ancestor of all eukaryotes. Therefore, all eukaryote species should be equidistant from bacteria, AND THEY ARE!!!!! CMI points to one of the most striking pieces of evidence FOR evolution, and mishandles it in such a striking and dumfounding way, especially for an organization that is supposed to be at the "cutting edge" of science based creationism. Go figure. Preferred forum: Biological Evolution Edited by Taq, : No reason given.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminPhat Inactive Member |
Thread copied here from the Creationists STILL Think that Evolution is a Ladder thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dwise1 Member Posts: 5949 Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
I just found the email from 1997 where I described what Denton wrote. It turns out that Denton had himself discovered the correct interpretation only to spend the rest of the chapter trying to explain it away. BTW, I got the diagrams from the NCSE's Creation/Evolution Newsletter, which I verified from Denton's book:
quote: At the time, it was reported that Denton learned a lot from the responses to his book, mainly that he actually knew a lot less than he had thought he did. He is supposed to have said that if he were to write it again, the book would be a lot different. However, he had no intention to revisit the subject. From 2000 I stated that he had reportedly changed his position to theistic evolution, but I do not remember the details nor what my source was. Still, it can be fun to watch an opponent to an interpretation arrive at that interpretation entirely on his own and then try to explain it away. Though it does demonstrate how well the branching tree interpretation fits the data so well.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10073 Joined: Member Rating: 5.2
|
Just to clear up any confusion in the opening post, I am not saying that the common ancestor of modern bacteria and eukaryotes is necessarily a eukaryote. What I am saying is that if you start with any modern bacteria and any modern eukaryote and trace their lineages to where they meet, they will always meet at the same common ancestor. If I start with an E. coli and a human they will meet a specific node in the tree of life. If I start with a Streptococcal bacterial species and an elm, those lineages will meet at the very same node as humans and E. coli met at.
Edited by Taq, : No reason given.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024