quote:
Originally posted by Tranquility Base:
Peter
I agree except . . .
Genomically I think we are starting to see some problems for 'monophyletic' evoltuion, and not just due to horzontal tranfer. The 'mosaic' nature of genomes, including 'convergent' rehappenings at some point may show that (i) evolution is wrong and (ii) God's blueprints were a bit non-monophyletic. I think we have seen hints of this recently in wing genes in unrelated taxa (birds and flies) being 'too' convergent.
Man is certianly most similar to primates. Man is biologically a very special primate from a creationit POV.
Sorry, what do you mean by 'mosaic' nature of genomes (I know
what a mosaic is ... just not heard it in relation to genomes
before).
As for convergence, and being 'too' convergent I find that an
argument from incredulity again. Just because it seems unlikely
doesn't mean it couldn't happen ... I'd need a little more than
that to see it as a real problem.
If a particular protein is beneficial to an organism, and that
protein leads an organism to be capable of producing a particular
kind of phenotypic feature then that could recurr in vastly
different taxa.
Not knowing exactly how geno- and phenotypes are related is a
bit of a problem ... but equally with the wing thing, someone mentioned
that the genes were protrusion genes, and that they could be
considered stronger evidence for common descent because they
are evident across all limbed critters.
Equally could indicate common design I guess.
Is there any evidence, that if it existed, would lead you
to favour common descent in the evolutionary sense, rather
than common design in the creationist sense?