$50 to anyone who can prove to me Evolution is a lie.

prophecyexclaimed, 1/Baseless assertion. Why to evolutionary trees based on morphological characteristics & genetic sequence data agree, then? Why are both generally congruent with the stratigraphy of fossils? Seems to me to be excellent evidence of what you say can't happen, did. Do you have anything other than incredulity & rhetoric to support your claim?2/A lineage that evolves even slightly becomes a "different creature". One that does it a lot becomes a very different creature.3/What fallacies of evolution?Mark------------------
"I can't prove creationism, but they can't prove evolution. It is [also] a religion, so it should not be taught....Christians took over the school board and voted in creationism. That can be done in any school district anywhere, and it ought to be done." Says Kent "consistent" Hovind in "Unmasking the False Religion of Evolution Chapter 6."

quote:

---

Religion is revelatory. Science is not. Case closed - not a religion. Anyway modern evolutinary theory isn't "based on the teachings of Darwin" any more than modern physics is just Newton's ideas. There's a lot more going on. We don't teach from Darwin's books anymore, you might have noticed. On the other hand your religion has been using the same textbook for 2000 years or more. Get with the times!

---

Exactly, my textbook doesn't change, it is the infallible word of God. My textbook will never change because what it says is and always will be true. That's the problem with books that man has devised. They change, they aren't reliable. But God made my textbook and he is reliable, not man. Can you put your trust fully in any man? No, not really. With God you can trust him forever.

quote:

---

Anyway modern evolutinary theory isn't "based on the teachings of Darwin

---

So the theory has evolved ( ) ? No but seriously Darwin made evolution. He did not discover it, for something to be discovered it has to be there (remember), It's his IDEA or THEORY, not a discovery. Your just advancing on what he thought was correct at the time... (ex. He considered white people to be the master race.) You are taking his ideas and fitting them to a modern world. Racism is considered wrong today (which it is) so you do not follow him on that idea. Sure your in the times, but the times aren't reliable.------------------
"As by this theory innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth? The number of intermediate links between all living and extinct species must have been inconceivably great!" (emphasis added) -- Charles Darwin

Funny, then, that he didn't mention it to anybody. After all the view that species had been created in their current, immutable form was the accepted view by both science and the church until the 1800's.

prophecyexclaimed wrote:
Religion: A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.Set of beliefs: Evolution
Practices: Science Courses
Based on teachings of Darwin!
A Religion.(dictionary.com, meaning number 3.)-------------a note worth mention:"Science Courses"??
No scientist holds man-made documents as the holy, inerrant, inspired word of god. Those who believe in religion feel that their sacred book, is inspired by a god, and not man, and that it is likewise, without flaw. Thus, you do not fix, what is not broken.
The Bible, they say, has "no error or contradiction, and the heavens, and earth, and all in it, were created in seven days by God, and there is no room for new data."That is a main distinction between science and spirituality.
One of the finest qualities of science, is that it begins with "I do not know", and always open to change when new information emerges(even at the expense of compromising old beliefs). Religion has a tendency to stagnate the minds of its believers, when new information becomes available. Usually with enmity against knowledge.Meanwhile...
Where do you get the information that Darwin was / is a spiritual leader? Buddha, Jesus, Gandhi would qualify as spiritual leaders. People are even debating on whether or not Darwin believed in God.
He was a scientist.
I do not let scientists decide my spiritual views.
Nor do I let spiritual men, guide my scientific beliefs.I went to dictionary.com
and searched for evolution... there is nothing in the dictionary that would deem evolution as a "religion". That wasn't an oversight of the publisher. That was intentional. What "god" do evolutionists all have in common, what is its name? When was the last time, tithes were gathered for the god of evolution, or the believers gathered to sacrifice animals or their firstborn babies to Baal or Merodach, or Jehovah? What is the name of this god, evolutionists supposedly cling to, that unites them in their "flock" or "fold". Where are the preachers, the shepherds, who guide evolutionists in their "spiritual journey" of genetic modification and other scientific research?Now, I looked up christianity, and it is defined as a religion.EVOLUTION:
A gradual process in which something changes into a different and usually more complex or better form. See Synonyms at development.
The process of developing. Gradual development. Biology.
Change in the genetic composition of a population during successive generations, as a result of natural selection acting on the genetic variation among individuals, and resulting in the development of new species. The historical development of a related group of organisms; phylogeny. A movement that is part of a set of ordered movements.
Mathematics. The extraction of a root of a quantity.
RELIGION WAS NOT FOUND IN THE ENTIRE DEFINITION FOR "EVOLUTION"
SORRY. BUT THAT IS BECAUSE IT'S NOT A RELIGION.CHRISTIANITY:
The Christian religion, founded on the life and teachings of Jesus.
Christians as a group; Christendom. The state or fact of being a Christian. pl. Christianities A particular form or sect of the Christian religion: the Christianities of antiquity.RELIGION:Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.The life or condition of a person in a religious order.A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.DARWIN WAS NOT A SPIRITUAL LEADER. HE RESEARCHED AND WROTE ABOUT SCIENCE, NOT SPIRITUALITY. Darwin was interested in scientific discovery, not spiritual issues.I hope this helps clarify, beyond doubt, evolution is not a religious system of beliefs. [This message has been edited by Sharon357, 08-20-2003][This message has been edited by Sharon357, 08-20-2003]

"Again you use adaptation as a blinding curtain to hide the falisies of evolution. Adaptation happens, Evolving Creatures over time to different creatures doesn't, No creature has ever adapted to the degree to be a different animal."

quote:

---

1/Baseless assertion. Why to evolutionary trees based on morphological characteristics & genetic sequence data agree, then? Why are both generally congruent with the stratigraphy of fossils? Seems to me to be excellent evidence of what you say can't happen, did. Do you have anything other than incredulity & rhetoric to support your claim?

​

2/A lineage that evolves even slightly becomes a "different creature". One that does it a lot becomes a very different creature.

​

3/What fallacies of evolution?

---

First off

quote:

---

2/A lineage that evolves even slightly becomes a "different creature". One that does it a lot becomes a very different creature.

---

Do you realize in any way what you are saying? If a rabbit's fur turns white because of it's area of snow for camoflauge, it, or it's lineage evolve into different creatures? (Please use the term evolved lightly ) No of course not, the fur might carry over to the offspring, therefore the offspring also have white fur. This is how genetics work.If I work out at the gym for basketball (adapting to the game, have to get stronger to compete, ya know) and I gain muscle, your saying I or my kids (in the future) or totally different creatures??!?! No I am PE the same person/(creature.)Secondly,

quote:

---

3/What fallacies of evolution?

---

All of it! (With the exception of what you call micro-evolution.)Thirdly,

quote:

---

1/Baseless assertion. Why to evolutionary trees based on morphological characteristics & genetic sequence data agree, then? Why are both generally congruent with the stratigraphy of fossils? Seems to me to be excellent evidence of what you say can't happen, did. Do you have anything other than incredulity & rhetoric to support your claim?

---

"Baseless Assertion" No I am the one on Baseful ground, a firm foundation!"Why to evolutionary trees based on morphological characteristics & genetic sequence data agree, then? Why are both generally congruent with the stratigraphy of fossils?"Show me, Back it up! How do I know anything you say is true? Explain in greater detail, C'mon I want to see this genetic sequence data, or the the evolutionary trees!" Do you have anything other than incredulity & rhetoric to support your claim?"The Question is: Do you?------------------
"As by this theory innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth? The number of intermediate links between all living and extinct species must have been inconceivably great!" (emphasis added) -- Charles Darwin

The problem is, what your book says is wrong.I'd rather be almost right, and getting closer, than eternally and totally wrong. After all, if your book was right, don't you think the findings of science would be moving closer to it, instead of so drastically away from it? Yeah, theories adapt and change in the light of new evidence. I know the idea of basing what you believe on verifyable, physical evidence is an alien one to you, but it's what science does. And the evidence we have access to changes over time. So it's only natural that our models of the world change, too.That fact that the bible is unchanging is the clearest evidence to me that it's wrong.

Do you realize what you're saying? That's not how adaptation works.What happens is that rabbits that are born with white fur in a snowy area reproduce more than those who don't. After a while genetic mutations accumulate and the new population of white rabbits can't or won't breed with the old ones. (That means they're a new species of rabbit.)Snow doesn't turn rabbits white. And your children won't inherit the body you work out in the gym.

Religion: A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.
Set of beliefs: Evolution
Practices: Science Courses
Based on teachings of Darwin!
A Religion.(dictionary.com, meaning number 3.)-------------

quote:

---

Where do you get the information that Darwin was / is a spiritual leader? Buddha, Jesus, Gandhi would qualify as spiritual leaders. People are even debating on whether or not Darwin believed in God.
He was a scientist.
I do not let scientists decide my spiritual views.
Nor do I let spiritual men, guide my scientific beliefs.

​

I went to dictionary.com
and searched for evolution... there is nothing in the dictionary that would deem evolution as a "religion". That wasn't an oversight of the publisher. That was intentional. What "god" do evolutionists all have in common, what is its name? When was the last time, tithes were gathered for the god of evolution, or the believers gathered to sacrifice animals or their firstborn babies to Baal or Merodach, or Jehovah? What is the name of this god, evolutionists supposedly cling to, that unites them in their "flock" or "fold". Where are the preachers, the shepherds, who guide evolutionists in their "spiritual journey" of genetic modification and other scientific research?

​

Now, I looked up christianity, and it is defined as a religion.

​

EVOLUTION:
A gradual process in which something changes into a different and usually more complex or better form. See Synonyms at development.
The process of developing. Gradual development. Biology.
Change in the genetic composition of a population during successive generations, as a result of natural selection acting on the genetic variation among individuals, and resulting in the development of new species. The historical development of a related group of organisms; phylogeny. A movement that is part of a set of ordered movements.
Mathematics. The extraction of a root of a quantity.
RELIGION WAS NOT FOUND IN THE ENTIRE DEFINITION FOR "EVOLUTION"
SORRY. BUT THAT IS BECAUSE IT'S NOT A RELIGION.

​

CHRISTIANITY:
The Christian religion, founded on the life and teachings of Jesus.
Christians as a group; Christendom. The state or fact of being a Christian. pl. Christianities A particular form or sect of the Christian religion: the Christianities of antiquity.

​

RELIGION:

​

Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.

​

A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.

​

The life or condition of a person in a religious order.

​

A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.

​

DARWIN WAS NOT A SPIRITUAL LEADER. HE RESEARCHED AND WROTE ABOUT SCIENCE, NOT SPIRITUALITY. Darwin was interested in scientific discovery, not spiritual issues.

​

I hope this helps clarify, beyond doubt, evolution is not a religious system of beliefs.

---

No this doesn't clarify anything, deems pretty useless to me."Where do you get the information that Darwin was / is a spiritual leader? Buddha, Jesus, Gandhi would qualify as spiritual leaders. People are even debating on whether or not Darwin believed in God.
He was a scientist.
I do not let scientists decide my spiritual views.
Nor do I let spiritual men, guide my scientific beliefs."IN REPLY:He made a religion/system of beliefs, this qualifies him as the leader.It's evolution that is the problem, of course the meaning wouldn't mark evolution as a religion, everyone thinks it is factual. When in reality it is not. I am part of a minority remember..."DARWIN WAS NOT A SPIRITUAL LEADER. HE RESEARCHED AND WROTE ABOUT SCIENCE, NOT SPIRITUALITY. Darwin was interested in scientific discovery, not spiritual issues."IN REPLY:What you call science is not. (Science: The observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena.) (From dictionary.com) Science is observable evolution beyond the known fact of Adaptation isn't. (I went over why adaptation isn't evolution more then enough)And Darwin didn't know that his theory crossed the line of science into spirituality. It did.------------------
"As by this theory innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth? The number of intermediate links between all living and extinct species must have been inconceivably great!" (emphasis added) -- Charles Darwin

quote:

---

Exactly, my textbook doesn't change, it is the infallible word of God. My textbook will never change because what it says is and always will be true.

​

The problem is, what your book says is wrong.

​

I'd rather be almost right, and getting closer, than eternally and totally wrong. After all, if your book was right, don't you think the findings of science would be moving closer to it, instead of so drastically away from it?

​

So the theory has evolved ( ) ?

​

Yeah, theories adapt and change in the light of new evidence. I know the idea of basing what you believe on verifyable, physical evidence is an alien one to you, but it's what science does. And the evidence we have access to changes over time. So it's only natural that our models of the world change, too.

​

That fact that the bible is unchanging is the clearest evidence to me that it's wrong.

---

First:The problem is, what your book says is wrong.I'd rather be almost right, and getting closer, than eternally and totally wrong. After all, if your book was right, don't you think the findings of science would be moving closer to it, instead of so drastically away from it?IN REPLY: My book is not wrong everything it says in it has happened, and will happen."I'd rather be almost right, and getting closer, than eternally and totally wrong. After all, if your book was right, don't you think the findings of science would be moving closer to it, instead of so drastically away from it?"Name some "findings of science" that move closer to Evolution, or away from Creation. Please."Yeah, theories adapt and change in the light of new evidence. I know the idea of basing what you believe on verifyable, physical evidence is an alien one to you, but it's what science does. And the evidence we have access to changes over time. So it's only natural that our models of the world change, too.That fact that the bible is unchanging is the clearest evidence to me that it's wrong."IN REPLY:An insult? I'd say so."That fact that the bible is unchanging is the clearest evidence to me that it's wrong."IN REPLY:Thats what make the Bible so right! We are obviously polarized here."Yeah, theories adapt and change in the light of new evidence. I know the idea of basing what you believe on verifyable, physical evidence is an alien one to you, but it's what science does. And the evidence we have access to changes over time. So it's only natural that our models of the world change, too."IN REPLY:That is what makes "theories" not all the way correct, it starts with an idea and changes to something that seems correct. But with observability does it only become Science, or correct in the eyes of man.Good Night, Sharon, crashfrog. I need the sleep.------------------
"As by this theory innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth? The number of intermediate links between all living and extinct species must have been inconceivably great!" (emphasis added) -- Charles Darwin

prophecyexclaimed wrote:
Religion: A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.
Set of beliefs: Evolution
Practices: Science Courses
Based on teachings of Darwin!
A Religion.
(dictionary.com, meaning number 3.)

​

He made a religion/system of beliefs, this qualifies him as the leader.

​

And Darwin didn't know that his theory crossed the line of science into spirituality. It did.Please quote some of these spiritual doctrines and religious rulings from Darwin. How much did he demand for tithes and offerings?
What was the name of the god he represented, since he was a prophet.Did he give any specifics on how many wives morally, a man is allowed to have, before he enters Valhalla?What was Darwin's absolute truth on heaven and hell?What specific evidence did Darwin present to the world, concerning Demons and Angels and other spiritual beings?What was Darwin's religious convictions about meats, unclean or clean?Did Darwin mention anything in his sacred texts about religious symbols that his followings should hold as holy relics to remind them of him, and the god of evolution he invented?Did Darwin promise anyone anything about eternal life, eternal punishment beyond this world?What was Darwin's final verdict on the spiritual issue of evil in the world?I know Darwin studied fossils and had quite a lot to say about the tangible_stuff_in_the_earth, empirical evidence... but I really can't tell you that much about his spiritual views. That's because he was not a spiritual leader.Darwin spent as much time preaching about spiritual issues, as Jerry Falwell spends lecturing Paleontology or Archaeology.

Darwin did have a degree in theology, you know. Don't you think he would have known the difference between science and religion?Evolution is science, in the same way paleontology, anthropology, and even astronomy are sciences. After all we can't do experiments on stars. It's a falsifyable theory that's been substantiated by evidence. To deny this is to close your eyes to evidence, which isn't only stupid, it's against the forum guidelines.(BTW start using the UBB codes, like {qs}quoted text{/qs} only with square brackets instead of curlies.)

A continumm of genetic similarity and morphological similarity, starting with those animals that look most like us (primates) being the most genetically similar - including the same broken genes and garbage DNA - and decreasing as we look farther away. For instance.Linearity in the fossil record, from simpler organisms on the bottom to more advanced forms on top. For instance.None of this makes sense from a view of creation. But it makes plenty of sense with an explanation of evolution. But it was written by men with limited knowledge. That's why it's wrong about so much stuff. (Take a look through the biblical inerrancy board to see some examples.) If the bible doesn't change when we find out something new, then it's wrong. it's pretty simple, really. What other eyes are there? Even your bible was written by men. (And maybe some women.) And god's not talkin'...

OK, what is this spiritual part of evolution that you claim to have seen ?If you're following typical creationist form it's something you've invented rather than admoit that you could be wrong.

I'm surprised no one has taken up this little challenge here: Prophecy: You are aware, are you not, that "evolution" in the context in which we are discussing it has nothing to do with 1-4 above? That only in the most generic sense of "change over time" can these be even considered "evolution"? And that the Theory of Evolution that we're arguing about here refers ONLY to 5-6: the development, proliferation and diversification of life?However, rather than challenging you to come up with something resembling a working definition of "kind" - since it is the basis of your assertion that change between "kinds" is impossible - I'd like to address what appears to be a more fundamental problem. Implicitly or not, you seem to have an extremely narrow, and erroneous, idea of what "science" itself is, based on the above and on subsequent postings. You appear to advocate that only that which is observable or directly manipulatable is science. Every time I encounter this argument, I am again amazed at how anyone living in our modern, technological world can maintain such a limited, parochial view of the incredible endeavor that is science. Do you really think that all scientists do is go out and collect bags of facts or putter about with expensive and exotic glassware in laboratories? It boggles my mind that someone can hold this attitude and yet sit in front of a computer, compose messages to people half-way around the world, and send them out instantaneously through a system that is based in large measure on the theoretical properties and behavior of things no one has ever directly observed or manipulated! The cognitive dissonance inherent in this worldview is beyond my comprehension. It truly is.For your edification (not that I expect it to do any good for someone whose view of science relegates it to the functional equivalent of using a piece of flint to carve notches in a bone tally stick in order to time caribou migrations), collecting observations is only one small aspect of science - and arguably not the most important one in the sense that it rarely produces new or revolutionary ideas (Francis Bacon notwithstanding). The true nature of science is what is known as the method of hypothesis, or sometimes the "inference to the best explanation". In this case scientists come up with an idea or question - known as a hypothesis, hence the name of the method - mostly for the sake of investigation. They then ask what would follow empirically from the hypothesis - iow, what evidence or observation would be expected if the hypothesis were accurate. They make a prediction of what should be found. Then they check these consequences and predictions against reality. If actual observations or phenomena or bits of evidence match what was predicted by the hypothesis, then it's a good bet that the hypothesis was "true" in the sense that it provides a reasonable explanation for reality. If not - if the observations don't meet expectations - then the hypothesis is either rejected or modified (i.e., scientists infer that the hypothesis is false as constituted). Scientists look for the hypothesis that best explains the observed data. And note well: it doesn't matter whether we are predicting a future observation OR what we would expect to see if the phenomena occurred in the past. The key point is that the hypothesis explains the pattern of data. If you are considering two or more different hypotheses about the same data, the one that best explains the observations is the winner.Moving this into the specific realm of evolutionary theory, there may be any number of possible explanations for the observed data - whether it be the fossil record, patterns of genetic similarity and inheritance, population dynamics, morphological, functional or behavioral relationships between disparate organisms (as in co-evolution or symbiotic relationships, etc), or any of the innumerable other lines of observations from multiple disciplines. However, the one, single, hypothesis that to this point best fits all of the myriad observations (i.e., that provides the best explanation at our current level of understanding for patterns in all of the known data), and the one that has not been shown to be false in relation to reality, is the evolutionary synthesis. Could we still be wrong? Certainly. However, given every test that it has ever been submitted to, given every prediction and retrodiction that it has ever fulfilled, and given every potential falsification that has never surfaced in the data, it remains the single best explanation to date. Some people, myself included, consider it so well-founded that it would be patently absurd to not provisionally accept its reality.I'll close with my favorite quote from Isaac Asimov:

quote:

---

Of course science is wrong! It was rather wrong yesterday, and it is, admittedly, somewhat wrong today, and it will be ever-so-slightly wrong tomorrow! But it is continually becoming less wrong, and it is demonstrably closer to the truth about nature than any other form of knowledge. Now, kindly tell us, where is your religion wrong?

---

Having read this thread I find it saddening and an incredible testimony to how utterly the American school system has failed this poor kid. He has no clue what science actually is or how to go about supporting a hypothesis, the logical deficits displayed are also appalling i.e. to prove something is does not exist you have to prove it exists? and he dismisses science as religion offhandedly while at the same time acknowldeging he has no background in the fields he is dismissing...and on top of it he clearly thinks that accepting scientific theories would somehow negate his spiritual life...truly terrible.

quote:

---

Do you realize in any way what you are saying? If a rabbit's fur turns white because of it's area of snow for camoflauge, it, or it's lineage evolve into different creatures? (Please use the term evolved lightly ) No of course not, the fur might carry over to the offspring, therefore the offspring also have white fur. This is how genetics work.

---

You may want to watch who you are lecturing on genetics since your next paragraph demonstrates you do not know how it actually works. In any case, you just described an example of evolution..change in allele frequencies over time. White fur rabbit variants have a selective advantage due to the difficulty of being spotted by predators RELATIVE to darker coat colors. Thus they have a greater chance of reproducing. If the trait is heritable they will pass the trait to their offspring and those who share the trait (assuming white fur stays an advantage) will also have this advantage...over time the trait will go to high frequency in the population...this is an type of observation that has been made countless times in the wild and in the lab.

quote:

---

If I work out at the gym for basketball (adapting to the game, have to get stronger to compete, ya know) and I gain muscle, your saying I or my kids (in the future) or totally different creatures??!?! No I am PE the same person/(creature.)

---

And you cannot pass on your workout to your offsping thus you example is a Lamarkian strawman and irrelevant. This fallacy you describe has been recognized as false for over 150 years.

quote:

---

Show me, Back it up! How do I know anything you say is true? Explain in greater detail, C'mon I want to see this genetic sequence data, or the the evolutionary trees!

---

Somehow I truly doubt you could even have the faintest grasp of what a tree tells you or how it is reconstructed much less doing it yourself from raw sequences...but you are very right not to take somones word for things as true...I could post links to literally thousands of papers with sequences and phylogenies..I will just take a list of this months entries..
for raw sequences, you can access the raw data atwwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.govThis is where all genetic data sets from published and much unpublished work is deposited...lets see a few references on evolutionary trees..please note, these are entries for just the last 30 days...there have been decades of research on this subject so the actual total is far far higher...i.e. tens of thousands....I would say Mark24 and I have a bit more than incredulity to base our thinking on....Items 1-20 of 58 of 3 Next1: Rocha MP, Cruz MP, Fernandes A, Waldschmidt AM, Silva-Junior JC, Pompolo SG. Related Articles, Links
Longitudinal differentiation in Melipona mandacaia (Hymenoptera, Meliponini) chromosomes.
Hereditas. 2003;138(2):133-7.
PMID: 12921165 [PubMed - in process]
2: Chenoweth SF, Hughes JM. Related Articles, Links
Oceanic interchange and nonequilibrium population structure in the estuarine dependent Indo-Pacific tasselfish, Polynemus sheridani.
Mol Ecol. 2003 Sep;12(9):2387-97.
PMID: 12919476 [PubMed - in process]
3: Galindez EJ, Estecondo S, Casanave EB. Related Articles, Links
The spleen of Zaedyus pichiy, (Mammalia, Dasypodidae): a light and electron microscopic study.
Anat Histol Embryol. 2003 Aug;32(4):194-9.
PMID: 12919068 [PubMed - in process]
4: Ding Y, Ortelli F, Rossiter LC, Hemingway J, Ranson H. Related Articles, Links
The Anopheles gambiae glutathione transferase supergene family: annotation, phylogeny and expression profiles.
BMC Genomics. 2003 Aug 13 [Epub ahead of print]
PMID: 12914673 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]
5: Kawakoshi A, Hyodo S, Yasuda A, Takei Y. Related Articles, Links
A single and novel natriuretic peptide is expressed in the heart and brain of the most primitive vertebrate, the hagfish (Eptatretus burgeri).
J Mol Endocrinol. 2003 Aug;31(1):209-20.
PMID: 12914537 [PubMed - in process]
6: Ishizaki H. Related Articles, Links
[Mitochondrial DNA Analysis of Sporothrix schenckii]
Nippon Ishinkin Gakkai Zasshi. 2003;44(3):155-7. Japanese.
PMID: 12913803 [PubMed - in process]
7: Bahr U, Schondorf E, Handermann M, Darai G. Related Articles, Links
Molecular Anatomy of Tupaia (Tree Shrew) adenovirus Genome; Evolution of Viral Genes and Viral Phylogeny.
Virus Genes. 2003 Aug;27(1):29-48.
PMID: 12913356 [PubMed - in process]
8: DeSantis TZ, Dubosarskiy I, Murray SR, Andersen GL. Related Articles, Links
Comprehensive aligned sequence construction for automated design of effective probes (CASCADE-P) using 16S rDNA.
Bioinformatics. 2003 Aug 12;19(12):1461-8.
PMID: 12912825 [PubMed - in process]
9: Herbeck JT, Novembre J. Related Articles, Links
Codon usage patterns in cytochrome oxidase I across multiple insect orders.
J Mol Evol. 2003 Jun;56(6):691-701.
PMID: 12911032 [PubMed - in process]
10: Wall DP, Herbeck JT. Related Articles, Links
Evolutionary patterns of codon usage in the chloroplast gene rbcL.
J Mol Evol. 2003 Jun;56(6):673-88; discussion 689-90.
PMID: 12911031 [PubMed - in process]
11: Sjoling S, Cowan DA. Related Articles, Links
High 16S rDNA bacterial diversity in glacial meltwater lake sediment, Bratina Island, Antarctica.
Extremophiles. 2003 Aug;7(4):275-82. Epub 2003 Apr 09.
PMID: 12910387 [PubMed - in process]
12: Guidi C, Zeppa S, Barbieri E, Zambonelli A, Polidori E, Potenza L, Stocchi V. Related Articles, Links
A putative mitochondrial fission gene from the ectomycorrhizal ascomycete Tuber borchii Vittad.: cloning, characterisation and phylogeny.
Curr Genet. 2003 Aug 9 [Epub ahead of print]
PMID: 12910371 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]
13: Cesari M, Luchetti A, Passamonti M, Scali V, Mantovani B. Related Articles, Links
Polymerase chain reaction amplification of the Bag320 satellite family reveals the ancestral library and past gene conversion events in Bacillus rossius (Insecta Phasmatodea).
Gene. 2003 Jul 17;312:289-95.
PMID: 12909366 [PubMed - in process]
14: Saito A, Fujii T, Miyashita K. Related Articles, Links
Distribution and evolution of chitinase genes in Streptomyces species: involvement of gene-duplication and domain-deletion.
Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek. 2003;84(1):7-15.
PMID: 12906357 [PubMed - in process]
15: Osaki M, Yamada S, Ishizawa T, Watanabe T, Shinano T, Tuah SJ, Urayama M. Related Articles, Links
Mineral characteristics of the leaves of 166 plant species with different phylogeny in the temperate region.
Plant Foods Hum Nutr. 2003 Spring;58(2):139-52.
PMID: 12906352 [PubMed - in process]
16: Osaki M, Yamada S, Ishizawa T, Watanabe T, Shinano T, Tuah SJ, Urayama M. Related Articles, Links
Mineral characteristics of leaves of plants from different phylogeny grown in various soil types in the temperate region.
Plant Foods Hum Nutr. 2003 Spring;58(2):117-37.
PMID: 12906351 [PubMed - in process]
17: Sullivan LC, Orgeig S, Daniels CB. Related Articles, Links
The Role of Extrinsic and Intrinsic Factors in the Evolution of the Control of Pulmonary Surfactant Maturation during Development in the Amniotes.
Physiol Biochem Zool. 2003 May-Jun;76(3):281-95.
PMID: 12905114 [PubMed - in process]
18: Kurland CG, Canback B, Berg OG. Related Articles, Links
Horizontal gene transfer: A critical view.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003 Aug 5 [Epub ahead of print]
PMID: 12902542 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]
19: Gobel TW, Schneider K, Schaerer B, Mejri I, Puehler F, Weigend S, Staeheli P, Kaspers B. Related Articles, Links
IL-18 stimulates the proliferation and IFN-gamma release of CD4+ T cells in the chicken: conservation of a Th1-like system in a nonmammalian species.
J Immunol. 2003 Aug 15;171(4):1809-15.
PMID: 12902481 [PubMed - in process]
20: Long CA, Zhang GP, George TF, Long CF. Related Articles, Links
Physical theory, origin of flight, and a synthesis proposed for birds.
J Theor Biol. 2003 Sep 7;224(1):9-26.
: Kohidai L, Vakkuri O, Keresztesi M, Leppaluoto J, Csaba G. Related Articles, Links
Induction of melatonin synthesis in Tetrahymena pyriformis by hormonal imprinting--a unicellular "factory" of the indoleamine.
Cell Mol Biol (Noisy-le-grand). 2003 Jun;49(4):521-4.
PMID: 12899443 [PubMed - in process]
22: Zhu S, Fushimi H, Cai S, Komatsu K. Related Articles, Links
Phylogenetic Relationship in the Genus Panax: Inferred from Chloroplast trnK Gene and Nuclear 18S rRNA Gene Sequences.
Planta Med. 2003 Jul;69(7):647-53.
PMID: 12898422 [PubMed - in process]
23: Adell T, Grebenjuk VA, Wiens M, Muller WE. Related Articles, Links
Isolation and characterization of two T-box genes from sponges, the phylogenetically oldest metazoan taxon.
Dev Genes Evol. 2003 Jul 24 [Epub ahead of print]
PMID: 12898249 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]
24: Wei JF, Lu QM, Jin Y, Li DS, Xiong YL, Wang WY. Related Articles, Links
alpha-Neurotoxins of Naja atra and Naja kaouthia Snakes in Different Regions.
Sheng Wu Hua Xue Yu Sheng Wu Wu Li Xue Bao (Shanghai). 2003 Aug;35(8):683-8.
PMID: 12897961 [PubMed - in process]
25: Insua A, Lopez-Pinon MJ, Freire R, Mendez J. Related Articles, Links
Sequence analysis of the ribosomal DNA internal transcribed spacer region in some scallop species (Mollusca: Bivalvia: Pectinidae).
Genome. 2003 Aug;46(4):595-604.
PMID: 12897868 [PubMed - in process]
26: Jobling MA, Tyler-Smith C. Related Articles, Links
The human Y chromosome: an evolutionary marker comes of age.
Nat Rev Genet. 2003 Aug;4(8):598-612.
PMID: 12897772 [PubMed - in process]
27: Beardsley PM, Yen A, Olmstead RG. Related Articles, Links
AFLP phylogeny of Mimulus section Erythranthe and the evolution of hummingbird pollination.
Evolution Int J Org Evolution. 2003 Jun;57(6):1397-410.
PMID: 12894947 [PubMed - in process]
28: Wilson AB, Ahnesjo I, Vincent AC, Meyer A. Related Articles, Links
The dynamics of male brooding, mating patterns, and sex roles in pipefishes and seahorses (family Syngnathidae).
Evolution Int J Org Evolution. 2003 Jun;57(6):1374-86.
PMID: 12894945 [PubMed - in process]
29: Jousselin E, Rasplus JY, Kjellberg F. Related Articles, Links
Convergence and coevolution in a mutualism: evidence from a molecular phylogeny of Ficus.
Evolution Int J Org Evolution. 2003 Jun;57(6):1255-69.
PMID: 12894934 [PubMed - in process]
30: Huelsenbeck JP, Rannala B. Related Articles, Links
Detecting correlation between characters in a comparative analysis with uncertain phylogeny.
Evolution Int J Org Evolution. 2003 Jun;57(6):1237-47.
PMID: 12894932 [PubMed - in process]
31: Brosnan S, Shin W, Kjer KM, Triemer RE. Related Articles, Links
Phylogeny of the photosynthetic euglenophytes inferred from the nuclear SSU and partial LSU rDNA.
Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2003 Jul;53(Pt 4):1175-86.
PMID: 12892147 [PubMed - in process]
32: Yoon JH, Kim H, Kim IG, Kang KH, Park YH. Related Articles, Links
Erythrobacter flavus sp. nov., a slight halophile from the East Sea in Korea.
Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2003 Jul;53(Pt 4):1169-74.
PMID: 12892146 [PubMed - in process]
33: Sohn K, Hong SG, Bae KS, Chun J. Related Articles, Links
Transfer of Hongia koreensis Lee et al. 2000 to the genus Kribbella Park et al. 1999 as Kribbella koreensis comb. nov.
Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2003 Jul;53(Pt 4):1005-7.
PMID: 12892118 [PubMed - in process]
34: Imhoff JF. Related Articles, Links
Phylogenetic taxonomy of the family Chlorobiaceae on the basis of 16S rRNA and fmo (Fenna-Matthews-Olson protein) gene sequences.
Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2003 Jul;53(Pt 4):941-51.
PMID: 12892110 [PubMed - in process]
35: Losos JB, Leal M, Glor RE, De Queiroz K, Hertz PE, Rodriguez Schettino L, Lara AC, Jackman TR, Larson A. Related Articles, Links
Niche lability in the evolution of a Caribbean lizard community.
Nature. 2003 Jul 31;424(6948):542-5.
PMID: 12891355 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
36: Singleton M. Related Articles, Links
Functional and phylogenetic implications of molar flare variation in Miocene hominoids.
J Hum Evol. 2003 Jul;45(1):797-819.
PMID: 12890445 [PubMed - in process]
37: [No authors listed] Related Articles, Links
[In Process Citation]
Zh Vyssh Nerv Deiat Im I P Pavlova. 2003 May-Jun;53(3):279-89. Russian.
PMID: 12889200 [PubMed - in process]
38: Zhu W, Brendel V. Related Articles, Links
Identification, characterization and molecular phylogeny of U12-dependent introns in the Arabidopsis thaliana genome.
Nucleic Acids Res. 2003 Aug 1;31(15):4561-72.
PMID: 12888517 [PubMed - in process]
39: Baleotti FG, Moreli ML, Figueiredo LT. Related Articles, Links
Brazilian Flavivirus phylogeny based on NS5.
Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz. 2003 Apr;98(3):379-82. Epub 2003 Jul 18.
PMID: 12886419 [PubMed - in process]
40: Hu M, Gasser RB, Abs El-Osta YG, Chilton NB. Related Articles, Links
Structure and organization of the mitochondrial genome of the canine heartworm, Dirofilaria immitis.
Parasitology. 2003 Jul;127(Pt 1):37-51.Items 41-58 of 58 Previous of 341: Schurko AM, Mendoza L, Levesque CA, Desaulniers NL, de Cock AW, Klassen GR. Related Articles, Links
A molecular phylogeny of Pythium insidiosum.
Mycol Res. 2003 May;107(Pt 5):537-44.
PMID: 12884950 [PubMed - in process]
42: Meng SW, Chen ZD, Li DZ, Liang HX. Related Articles, Links
Phylogeny of Saururaceae based on mitochondrial matR gene sequence data.
J Plant Res. 2002 Apr;115(2):71-76.
PMID: 12884129 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]
43: Banks H. Related Articles, Links
Structure of Pollen Apertures in the Detarieae sensu stricto (Leguminosae: Caesalpinioideae), with Particular Reference to Underlying Structures (Zwischenkorper).
Ann Bot (Lond). 2003 Jul 24 [Epub ahead of print]
PMID: 12881406 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]
44: Martin W, Rotte C, Hoffmeister M, Theissen U, Gelius-Dietrich G, Ahr S, Henze K. Related Articles, Links
Early cell evolution, eukaryotes, anoxia, sulfide, oxygen, fungi first (?), and a tree of genomes revisited.
IUBMB Life. 2003 Apr-May;55(4-5):193-204.
PMID: 12880199 [PubMed - in process]
45: Marchitelli C, Savarese MC, Crisa A, Nardone A, Marsan PA, Valentini A. Related Articles, Links
Double muscling in Marchigiana beef breed is caused by a stop codon in the third exon of myostatin gene.
Mamm Genome. 2003 Jun;14(6):392-5.
PMID: 12879361 [PubMed - in process]
46: Al-Khalifah NS, Askari E. Related Articles, Links
Molecular phylogeny of date palm (Phoenix dactylifera L.) cultivars from Saudi Arabia by DNA fingerprinting.
Theor Appl Genet. 2003 Jul 23 [Epub ahead of print]
PMID: 12879257 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]
47: Nikaido M, Cao Y, Harada M, Okada N, Hasegawa M. Related Articles, Links
Mitochondrial phylogeny of hedgehogs and monophyly of Eulipotyphla.
Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2003 Aug;28(2):276-84.
PMID: 12878464 [PubMed - in process]
48: Delsuc F, Stanhope MJ, Douzery EJ. Related Articles, Links
Molecular systematics of armadillos (Xenarthra, Dasypodidae): contribution of maximum likelihood and Bayesian analyses of mitochondrial and nuclear genes.
Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2003 Aug;28(2):261-75.
PMID: 12878463 [PubMed - in process]
49: Murata Y, Nikaido M, Sasaki T, Cao Y, Fukumoto Y, Hasegawa M, Okada N. Related Articles, Links
Afrotherian phylogeny as inferred from complete mitochondrial genomes.
Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2003 Aug;28(2):253-60.
PMID: 12878462 [PubMed - in process]
50: de Jong WW, Stanhope MJ, Springer MS. Related Articles, Links
Papers from the symposium "Mammalian Phylogeny," Sorrento, Italy, June 16, 2002.
Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2003 Aug;28(2):169-70. No abstract available.
PMID: 12878456 [PubMed - in process]
51: Saravanan T, Weise C, Sojka D, Kopacek P. Related Articles, Links
Molecular cloning, structure and bait region splice variants of alpha2-macroglobulin from the soft tick Ornithodoros moubata.
Insect Biochem Mol Biol. 2003 Aug;33(8):841-51.
PMID: 12878230 [PubMed - in process]
52: Jackson CR, Dugas SL. Related Articles, Links
Phylogenetic analysis of bacterial and archaeal arsC gene sequences suggests an ancient, common origin for arsenate reductase.
BMC Evol Biol. 2003 Jul 23;3(1):18.
PMID: 12877744 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]
53: Nicholas DR, Ramamoorthy S, Palace V, Spring S, Moore JN, Rosenzweig RF. Related Articles, Links
Biogeochemical transformations of arsenic in circumneutral freshwater sediments.
Biodegradation. 2003 Apr;14(2):123-37.
PMID: 12877467 [PubMed - in process]
54: Carafa A, Duckett JG, Ligrone R. Related Articles, Links
The placenta in Monoclea forsteri Hook. and Treubia lacunosa (Col.) Prosk: insights into placental evolution in liverworts.
Ann Bot (Lond). 2003 Aug;92(2):299-307.
PMID: 12876192 [PubMed - in process]
55: Roy H, Becker HD, Reinbolt J, Kern D. Related Articles, Links
When contemporary aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases invent their cognate amino acid metabolism.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003 Jul 21 [Epub ahead of print]
PMID: 12874385 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]
56: Montes B, Restrepo A, McEwen JG. Related Articles, Links
[In Process Citation]
Biomedica. 2003 Jun;23(2):213-24. Spanish.
PMID: 12872561 [PubMed - in process]
57: Anisimova M, Nielsen R, Yang Z. Related Articles, Links
Effect of recombination on the accuracy of the likelihood method for detecting positive selection at amino acid sites.
Genetics. 2003 Jul;164(3):1229-36.
PMID: 12871927 [PubMed - in process]
58: Jay JM. Related Articles, Links
A review of recent taxonomic changes in seven genera of bacteria commonly found in foods.
J Food Prot. 2003 Jul;66(7):1304-9.
PMID: 12870768 [PubMed - in process]