Forensic Evidence Against Creationism

Creationists like to claim that evolutionary theory is based on an erroneous interpretation of the available evidence. Since there are no eyewitnesses, there is no way to 'demonstrate' evolution. Most importantly, they claim that the same evidence supports a creation model.It's important to note that the DNA process is so well understood that it can be used to determine paternity beyond reasonable doubt. Furthermore, there are plenty of instances where forensic evidence can be used to reconstruct quite convincingly a series of events to which there were no direct eyewitnesses.The similarities in the morphology and the genetic code of humans and chimpanzees has been claimed as evidence of common ancestry, but creationists claim this also supports 'common design.' How valid is this claim?If a professor receives a student's term paper and realizes it's very similar to a term paper submitted the prior year, the explanation could be that student B plagiarized the work of student A. On the other hand, it could be that the papers are just remarkably similar because of their common subject.The case for plagiarism, a mindless process of copying, doesn't have to point to the exact similarity of the two artifacts. Student B's name is on the term paper, obviously, the course's current texts have been included in the bibliography, and student B's alleged copying seems to have garbled a sentence that appears in legible form in Student A's paper. If the two texts are not exact, then, can we really make a case that they were not created separately?If Student B's term paper contained not just the words of Student B's term paper but its spelling and punctuation mistakes as well, it would be stretching the imagination indeed to assume that both students made exactly the same mistakes at exactly the same spots.What we know about the DNA copying process is enough to make a convincing case concerning the curious similarities as well as the telltale differences in the genomes of humans and chimps. The spot where two chromosomes fused in the human genome can still be located in the chimpanzee genome. Additionally, the identical mutation-wrecked vitamin C gene exists in both genomes at exactly the same spot.Would creationists tell Student B to deny copying Student A's paper? Since there were no eyewitnesses to the alleged plagiarism, and the two texts are not exact, would that constitute reasonable doubt? Could these two term papers really be independent creations?Creationists expect us to look at the remarkable similarities in the morphology and genes of humans and other life forms and deny the possibility that our knowledge of the DNA copying process suggests common ancestry. I submit that it is stretching the imagination to the breaking point to suggest that humans and chimps are completely separate creations, and forensic evidence supports the evolutionary explanation exclusively.------------------
The dark nursery of evolution is very dark indeed.
Brad McFall

The differences are in what we CAN NOT as of yet explain. Gish said that kinds become clearer as the divergences more appear. Eldredge simply wondered what this might be. He had not the clue. Volta thought DISSIMILARITY of metals was cause against the biology of Galvani but he was experimentally shown mistaken what we got instead was a different physics and yet for all of the constraints in last years EVOLUTION journal sans apopotosis WOLFRAM SCIENCE disavows using the same argumentation of a different physics in development say among Primates. If you scientifically hold that the similarity is due to "ancestry" then WHY ON THIS EARTH are no evolutionists trying to determine the equipollence of this continuum??? Some dont think that it can be materially found out and accept Jacob's junk yard mentality FOR WHAT WE DONT KNOW. This is a conservative paradigm despite all the lack of restraint and need NOT be in conflict with attempts to keep seperating what evolutionists dont put asunder should this facilitate visualization. I will elaborate in a book nook post soon. Using a LEGAL basis to judge any potential paradigm shift gaining gains theoretical but not necessarily hypothetical value.Why cant you leave creationists alone to investigate the extent of what we dont know??? If we KNEW the distribution of lineage dense in itself domains we might even be able to EMPRICALLY aportion some of space time and form to creationist criticism and part ot evolutionary interpreation in the form of a truce opr some such kind of "deal" Mark25 wants but as some leading biologist (Eldredge) answered Provine's question "are we at war phil?" with a yes I can only suggest we willthe lord of therings king's peace instead. But my parents are still not listening. We are not at war in my generation.