Discussing the evidence that support creationism

Hi Aquilegia,Welcome to EvC, I hope you take the time to learn a little something here. I will tackle your point number 3: This is just simply false. In all genetic taxonomies I have seen snakes fall out with other diapsids and group with lizards as Lepidosauromorpha within the diapsid clade. What I suspect you are referring to is the old 1965 molecular sequence of the cytochrome-c protein that showed that humans and rattlesnakes had very similar aa sequences in this protein. First of all the similarity is not as great as once believed (although still remarkably similar). A 1991 study (Ambler & Daniel, 1991) found a great deal of error in the 1965 work, and they discuss the pitfalls of non-genetic molecular phylogenies. Basically, because of the highly conserved nature and redundancy of some proteins, they do not make good phylogenetic trees because they tend to re-evolve multiple times, exist in several forms in a single species, etc. Think about hemoglobin, it is found in tetrapods but also in some clams, worms, etc. No one would think a valid tree could be drawn using just one protein such as hemoglobin. The authors also discuss the high rate of convergence in cytochrome sequences in widely different taxa again reinforcing how it cannot be used alone for phylogenies.Ambler RP and Daniel M (1991) Rattlesnake cytochrome c. A re-appraisal of the reported amino acid sequence. Biochemical Journal 274(3):825-831

---

"I have seen so far because I have stood on the bloated corpses of my competitors" - Dr Burgess Bowder

Ray, every thinking person of any ilk should look at everything as an opportunity to learn. If you do not then I am sad for you. I go to different churches that I do not believe in, why? To learn. I read websites from YEC's, from conservatives, from communists, from vegans to Nazis. Why? To learn. I want to know what people think and why they do it. If creationists come to EvC with the goal of evidencing creationism and falsifying evolution then they have done a piss-poor job of it. If they come with any interest in learning then material is provided here.You cannot, as a veteran of these debates, seriously identify yourself with those that burst in here with "Paluxy man-track" arguments can you? My hope is that those people will stick around at least as long as it takes to recognize the lies they have been told.Edited by Lithodid-Man, : To clarify point before response

---

"I have seen so far because I have stood on the bloated corpses of my competitors" - Dr Burgess Bowder

So that is the most you got out of this thread. Then I concede, Ray is right. You did not come here to learn a thing. I am a fool for thinking someone might have bettered themselves with this thread (or others on EvC). Sorry for wasting your time.

---

"I have seen so far because I have stood on the bloated corpses of my competitors" - Dr Burgess Bowder