Darwinism and Nazism

Dear WJ,This is what I encountered on another board:http://creationtalk.com/ubb/Forum2/HTML/000148.html
Background"Most mammals possess a functional gene encoding the enzyme protein known as
L-gulono-gamma-lactone oxidase (GLO) which is required for synthesising ascorbic
acid. However, most primates (including man) and guinea pigs do not possess this
functional gene and must consume ascorbic acid (vitamin C) in their diet or they
will become sick (scurvy).But primates (including man) do possess a gene which is very similar to the GLO
gene of other mammals, however it suffers from crippling mutations which render
it inoperative. Therefore it is termed a pseudogene."A small section of the GLO pseudogene sequence was recently compared from
human, chimpanzee, macaque and orangutan; all four pseudogenes were found to
share a common crippling single nucleotide deletion that would cause the
remainder of the protein to be translated in the wrong triplet reading frame
(Ohta and Nishikimi BBA 1472:408, 1999)."Problems for "Intelligent Design""Then God saw everything that He had made, and indeed it was very good." Genesis
1:31 NKJV
The example of human GLO pseudogene is explicable and predictable using the
theory of biological evolution. However it presents massive problems for
intelligent design adherents.Why can most other mammals synthesise ascorbic acid when man has to get it
through his diet? If the intelligent designer knew how to make the GLO gene
properly, why not give one to man? What is intelligent about including a
susceptibility to scurvy in the human genome?Why give man a faulty GLO gene? Wouldn't it be more "intelligent" to give him
nothing at all rather than some junk sequences which add to the genetic load?In anticipation of some fundie argument that the mutation in the human GLO gene
is man's punishment from god after eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge,
why did god also punish other primates and guinea pigs?Why does man share the identical deletion mutation in the GLO pseudogene with
other primates? Did the intelligent designer lose the blueprint when he got
around to making primates? Why the identical deletion when any old deletion
would probably do the job?And this is only one example. There is much more evidence of genetic errors
shared by man and other primates and a pattern reflecting relative evolutionary
closeness between the primates, including man.Intelligent Designer RIP"PB: IF YOU USE MY EXAMPLES THAT I ALREADY EXPLAINED FROM A GUToB STANCE, PLEASE INCLUDE MY INFO TOO. LEAVING OUT DATA IS NO SCIENCE. SO, CARE TO DISCUSS THE GLO GENE IN DETAIL, AGAIN?Best wishes,
Peter

Dear WJ,WJ: I DO want to discuss science, not lurid, unsupported speculation like your GUToB.PB: Unsupported only for the blind/mute.WJ: IIRC, you have previously made assertions about the presence of populations of persons who can synthesise ascorbic acid, but the evidence was never provided.PB: Strawman. I invite you to discuss this topic again.Feel free to start a new thread and provide any corrections you think necessary to my little piece, including how your GUToB means that humans and other closely related primates can't synthesis ascorbic acid. Not enough creatons in the diet?PB: Another strawman. The NONRANDOM indel-mutaion is introduced through a mechanism described by Caporale in her book on Page 38. I do NOT have to use creatons. You, in another thread, even mailed that I wasn't serious about the creatons. But now, you take it as a strawman. Sad.PB: Why didn't you post it to this board? Since I immediately rebut and obliterate it? Better show the public all scientific information, instead of a selection. You know what kind of science it is that deliberately leaves out data/explanation, don't you.
To spell it out for you: PS...O-science.Best wishes,
Peter