Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: I have a question??? If evolution is a fact... Why??

Expand Messages
  • mark
    ... If ... is ... God, then there is also no basis by which the individual can be assured that is real. Therefore, the belief is simply a belief. And beliefs
    Message 1 of 417 , Sep 1, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In creation_evolution_debate@yahoogroups.com, eduard at home
      <yeoman@...> wrote:
      >
      > > eduard ---
      > > If there are no acts of God, then there is no God. One
      > follows from the other. All you are doing is to argue that in the
      > absense of real evidence, there just might be some unseen and
      > unknown evidence that we have missed.
      > >
      > mark; No, I am saying there is no evidence acceptable to science.
      If
      > I see, hear, or feel something I believe it exists, even if there
      is
      > no hard evidence that science can test, repeat, or substantiate. I
      > believe the life of Jesus was a case of God showing us he is real.
      >
      > eduard ---
      > If there is no basis by which science can measure the acts of
      God, then there is also no basis by which the individual can be
      assured that is real. Therefore, the belief is simply a belief.
      And beliefs can be wrong, since there is no criteria to determine
      truth.
      >
      Mark; That I will not argue, since I am well aware that Belief in
      God is just that, belief.
    • green3jeans
      ... creation_evolution_debate@yahoogroups.com, swimmingkangaroo ... in ... found ... their ... retroviral ... process ... genome, ... each ... genomes ...
      Message 417 of 417 , Sep 30, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In creation_evolution_debate@yahoogroups.com, "swimmingkangaroo"
        <debatebill@...> wrote:
        >
        > --- In
        creation_evolution_debate@yahoogroups.com, "swimmingkangaroo"
        > <debatebill@> wrote:
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > > Prediction 4.5: Molecular evidence - Endogenous retroviruses
        > > >
        > > > Figure 4.4.1. Human endogenous retrovirus K (HERV-K) insertions
        in
        > > > identical chromosomal locations in various primates (Reprinted
        > from
        > > > Lebedev et al. 2000, © 2000, with permission from Elsevier
        > > Science).
        > > >
        > > > Endogenous retroviruses provide yet another example of molecular
        > > > sequence evidence for universal common descent. Endogenous
        > > > retroviruses are molecular remnants of a past parasitic viral
        > > > infection. Occasionally, copies of a retrovirus genome are
        found
        > in
        > > > its host's genome, and these retroviral gene copies are called
        > > > endogenous retroviral sequences. Retroviruses (like the AIDS
        > virus or
        > > > HTLV1, which causes a form of leukemia) make a DNA copy of
        their
        > own
        > > > viral genome and insert it into their host's genome. If this
        > happens
        > > > to a germ line cell (i.e. the sperm or egg cells) the
        retroviral
        > DNA
        > > > will be inherited by descendants of the host. Again, this
        process
        > is
        > > > rare and fairly random, so finding retrogenes in identical
        > > > chromosomal positions of two different species indicates common
        > > > ancestry.
        > > >
        > > > Confirmation:
        > > > In humans, endogenous retroviruses occupy about 1% of the
        genome,
        > in
        > > > total constituting ~30,000 different retroviruses embedded in
        each
        > > > person's genomic DNA (Sverdlov 2000). There are at least seven
        > > > different known instances of common retrogene insertions between
        > > > chimps and humans, and this number is sure to grow as both these
        > > > organism's genomes are sequenced (Bonner et al. 1982; Dangel et
        > al.
        > > > 1995; Svensson et al. 1995; Kjellman et al. 1999; Lebedev et al.
        > > > 2000; Sverdlov 2000). Figure 4.4.1 shows a phylogenetic tree of
        > > > several primates, including humans, from a recent study which
        > > > identified numerous shared endogenous retroviruses in the
        genomes
        > of
        > > > these primates (Lebedev et al. 2000). The arrows designate the
        > > > relative insertion times of the viral DNA into the host genome.
        > All
        > > > branches after the insertion point (to the right) carry that
        > > > retroviral DNA - a reflection of the fact that once a
        retrovirus
        > has
        > > > inserted into the germ-line DNA of a given organism, it will be
        > > > inherited by all descendents of that organism.
        > > >
        > > > The Felidae (i.e. cats) provide another example. The standard
        > > > phylogenetic tree has small cats diverging later than large
        cats.
        > The
        > > > small cats (e.g. the jungle cat, European wildcat, African
        > wildcat,
        > > > blackfooted cat, and domestic cat) share a specific retroviral
        > gene
        > > > insertion. In contrast, all other carnivores which have been
        > tested
        > > > lack this retrogene (Futuyma 1998, pp. 293-294; Todaro et al.
        > 1975).
        > > >
        > > > Potential Falsification:
        > > > It would make no sense, macroevolutionarily, if certain other
        > mammals
        > > > (e.g. dogs, cows, platypi, etc.), had these same retrogenes in
        the
        > > > exact same chromosomal locations. For instance, it would be
        > > > incredibly unlikely for dogs to also carry the three HERV-K
        > > > insertions that are unique to humans, as shown in the upper
        right
        > of
        > > > Figure 4.4.1, since none of the other primates have these
        > retroviral
        > > > sequences.
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > Mark; Dindy Going to take this one step or section at a time as
        it
        > > > is such a long post. I started with ERV's as I thought it was
        the
        > > > strongest argument for common ancestory.
        > > > Erv's as you know insert themselves into the hosts gnome and are
        > > > then passed down or inherited by it's decendents. This much is
        > very
        > > > true, but the article implies that that is the only process
        that
        > can
        > > > be used to pass a retrovirus. Since they used Aids as an
        example I
        > > > will also. We know that Aids can be passed on from parent to
        > sibling
        > > > but it can also be contracted by other means other than
        heredity.
        > As
        > > > far as I know we believe that Aids was contracted by humans from
        > > > Chimps somehow (I am not sure we really know how) and I really
        > > > cannot believe it was contracted by sexual means between the
        two,
        > I
        > > > would suppose the most likely probability would have been
        someone
        > > > bitten by an infested primate or any of a mydraid means of
        > insertion
        > > > at the same time in history, and then passing it on to their
        > > > descendents. Due to the overall genetic similarity of our DNA,
        it
        > > > would be likely that the ERV would insert itself into the same
        > > > chromosonal locations. There are certain points in both human
        and
        > > > Primate gnomes that are considered hotspots for insertion of
        > viruses
        > > > and finding them there would be expected (see research by
        Sverdlov
        > > > on the HERV-K LTRs and chromosone 19). The Talkorigins article
        > > > states There are at least seven different known instances of
        > common
        > > > retrogene insertions between chimps and humans. Seven is not
        much
        > > > when you are talking about the human gnome. Given figures I have
        > > > managed to dig up there is somewhere between 50-60 thousand
        bases
        > in
        > > > every gnome. If the ERV is in the same exact bases of the same
        > gnome
        > > > it would be hard to refute, but the article was not that
        > definative.
        > > > I am reading a article in Nature mag called inital sequence of
        the
        > > > chimpanzee gnome and comparison to with the human gnome. It is
        > long
        > > > and fairly technical so I am going to be a while deciphering
        all
        > of
        > > > it.
        > > > The claim that common ancestry only viable explanation for
        > finding
        > > > ERVS in the same location of different species, is based off the
        > > > premise that ERV's are non functional products of a retrovial
        > > > infection randomly inserted into the host. One thought is a
        > designer
        > > > would not place a non functional sequence at the same location
        in
        > > > seperate species, and because the DNA chain is to long for
        > > > coincidental insertion that leaves common ancestry as the only
        > > > viable conclusion. That ERV's are inserted at random is an
        > > > assumption, and not all ERV's are non functional. Some are
        > > > transcriptionally active and ERV expression has been found in
        > > > humans. We do not really know for sure yet what ERV's and other
        > > > transposons may be doing in an organism or what roles they may
        > have
        > > > played in our past. If common ancestory is true there should be
        > some
        > > > common ERV's in other species of mammals also, as we would have
        > all
        > > > came from a common ancestor at one time or another in our
        > > > evolutionary past. Unless you prescibe to a theory that Primates
        > > > came from a different ancestor than other mammals. Then we would
        > > > have multiple ancestors for multiple species.
        > > >
        > >
        > Dindy:
        > Mark said: If common ancestory is true there should be some
        > > > common ERV's in other species of mammals also, as we would have
        > all
        > > > came from a common ancestor at one time or another in our
        > > > evolutionary past.
        >
        > Indeed there is a common ERV that is found in all placental
        mammals,
        > the HERV-L related elements. The HERV-L components share the same
        > commonalities across the mammalian species, researchers have found
        > that the variance of the compoennts correlates with the the
        > divergence of various species.
        >
        > For more info see:
        > "ERV-L Elements: a Family of Endogenous Retrovirus-Like Elements
        > Active throughout the Evolution of Mammals" by Laurence Bénit,1
        Jean-
        > Baptiste Lallemand,1 Jean-François Casella,1 Hervé Philippe,2 and
        > Thierry Heidmann1,* in Journal of Virology, April 1999, p. 3301-
        3308,
        > Vol. 73, No. 4
        > 0022-538X/99/$04.00+0
        >
        > http://jvi.asm.org/cgi/content/abstract/73/4/3301
        >
        green3:
        In fact, genetics is being used to re-examine taxonomical
        classifications.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.