Gorilla Genome is Bad News For Evolution
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
18-05-2012, 03:56 PM
Gorilla Genome is Bad News For Evolution
What are your reponses to this kind of crap?

My brother posted this on FB and it irks me, but I have no science based retort. The only thing I can say is "wrong," but my brother has created a fine balance of science and theology in his mind and can "reason" himself into shutting me up. I wish I had a grasp of evolution, but I really don't aside from basic basic stuff.

He's been slowly questioning his faith and is kinda following in my footsteps and I think this recent doubt of evolution (he never has before) is kind of the death rattle of his faith. I'd like to push him over the edge.

Are there any laymen friendly websites that can help me understand what all this means and how to reply to this stuff?

We make our world significant by the courage of our questions and the depth of our answers.

- Carl Sagan
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-05-2012, 05:11 PM (This post was last modified: 19-05-2012 06:15 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Gorilla Genome is Bad News For Evolution
3 problems with the bible based nonsense he linked you to.

1. The science is misrepresented. Here's the reality. http://www.biologynews.net/archives/2012...uence.html

2. Even if somehow the gene sequencing projects ongoing, were to indicate that small adjustmments need to be made in the current view of Evolution, there are MASSIVE amounts of data, (including the fact that he STILL has to admit, even with this NEW data, that Homo Sapiens, is STILL related to a primate precursor)..the new data just indicates the divergence process may have been more complex than thought.

3. Genesis is a set of myths. Every Biblical scholar in the world, (except for a few nut cases), agrees on that. Seriously ? They know how the myths developed, and where the writers/editors got the component parts, and when, and how, and why it was written, re-written, and re-re-written. Too bad he is so totally ignorant. Not much you can do to fix that. Tell him to get an education. In other words, even if somehow the Theory of Evolution were to be shown to be off-base, it would NOT lead anyone to the Bible. The Bible has been debunked. The loss of Evolution, would simply lead somewhere else, NEVER again to the Bible. The Bible as an explanation is off the table. It will never again be on the table, no matter what science finds, or doesn't find. It is no longer one of the options.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein (That's a JOKE, ya idiot)
"And you quit footing the bill for these nations that are oil rich - we're paying for some of their *squirmishes* that have been going on for centuries" - Sarah Palin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
18-05-2012, 07:59 PM
RE: Gorilla Genome is Bad News For Evolution
I do believe humans have more resemblance to the chimpanzee than to the Gorilla. Due to the differences in species, a discovery in Gorilla DNA, depending on where it is, may not affect human ancestors or cousins in any way.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes pppgggr's post
19-05-2012, 12:21 AM
RE: Gorilla Genome is Bad News For Evolution
The start of the conversation should usually be "show me the conclusions you have come to in a published paper, not just the cherry-picked data you have used to come to those conclusions". It's common for lay people to either misunderstand a paper or misunderstand the significance of a particular paper. If the conclusions of a blog post based on a paper disagree with the conclusions of the paper itself then we can conclude that the blog post is extrapolating beyond the science to create an artificial degree of doubt or significance.

In this case my first steps were to look at both the references in the article and to google to the author of the blog post. Following the author's name I found a reference on rationalwiki.org[1] that specifically included a refutation of his article[2]. The response is by PZ Myers, a biology professor.

[1] http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Tomkins
[2] http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2...ous-thing/

Give me your argument in the form of a published paper, and then we can start to talk.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-05-2012, 01:43 AM
RE: Gorilla Genome is Bad News For Evolution
(19-05-2012 12:21 AM)Hafnof Wrote:  The start of the conversation should usually be "show me the conclusions you have come to in a published paper, not just the cherry-picked data you have used to come to those conclusions". It's common for lay people to either misunderstand a paper or misunderstand the significance of a particular paper. If the conclusions of a blog post based on a paper disagree with the conclusions of the paper itself then we can conclude that the blog post is extrapolating beyond the science to create an artificial degree of doubt or significance.

In this case my first steps were to look at both the references in the article and to google to the author of the blog post. Following the author's name I found a reference on rationalwiki.org[1] that specifically included a refutation of his article[2]. The response is by PZ Myers, a biology professor.

[1] http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Tomkins
[2] http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2...ous-thing/
Maybe I should have actually read the article in the first post....After reading your two articles, my statement seems idiotic.....XD.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-05-2012, 06:12 AM
RE: Gorilla Genome is Bad News For Evolution
Please don't put yourself down. I'm in my 30s and married with two children. I only deconverted officially late last year. If there's a difference in contribution to anti-creationist debate I'd put a good chunk of that down to my having obsessively watched more potholer54/potholer54debunks and c0nc0rdance youtube videos than you Smile

Give me your argument in the form of a published paper, and then we can start to talk.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-05-2012, 10:41 AM
RE: Gorilla Genome is Bad News For Evolution
A) Tell him to read the paper and not the biased reporting by those with an agenda.

B) Their conclusion of: "These results continue to clearly support a Genesis-based biblical view of unique created kinds and mankind being created in the image of God" is based on...nothing. The papers don't say this, but because they have interpreted the results to be conflicting with what they perceive as evolution, they jump to it. Argument from ignorance 101. The study didn't say what we thought it would say if evolution was true, therefore I can't think of an alternative explanation, therefore god.


C) We share a common ancestor with them, that doesn't mean we share every single piece of our DNA or anatomy with them. Each lineage split at different times and even human ancestry is more complex than is typically illustrated (the linear progression of chimp to man is not only flawed, but displays blatant racism from the early scientists that assembled it. Here is a better representation of the human lineage and notice that at ~2 million years ago there were multiple human species living at the same time. Humans all belong to the genus "Homo" so anything with that designation is human.) Dogs don't share all of the same traits with wolves, even though we can demonstrate they descended from wolves. Humans and the great apes are similar, yet different, what a surprise.


D) These differences could also be related to different selection pressures too. Each lineage evolved independently and would therefore have experienced different selection pressures. All life is related through common ancestry, yet the DNA of an insect is markedly different from that of a platypus. The differences and the similarities are significant, but they don't disprove evolution.

Evolve

Smartass
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/James_Beard2
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-05-2012, 11:29 AM (This post was last modified: 19-05-2012 02:53 PM by ghostexorcist.)
RE: Gorilla Genome is Bad News For Evolution
(18-05-2012 03:56 PM)zaika Wrote:  What are your reponses to this kind of crap?

[...]

When dealing with Creationist propaganda sites, never ever take any article at face value. I'm afraid Hafnof beat me to the punch about looking at their sources. In addition, always check what the science blogs have to say. You probably would have run onto PZ Myer's rebuttal quicker if you had done this step first.

(19-05-2012 12:21 AM)Hafnof Wrote:  The start of the conversation should usually be "show me the conclusions you have come to in a published paper, not just the cherry-picked data you have used to come to those conclusions". It's common for lay people to either misunderstand a paper or misunderstand the significance of a particular paper. If the conclusions of a blog post based on a paper disagree with the conclusions of the paper itself then we can conclude that the blog post is extrapolating beyond the science to create an artificial degree of doubt or significance.

In this case my first steps were to look at both the references in the article and to google to the author of the blog post. Following the author's name I found a reference on rationalwiki.org[1] that specifically included a refutation of his article[2]. The response is by PZ Myers, a biology professor.

[1] http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Tomkins
[2] http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2...ous-thing/

Good catch, my friend.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: