God sucks!

[mcgonser]

But what about the fact that chimps and humans share 96% of the same DNA?  Ole' Jeebus folk say it's all:

Can you prove that??? I don't think so. I like the theory that if man evolved from ape then the ape would of died out of existence thru evolution.

[Locutus]

Can you prove that???  I don't think so.

But of course I can.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/08/0831_050831_chimp_genes.html

http://www.genome.gov/15515096

But I don't guess the National Institutes of Health matters much to you since it's science and all that.  But, if you are indeed studious as you claim, perhaps you'll find that reading interesting.  Humans and chimps share about 96% of the same DNA.  Maybe you came from the rib of an ape. 

I like the theory that is man evolved from ape than the ape would of died out of existence.

I thought you were studious, educated, and all.  If you were, you would know that evolution clearly does not state that humans evolved from apes.  It merely states that we have a common ancestor with the apes. 

You're really studious?

[Exterminator]

I thought you were studious, educated, and all.  If you were, you would know that evolution clearly does not state that humans evolved from apes.  It merely states that we have a common ancestor with the apes. 

You're really studious?

I'm guessing that's a rhetorical question?   

[Henry Hawk]

Humans and chimps share about 96% of the same DNA. 

Just for arguements sake, I did copy and paste this from another article I have read, it goes like this:


Does a high degree of similarity mean that two DNA sequences have the same meaning or function? No, not necessarily. Compare the following sentences:

There are many scientists today who question the evolutionary paradigm and its atheistic philosophical implications.
or
There are not many scientists today who question the evolutionary paradigm and its atheistic philosophical implications.

These sentences have 97% homology and yet have almost opposite meanings! There is a strong analogy here to the way in which large DNA sequences can be turned on or off by relatively small control sequences.

The DNA similarity data does NOT quite mean what the evolutionary popularizers claim!

[Exterminator]

Just for arguements sake, I did copy and paste this from another article I have read, it goes like this:


Does a high degree of similarity mean that two DNA sequences have the same meaning or function? No, not necessarily. Compare the following sentences:

There are many scientists today who question the evolutionary paradigm and its atheistic philosophical implications.
or
There are not many scientists today who question the evolutionary paradigm and its atheistic philosophical implications.

These sentences have 97% homology and yet have almost opposite meanings! There is a strong analogy here to the way in which large DNA sequences can be turned on or off by relatively small control sequences.

The DNA similarity data does NOT quite mean what the evolutionary popularizers claim!

That is the most ridiculous arguement (sic) you've offered to date.

[Bo D]

God sucks because his chillins' say this is a lie:

Not all of us say that, Dude!

[Bo D]

man evolved from an ape

Scientists have NEVER said any such thing. The only ones who have ever proposed that idea are the under/un-educated idiots who have no understanding of science.

[Henry Hawk]

That is the most ridiculous arguement (sic) you've offered to date.

I really think there is a good analogy there.......the article goes on to say:

What if human and chimp DNA was even 96% homologous? What would that mean? Would it mean that humans could have 'evolved' from a common ancestor with chimps? Not at all! The amount of information in the 3 billion base pairs in the DNA in every human cell has been estimated to be equivalent to that in 1,000 books of encyclopedia. If humans were 'only' 4% different this still amounts to 120 million base pairs, equivalent to approximately 12 million words, or 40 large books of information. This is surely an impossible barrier for mutations (random changes) to cross...

[Bo D]

I really think there is a good analogy there.......the article goes on to say:

What if human and chimp DNA was even 96% homologous? What would that mean? Would it mean that humans could have 'evolved' from a common ancestor with chimps? Not at all! The amount of information in the 3 billion base pairs in the DNA in every human cell has been estimated to be equivalent to that in 1,000 books of encyclopedia. If humans were 'only' 4% different this still amounts to 120 million base pairs, equivalent to approximately 12 million words, or 40 large books of information. This is surely an impossible barrier for mutations (random changes) to cross...

I would sure like to see that entire article and the credentials of the person that researched it.

[Henry Hawk]

I would sure like to see that entire article and the credentials of the person that researched it.

Not a problem Bo..Here ya go..

[Exterminator]

Not a problem Bo..Here ya go..

Christian answers...who saw that coming?

[Bo D]

A quote from the article ....

"There has simply been insufficient time for ape-like creatures to turn into humans."

How do you explain the evolution of wolf to chihuahua in, say 20,000 years or so?

[Exterminator]

A quote from the article ....

"There has simply been insufficient time for ape-like creatures to turn into humans."

How do you explain the evolution of wolf to chihuahua in, say 20,000 years or so?

That couldn't be possible because according to the bible, the earth is only 6,000 years old. 

[Bo D]

That couldn't be possible because according to the bible, the earth is only 6,000 years old. 

I really don't think the Bible says that. It's just an invention by a few idiots which has been repeated by quite a few more.

[Exterminator]

I really don't think the Bible says that. It's just an invention by a few idiots which has been repeated by quite a few more.

Are you sure?

The Bible has very clear Genaelogies in Genesis and I Chronicles that give the ages of the descendants of Adam. This allows very precise calculations of the time that lapsed from Adam to Abraham. Historians have also identified not only the time when Abraham lived, but also King David and even Jesus Himself.
The following timeline is centered around three generally accepted dates:
1) The call to rebuild Jerusalem -444 B.C.
2) The birth of Christ -6 B.C.--accurate historical timing has shown us that Jesus' birth came 6 years earlier than it was once thought
3) The death of Herod the Great -4 B.C.

By creating this timeline, we can place the birth of Adam at 4174 B.C. [give or take a year or two!] At this point, for us to show Biblically that the earth itself is approximately 6,177 years old.