Jump to content


Photo

The Curious Case Of Human And Chimps


  • Please log in to reply
81 replies to this topic

#1 Yorzhik

Yorzhik

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 233 posts
  • Age: 42
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Michigan

Posted 17 March 2009 - 10:06 AM

There is so many similar points to humans and chimps in their DNA's, that it seems something is different about the relationship than between most other animals.

For example, the fused chromosome, ERVs, and other DNA relevant events, that point to something different between humans and chimps than between other animal pairs.

So what happened? These are some ideas I had:
1. God experimented with chimps before making man (unlikely, in my opinion)
2. Something natural happened after the fall to produce chimps (even more unlikely, in my opinion)
3. Genetic experiments before the flood produced chimps (the most likely case, in my opinion)

I'm an "intuitive"; so I see something but I cannot explain it. I'm hoping others, "thinkers", could help figure out exactly what is going on. Most likely we won't have enough data to figure anything out, but then again, maybe we do.

#2 Yorzhik

Yorzhik

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 233 posts
  • Age: 42
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Michigan

Posted 17 March 2009 - 11:30 AM

There is so many similar points to humans and chimps in their DNA's, that it seems something is different about the relationship than between most other animals.

For example, the fused chromosome, ERVs, and other DNA relevant events, that point to something different between humans and chimps than between other animal pairs.

So what happened? These are some ideas I had:
1. God experimented with chimps before making man (unlikely, in my opinion)
2. Something natural happened after the fall to produce chimps (even more unlikely, in my opinion)
3. Genetic experiments before the flood produced chimps (the most likely case, in my opinion)

I'm an "intuitive"; so I see something but I cannot explain it. I'm hoping others, "thinkers", could help figure out exactly what is going on. Most likely we won't have enough data to figure anything out, but then again, maybe we do.

View Post

Oh, one more likely one: Chimps just happen to have been created by God very similar to each other from some earlier idea that God had before he created either of them.

#3 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7048 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 17 March 2009 - 12:33 PM

What if the fused chromosomes and other anomalies were a result of both kinds (Chimps and Humans) experiencing similar ecological changes? I believe the pre-flood world was much different than today. The pre-flood world would have resembled the paradise Adam and Eve were in, even though unbridled entropy was already active. Different atmosphere caused by a vapor canopy or some other radiation blocking feature that was destroyed when the fountains of the great deep broke open. The best evidence for this is in the fossil record. The pre-flood world promoted giantism all the way from plants and animals to huge insects.

The Bible records the life span of man dropping off sharply after the Flood. There is ample reason to believe the earth was quite different before the flood even though it was after the fall.

If the earth experienced the violent rearrangement of continents and the post-flood world has higher radiation levels, possibly a thinner atmosphere, and poorer vegetation then wouldn't it be easy to perceive similar genetic mutations caused by the new conditions to show up universally among organisms and most similarly among similar organisms with similar diets and similar habitats?

#4 Yorzhik

Yorzhik

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 233 posts
  • Age: 42
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Michigan

Posted 19 March 2009 - 07:29 AM

What if the fused chromosomes and other anomalies were a result of both kinds (Chimps and Humans) experiencing similar ecological changes? I believe the pre-flood world was much different than today. The pre-flood world would have resembled the paradise Adam and Eve were in, even though unbridled entropy was already active. Different atmosphere caused by a vapor canopy or some other radiation blocking feature that was destroyed when the fountains of the great deep broke open. The best evidence for this is in the fossil record. The pre-flood world promoted giantism all the way from plants and animals to huge insects.

The Bible records the life span of man dropping off sharply after the Flood. There is ample reason to believe the earth was quite different before the flood even though it was after the fall.

If the earth experienced the violent rearrangement of continents and the post-flood world has higher radiation levels, possibly a thinner atmosphere, and poorer vegetation then wouldn't it be easy to perceive similar genetic mutations caused by the new conditions to show up universally among organisms and most similarly among similar organisms with similar diets and similar habitats?

View Post

That is a good point. However, the changes are too identical for it to be chalked up to chance in my opinion. Also, we would see at least a few other pairs of relatively unrelated animals that had the same kind of curious ties in their DNA.

#5 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 19 March 2009 - 07:38 AM

Here i some info on the subject from two videos I did on youtube,

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.c...></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.c...olor2=0x54abd6" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.c...></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.c...olor2=0x54abd6" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

#6 Yorzhik

Yorzhik

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 233 posts
  • Age: 42
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Michigan

Posted 19 March 2009 - 07:57 AM

Oh, one more likely one: Chimps just happen to have been created by God very similar to each other from some earlier idea that God had before he created either of them.

View Post

When I said "Chimps just happen to have been created by God very similar to each other from some earlier idea that God had before he created either of them." I meant "Chimps and humans just happen to have been created by God very similar to each other from some earlier idea that God had before he created either of them."

#7 RobotArchie

RobotArchie

    Junior Member

  • Banned
  • PipPip
  • 72 posts
  • Age: 49
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • London, UK

Posted 19 March 2009 - 08:09 AM

I seriously have to wonder about the two videos posted right above here.......

Science actually says that the modern chimp is not a modern human and a modern man is not a modern chimp.

Science based methods such as DNA testing shows a common ancestor between modern chimps and modern men as it also shows the relationship and common descent with all other modern life forms. We are all related, it's just that being primates we are more closely associated in time with our 'cousins' the chimps.

DNA testing has not confirmed the hypothesis of the direct relationship between modern women and modern man's rib bone quite yet either....... but there may be some element of truth in the Bible where life is traceable back to a handful of mud ....... where that differs in not being directly traceable to any one particular puddle of primordial slime as yet unknown.

Perhaps such conditions may even be found in extrapolations based on the modern area around Bahrain where it's thought that perhaps the pre-Christian era 'Garden Of Eden' was located? Who knows? Hope, like Spring - springs eternal...... and after that. follows the autumn leaves of the Fall.....

#8 Yorzhik

Yorzhik

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 233 posts
  • Age: 42
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Michigan

Posted 19 March 2009 - 09:32 AM

I seriously have to wonder about the two videos posted right above here.......

Science actually says that the modern chimp is not a modern human and a modern man is not a modern chimp.

Science based methods such as DNA testing shows a common ancestor between modern chimps and modern men as it also shows the relationship and common descent with all other modern life forms. We are all related, it's just that being primates we are more closely associated in time with our 'cousins' the chimps.

DNA testing has not confirmed the hypothesis of the direct relationship between modern women and modern man's rib bone quite yet either....... but there may be some element of truth in the Bible where life is traceable back to a handful of mud ....... where that differs in not being directly traceable to any one particular puddle of primordial slime as yet unknown.

Perhaps such conditions may even be found in extrapolations based on the modern area around Bahrain where it's thought that perhaps the pre-Christian era 'Garden Of Eden' was located? Who knows? Hope, like Spring - springs eternal...... and after that. follows the autumn leaves of the Fall.....

View Post

When you say "Science based methods such as DNA testing shows a common ancestor between modern chimps and modern men as it also shows the relationship and common descent with all other modern life forms." you are simply saying something that isn't true. DNA shows a relationship between humans and chimps, which I am exploring in this thread. But DNA evidence also shows that all organisms could not possibly have a common ancestor, which I am not exploring on this thread.

#9 RobotArchie

RobotArchie

    Junior Member

  • Banned
  • PipPip
  • 72 posts
  • Age: 49
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • London, UK

Posted 19 March 2009 - 11:21 AM

When you say "Science based methods such as DNA testing shows a common ancestor between modern chimps and modern men as it also shows the relationship and common descent with all other modern life forms." you are simply saying something that isn't true. DNA shows a relationship between humans and chimps, which I am exploring in this thread. But DNA evidence also shows that all organisms could not possibly have a common ancestor, which I am not exploring on this thread.

View Post


I for one am glad to hear it... lol! have at it!

DNA also shows our disturbingly close relationship to mushrooms........ but it's not a terribly sexy topic to explore, lol!

We're kept in the dark........ and what do they feed us on?...........

#10 Robert Byers

Robert Byers

    Junior Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 40 posts
  • Age: 44
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Toronto,Ontario,Canada

Posted 20 March 2009 - 09:33 PM

This creationist wants to find very little difference between us and chimpsx.
The apes were made before people. So God would only pick the best body for to put a being in his image. What else would he pick? A bug, fish, or bird?
Unless there is a type of body so different as to force us to see it as very different from other creatures then the ape body could only be picked as its the best body to live in as we do.
All creatures have the same basic plan of eyes, ears, lungs, legs, head and so god would not leave this plan just so we don't think we are from apes.

Any thing in genetics can be seen as from like need or cause equals like result. genetics is just that. atomic reactions to other atomic actions. we and apes should or could have the same genetics on any thing.

#11 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 20 March 2009 - 11:21 PM

This creationist wants to find very little difference between us and chimpsx.
The apes were made before people. So God would only pick the best body for to put a being in his image. What else would he pick? A bug, fish, or bird?
Unless there is a type of body so different as to force us to see it as very different from other creatures then the ape body could only be picked as its the best body to live in as we do.
All creatures have the same basic plan of eyes, ears, lungs, legs, head and so god would not leave this plan just so we don't think we are from apes.

Any thing in genetics can be seen as from like need or cause equals like result. genetics is just that. atomic reactions to other atomic actions. we and apes should or could have the same genetics on any thing.

View Post


God's word says that He formed man from the dust of the ground and breathed life into Him which made him a living soul.

So you trying to say that God used apes to make man, is not where in the Bible. And by the way that is a bad representation of YEC. So since you sound more like a theistic evolutionist. Or someone who is toying with us. I changed you world view to fit what you believe. Which by the way is not wht YEC believes because your view is not literal.

#12 Guest_tharock220_*

Guest_tharock220_*
  • Guests

Posted 21 March 2009 - 01:31 PM

What if the fused chromosomes and other anomalies were a result of both kinds (Chimps and Humans) experiencing similar ecological changes? I believe the pre-flood world was much different than today. The pre-flood world would have resembled the paradise Adam and Eve were in, even though unbridled entropy was already active. Different atmosphere caused by a vapor canopy or some other radiation blocking feature that was destroyed when the fountains of the great deep broke open. The best evidence for this is in the fossil record. The pre-flood world promoted giantism all the way from plants and animals to huge insects.

The Bible records the life span of man dropping off sharply after the Flood. There is ample reason to believe the earth was quite different before the flood even though it was after the fall.

If the earth experienced the violent rearrangement of continents and the post-flood world has higher radiation levels, possibly a thinner atmosphere, and poorer vegetation then wouldn't it be easy to perceive similar genetic mutations caused by the new conditions to show up universally among organisms and most similarly among similar organisms with similar diets and similar habitats?

View Post


Yes, but why is only the human chromosome fused??? What kind of radiation would have been released due to continental shift???

Ikester, humans didn't evolve from chimps, and yeah chromosome 2 could have always been fused, but the vast majority of chromosomes we've seen don't have telomeres in the middle.

#13 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7048 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 21 March 2009 - 02:17 PM

Yes, but why is only the human chromosome fused???  What kind of radiation would have been released due to continental shift???

View Post

What you're assuming is that continental shift was the only difference between then and now. You claim to be a Christian. Do you agree that Humans lived 800 to 900 years before the Flood?

I at least know that you'll agree that the large vegetarian dinosaurs had disproportionately small nostrils for the size of their body. You'll also agree that insects grew much larger than our current environment can support. There was more than just continental shift. I have the evidence to support that things were different but I won't conclude to be certain what those differences were, though there are some interesting speculations as to what they could have been.

#14 Archea

Archea

    Junior Member

  • Banned
  • PipPip
  • 34 posts
  • Age: 18
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • Maryland

Posted 23 March 2009 - 05:26 AM

Adam,

The content of the atmosphere is always changing. I think in the past when the dinosaurs were around the oxygen levels were higher than they are now, I think this is why in the past we've seen gigantic creatures. But I am curious as to why you claim that radiation levels were higher post-flood. Not all mutations are a result of radiation.

Going to the part about humans living 800 years pre-flood. As I've discussed this with others here, the early Hebrews did not distinguish between the soul and the physical body. And my religion professor explained it to the class that what the authors we're trying to convey through number of years lived was how close people were to God. Over time people became more and more corrupt as shown through the decrease in years lived which equal the spiritual connection to God.

#15 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7048 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 23 March 2009 - 07:14 AM

Archea,

You missed the point. Things having been very different in the past would hinder how accurately we can pinpoint events through the present... unless we had a reliable eyewitness... :D

Your professor makes his claims from silence I assure you. He has no evidence and vague non connections concocted in his head or the head of another liberal theologian.

#16 Archea

Archea

    Junior Member

  • Banned
  • PipPip
  • 34 posts
  • Age: 18
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • Maryland

Posted 23 March 2009 - 06:43 PM

Archea,

You missed the point. Things having been very different in the past would hinder how accurately we can pinpoint events through the present... unless we had a reliable eyewitness... ;)

Your professor makes his claims from silence I assure you. He has no evidence and vague non connections concocted in his head or the head of another liberal theologian.

View Post


His claims make sense, and he has probably studied this much more than any one of us. On another thread I was attacked for going against what a professional in their field said, just because he is considered to have authority through his degree. Could I not make the same argument here? Here is someone his has studied Christianity both professionally and personally (I happen to know he is also a Christian), and you think you know better than him? Paraphrasing from the other post: 'you obviously have no idea what you are talking about'.


But putting theology behind, how would the world being different than today hinder scientific research? No scientists or creationist so far has even slightly hinted that the laws themselves would be different. So why can't we use science to determine what happened in the past?

I know we can use Ice core samples from the Arctic to determine things like, atmospheric composition, temperature and precipitation thousands of years ago. No eyewitnesses needed :lol:

#17 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7048 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 23 March 2009 - 07:45 PM

His claims make sense, and he has probably studied this much more than any one of us.

View Post

I'm sure he has many reasons for believing what he does but don't assume that someone holds a position necessarily because they've exhaustively and objectively researched it with only the truth in mind.

On another thread I was attacked for going against what a professional in their field said, just because he is considered to have authority through his degree.

View Post

Here? I have a hard time believing that... we're all a bunch of rebels here, we only believe things if they're true. Can you provide a link?

Paraphrasing from the other post: 'you obviously have no idea what you are talking about'.

View Post

Can you provide a link?

But putting theology behind, how would the world being different than today hinder scientific research? No scientists or creationist so far has even slightly hinted that the laws themselves would be different. So why can't we use science to determine what happened in the past?

View Post

The question is; should we lay assumptions and limitations on the table before assuming that we have overturned the plainest reading of scripture which has proven itself 100% reliable in the plainest sense. Jesus took Genesis as plainly written so shouldn't your professor?

I know we can use Ice core samples from the Arctic to determine things like, atmospheric composition, temperature and precipitation thousands of years ago. No eyewitnesses needed ;)

View Post

Ice Core data is loaded with assumptions. Please look up the lost squadron sometime and notice how environmental changes can produce faulty data regarding ice layers if faulty assumptions are imposed onto present observations.

If you wish to discuss liberal theology or ice core data consider starting a new thread.

#18 assist24

assist24

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 251 posts
  • Age: 40
  • no affiliation
  • Agnostic
  • United States

Posted 23 March 2009 - 09:11 PM

Just to bring everyone up to speed on the actual genetic data, here is a nice overview from the Stanford University Understanding Genetics project of the observed chromosome 2 fusion evidence.

Chimpanzee and human chromosomes are very similar. The human chromosome 2 is made up of two fused chromosomes from the common human-chimp ancestor, giving the humans 23 pairs instead of 24 seen in chimps.

Posted Image
H=Human, C=Chimp

What evidence do we have that two chromosomes fused to create human chromosome 2?

The very strong evidence to back up the fusion comes from the weird architecture of chromosome 2. Chromosomes usually have a centromere in the middle and a telomere at each end. But human chromosome 2 has telomeres both in the middle and the ends. And it has two centromeres too. The easiest (and possibly only) explanation is that this happened because of the fusion of two chromosomes.

As I said before, chromosomes have a centromere and two telomeres. The centromere is a DNA sequence that is found near the middle of the chromosome. It is used to separate chromosomes during mitosis (replication). Telomeres are DNA sequences that are found at the ends of chromosomes. They protect the chromosomes from losing sequence during DNA replication.

Now let's predict what would happen to our chromosomes if there was a fusion event. We would expect to find telomeres (end sequences) where they don't belong (in the middle of a chromosome). We would also expect to find two centromeres in a single chromosome.

And that is exactly what we find in human chromosome 2. As I said before, this chromosome has two centromeres and telomeres where they don't belong.

Now let's go a little deeper into the evidence. Remember that telomeres are DNA sequences found at the ends of chromosomes. They are made up of many small DNA repeats that run toward the end of the chromosome. There is also a unique pattern of DNA sequence called the pre-telomeric region. This lies just before the telomere. And every chromosome has these sequences.

At the proposed fusion point we find both telomeric and pre-telomeric sequences. In fact, we first see pre-telomeric sequence, then telomeric sequence. Then we see the telomeres inverted and the pretelomeres too (see the figure below). This is exactly what we would predict for a chromosome fusion.

But these sequences don't look exactly like the telomere sequences we see at the ends of the chromosomes. These fusion telomere sequences have collected many DNA changes over time. Biologists can still recognize these sequences at the fusion as old telomeres because even though they aren't exactly the same, they are still pretty similar. At some places they are about 80-90% similar!

And the fact that the fusion telomere sequences have changed over time is even more evidence in support of common ancestry. Evolution predicts that DNA collects random mutations over time. Sometimes these mutations lead to changes we can see. And sometimes these changes don't seem to do anything. Common design predicts that DNA mutations have a purpose. But these fusion sequences don't seem to give humans any advantage.

Biologists also find a second centromere in chromosome 2. This centromere is in the exact location we would expect. It is also no longer functional--it has been inactivated over time.

Posted Image

This fusion is not the only difference between people and apes. There are millions of other changes sprinkled throughout all of the chromosomes.

Posted Image
The DNA sequence of the fusion point on human chromosome 2.

Compare the telomere sequence found at the ends of the chromosome (dark yellow) to the fused telomere sequence (light yellow). Notice how the letters change after the fusion. This is actually even stronger evidence for the fusion. Remember that DNA has 2 strands but we are only showing one. The match for TTTAGG on the other strand would be CCTAAA the way we have written it.

Stanford University source


Here is a recent (2005) paper with a detailed look at the chromosome 2 fusion evidence.

Generation and annotation of the DNA sequences of human chromosomes 2 and 4
LaDeana W. Hillier,  Tina A. Graves, Robert S. Fulton, et al.
Nature 434, 724-731 (7 April 2005)

Abstract:  Human chromosome 2 is unique to the human lineage in being the product of a head-to-head fusion of two intermediate-sized ancestral chromosomes. Chromosome 4 has received attention primarily related to the search for the Huntington's disease gene, but also for genes associated with Wolf-Hirschhorn syndrome, polycystic kidney disease and a form of muscular dystrophy. Here we present approximately 237 million base pairs of sequence for chromosome 2, and 186 million base pairs for chromosome 4, representing more than 99.6% of their euchromatic sequences. Our initial analyses have identified 1,346 protein-coding genes and 1,239 pseudogenes on chromosome 2, and 796 protein-coding genes and 778 pseudogenes on chromosome 4. Extensive analyses confirm the underlying construction of the sequence, and expand our understanding of the structure and evolution of mammalian chromosomes, including gene deserts, segmental duplications and highly variant regions.

source


From the paper:

Chromosome 2 is unique to the human lineage of evolution, having emerged as a result of head-to-head fusion of two acrocentric chromosomes that remained separate in other primates. The precise fusion site has been located in 2q13–2q14.1 (ref. 2; hg16:114455823–114455838), where our analysis confirmed the presence of multiple subtelomeric duplications to chromosomes 1, 5, 8, 9, 10, 12, 19, 21 and 22 (Fig. 3; Supplementary Fig. 3a, region A). During the formation of human chromosome 2, one of the two centromeres became inactivated (2q21, which corresponds to the centromere from chimp chromosome 13) and the centromeric structure quickly deterioriated42. A search of genome sequence for the presence of vestigial centromere and pericentromeric sequences identified a 2.6-Mb region in 2q21.1–2q21.2 that is enriched for pericentromeric duplications to chromosomes 1, 7, 9, 10, 13, 14, 15, 18, 21 and 22 as well as a variety of centromeric satellite repeat sequence motifs (HSAT5, GSATII, ACRO1). The degree of sequence identity of the interchromosomal duplications (< 98%) suggests that these pericentromeric segmental duplications existed before the formation of this chromosome. Within this 2.6-Mb interval, we identified a relatively large tract of satellite sequence (three tracts totalling 31,198 bp of alpha-satellite sequence over 36,696 bp), which likely demarcates the position of the ancestral centromere (Supplementary Fig. 3a, region B.). These data raise the possibility that ancestral telomeres and ancestral centromeres that have disappeared over the course of mammalian chromosomal evolution might be marked by the presence of an abundance of residual pericentromeric and subtelomeric duplications.

Posted Image
Fig. 3 Large (> 10 kb), highly similar (> 95%) intrachromosomal (blue) and interchromosomal (red) segmental duplications are shown for a 3-Mb region along the horizontal line of chromosome 2, in increments of 0.5 Mb. The upper panel shows extensive duplication with pericentromeric regions on other chromosomes. Centromeres are shown in purple. The coloured vertical bars underneath chromosome 2 are satellite sequences. The lower panel shows the percentage identity of each pairwise alignment. Coloured bars represent alignments from different chromosomes.


Hope that helps.

#19 Robert Byers

Robert Byers

    Junior Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 40 posts
  • Age: 44
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Toronto,Ontario,Canada

Posted 23 March 2009 - 11:22 PM

God's word says that He formed man from the dust of the ground and breathed life into Him which made him a living soul.

So you trying to say that God used apes to make man, is not where in the Bible. And by the way that is a bad representation of YEC. So since you sound more like a theistic evolutionist. Or someone who is toying with us. I changed you world view to fit what you believe. Which by the way is not wht YEC believes because your view is not literal.

View Post


Well i changed it back. i speak with integrity in saying i am yec. please don't say i'm lying or stupid in my claims to identity.

You didn't understand what i said.
Ididn't say god made man from a ape but rather ikt was the model for the human body.
yes adam was from dust and not born.
Yet the ape body is clearly the besty one for a being in gods image to b e put into unless someone has a better idea.
my idea is excellent and makes a better yec case for why the sameness of apes/man is not a problem.

#20 oliver

oliver

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 148 posts
  • Age: 57
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Brittany, France

Posted 24 March 2009 - 01:57 AM


On another thread I was attacked for going against what a professional in their field said, just because he is considered to have authority through his degree.

Here? I have a hard time believing that... we're all a bunch of rebels here, we only believe things if they're true. Can you provide a link?

View Post

I presume Archea is referring to the Welcome->Hi everyone thread here, where he outright called Professor JC Sanford a liar in respect of what he said in this interview. It seems to me very reckless for a first-year student to assume he understands the subject better than someone who has studied it for years. More likely he has misunderstood things himself.

In such a case I as a non-expert have to choose between authorities and I reckon Sanford is much more likely to be a good one.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users