No, you misunderstand what actually happened in my case. The order of events
was that I became convinced that the only way the biological data could be
accounted for was via the theory of evolution. It was the pseudogenes that
did it for me.
The epsilong immunoglobulin pseudogene, which is a broken gene, it doesn't
work, have been found at the same location in the genomes of chimps, gorilla,
gibbons and man. Part of the chimp pseudogene has been cut out so even if you
claim that it performs a function in gorilla gibbon and man it can't perform
even that function in chimps. Since designers don't design broken parts onto
their designs, this can not be considered part of God's perfect design.
Automotive engineers don't design a spare but broken transmission onto the
your car, a spare but broken gas tank etc. That would be considered
ridiculous design.
Now when you consider that the genome consists of about 3.5 billion
nucleotides the odds of 4 species having the same sequence inserted at the
same location 4 different times is about one chance in 1.5 x 10^38
>GR>Also, every view has presuppositions. Your view, my view, all views.
>
>But our task is to minimize these as much as possible when interpreting
>data. There is no excuse for not attempting it.
>
OK. There is no excuse. I guess you have such a minimalist theory. I would
like to hear it. It is so much easier to criticise a viewpoint than to
develop one that matches all the data. Let's hear your theory of how this all
happened. Where was Adam created? When did it happen? Where was the flood?
Was it global or local? Where did the flood waters come from? Where did they
go? When was the flood? Where do the fossil men fall into your theory? How
did the fossils form? When did they form? Was there animal death before the
flood? Before Adam? Why are their no amphibian traces in the Cambrian. Why
are no living forms of macroscopic life found prior to the Upper Cretaceous?
Why are there no modern mammal species prior to the Oligocene? Why do whales
and dolphins not appear in the Devonian strata with the remains of other large
fish?
And why is there no evidence of grass on the planet prior to the Miocene?
Neither pollen grain nor blade of grass. But there are lots of plant fossils.
glenn
>GR>Maybe yours is that evolution can
>GR>not possibl;y be true.
>
>Not by your model.
>
>GR>>That is what evolution often generates... theories layered upon
>GR>>theories, not strictly the piecing of data... and thus by your
>GR>>definition, successively weaker theories. That is why we have the law of
>GR>>parsimony... Occam's razor... to hold us accountable.
>GR>>
>
>GR>Who says that Occam was right? Why must nature be simple? Creationists
> are
>GR>always talking about how complex living systems are and how
> unexplainable.
>GR>Shouldn't Occam's razor be applied there?
>
>If you are willing to depart from that simple and important rule, fine.
>I just believe that the potential for error increases exponentially with
>each unnecessary multiplication and layering of presumptive entities.
>
>GR>But I must ask. Where exactly in the Bible does it say that evolution
> didn'
>GR>happen?
>
>You have asked this often. It raises some interesting analogies.
>
>Let's say that a man comes to my door and asks me where my neighbor is.
>I respond that I do not know because he did not tell me. The man says
>"Then it is quite possible that he has moved, or can you produce a
>letter that says that he did not?". I say that I cannot. He says, "Well,
>I have seen this before and I know that he moved."
>
>He may be right, he may be wrong. The point being that thismode of logic
>doesn't establish truth.
>
>Paul Durham
>
>
>to: IN:GRMorton@gnn.com
>cc: IN:evolution@calvin.edu
>
Foundation,Fall and Flood
http://members.gnn.com/GRMorton/dmd.htm