Re: Wells and Molecular Phylogenies

From: D. F. Siemens, Jr. (dfsiemensjr@juno.com)
Date: Wed Oct 29 2003 - 14:44:45 EST

  • Next message: Iain Strachan: "Re: Wells and Molecular Phylogenies"

    Anderson's answer is a red herring, or classifiable as an /ad
    ignorantiam/. We are just in the process of deciphering some of the
    mechanisms in cells. For example, /Science/, 302:214-6) (10 October 2003)
    describes what is known about cell motion and the current disagreement on
    some of the details. Another report (page 211) reports on test chips for
    the whole human genome, with varying numbers of genes represented, and
    the recognition that we still don't have all the expressed genes in hand.
    To demand an answer now is nonsensical. But he wants to argue that, if
    you can't give a mechanism, it must be God. This is both Gog and
    fallacious.
    Dave

    On Tue, 28 Oct 2003 23:38:45 -0700 allenroy <allenroy@peoplepc.com>
    writes:
    "D. F. Siemens, Jr." wrote:
    > Creation, Evolution and the Molecular Revolution
    > by Kevin L. Anderson, Ph.D.*

    This braying jackass refuses to recognize that bacterial and viral genes
    have been incorporated in most genomes by transfer. It has nothing to do
    with descent. I find it hard to believe that anyone with even the most
    rudimentary familiarity with the literature would make a statement like
    Anderson's. I conclude that such falsehood must be deliberate.
    I contacted the "braying Jackass" about bacterial and viral genes being
    incorporated into genomes. Here is his response:
    "As for the comment about these genes not resulting from common descent,
    I could not agree more. However, there are a number evolutionary
    scientists, including one of the leaders of the DOE's genome project,
    that are saying exactly that -- the presence of these genes in the human
    genome is evidence of common descent (ex. see Nature. 2001. 411:940;
    Science. 2001. 292:1903). Perhaps you would want to contact these
    various evolutionists and explain to them their incredible ignorance.
    "Yes, some evolutionists do insist such HGT between bacteria and humans
    occurred recently (ex. TIG. 2001. 17:235). But, they have no explanation
    of how this happened, only speculation. Therefore, would you please
    provide even one demonstrated means by which bacterial genes can be
    incorporated into the human gene line. This information is apparently
    widely and thoroughly known so you should have no problem quickly
    providing such information. This "braying jackass" is always anxious to
    learn new information.
      
    "Kevin
      



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Oct 29 2003 - 14:53:44 EST