Don Winterstein said:
"By far the strongest evidence for evolution has always lain and
continues to lie in the fossil record and the great ages it implies. "
I disagree (for me, anyway). I've been following this
creation/evolution controversy for many years,,, and it always seems (on
the surface) to be very questionable... as if both sides have very good
scientific evidence. I was an old young earth creationist (a combo of
the OEC and YEC views ;-)
Since reading Collin's book, and appreciating that he's a born-again
Christian, and seeing him state the evidence regarding pseudogenes and
human/ape chromosomes, I have come to a variation of the TE theme. It's
a radical shift... all because of the biological evidence. If special
creation is true, there would be no copies of junk from other
life-forms... I'm convinced of that.
Because of the biological evidence, I'm now more readily willing to
accept the fossil evidence and traditional scientific interpretation.
I have a Masters in Ministry degree from Luther Rice Seminary
(www.lru.edu)... just got it this year. We had a class called
"Worldviews and Origins." They pretty much assumed a YEC position, and
a textbook for worldviews was Nancy Pearcy's (Discovery Institute)
"Total Truth." We also learned the basics of DNA and the marvels of
protein synthesis in class (these complex designs and process prove
God's working). This biology was a start for me, I then graduated, then
read Collin's book. I have a deep respect for Collins because of his
scientific knowledge and Christian service/thinking, so it carries
tremendous weight for me. YEC's (and Phillip Johnson) seems to say that
modern scientists are only believing what they do because of their
atheistic worldview... I think people like Collins demonstrate that to
be false.
So for me, the biological evidence of pseudogenes and human/ape
chromosomes ("biological fossils") became the evolution dam that was
breeched, and now I'm being swept away by the flood. It was hopeless
for a while, but people like Collins and groups like ASA have been
rescuers for me. My house was on fire... now it is being remodeled.
The fires have all been put out, and I'm looking for design advice and
picking colors now ;-) Sorry for the mixed metaphors, but they both fit
well ;-)
...Bernie
www.sciligion.org <http://www.sciligion.org/>
________________________________
From: Don Winterstein [mailto:dfwinterstein@msn.com]
Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2007 5:17 AM
To: asa; Dehler, Bernie
Subject: Re: [asa] ORIGINS: pseudogenes are overwhelming evidence for
evolution...?
"Is it true there is no serious response from young earthers or old
earthers to the claim that pseudogenes are overwhelming proof for
evolution?"
By far the strongest evidence for evolution has always lain and
continues to lie in the fossil record and the great ages it implies.
Without this evidence for massive change in life forms down through long
ages, the theory of evolution wouldn't stand a chance. Pseudogenes
would be mere unexplained curiosities.
However, given the compelling evidence for both great age and great
change, the DNA contribution becomes meaningful and forceful.
Don
----- Original Message -----
From: Dehler, Bernie <mailto:bernie.dehler@intel.com>
To: asa@calvin.edu
Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2007 10:02 PM
Subject: [asa] ORIGINS: pseudogenes are overwhelming evidence
for evolution...?
Hi all-
I'm new to this group (and ASA), so I hope I'm not bringing
up something already discussed in great detail. If so, maybe you can
direct me to the log.
In my recent studies on the origins debate, it seems to me
that there is "overwhelming evidence for evolution" via pseudogenes.
These are genes present and functional in lower life forms, yet we have
messed-up (nonfunctional) copies of them. There are supposed to be
thousands of pseudogenes in the human genome. Humans and apes have
these messed-up copies, but not lower life-forms. Since we share the
messed-up copies with apes, we can't say that it is from the fallen
human nature, as apes also have them messed-up while lower lifeforms
don't. A prime example is supposed to be ascorbic acid (vitamin c).
Hugh Ross, in his book "Who was Adam" explains the
technical details well, and ends up saying there is no "old earth"
response (since old earth is against evolution)... no response yet,
anyway. Young earther's also don't seem to have a response to this
argument.
It seems to me that we have to accept this evidence for
evolution... just as we have accepted evidence from Copernicus/Galileo
regarding a heliocentric solar system.
Question: Is it true there is no serious response from
young earthers or old earthers to the claim that pseudogenes are
overwhelming proof for evolution?
Then again, there's also the biological evolutionary
evidence based on chromosomes. Humans have one less chromosome than
apes, and it can be seen that the reason why is because two ape-like
chromosomes have joined into one for human. This joint is obvious.
Again, any good young earth or old earth responses?
Both the pseudogene and chromosome evidence for evolution
were cited as evidence by Dr. Francis Collins in his recent book.
By the way, I'm on the mailing list for Liberty University.
They claim there is no compelling evolutionary evidence. Check out this
quote:
Dr. David DeWitt, Liberty University professor of biology, wants
to help Christians understand the nature of creationism and teach them
how to ably counter mainstream arguments.
His new book, "Unraveling the Origins Controversy," is a crash
course in biblical creationism and examines assumptions on both sides of
the origins debate with clear biblical teachings.
The veteran professor, who is director of Liberty's Center for
Creation Studies, notes that there are new scientific findings in terms
of the earth's foundations almost every day and Christians need to have
a framework for understanding these alleged evolutionary breakthroughs.
Dr. DeWitt, who recently received a large National Institutes of
Health grant to support his Alzheimer's disease research, said, "We live
in the same world and use the same facts as evolutionists. We simply
use different assumptions and reach creation conclusions."
Included in Dr. DeWitt's scientific refutation of evolutionary
theory, he incorporates Scripture throughout his book to support the
science of creationism. He believes the value of his book is that it is
written by a scientist who integrates up-to-the-minute findings with a
biblical worldview.
Asked if there is any argument an evolutionist can make that a
creationist cannot effectively answer, Dr. DeWitt smiled wryly and
offered a simple, "No."
"We have nothing to worry about in defending our beliefs," he
confidently stated.
...Bernie
www.sciligion.org <http://www.sciligion.org/>
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sun Nov 4 19:15:41 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Nov 04 2007 - 19:15:42 EST