RE: [asa] ORIGINS: (Dobson) pseudogenes are overwhelming evidence for evolution...?

John Walley said:

"An old earth is as far as you can take science in the evangelical
church and even that is by the hardest. This is borne out by Dobson's
Truth Project skirting this issue and not even taking a stand on it.
Common descent is way beyond the pale."

If they are "skirting the issue" I think there's a very good reason for
it! It is because they don't have the confidence to make a strong stand
either for or against. That sounds like a very positive sign for the TE
position. The problem is that people like Dobson want to say the Bible
is "inerrant" and you can't say that as a TE, can you? I think TE says
there is no special man called "Adam," which has ramifications in
historical genealogies, for one problem. Then TE also denies the global
flood. I lean towards TE, but I'm still learning all the positions
better...

...Bernie

www.sciligion.org <http://www.sciligion.org/>

________________________________

From: John Walley [mailto:john_walley@yahoo.com]
Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2007 8:09 AM
To: 'David Opderbeck'
Cc: Dehler, Bernie; asa@calvin.edu
Subject: RE: [asa] ORIGINS: pseudogenes are overwhelming evidence for
evolution...?

>And, the full TE position really says exactly the same thing, except
that it holds that God's causal influence was secondary rather than
direct.

David,

This is exactly the point. The difference between OEC and TE is not the
messy code but how it got there, and whether it was a primary or
secondary cause.

This is the exact corollary to the "appearance of age" argument of the
YEC's that OEC refutes. They will concede as they do in "Who Was Adam"
that pseudogenes give the "appearance of common descent" but just likes
the YEC's do with the appearance of age, instead of admitting it, resort
to some theological cop-out. OEC is clinging to a wishful thinking
level of concordism of the scriptures that is not supported by the
science.

An old earth is as far as you can take science in the evangelical church
and even that is by the hardest. This is borne out by Dobson's Truth
Project skirting this issue and not even taking a stand on it. Common
descent is way beyond the pale.

John

-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of David Opderbeck
Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2007 8:41 AM
To: John Walley
Cc: Dehler, Bernie; asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: [asa] ORIGINS: pseudogenes are overwhelming evidence for
evolution...?

I think a typical OEC response is that God reused the genetic code as He
progressively created. I don't think this is a terrible response. The
counter-argument is, why would God re-use "messy" code? But why not?
No one argues for "perfect" design, and any complex coding exercise
involves pieces of code that may have had some functionality in earlier
iterations but that aren't called upon in later ones. And, the full TE
position really says exactly the same thing, except that it holds that
God's causal influence was secondary rather than direct.

On 11/4/07, John Walley <john_walley@yahoo.com> wrote:

Bernie,

That section in "Who Was Adam" was written by Dr. Fuz Rana who is RTB's
staff biochemist. His response to pseudogenes is like that for junk
DNA, they question its junk status and instead suggest that it may have
been part of God's design. YEC's have the same response as well.

Fuz monitors this list and if he see this, he may have something else to
add. I know that some in the RTB base have pressed them to modify their
position on this. I think that after Collins and Behe have both come out
on this point, they will eventually have to in order to maintain their
credibility.

The problem is that this is a real theological can of worms within the
evangelical church which is where they get most of their support.

Thanks

John

-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of Dehler, Bernie
Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2007 1:03 AM
To: asa@calvin.edu
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 19:35:41 2007