Re: Propping up the theory of Evolution



The amount of genomic difference between chimps and humans is about
what one would expect *if* the entire difference were due to fixation
of selectively neutral traits (in the 97% of our genomes that is
relatively sequence-irrelevant). Actually, the amount of difference
is a little less than that expectation. That is because of
selection. Most selection is selection *against* change. The number
of sites that differ between chimp and human that can be clearly
identified as having a selective pressure *for* change can be numbered
to be in the range of 50 or so sites (none a protein coding region).

What is 97% of 2 billion if there are 2 billion bits of information in
a strand of DNA?
Thats 40 million bits of information. We are not like monkeys, and
whoever wrote that 40 million bits of code would tell you that nature
by itself, cannot write a 40 million bit meaningful essay by random
chance, by merely producing random characters, as you would suggest.

If you write a computer program that generates random characters, how
long would it take, for that program to randomly generate an essay,
that contained 40 million bits of information, that made sense. That
is proper grammatic sentences, instructions, that had meaning across
various scientific disciplines, and not just any sentences, but
sentences which result in the differences between an ape and man?

Of all the possible sentences you could randomly generate.

But when you say well its 97% the same, you are merely trying to
disguise the reality of the situation, which is what always happens
when people are not willing to admit the truth.
If we say for instance that it is just 4 MB of text, well have a look
on your harddrive for a text file that is 4 MB, and imagine what a 4MB
text file of instructions might look like.
Thats about 70,000 lines of computer code. 70,000 meaningful sentences
that are not just talk about the weather, but some really high tech
sh*t. About neural network brain functionality and pattern recognition
and language skills and comprehension abilities, hightened motor
control and all the rest.
You're dreaming if you think that happened without intelligent design.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Is the AAH a legitimate hypothesis? Of course it is.
    ... The fact humans swim better ... >> chimps really must be due to natural selection because the weakest ... > history of chimps since the bifurcation of our lineages where in one ... > lineage increasing abilities in water led to greater survival. ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: Possible vs. Likely
    ... impossible for humans to have "micro-evolved" their genetic ... differencesd with chimps, ... If a gene can "limp along and exist against selection to remove it" ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Possible vs. Likely
    ... impossible for humans to have "micro-evolved" their genetic ... differencesd with chimps, ... Any change in any gene, protein, ... mutation selection balance. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Atheists support evolution because evolution supports their
    ... But scientists have now found that chimps are ... more evolved than humans are, ... selection in chimpanzee evolution than in human evolution". ... just that more genes underwent selection in chimps than ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: A critique of the BBC aquatic ape programme and the transcript.
    ... If indeed the accounts of swimming chimps are not accounts ... that chimps can essentially teach themselves to swim ... > difference between humans and chimps is mitigated by a number of things ... > influences how selection and drift operate. ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)