Posted by MEYER on August 04, 1998 at 12:54:54:
In Reply to: Genes and pseudogenes posted by rpcman on August 04, 1998 at 11:23:08:
: Such as our supposedly common ancestor with the apes.
: How do you explain (as a creationist) our shared genes and pseudogenes with other primates? What about fossils such as Australopithecus and Homo erectus?
All life shares similarites, but that doesn't mean they are directly related. I would say our "shared" genes are partly the result of viruses over time infesting both humans and apes. Such as the AIDS virus, ebola, etc.
And the fossil record is so exagerated it's funny. There are thousands of species going extinct every year, that will not have decendants. The fossil record is a document of species that made it for a time, then went extinct. The mighty T-Rex was very successful for a very long time, so was Neandertal, but they "Rest in Peace". When a fossil is found the only fact is "someting died". There is nothing to suggest that Lucy was anything other than a 3.5 feet tall ape like animal that went extinct. Todays observed speciation doesn't support todays assumption that all life share common ancestors. In fact the observed events only show there are limits to what speciation is capable of. Such as the bananna eating butterfly in Hawaii. It remained a butterfly, but adapted to survive on bannana's.
Science is based on observation and testability. Common ancestor type evolution is un-observable and definitly untestable.
I have no problem as a creationist in knowing evolution is a fact. But I do have a problem with assumptions being called a fact.
[ Follow Ups ] [ Exmormon.org- Honest Inquiry Message Board ] [ FAQ ]