Home » Intelligent Design » A Compass That is Never Right

A Compass That is Never Right

What good is a compass that is never right? Evolution certainly is not that bad, but it is telling how often Darwin’s idea, mandated to be a fact, is so far off base. Consider for example the kangaroo genome, which turned out to be similar to the human genome. As one evolutionist explained:  Read more
  • Delicious
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • RSS Feed

6 Responses to A Compass That is Never Right

  1. semi off topic hot off the press:

    It turns out the genetic variability between any two humans is greater than what we were led to believe:

    Powerful Genome Barcoding System Reveals Large-Scale Variation in Human DNA
    Excerpt: “There’s a whole world beyond SNPs — single nucleotide polymorphisms — and we’ve stepped into that world,” says Brian Teague, a doctoral student in genetics at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. “There are much bigger changes in there.”

    Variation on the order of thousands to hundreds of thousands of DNA’s smallest pieces — large swaths varying in length or location or even showing up in reverse order — appeared 4,205 times in a comparison of DNA from just four people, according to a study published May 31 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

    Those structural differences popped into clear view through computer analysis of more than 500 linear feet of DNA molecules analyzed by the powerful genome mapping system developed over nearly two decades by David C. Schwartz, professor of chemistry and genetics at UW-Madison.

    “We probably have the most comprehensive view of the human genome ever,” Schwartz says. “And the variation we’re seeing in the human genome is something we’ve known was there and important for many years, but we haven’t been able to fully study it.”,,,,To get a better picture of those structural variations, Schwartz and his team developed the Optical Mapping System, a wholly new type of genome analysis that directly examines millions of individual DNA molecules.

    Common systems for analyzing genomes typically chop long DNA molecules into fragments less than a couple thousand base pairs long and multiply them en masse, like a copy machine, to develop a chemical profile of each piece.

    Reading such small sections without seeing their place in the larger picture of DNA leaves out critical understanding. To make matters worse, interesting parts of the human genome are often found within DNA’s trickiest stretches.

    “Short pieces could really come from so many different locations,” Teague says. “An enormous part of the genome is composed of repeating DNA, and important differences are often associated with areas that have a lot of repeated sections.”

    It’s a problem inherent to the method that has irked Schwartz for a long time.
    http://www.sciencedaily.com/re.....155435.htm

    I wonder how much greater the difference will grow between man and chimps once they bring this “larger picture” view to bear on that particular growing chasm.

    ————

    also of note to biomimicry

    From butterflies’ wings to bank notes — how nature’s colors could cut bank fraud
    Excerpt: According to Kolle: “We have unlocked one of nature’s secrets and combined this knowledge with state-of-the-art nanofabrication to mimic the intricate optical designs found in nature.”,,,”These artificial structures could be used to encrypt information in optical signatures on banknotes or other valuable items to protect them against forgery. We still need to refine our system but in future we could see structures based on butterflies wings shining from a £10 note or even our passports,” he says.
    http://www.physorg.com/news194418476.html

    Intelligent Design – Light and Water – video
    http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4669620

  2. PaV, for those of us who are not that literate in population genetics, could you please draw out the additional difficultly that this study:,,,,

    Powerful Genome Barcoding System Reveals Large-Scale Variation in Human DNA
    Excerpt: “There’s a whole world beyond SNPs — single nucleotide polymorphisms — and we’ve stepped into that world,” says Brian Teague, a doctoral student in genetics at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. “There are much bigger changes in there.” Variation on the order of thousands to hundreds of thousands of DNA’s smallest pieces — large swaths varying in length or location or even showing up in reverse order — appeared 4,205 times in a comparison of DNA from just four people,
    http://www.sciencedaily.com/re.....155435.htm

    ,,,,,,, places on neo-Darwinism?

  3. 3

    YEC here. First all this shows is once again there is just a common blueprint from a creator and genes are just numbers for parts. Something like that.
    Humans or kangaroos having like atomics is not a sign of relationship but a sign of a limited range of genetics for the natural world coming from a creator with a logical program.
    Its always about order and lack of diversity where there should be happenchance and fantastic diversity if evolution was true.

    By the way this creationist insists marsupials and placentals are the same creatures from the same pairs etc off the Ark. Simple adaptation to areas accounts for pouches. Faulty classification systems has also been a mate to evolutionism.

  4. off topic hot off the press:

    Jumping Genes Provide Extensive ‘Raw Material’ for Evolution, Study Finds
    Excerpt: The investigators determined that any two peoples’ genomes differ at roughly 285 sites out of the 1139 sites studied. These results were found by scanning the genomes of 25 individuals, 15 of which were unrelated. They report their findings online in Genome Research.
    Jumping genes — also called transposons — are sequences of DNA that move to different areas of the genome within the same cell.
    “The significance of this work is that there is much more diversity in our genome due to insertions by this family of transposons than previously thought,” said co-author Haig Kazazian, MD, Seymour Gray Professor of Molecular Medicine, in the Penn Department of Genetics.
    http://www.sciencedaily.com/re.....171838.htm

    The first thought that comes to my mind is that individual people are a lot more unique than scientists have led us to believe. Of course this is not the first thought that comes to the evolutionists mind. their first thought?

    Excerpt: “This movement of genetic material provides the raw material of genetic evolution,”’ ”

    Yeah let’s skip that pesky part of where the genetic material came from in the first place,,,

    How to Play the Gene Evolution Game
    http://www.evolutionnews.org/2.....ution.html

    ,,,,and just move straight to the three-card monte game of rearranging existing genes.

    Three-Card Monte — School for Scoundrels
    http://video.google.com/videop.....173807719#

  5. off topic; John Lennox is interviewed by Justin Brierly of Premier Broadcasting here:

    http://www.premier.tv/

    Francis Chan also has a interview on the page:

  6. semi-off topic: Dr. Sternberg has a article on Introns up at ENV:

    Matheson’s Intron Fairy Tale
    http://www.evolutionnews.org/2....._tale.html

Leave a Reply