Neo-Darwinists believe our ancestry includes aquatic invertebrates that changed into aquatic vertebrates that changed into amphibians that changed into reptiles that changed into small egg-laying mammals that changed into small placental mammals that changed into primates that changed into humans, ultimately as a result of unique historically distinct identical mutations in the eggs and sperm of mating individuals. But does this hypothesized historical sequence of mutations accurately predict what the Human Genome Project proves about the segmentation of our genome?
Are the parts for our supposedly oldest traits, from aquatic invertebrates, separate from the parts for our supposedly later traits from aquatic vertebrates? From amphibians? From reptiles? From small egg-laying mammals? From small placental mammals? From primates? From the parts for our supposedly most recent human traits?
If the DNA configurations causing these traits arose separately, they must occur separately on the genome. Otherwise, there is no genetic evidence that these traits originated according to the Neo-Darwinian model.
Comment by Lydia Hazel, Makanda, IL: Hazel presented these ideas to several geneticists and biologists, including editors of major science publications, but none of them responded. So she was thinking that, if lots of other people besides herself began asking these questions, scientists might some day consider answering them.
Updated: 2005-11-01 04:36:32
Home | Login | Contact Us | Forum
© 2001-2016 Joplin Independent