Ok, do it your way.
The thing is the changes would not be that discrete. There is a relatively wide variance between humans. There could also be silent differences, that affect how things are expressed.
The evidence is that it arose from RNA. Where did RNA come from?
Fine.
Strictly not. They can tell “closer to bird DNA than to Ape DNA” or similar. There is no great barrier between different types of DNA. An example I often use is Cytochrome C. Here are some Cytochrome C amino acid sequences (aas derived from the relevant DNAs):
H: mgdvekgkki fimkcsqcht vekggkhktg pnlhglfgrk tgqapgysyt aanknkgiiw gedtlmeyle npkkyipgtk mifvgikkke eradliaylk katne
C: mgdvekgkki fimkcsqcht vekggkhktg pnlhglfgrk tgqapgysyt aanknkgiiw gedtlmeyle npkkyipgtk mifvgikkke eradliaylk katne
R: mgdvekgkki fimkcsqcht vekggkhktg pnlhglfgrk tgqapgysyt aanknkgiTw gedtlmeyle npkkyipgtk mifvgikkke eradliaylk katne
M: mgdvekgkki fVQkcAqcht vekggkhktg pnlhglfgrk tgqaAgFsyt DanknkgiTw gedtlmeyle npkkyipgtk mifAgikkkG eradliaylk katneH/C: mgdvekgkki fimkcsqcht vekggkhktg pnlhglfgrk tgqapgysyt aanknkgiiw gedtlmeyle npkkyipgtk mifvgikkke eradliaylk katne
Frg: gdvekgkki fvqkcaqcht cekggkhkvg pnlygligrk tgqaagfsyt danknkgitw gedtlmeyle npkkyipgtk mifagikkkg erqdliaylk sacsk
Fly: mgvp agdvekgkkl fvqrcaqcht veaggkhkvg pnlhgligrk tgqaagfayt dankakgitw nedtlfeyle npkkyipgtk mifaglkkpn ergdliaylk satk
Sun: asfaeap agdpttgaki fktkcaqcht vekgaghkqg pnlnglfgrq sgttagysys aanknmaviw eentlydyll npkkyipgtk mvfpglkkpq eradliaylk tstaWe can determine the probable species to within a certain degree of error. When we are close to a boundary the error may overlap the boundary - those two points a quarter of an inch apart will look the same to a GPS system with an accuracy of one meter. We can only measure to the accuracy our equipment and the degree of preservation of the DNA allows.
Yes. For example, Neanderthals (which are not strictly transitional since they went extinct) give an example. Human mtDNA forms a cluster with some variatins within the cluster. Neanderthal mtDNA forms another cluster which is outside the human mtDNA cluster, there is no overlap (just). Chimp mtDNA forms a third non-overlapping cluster which is even further from Neanderthal mtDNA. Neanderthals thus have mtDNA between humans and chimps, differrent from both but closer to humans than to chimps. This indicates that we split from the Neanderthals’ ancestors more recently than we split from the chimps’ ancestors. See Neandertal DNA Sequences and the Origin of Modern Humans for one of the sources for this. It includes a illustration of the three clusters:
Some RNA can self-catalyze? Really? And where did the information come from? Scientists have done this?
Yes. See Spiegelman Monster.
Spiegelman, Sol; D. L. Kacian, D. R. Mills, F. R. Kramer (October 1972). “A Replicating RNA Molecule Suitable for a Detailed Analysis of Extracellular Evolution and Replication”. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
Yes, Spiegelman, Kacian, Mills and Kramer did it in 1972.
That is not what it says at the top of the article.
DEEP BREATH TIMMY BOY!!! Ok let’s try to keep it very simple. Question: If Archaeopteryz cut his body and bled, and that sample was taken and tested for what species it was the DNA would not be bird DNA or at least that is what the testor would conclude? yes or no?
It would have had both bird DNA and dinosaur DNA. Which, by the way, would be very, very similar because why?
Define “bird DNA”.
It seems to me that if you are not intending on making it a lesson, the best position is to have a 3-5 sentence summary of Dei Verbum ready to describe how one is to read the Bible. If that is not satisfactory, then direct the student to read the document for him or herself.
I would take you back even further. Inorganic molecules might be the first replicators. That is way back before RNA came on the scene. But the idea is pretty radical in many ways. I like it though because it gives us a mechanism to bridge from inorganic to organic to biochemistry and eventually we get to RNA and then to life. Starting at fairly simple inorganic molecules and ending up at humans is a pretty cool idea. And all it does is follow the principles of physics and chemistry and we can understand that.
Most scientists accept that life did come from non life. Before there was life there wasn’t life and then somehow there was life. Scientists are trying to find out how that happened. You seem to know how so you quit looking. I don’t know for sure how so I keep looking. Which way would most likely lead to increased knowledge and understanding of the way our universe works?
Yes, what he said!
Ok so Phil you are saying that the DNA is different!!! When does it change, and how since it’s “code” (see Sungenis’ question) hasnt existed???Roger << If Archaeopteryz cut his body and bled, and that sample was taken and tested for what species it was the DNA would not be bird DNA or at least that is what the testor would conclude? >>
Archaeopteryx would have Archaeopteryx DNA.
QUESTION ANSWERED!
bringyou.to/apologetics/ProtheroFossils.jpg
Archaeopteryx is classified as a “bird” because it has feathers. It’s DNA would probably be somewhat similar to modern “bird” DNA but we don’t have samples to test. It would also be similar to ancient dinosaur DNA, but we need to call Steven Spielberg to gather samples to test. There is no one “bird” or “dinosaur” DNA, they all differ slightly is what I understand. The majority view today is that birds evolved from dinosaurs.
http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/TRex2.jpg
Phil P
