------------------------------------------------------- CONVENTION OF THE GOAN DIASPORA FROM GOA INTO THE WORLD Lisbon, Portugal June 15-17, 2007 Details at: http://www.goacom.org/casa-de-goa/noticias.html -------------------------------------------------------
I am surprised that you chose the 98% similarity between chimp and bono species to make your point, why not Homology or Embryology (Haeckels embryos in particular?) are they dead ends so far as Darwinism are concerned? My take is you are repeating Berra's Blunder. It is sad when one has to take the stand that 'it has all been explained before' or like in your case 'is an established scientific principal' why not simply exchange views? I do not see any "compelling pieces of evidence in favor of descent of humans from common ancestor" with the similarity in genes. If you are assuming as neo-Darwinism does, that we are what we are because of our genes, then you are saying that the amazing difference between us and the other primates is because of the 2% dissimilar genes we carry. The 98% of the common genes happen to be the so called body-building genes, in my opinion this similarity is just as compatible with COMMON DESIGN as it might be with common ancestry. To me the evolutionary icons, (one of which we just discussed above) are not persuasive anymore, the creationist lawyer's incisive insights are one of the reason for the skepticism with which I look at Darwinism today. There are others too like Michael Behe, William A. Dembski, James M Kushiner, Lee Strobel etc. I urge those on this list who are interested in the debate to look these authors up. I am enjoying this discussion. Orlando > --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>Dr Phillip E. Johnson, university of California >>calls it is a World view of our culture, a view of >>the origin of living things, of the reality of a >>creator or unreality of a creator. "The officially >>sponsored creation story of our culture" (emphasis >>are mine) > > The above post has got to be simply an extended flame > bait. It is hard to imagine anybody would seriously > cite a creationist lawyer's opinion and his own > home-baked beliefs as an argument against an > established scientific principle, a biological fact > that is supported by overwhelming evidence. > > As far as human evolution is concerned, one of the > most compelling pieces of recent evidence in favor of > the descent of humans from the common ancestor of > non-human primates, namely chimpanzees and bonobos, is > the 98% structural similarity of DNA between the three > species of primates. > > What is Phillip Johnson's abstract legal argument > against that physical evidence? ------------------------------------------------------- Goanet recommends, and is proud to be associated with, 'Domnic's Goa' - A nostalgic romp through a bygone era. This book is the perfect gift for any Goan, or anyone wanting to understand Goa. Distributed locally by Broadway, near Caculo Island, Panjim & internationally by OtherIndiaBookStore.Com. For trade enquiries contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------------------------------------------------------
