Re: What limits inquiry

Glenn Morton (GRMorton@gnn.com)
Wed, 04 Sep 1996 06:34:22

>Theory 1... you refer to the "general theory of evolution" and assume it
>true... to which you go to
>
Yes, but I give reasons and data to support the belief. Believe me, it was a
long time coming for me to accept evolution. I didn't want to at all. But I
felt, after looking at the details, if I were to be honest with the data, I
had to go that way.

>Theory 2... you assume that we arose from apes "If we arose from the
>apes,(as I believe we did)"
>
Once again. I have given data to support this position. The pseudogene data.
What do you think of it? How do you handle it?

>and interpreting the data in this light you arrive at a 3rd theory...
>
>Theory 3..."Assume that God was ready to create a being who was "made
>in image". During this time, there was among the physical ancestor man a
>very rare mutation -- a chromosomal fusion...Thus Adam was created from
>the product of a chromosomal fusion "
>
Apes have 48 chromosomes humans have 46. The banding between the individual
chromosomes is very similar and examining the chromosomal banding you can even
see which two chromosomes must have fused to create humans. (see Jorge J.Yunis
and Om Prakesh "The Origin of Man: a Chromosomal Pictorial Legacy," Science
March 1982, p. 1526ff)
Chromosomal fusion and fission is a documented process by which mammals
speciate. There are rats which have done this in the past 400 years and their
chromosomes are unlike any other rats on earth. How do we know this occurred
in the past 400 years? We have islands which had no rats when European ships
went there. But ship rats escaped and populated the islands. But today, the
chromosomes are much different and could not have come from any other locality
on earth. Their unique chromosomes had to have developed on the island. (see
"Mauritius Type Black Rats wit Peculiar Karyotypes derived from Robertsonian
Fission of Small Metacentrics," Chromosoma, 75: 51-62 (1979))

>You have just validated my previous post. A point of fact is that you
>also appealed to a geneticist in your response... is that an indication
>that you too need to learn more... and who is sitting in judgement of
>others here?
>

Who doesn't need to learn more? But you didn't see any corrections. And lots
of people on this board would love to do just that. And if I am wrong, I
would love to have them do it.

Back off if you want. But Paul, in all seriousness, if you can not tell
someone where Neanderthal fits into the Biblical scheme of things, which is a
very reasonable question, and you cannot tell them a correct order of the
events evolutionists believe occured, how are you going to be effective at
fighting evolution? If you think that it is "attack mode" everytime I ask you
a question, or suggest that you should read something, how are you ever going
to be able to handle a truly hostile evolutionary atheist?

glenn

Foundation,Fall and Flood
http://members.gnn.com/GRMorton/dmd.htm