On Richard Dawkins evolution board recently someone posted an inquiry regarding a quote from a creationist that states
'But the real blow dealt to the evolutionist claim of the homology of pentadactylism came from molecular biology. The assumption of "the homology of pentadactylism," which was long maintained in evolutionist publications, was overturned when it was realized that the limb structures were controlled by totally different genes in different creatures possessing this pentadactyl structure.'
I am curious about htis myself and so am asking here what is the explanation for this? Note I think this quote comes from Harun Yahya.
On Nov 4, 8:30 am, Net Traveller <nilbog_k...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> On Richard Dawkins evolution board recently someone posted an inquiry > regarding a quote from a creationist that states
> 'But the real blow dealt to the evolutionist claim of the homology of > pentadactylism came from molecular biology. The assumption of "the > homology of pentadactylism," which was long maintained in evolutionist > publications, was overturned when it was realized that the limb > structures were controlled by totally different genes in different > creatures possessing this pentadactyl structure.'
> I am curious about htis myself and so am asking here what is the > explanation for this? > Note I think this quote comes from Harun Yahya.
It strikes me as pure fabrication. Limb development is controlled by Hox genes, and such genes are extremely conservative. The same basic genes control fin development in fish as control limb development in humans.
On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 00:30:59 -0800 (PST), Net Traveller
<nilbog_k...@yahoo.com.au> wrote: > On Richard Dawkins evolution board recently someone posted an inquiry > regarding a quote from a creationist that states
> 'But the real blow dealt to the evolutionist claim of the homology of > pentadactylism came from molecular biology. The assumption of "the > homology of pentadactylism," which was long maintained in evolutionist > publications, was overturned when it was realized that the limb > structures were controlled by totally different genes in different > creatures possessing this pentadactyl structure.'
> I am curious about htis myself and so am asking here what is the > explanation for this?
By "different genes" the Creationist moron surely must mean "modified genes." The fossil record shows pentadactylism going back at least 365,000,000 years ago, including not just five fingers but the wrist bones, arm bones, shoulder bones, and neck bones as well---- "pentadactylism" is just the tip of the ice berg.
The finger genes of the ZPA patch that develops on "hands" in land-dwelling and some sea-dwelling animals has not remained fixed in any species that we know of since the Devonian, as this Creationist nut seems to believe it should have. That is, he assumes evolution did not happen, and then asks why differing ZPA patch genes are different but perform the same fuctions. Amazing how stupid Creationists can be to not even realize what they say and write is self-contradictory.
Nested hierarcy is the explanation: pentadactylism showed up early in the history of life on Earth, and evolution modified those existing structures.
If Adnan Oktar were honest and not thge evil shit he is, he would have asked why the precursors to the genes for making hands show up in fish, sharks, and assorted finned species. Why would his gods want us to look at the DNA and conclude hands evolved from fins?
> Note I think this quote comes from Harun Yahya.
-- http://desertphile.org Desertphile's Desert Soliloquy. WARNING: view with plenty of water "Why aren't resurrections from the dead noteworthy?" -- Jim Rutz
<richardalanforr...@googlemail.com> wrote: > On Nov 4, 8:30 am, Net Traveller <nilbog_k...@yahoo.com.au> wrote: > > On Richard Dawkins evolution board recently someone posted an inquiry > > regarding a quote from a creationist that states
> > 'But the real blow dealt to the evolutionist claim of the homology of > > pentadactylism came from molecular biology. The assumption of "the > > homology of pentadactylism," which was long maintained in evolutionist > > publications, was overturned when it was realized that the limb > > structures were controlled by totally different genes in different > > creatures possessing this pentadactyl structure.'
> > I am curious about htis myself and so am asking here what is the > > explanation for this? > > Note I think this quote comes from Harun Yahya. > It strikes me as pure fabrication. > Limb development is controlled by Hox genes, and such genes are > extremely conservative. The same basic genes control fin development > in fish as control limb development in humans.
Yeah, it's bullshit. The genes are not "totally different:" the cultist merely asserted they are. The "Sonic Hedgehog" gene is observed to have changed over time, and I suppose a Phylogenetic tree has already been mapped showing those relationships.
-- http://desertphile.org Desertphile's Desert Soliloquy. WARNING: view with plenty of water "Why aren't resurrections from the dead noteworthy?" -- Jim Rutz
On Nov 4, 9:43 am, Desertphile <desertph...@invalid-address.net> wrote:
> Nested hierarcy is the explanation: pentadactylism showed up early > in the history of life on Earth, and evolution modified those > existing structures.
Any particular reason why five is preferred? Is it just an accident of evolution or is there some geometrical or other reason five is preferred? Why have six toed cats not taken over the world?
On 2009-11-05, Kent <musquods...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 4, 9:43 am, Desertphile <desertph...@invalid-address.net> > wrote:
>> Nested hierarcy is the explanation: pentadactylism showed up early >> in the history of life on Earth, and evolution modified those >> existing structures.
> Any particular reason why five is preferred? Is it just an accident of > evolution or is there some geometrical or other reason five is > preferred? Why have six toed cats not taken over the world?
On 5 Nov, 04:39, Garamond Lethe <cartographi...@gFNORDmail.com> wrote:
> On 2009-11-05, Kent <musquods...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Nov 4, 9:43 am, Desertphile <desertph...@invalid-address.net> > > wrote:
> >> Nested hierarcy is the explanation: pentadactylism showed up early > >> in the history of life on Earth, and evolution modified those > >> existing structures.
> > Any particular reason why five is preferred? Is it just an accident of > > evolution or is there some geometrical or other reason five is > > preferred? Why have six toed cats not taken over the world?
> They can't be bothered?
Indeed, they want you to believe that, as they already telepathically control every household they visit for food. :P
> On 5 Nov, 04:39, Garamond Lethe <cartographi...@gFNORDmail.com> wrote: >> On 2009-11-05, Kent <musquods...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Nov 4, 9:43 am, Desertphile <desertph...@invalid-address.net> >> > wrote:
>> >> Nested hierarcy is the explanation: pentadactylism showed up early >> >> in the history of life on Earth, and evolution modified those >> >> existing structures.
>> > Any particular reason why five is preferred? Is it just an accident of >> > evolution or is there some geometrical or other reason five is >> > preferred? Why have six toed cats not taken over the world?
>> They can't be bothered?
> Indeed, they want you to believe that, as they already telepathically > control every household they visit for food. :P
That's absurd, and as soon as I finish feeding my cats I'll tell you why....
<cartographi...@gFNORDmail.com> wrote: >On 2009-11-05, Devils Advocaat <mankyg...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: >> On 5 Nov, 04:39, Garamond Lethe <cartographi...@gFNORDmail.com> wrote: >>> On 2009-11-05, Kent <musquods...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > On Nov 4, 9:43 am, Desertphile <desertph...@invalid-address.net> >>> > wrote:
>>> >> Nested hierarcy is the explanation: pentadactylism showed up early >>> >> in the history of life on Earth, and evolution modified those >>> >> existing structures.
>>> > Any particular reason why five is preferred? Is it just an accident of >>> > evolution or is there some geometrical or other reason five is >>> > preferred? Why have six toed cats not taken over the world?
>>> They can't be bothered?
>> Indeed, they want you to believe that, as they already telepathically >> control every household they visit for food. :P
>That's absurd, and as soon as I finish feeding my cats I'll tell you why....
If you strap a piece of buttered toast on the back of a cat, and then drop that cat from a fixed height, it will hover. This is because when you drop a piece of buttered toast, it always falls to the ground, buttered side down. But cats always land on their feet.
This duality creates a quantum indecision singularity, and the cat hovers.
<cartographi...@gFNORDmail.com> wrote: > On 2009-11-05, Kent <musquods...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Nov 4, 9:43 am, Desertphile <desertph...@invalid-address.net> > > wrote:
> >> Nested hierarcy is the explanation: pentadactylism showed up early > >> in the history of life on Earth, and evolution modified those > >> existing structures. > > Any particular reason why five is preferred? Is it just an accident of > > evolution or is there some geometrical or other reason five is > > preferred? Why have six toed cats not taken over the world? > They can't be bothered?
Because they have humans to do all the heavy lifting? And the light lifing? And the door-opening? And the can opener twisting?
-- http://desertphile.org Desertphile's Desert Soliloquy. WARNING: view with plenty of water "Why aren't resurrections from the dead noteworthy?" -- Jim Rutz
<musquods...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Nov 4, 9:43 am, Desertphile <desertph...@invalid-address.net> > wrote: > > Nested hierarcy is the explanation: pentadactylism showed up early > > in the history of life on Earth, and evolution modified those > > existing structures. > Any particular reason why five is preferred? Is it just an accident of > evolution or is there some geometrical or other reason five is > preferred? Why have six toed cats not taken over the world?
Just a guess on my part, but it appears the flippers in the first few fish-to-amphibian species were not wide enough for the proto- "Sonic Hedgehod" gene to make more fingers: the gene ran out of space. Damn shame: we could use a second thumb on each hand, to make banjo playing easier.
-- http://desertphile.org Desertphile's Desert Soliloquy. WARNING: view with plenty of water "Why aren't resurrections from the dead noteworthy?" -- Jim Rutz
>On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 20:22:39 -0800 (PST), Kent ><musquods...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Nov 4, 9:43 am, Desertphile <desertph...@invalid-address.net> >> wrote:
>> > Nested hierarcy is the explanation: pentadactylism showed up early >> > in the history of life on Earth, and evolution modified those >> > existing structures.
>> Any particular reason why five is preferred? Is it just an accident of >> evolution or is there some geometrical or other reason five is >> preferred? Why have six toed cats not taken over the world?
>Just a guess on my part, but it appears the flippers in the first >few fish-to-amphibian species were not wide enough for the proto- >"Sonic Hedgehod" gene to make more fingers: the gene ran out of >space.
|
