homology controlled by different genes - talk.origins

Message from discussion homology controlled by different genes

Desertphile

View profile

More options Nov 4 2009, 6:43 pm

Newsgroups: talk.origins

From: Desertphile <desertph...@invalid-address.net>

Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2009 10:43:40 -0700

Local: Wed, Nov 4 2009 6:43 pm

Subject: Re: homology controlled by different genes

  Forward
  | Print
  | View thread
  | Show original
  | Report this message
  | Find messages by this author
  

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.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zone_of_polarizing_activity

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

Forward