Darwin's Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution
Top Comments
All Comments (149)
-
@TransitionalApe You need to learn how to reason and present your argument. Stop embarassing yourself.....really.
-
@TransitionalApe Abiogenesis is sure evolution, its oraganic evolution. It must have happend for macro evolution to take place.
-
Abiogenesis is not evolution.
It surprises the dishonest creationists that darwin had limited knowledge of biochemistry? The idiotic strawman arguments only fool the ignorant. It does not serve your cause to jump up and down pretending that any gap in scientific knowledge must be filled in with your particular bronze age superstition.
-
although it is unclear which is true, i would hope that there is a god, or its just us... and that is fucking scary considering how fucking insane this species is, i mean nuking our only planet....
-
What is the Darwinian explanation for the production of AMP? Also for the biobiosynthesis of the larger amino acids, lipids, vitamins, heme ect.
Come on sheep what did Darwin teach you about this????
-
You are wrong! This was the first successful heart transplant ever! They researched every kind of arteries and organs out there!
-
If we are so much like apes, how come they use pig arteries in heart surgery?
-
well originally I responded to your comment, using the wording. I apologize for the mistake. Its still not conclusive
"Hahn said any serious measure of genetic difference between humans and chimps must incorporate both variation at the nucleotide level among coding genes and large-scale differences in the structure of human and chimp genomes. The real question biologists will face is not which measure is correct but rather which sets of differences have been more important in human evolution."
Because the valves/arteries are pretreated for grafting and pigs are pretty accessible, whereas chimps are not.
worldwithoutawhisper 2 years ago 6
Sure, you caught me responding to your comment without reading an article. Good job. You apparently didnt read the article either. They are using a different statistical method they have devised ... and have ESTIMATED an outcome difference of 6%. So they dont even know if that will be their outcome, and left completely alone whether their technique is even close to accurate. Jumping the gun much?
SupremeChimp 3 years ago 3