Aineo wrote:Common DNA is simple to explain if you consult an engineer. If you are going to build a vehicle you have a common blueprint and then add all the frills. The 98% of DNA common to apes and men account for all the physical differences found in both species; in other words each species DNA is what determines the animal.
Or, it could be a product of evolution. One genome evolving into the next, keeping the good while adding more as complexity evolves. The human ape comparison is a fine example that demonstrates a common ancestry.
By asking this question you have demonstrated your study of DNA is superficial.
:roll: or I could have been trying to discover the level of complexity to keep the discussion on.
All dogs have a common ancestor, the wolf. What you have is selective breeding and your dog has not evolved into a lion, horse, ape, man, or any other species. What started as a dog is still a dog and is microevolution.
Each modern dog is a seperate sub-species. Foxes, wolves, and jackals are very distinct species, yet they all share a common ancestor. An ancestor that has evolved into a fox, a jackal, and a wolf.
The Talmud is the foundation of the Bible just as Darwin is the foundation of modern evolutionary theory so your simile only establishes my terminology.
as it does mine.
We can see evolution within species (microevolution) but we do not find any evolution that fits Darwin's theory of all life evolving from a single cell.
Macroevolution requires great amounts of time. Of course you aren't going to see it. Do you doubt that cro-magnon man existed? the Neandertal man existed? What about Homo-erectus and the rest of the human chain?
The Cambrian explosion should be sufficient proof to show that Darwin and macroevolution are nothing more than a disproven theory. What Darwin said should not happen did happen and that is the sudden appearance of fully developed species. Darwin was aware of this before he published his book but believed that transitional fossils would be found that vindicated his theory. If Darwinian evolution were a valid thesis then you would expect to find some transitional fossils in the pre-Cambrian layers.
You refer to the cambrian explosion as though it suddenly occured over night instead of over the course of millions of years. The increased speciation comes as a result of different interactions between living specimans of the time. Sexual reproduction was a major impetus of the cambrian explosion.