Proteins argue against evolution


Genes that don’t appear in just any creature, but specifically in one that the Fossil evidence shows it’s related to?

It does prove of biological progression regardless of what it is you think was “guiding” it.

Just as we observe biological progression today.

I discount God doing it directly, because the design is imperfect, and the “complexity” is like a Rube Goldberg Machine.

Whimsical, intricate, but overly elaborate, and nothing a true Engineer would do. It is however something an unthinking, mechanical process would do.

How long is a “day”? I think you’re being too literal.

A “day” on Venus for instance, a planet of near the same size, lasts longer than it’s year. Earth’s own “day” we know was different before the formation of the moon.

If the proto-Earth was tidally locked, a “day” could be eons.


But similar creatures. Similar creatures likely contain similar features and similar genes.

It is? What about the impact of original sin on the world?

Maybe God is artistic.

Why not be literal about it?

When Bioware encoded Knights of the Old Republic, Bioware created it in the course of months. Everything in it is in place, with history and back story that never occurred (or played out) in the fictional universe, yet characters in the universe will remember these events or see evidence of those events. Grant the denizens of that world or any other virtual world real artificial intelligence, what would they make of their universe?

It is no stretch to take Genesis 1 literally. It limits God.

That said, I don’t think it’s much of a stretch and wouldn’t be surprised to find out a day was some longer period. It’s simpler to take the Scriptures straight up here. God did it. God is all-powerful. I have no reason to believe He couldn’t or wouldn’t do it.


Agreed. RWNJ. I find it most curious that MOST of the scientists working on the Human Genome Project are Christians–even those that WEREN’T when they hired onto the project. Could it be that they realized at some point that genetic coding is so complex that it simply COULD NOT have happened randomly or by accident.


Which didn’t live at the same time. You can’t get past that.

There’s no reason for a chicken, to have the genes of a completely different creature, it doesn’t need.
Not unelss the chicken did not just “op” into being, but was made from a process occurring over eons.

Just like the stars and planets themselves. They too are made from the materials of precursors.

There’s too many indications of progression going on, nothing that makes sense for God to do, unless this is the mechanism he made it happen through.

Vestigial structures of when species were their precursors (whales having hind legs, because they had a land-dwelling ancestor).

Genes from their precursors, which we can turn on.

Structural anachronisms from their precursors showing up in their embryos.

We humans ourselves have “useless” muscles on the bottom of our feet from when we could grab things,
The appendix, a useless organ, and wisdom teeth, largely useless structures, from when we ate plants, and had to spend most of our time chewing leaves to consume & digest glucose.

Humans have DNA from other Humanoid species in them; the Neanderthal, the Denisovans,
the remains of which we have found, and point to other progression within our species, other branches we left behind.

This is all real, it’s all documented, and it points to a rational world design, that everything else in reality points to us having.

If nature can build nuclear reactors, Giant’s causeway, and the wonders we see in the night sky, there’s no reason to deny that it could also make us.

No, it limits God to say he couldn’t a design a universe that would automatically create us.

If he has to intervene at regular intervals to get what he wants, finicking with his own creation before it does what he wants, that’s the same as saying he isn’t the master builder.

I would say, he didn’t need to finick with anything, until free will came into the picture, because that’s the one thing we know he truly can’t control.

He would not do it for the same reason he does not make rain fall from a cloudless sky.

He made the world as a rational structure, because he is a rational being. He does not take shortcuts nor does he need to.


AS. You are perfectly free to believe that you first appeared on this planet as pond scum. Most of US don’t buy it because the evidence against it is overwhelming.


CRISPR means you can’t deny it anymore Dave.

That’s practical science, proving Evolution is going on. CRISPR wouldn’t work otherwise.

Again, you don’t have an explanation, for why it is a Chicken has dino DNA.

They didn’t live side-by-side, the only reason the Chicken would have this DNA, is if they were related.


Don’t really know anything about that, but cool :slight_smile:

Really, I can get past that. God created stuff – the stuff in the ground too!

Don’t forget how much useless code exists in Windows.

Common DNA is not surprising in a designed or instantly or randomly created system.

I didn’t remotely say such a thing. In fact I said exactly the opposite. But I can also just take the book at its word. It’s God. God did it. My original comment is that I marvel when Christians scoff at the notion that God created the earth in six days. I’ve not scoffed at the idea that God created a universe that created us.

Out of curiosity do you think Adam and Eve were symbolic too?

Yeah, I quite agree.

Evidence? I mean I have a book that says He did do something.


Not without taking a shortcut and making our reality irrational. Which God doesn’t do.

Except, Windows had iterations, and evolved overtime.

That’s the key here, intact code, from a previous creature, that was useful to that creature, but not the one we’ve found it in.

Like code that was in windows 98, in non-functional presence in Windows 2000. It points to an iterative process.

That’s what you can’t deny, a biological progression did happen, all the evidence points to it. There’s no reason for God to create a universe in media res ,

That’s going too far, just to rescue a literal reading of Genesis.

Common DNA
Not common, leftover, intact, and not used.

The chicken did not have Dinosaur legs, until we turn the genes on.

Genes evolution turned off, and leaves off.

Ergo, even if you want to argue in media res, that means you’re admitting Evolution is at work now, and has been since the date of creation; wherever it is you put that.

It’s a story that concurs with Evolution, in a way Jourdan Peterson explains.

We developed keen vision, and color perception, specifically, to detect snakes and ripe, red fruit.

Women likely developed full consciousness first, because they had more to be worried of.

Once you develop consciousness, worries abound, because now you have knowledge of the future, and what it can do to you.


Not really a Catholic doctrine, right? Have you rejected Catholicism then? Seems to me you are or were Catholic. Forgive me if I remember incorrectly


We share 98% of OUR DNA with Chimpanzees. Do you believe that Chimps are OUR predecessors? The existence of a single bone in a chicken leg that RESEMBLES a bone in a T-Rex leg is NOT “proof” by any stretch of the term that the two were RELATED in any way. That’s pure BS.


Catholicism calls the Story in Genesis symbolic:

Further, remember what I said about what is a “day”? To even the early Church fathers, this wasn’t clear:


CRISPR is a tool. You’ve mentioned it several times in this thread as if it can create information without intelligent input. It cannot. It can move it around, but information originally comes from an intelligent agent.

Proteins argue against evolution.

Are you sure they didn’t live side-by-side? Of course you are–you have faith in evolution. But those of us who’ve stepped back and looked at the big picture aren’t so sure.

Also, if you find the same gene in different organisms, it is just as much evidence of design as of evolution. The designer had a box of parts.


I mean Adam and Eve not creation. I’m pretty familiar with your viewpoint and the church’s on creation. I’m just wondering how that ties to Adam and Even. Pretty sure Catholic Church recognizes them as actual people.

Do you subscribe to the church’s doctrine on this or Jordan Peterson’s? Or do I understand Catholicism incorrectly?


It’s not creating anything, it’s turning pre-existing genes on. Again, if you understand what it is, and what it’s doing, the conclusion is undeniable.

Once more, I think you concede that micro-evolution happens, or that at least a biological progression of some sort happens, because both of the writers you cited do this.

Are you going to clarify this or not?

Peptides. We don’t need strings of 100 amino acids, when we can have structures with far less than that, with < 7 amino acid types. The moment this was discovered, the argument about proteins became pointless.

You haven’t even tried to make a counter argument on this, all you’ve done is acknowledge that peptides exist.


Incorrectly, though there’s conflicting voices out there, so I get it. A International Theological Commission headed by then Cardinal Ratzinger concluded this on the matter:

Catholic theology affirms that that the emergence of the first members of the human species (whether as individuals or in populations) represents an event that is not susceptible of a purely natural explanation and which can appropriately be attributed to divine intervention


I already answered this: no , we had a common ancestor. That’s why our DNA is similiar.

Our lines diverged 5-7 million years ago.

It’s not a T-rex bone it resembles (it’s a Deinonychus), and it’s not just a resemblance, it’s the same DNA.

You don’t have an explanation for that.

Your entire argument, rests upon ignoring what Scientists have discovered, claiming it’s something else.

Acknowledging what they are, would mean admitting that biological progression is real. Which is clearly evident to anyone whose examined the evidence.


BS again, AS. I don’t believe we HAVE any “Deinonychus” DNA so no way to make such a DNA “match.”



I used to be, but I lean more toward an old Earth now (although not dogmatically). Scripture does say, though, that to God, a day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years are as a day.


The Chicken has it Dave. The Chicken has this DNA.

You can’t deny it, the Chicken had a gene from it, a gene that was already present and turned off, until we came along and turned it on.

I said this before, if you understand what CRISPR is, and what it’s doing, the truth is undeniable.
It doesn’t work, without biological progression of some sort happening.

You can credit God for guiding that progression, but the progression itself is still happening.
Species are becoming other species, differences accrue overtime, genes are turned on and off.

We see this in real time happen to us through Epigenetics, as we speak. That’s why racial differences exist.


Pre-existing genes? Already existing? It looks like you’re trying to get around the protein problem by saying the information was already there. Well how did it get there? Where did these pre-existing genes come from? You don’t solve the problem by shifting it in time or place. Either you’re claiming the information was ultimately created by a random process, which doesn’t work, or it came from an intelligent agent.

Micro-evolution? Oh yes. That changes features within a species. Where species are defined tightly enough, it even creates new species–but not new kinds. No amount of micro-evolution could ever get you from a simple organism to a mammal.

My my. Aren’t we testy and impetuous.

No, the protein argument is unaffected. Our bodies use 20 amino acids (or maybe 22–odd), not 7. If you present a path to get from a bunch of 7-amino-acid peptides that become a present-day 100-aa-protein, then you’ve just presented a tortuous path that still must beat the very same odds that I outlined in the first post. Multiply the permutations of each peptide times each other. In fact, you may have added some complexity that made the odds worse.

You can’t solve the problem with peptides.

My my. Aren’t we testy and impetuous.

All I did was acknowledge peptides exist because they don’t solve your problem.