Changes

'''Homology''' involves the theory that [[Macroevolution|macroevolutionary]] relationships can be demonstrated by the similarity in the anatomy and physiology of different animals. <ref name="Bergman">Bergman, 2001</ref>

'''Homology''' involves the theory that [[macroevolution]]ary relationships can be demonstrated by the similarity in the anatomy and physiology of different animals.<ref name="Bergman">Bergman, 2001</ref>

== Invalidity of the Homology Argument ==

== Invalidity of the Homology Argument ==

Creation scientists claim that similarity can just as readily be explained by a common Designer as common ancestry, and that homology is therefore not evidence that can be used to support the [[Theory of evolution|evolutionary view]].<ref>Parker</ref><ref name="Bergman" /><ref>Anon., 1992</ref>

Creation scientists claim that similarity can just as readily be explained by a common Designer as common ancestry, and that homology is therefore not evidence that can be used to support the [[Theory of evolution|evolutionary view]].<ref name="Bergman" /><ref>Parker</ref><ref>Anon., 1992</ref>

Consequently, the widely-cited chimp/human [[DNA]] homology argument is also invalid.<ref>Batten, 1996</ref><ref>Purdom, 2006</ref><ref>Sarfati</ref>

Consequently, the widely cited chimp/human [[DNA]] homology argument is also invalid.<ref>Batten, 1996</ref><ref>Purdom, 2006</ref><ref>Sarfati</ref>

Furthermore, they argue that the evidence of ''against'' the evolutionary view.  For example, you would expect that similarity due to common ancestry would be controlled by similar genes passed down from ancestors to descendants.  Yet there are many examples where similar (homologous) structures are controlled by ''different'' genes.<ref>Kofahl, 1992</ref>

Furthermore, they argue that the evidence of ''against'' the evolutionary view.  For example, you would expect that similarity due to common ancestry would be controlled by similar genes passed down from ancestors to descendants.  Yet there are many examples where similar (homologous) structures are controlled by ''different'' genes.<ref>Kofahl, 1992</ref>

By itself, this demolishes one part of the evolutionists’ argument and makes it, clearly, a case of arbitrary imposition of modern values. In a context such as the above, ‘radically different design’ would have indicated to an ancient reader either no deity, or else a deity whose means was chaos and instability, or a deity who did not have mastery over creation.<ref>Holding, 2006</ref>}}

By itself, this demolishes one part of the evolutionists’ argument and makes it, clearly, a case of arbitrary imposition of modern values. In a context such as the above, ‘radically different design’ would have indicated to an ancient reader either no deity, or else a deity whose means was chaos and instability, or a deity who did not have mastery over creation.<ref>Holding, 2006</ref>}}

==External Links==

==External links==

*[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_6P6bXA50c0&feature=related Neo-Darwinism's Homology Problem - Video Clip]

*[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_6P6bXA50c0&feature=related Neo-Darwinism's Homology Problem - Video Clip]

* Batten, Don, [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/622/ Human/chimp DNA similarity], ''Creation'' 19(1):21–22, December 1996.

* Batten, Don, [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/622/ Human/chimp DNA similarity], ''Creation'' 19(1):21–22, December 1996.

* Bergman, Jerry, [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/1818 Does homology provide evidence of evolutionary naturalism?], ''Journal of Creation'', 15(1):26–33, April 2001.

* Bergman, Jerry, [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/1818 Does homology provide evidence of evolutionary naturalism?], ''Journal of Creation'', 15(1):26–33, April 2001.

* Holding, James Patrick, [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/4781 ‘Not to Be Used Again’: Homologous Structures and the Presumption of Originality as a Critical Value], Creation Ministries International, 29th November, 2006.

* Holding, James Patrick, [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/4781 ‘Not to Be Used Again’: Homologous Structures and the Presumption of Originality as a Critical Value], Creation Ministries International, 29 November 2006.

* Kofahl, Robert E., [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/1926/ A serious problem for homology], ''Creation'' 14(2):31, March 1992.

* Kofahl, Robert E., [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/1926/ A serious problem for homology], ''Creation'' 14(2):31, March 1992.

* Parker, Gary, [http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/cfol/ch1-homology.asp Comparative similarities: homology] (chapter 1 of Creation: The Facts of Life).

* Parker, Gary, [http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/cfol/ch1-homology.asp Comparative similarities: homology] (chapter 1 of Creation: The Facts of Life).

* Purdom, Georgia,  [http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v1/n2/human-and-chimp-dna If human and chimp DNA are so similar, why are there so many physical and mental differences between them?] ''Answers'', 1(1):64, 5th September 2006.

* Purdom, Georgia,  [http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v1/n2/human-and-chimp-dna If human and chimp DNA are so similar, why are there so many physical and mental differences between them?] ''Answers'', 1(1):64, 5 September 2006.

* Sarfati, Jonathan, [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3835 Humans: images of God or advanced apes?] (Chapter 6 of Refuting Evolution).

* Sarfati, Jonathan, [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3835 Humans: images of God or advanced apes?] (Chapter 6 of Refuting Evolution).

==References==

==References==

[[Category:Biology]]

[[Category:Biology]]

[[Category: Science]]

[[Category:Science]]