Difference between revisions of "Talk:Gorilla"
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
Not all creationists are young earth. Too many places on this site, evolution and age of the earth are assumed to be the same thing. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 14:31, 21 June 2007 (EDT) | Not all creationists are young earth. Too many places on this site, evolution and age of the earth are assumed to be the same thing. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 14:31, 21 June 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==Common ancestor?== | ||
| + | The article says "Comparison of DNA sequences of humans and gorillas show them to be 99% identical, but even with these similarities there are so many gaps in the sequence that it is nigh impossible for them to have descended from a common ancestor." I don't get it. Why do you need to analyse the number of gaps in the DNA to conclude that gorillas and people have no common ancestor? Surely the number of gaps would suggest only that any common ancestor must have been ''a long time ago''. The absolute ''rejection'' of common ancestry cannot be based on this, only on a more fundamental rejection of evolutionist theory. It looks like an illogical argument. [[User:Humblpi|Humblpi]] 08:16, 15 February 2008 (EST) | ||
Revision as of 13:16, February 15, 2008
Why is there an evolutionist link on here? Ratso 18:01, 14 April 2007 (EDT)
Um, because Conservapedia claims to be 'unbiased'? And because neither you not User:Conservative has deleted it yet? --BobD 18:03, 14 April 2007 (EDT)
- I believe he deleted it. ScorpionTell me what you think 14:56, 15 April 2007 (EDT)
Not all creationists are young earth. Too many places on this site, evolution and age of the earth are assumed to be the same thing. DanH 14:31, 21 June 2007 (EDT)
Common ancestor?
The article says "Comparison of DNA sequences of humans and gorillas show them to be 99% identical, but even with these similarities there are so many gaps in the sequence that it is nigh impossible for them to have descended from a common ancestor." I don't get it. Why do you need to analyse the number of gaps in the DNA to conclude that gorillas and people have no common ancestor? Surely the number of gaps would suggest only that any common ancestor must have been a long time ago. The absolute rejection of common ancestry cannot be based on this, only on a more fundamental rejection of evolutionist theory. It looks like an illogical argument. Humblpi 08:16, 15 February 2008 (EST)