Same Designer, Same Genes -argument

Open discussion for all registered members.

Same Designer, Same Genes -argument

Postby Masterpiece » Sun May 26, 2013 6:42 pm

One creationist told me basicly the Same Designer, Same Genes -argument, and I have tried to find some good counter-arguments against it. Who has had this conversation before? Any good advise?

I found a video by DonExodus2, titled "Why "Same Designer, Same Genes" is not a valid argument". But I would love to find out more specific arguments. Is there studies on some genes that has shown the differences that are only explained by common decent?
Masterpiece
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2013 7:00 pm
Location: Helsinki, Finland

Re: Same Designer, Same Genes -argument

Postby EnlightenmentLiberal » Sun May 26, 2013 11:01 pm

Off the cuff, I might try this: So, you agree that the tree of life of taxonomy, as discovered a hundred years before Darwin, is obvious to all? So, you also agree that the genetic tree of life coincides near exactly with the genetic tree of life? Thus you agree that evolution is an accurate predictive model of the universe? Thus your position is that the "designer" happened to make it also look exactly as if common ancestry, evolution, etc. was true?

Also this: If you take an honest look at human-created things, you do not see what you see in the genome. The relationships between human-created things does not form a tree. Instead, as you argue, you see that we frequently reuse parts, but we do so in a rather unpredictable way. We might use part X in some created things, part Y in other created things that only overlaps about half with X, and so on. This does not form a tree. This is not what we see with taxonomy and genetics. Taxonomy and genetics is does not have the appearance of a creator.

Also junk DNA. Created things tend not to contain massive amounts of useless redundant stuff. They tend to be simple. Contrast with the human genome where over half of it is useless junk, and probably closer to 90% or 95% is useless junk.
EnlightenmentLiberal
 
Posts: 201
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2013 10:32 am

Re: Same Designer, Same Genes -argument

Postby sepia » Tue May 28, 2013 11:38 am

Since a designer can create different designs the conclusion doesn't necessarily follow, that's true.

I don't know any response from a creationist, but to be fair, we actually know, that there is often an correlation between an artist and a special style. A creationist might give this as answer and claim: Same genes --> Same style --> Same designer.

But the same people will tell you, that different genes still don't mean different designer. So they already believe in a designer, who isn't comitted to a singe style!

And the most important thing: Even if the conclusion of a single designer followed plausibly from the premises

1) genes are designed

2) homologies exist

The evolutionary explanation is still more plausible, since the first premise is still unsupported.
sepia
 
Posts: 112
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2012 2:38 pm
Location: austria

Re: Same Designer, Same Genes -argument

Postby Masterpiece » Fri May 31, 2013 3:27 pm

Thanks for responses. I'll try to come up with somekind of argument from those.
Masterpiece
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2013 7:00 pm
Location: Helsinki, Finland


Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests