Failure of Human Evolution in Evolutionist Terms

As related in the previous post, The Creation of Adam, genomic scientists have proved that modern humans did not evolve from more primitive forms.  Their genomic methods, intended to prove that humans evolved from apes and Neanderthals, suddenly got too good, and proved just the opposite – that the human genome is unique. This essentially pulled the rug out from under this entire evolutionist community, and suddenly they are trying to redefine themselves. They have even ‘evolved’ a novel term to describe this new period: Postgenomics.

A book (Postgenomics, Perspectives on Biology After the Genome, by Sarah S. Richardson and Hallam Stevens, Duke University) has already been published containing 12 essays by philosophers and social scientists trying to define this new science. A few quotes from a review of the book that appeared in Science 31 July 2015 are highlighted below: “The primary theme of this volume is that postgenomics research is characterized by a fundamental shift in how problems are identified, hypotheses are proposed, and data are treated rather than by improvments in DNA sequencing technology.” … “Postgenomics is “a historical marker for an era where the results of genomics … are being brought together with other types of biological traditions  and outputs” Like religions? ” In some cases , this synthesis challenges researcher’s abilities to provide explanations for biological phenomena.” Like human DNA is unique and not related to the DNA of more primitive species? “For example, the effort to reconcile genomic data with insights from other biological sciences can call into question the reductionistic goal of articulating  a simple relationship between genotype and phenotype.” e.g. between genomes and Neanderthals.

An amusing statment is: “An important secondary theme of the book is that while postgenomics presents new technical and theoretical challenges for scientists, it also allows science studies scholars to observe firsthand how scientists react to new discoveries.” (remember The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, by Thomas Kuhn?) Also illustrating the situation in which genomic scientists find themselves, an anthropologist ” … highlights the importance of affect – specifically emotional reactions, such as surprise – as a driver of scientific discovery and change.” As would be expected a few of the authors refuse to accept the new findings, for example: ” … the notion that individuals have a unique, fixed genome is untenable in light of contemporary scientific knowledge.” This is the last gasp of the old evolutionst genomics scientists.

1 Cor 1:19-20 KJV For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? 

~ by Angiras on August 7, 2015.

%d bloggers like this: