Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

New Peer-Reviewed Paper Challenges Darwinian Evolution

Jonathan McLatchie
December 30, 2010
Intelligent Design
1
Categories
Intelligent Design
Share
Facebook
Twitter/X
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

Over recent months, papers challenging key elements of Darwinian theory — the kind of papers which are supposed not to exist — have increasingly been slipping through the net and finding their way into the peer-reviewed literature. One such paper, “Is gene duplication a viable explanation for the origination of biological information and complexity?,” authored by Joseph Esfandier Hannon Bozorgmeh and published online last week in the journal, Complexity, challenges the standard gene duplication/divergence model regarding the origin of evolutionary novelty. Read More>>>

Comments
Joseph, Very interesting article, thanks for the post. This deserves a UD thread on its own. Here is the most interesting quote it had:
A critical mistake of the theory of evolution was the assumption that completely distinct organisms could evolve from one common ancestor
Somebody ought to print this article and stamp it on Richard Dawkins' face!Shogun
January 2, 2011
January
01
Jan
2
02
2011
06:58 PM
6
06
58
PM
PDT
Hey, hey, hey- Genome Data Proves False the Theory of Evolution, New Theory Shows Complex Animals and Plants Originated from Prebiotic Chemistry All 3 papers can be downloaded...Joseph
January 2, 2011
January
01
Jan
2
02
2011
07:06 AM
7
07
06
AM
PDT
Gene duplication- it needs to have the binding site duplicated along with it and even then all you have is another existing protein free to diffuse about the cell.Joseph
December 31, 2010
December
12
Dec
31
31
2010
09:06 AM
9
09
06
AM
PDT
In reality, evolution by duplication and modification of an existing function can only be accomplished by intelligent agents, most notably demonstrated in television serials and romance novels.SCheesman
December 30, 2010
December
12
Dec
30
30
2010
01:34 PM
1
01
34
PM
PDT
I guess if the author has written something like "Gene duplication is the Hail Mary pass of Darwinian evolution of the genome" the paper wouldn't have passed peer-review, even though it would have been a more accurate statement, so the actual wording is quite understandable.SCheesman
December 30, 2010
December
12
Dec
30
30
2010
01:28 PM
1
01
28
PM
PDT
From the abstract:
Therefore, although the process of gene duplication and subsequent random mutation has certainly contributed to the size and diversity of the genome, it is alone insufficient in explaining the origination of the highly complex information pertinent to the essential functioning of living organisms.
Even the first sentence is a stretch, likely inserted as a sop to the vigilante Darwinians. "Has certainly". How can you be so certain? Name one instance!SCheesman
December 30, 2010
December
12
Dec
30
30
2010
01:24 PM
1
01
24
PM
PDT

Leave a Reply