Universal Genome in the Origin of Metazoa

_{August 21, 2008

Intelligent Design}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

I blogged on this almost a year ago here:

Front loading passes peer review in Cell Cycle

Cell Cycle has a policy of making articles availabe without subscription after one year passes from initial publication. It’s been just over a year. The full paper is at:

http://www.landesbioscience.com/journals/cc/article/shermanCC6-15.pdf

Comments

Anyone with any proposals about the origins of matazoans has to account for the origin of wet electricty- that is the current that runs our bodies. Blind/ purpose-less forces just happened upon the right ions for the job? Not likely.Joseph_{August 22, 2008
August
08
Aug
22
22
2008
12:43 PM
12
12
43
PM
PDT}

Wow. How did that get published without the secret handshake?Jehu_{August 22, 2008
August
08
Aug
22
22
2008
05:15 AM
5
05
15
AM
PDT}

I think it ironic that Darwin's theory works fine, but only in reverse.mad doc_{August 22, 2008
August
08
Aug
22
22
2008
01:21 AM
1
01
21
AM
PDT}

sparc I suggest you heed my prior warning to you about one line replies lacking any explanation of the point you wish to make.DaveScot_{August 21, 2008
August
08
Aug
21
21
2008
10:30 PM
10
10
30
PM
PDT}

Dave, this is a splendid article. Thanks for staying on top of it. While reading it, I got very angry. Sherman presents two very testable hypotheses, which completely flies in the face of the usual, "ID isn't a science. It doesn't have any ideas that can be tested." Isn't it clear that if the Darwinists would open up their labs and their peer-reviewed journals to ID thinking, that ID would generate more and more testable hypotheses? But the Darwinists will have to open up their minds before this will happen; so, lots of luck with that one. Sherman writes this: "Among entirely novel families of genes that appeared in Metazoa are genes associated with formation of body plans, organ development and cell-cell communications, for example HOx, TGFbeta, Wnt, nuclear receptor systems, etc. Some of them are clearly involved in complex developmental programs, associated with bilateral organization. Existing data from morphology suggest that bilateral taxons emerge from organisms with radial symmetery, like Cnidaria. Whether this suggestion is correct or these groups evolved independently, one does not expect to find genes responsible for development of bilateral organisms in primitive Metazoa with radial symmetery" Radial and bilateral symmetry are radically different body types. How do Darwinists explain the presence of needed genes for a bilateral body plan inside an organism that has radial symmetry? What possible evolutionary advantage would these impart?PaV_{August 21, 2008
August
08
Aug
21
21
2008
06:23 PM
6
06
23
PM
PDT}

No citations yet in Google Scholar. Gregor Mendel was ignored for 30 years. Evolutionary biologists as a group aren't the sharpest tools in the shed, evidently.DaveScot_{August 21, 2008
August
08
Aug
21
21
2008
01:59 PM
1
01
59
PM
PDT}

From my reading, Sherman posits an ancestral "universal genome" with some serious coding that produced the diversity that came afterward, via encoded development programs and other systematic parameters. I.E. top-down diversity and variety, not bottom-up. The "universal genome" would be the intelligent designer proxy. You don't have to explain where it came from, if the empirical evidence indicates it's a better explanation.William J. Murray_{August 21, 2008
August
08
Aug
21
21
2008
11:16 AM
11
11
16
AM
PDT}

No citations yet in Google Scholar. Some blogs etc citing: "Universal Genome in the Origin of Metazoa" GoogleDLH_{August 21, 2008
August
08
Aug
21
21
2008
11:08 AM
11
11
08
AM
PDT}

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply