Here is a case of evolutionary bias causing misrecognition of orphan genes in humans. Orphan genes are presumed protein coding genes that exist in only one species and have such non-similarity to anything in any other species they are called orphans (a play on words of the ORF acroym for Open Reading Frame). This came up in the Nelson-Velasco debate where Velasco said there are 0 orphan genes, and Nelson pointed out the reason some say they are zero is because of their biases. Nelson has been vindicated as I pointed out in New Mechanism of Evouion — POOF Here’s is the proof of this cover up Distinguishing protein-coding and noncoding genes in the human genome: 1. “The remaining 1,177 Read More ›

When it comes to explaining the origin of complexity, evolutionists are a house divided. Here’s what Professor Richard Dawkins has to say on the subject: I have written many times that natural selection is NOT the only mechanism of evolution. I have said it is the only known mechanism of ADAPTIVE evolution. And I’ll say that again. Natural selection is the only known mechanism of adaptive evolution, meaning the evolution of complex adaptations carrying the illusion of design. If you have another candidate not involving selection, let’s hear it. (Source, November 26, 2011.) Compare that with what Professor PZ Myers wrote recently, in two posts which are provocatively titled, The fundamental failure of the evolutionary psychology premise and Complexity is Read More ›

Remember how nearly-identical chimpanzee-human genes were celebrated as yet another proof of evolution? There was only one problem: it didn’t make sense because the genes were too similar. The minor differences were probably not enough to produce species as different as the chimp and human and, as I explained in my bookDarwin’s Proof, there must be more significant differences to be found between the two primates. And indeed such differences were discovered. One was that even those highly similar genes were often transcribed at very different levels in the two species. This, evolutionists reasoned, must have been a driver in the primate evolution that led to such different species. What evolutionists did not realize was that, once again, they had Read More ›

A visual artist and a Ph.D. in computational genomics have gotten together to predict what we mere human mortals will look like in, say, 100,000 years. Given the prediction, I for one am glad I won’t be around to see it actually happen. The current design appeals to me much more. But maybe others will feel differently.

Humans, like everything else in biology, contradict evolution. Human uniqueness has sent evolution spiraling for years. Relative brain size, hairless sweaty skin, striding bipedal posture, long-distance running, ability to learn to swim, innate ability to learn languages in childhood, prolonged helplessness of the young, ability to imitate and learn, inter-generational transfer of complex cultures, awareness of self and of the past and future, theory of mind, increased longevity, provisioning by post-menopausal females, difficult childbirth, cerebral cortical asymmetry are just a few from a long list of features that make humans exceptional. Another such feature is the lack of endemic infectious retroviruses in humans. The problem is that these viruses are present in the other primates, and so according to evolutionists Read More ›