Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
TheNewCreationist
It's not about me. It's about the evidence. But if you must know, yes, I am a creationist because of the evidence. http://newcreationist.blogspot.com/
Concerning the comparative 5/17 chromosomal translocation between Gorillas and Humans...?
Concerning the comparative 5/17 chromosomal translocation between Gorillas and Humans, why exactly doesn't this contradict common ancestry between humans and gorillas?
2 AnswersBiology8 years agoWhy are you a creationist?
I am a young earth creationist myself and have noticed there is a considerable amount of 'creationist bashing' going on here in YAnswers. Along with the general hostility directed towards creationists, especially YEC, there is a strong prejudice emanating from evolutionists that perturbs genuine curiosity about what creationists believe and why, hence my question is directed solely to creationists. Why are you a Creationist?
As for me, I have many reasons some of which are on my blog
http://newcreationist.blogspot.com/
and on my YouTube channel
1 AnswerReligion & Spirituality9 years agoHow long can Darwinism survive in the face of so much contradictory evidence?
Thirty percent of the gorilla genome contradicts evolutionary phylogeny according to a recent study and it has been known for awhile that gene trees do not support common descent yet this evidence is not reported to the public by the main stream media. This information is however available to anyone who looks for it . Eventually more people are bound to learn the truth and abandon Darwinian evolution as I did but how long till they do?
23 AnswersReligion & Spirituality9 years agoHow can you tell if a fossil is transitional?
How could it unequivocally be established that a particular fossil is transitional? Say for example, if a fossil is of a particular animal which had no descendants such that it subsequently went extinct then it would not be a transitional form because nothing came after it so there would be no living descendants. By what scientific method then do scientists determine whether or not a fossil is transitional? Or is it simply assumed because your theory demands it?
3 AnswersEarth Sciences & Geology10 years agoHow will Evolution Theory survive in light of the data?
I found this article on the Evolution News and Views website,
"Study Reports a Whopping '23% of Our Genome' Contradicts Standard Human-Ape Evolutionary Phylogeny" - Evolution News & Views
I find it interesting for many reasons, mostly because the data contradicts evolutionary trees because species which are supposedly more closely related should be more similar genetically. This is not the case with 23% of the genes compared between Human and Chimp according to a study, 'Mapping Human Genetic Ancestry', published in 'Molecular Biology and Evolution' which says, "For about 23% of our genome, we share no immediate genetic ancestry with our closest living relative, the chimpanzee."
So, one thing that becomes abundantly clear is that the 98.5% similarity between humans and chimps then is not true by a fairly wide margin. And another even more crucial thing that becomes apparent is that the data does NOT support evolutionary common descent but rather contradicts it. The question arises then, "How will Evolution Theory survive in light of the data?"
1 AnswerBiology10 years agoWhy don't Creationists look at the evidence?
Why do evolutionists have to lie about the evidence?
Richard Dawkins said, "If you take any set of animals, and identify the same gene in different animals, and you really can do that, because the letters of the DNA code -- that is, the same code in all animals -- and you really can find a gene which is the same -- in, say, all mammals. For example, there's a gene called FOXP2, which is a couple of thousand letters long, and most of the letters are the same in any mammal, so you know it's the same gene. And then you go through, and you literally count the number of letters that are different.
So, in the case of FOXP2, if you count the number of letters that are different between humans and chimpanzees, it's only about 9."
When I checked on this, I found that it is not true.
...and...
1 AnswerReligion & Spirituality10 years agoWhy do evolutionists have to lie about the evidence?
Why do evolutionists have to lie about the evidence?
Richard Dawkins said, "If you take any set of animals, and identify the same gene in different animals, and you really can do that, because the letters of the DNA code -- that is, the same code in all animals -- and you really can find a gene which is the same -- in, say, all mammals. For example, there's a gene called FOXP2, which is a couple of thousand letters long, and most of the letters are the same in any mammal, so you know it's the same gene. And then you go through, and you literally count the number of letters that are different.
So, in the case of FOXP2, if you count the number of letters that are different between humans and chimpanzees, it's only about 9."
When I checked on this, I found that it is not true.
...and...
1 AnswerBiology10 years agoWhy do evolutionists have to lie about the evidence?
Richard Dawkins said, "If you take any set of animals, and identify the same gene in different animals, and you really can do that, because the letters of the DNA code -- that is, the same code in all animals -- and you really can find a gene which is the same -- in, say, all mammals. For example, there's a gene called FOXP2, which is a couple of thousand letters long, and most of the letters are the same in any mammal, so you know it's the same gene. And then you go through, and you literally count the number of letters that are different.
So, in the case of FOXP2, if you count the number of letters that are different between humans and chimpanzees, it's only about 9."
When I checked on this, I found that it is not true.
...and...
1 AnswerReligion & Spirituality10 years agoIf Evolution were true, as opposed to Creation, then why does the genetic evidence contradict Evolution?
There is quite a bit of genetic evidence which supports the Biblical claim that Humans are a uniquely created species with no common ancestry with any other species. Here is one example:
http://newcreationist.blogspot.com/2011/06/gene-tr...
Why does the genetic evidence contradict Evolution Theory?
___________________________
As long as the subject of evolution has religious implications and is brought up by those who oppose religious beliefs then this is one of the places where the discussion should take place.
5 AnswersReligion & Spirituality10 years agoWhy shouldn't Christians, or anyone else, ask questions about evolution in the Religion section?
Evolution is presented here by atheists as an argument against religious beliefs all the time and the religious ramifications of evolution have been discussed here for years now, since Yahoo answers first started. This is were the heat of the discussion is taking place. As long as the subject of evolution has religious implications and is brought up by those who oppose religious beliefs then what do you suppose is the motivation for opposing the questioning of evolution theory here in this forum? Don't you think this is one of the places where the discussion should take place?
newcreationist.blogspot.com
7 AnswersReligion & Spirituality10 years agoWhere does it say in the Bible that you shouldn't lie?
5 AnswersReligion & Spirituality1 decade agoWhat is the best modern English translation of the Bible?
14 AnswersReligion & Spirituality1 decade ago