 
|
 Return to the Guestbook |
| |
Guest |
Comments |
Date |
|
| |
Kyle
|
Given longer age spans during the time of the patriarchs (hundreds of years, due to differing environmental factors before the great deluge), the genetic mutations of say, mitochondrial DNA, for instance, would spell out a different character than those we find today (the Lake Mungo specimen, for instance; an otherwise morphologically modern aboroginal individual dated as being archaic, AND having significant differences in DNA coding, which taken from the fossils). This does not imply macroevolution, northe "non-human" characteristics of these individuals (which has been the mantra by paleontologists about neanderthal man for years now; this recent find is a challenge to that claim). It shows that the genetic code for the human race is extremely variablewithin certain degrees, taken from an extremely variable and rich source for genetic information (i.e., Adam). I do not see how this is not a viable explanation in contrast to macroevolutionary explanations. |
7/25/2002 2:53:47 PM |
|
|
|
|
