Did you know that most of the evidence claimed for evolution is actually not evidence for evolution? That's right, remember the mountain of evidence that evolutionists say is supposed to make evolution a fact? Well most of it consists of biological findings that merely have been interpreted according to evolution.何やら仰々しく始まるエントリ...
進化論の証拠だと主張されたものの大半が、進化論の証拠ではないことを知っているだろうか？ その通り、進化論者が進化論を事実にすると言っている証拠の山は？ 生物学上の発見はの大半は進化論に従って解釈されただけのものなのだ。
A prestigious scientific journal, the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, published detailed findings about how DNA information is used to make proteins in our cells. The research team, led by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory professor Michael Zhang, discovered subtle signals in the DNA that help guide incredibly complex molecular machinery when editing the DNA information. The findings are not in any way evidence for evolution, and yet the headlines proclaimed “Scientists Find a Fingerprint of Evolution Across the Human Genome.”十分に進化とは関連しているけどね：
...
The paper's title alone (“RNA landscape of evolution for optimal exon and intron discrimination”) suggests a new finding about evolution, and the paper concludes that human genes seem to have been optimized “during evolution.”But the “during evolution” part is gratuitous. The key findings are about how the genetic signals work, not that they evolved. There is, in fact, nothing in the findings to indicate evolution.
評価の高い科学学術誌PNASは、DNA情報が我々の細胞内でタンパク質を作るのにどのように使われるかについての発見の詳細を掲載した。Cold Spring Harbor LaboratoryのMichael Zhang教授率いる研究チームは、DNA情報を編集するとき、信じられないほど複雑な分子機械を導くのを助けるDNAの中に微妙な信号を発見した。研究結果は、どんな形であれ進化の証拠ではないが、見出しは「科学者はヒトゲノムにある進化の足跡を見つけた」というものだった。論文タイトルは「最適ExonとIntronの区別のための進化のRNAランドスケープ」で、これは新たな発見が進化についてだと示唆していて、結論では「ヒトゲノムが進化の過程で最適化されたと思われる」となっている。しかし、「進化の過程で」は不要だ。事実、この発見は何も進化を示していない。
[Cornelius Hunter: "Scientists (Do Not) Find a Fingerprint of Evolution" (2010/02/04) on Darwins-God, also on Uncommon Descent]
Zhang et al: "RNA landscape of evolution for optimal exon and intron discrimination", PNAS April 15, 2008 vol. 105 no. 15 5797-5802進化の足跡をつけた仕掛けが次の誰かのネタという位置づけなわけだが。
Accurate pre-mRNA splicing requires primary splicing signals, including the splice sites, a polypyrimidine tract, and a branch site, other splicing-regulatory elements (SREs). The SREs include exonic splicing enhancers (ESEs), exonic splicing silencers (ESSs), intronic splicing enhancers (ISEs), and intronic splicing silencers (ISSs), which are typically located near the splice sites. However, it is unclear to what extent splicing-driven selective pressure constrains exonic and intronic sequences, especially those distant from the splice sites. Here, we studied the distribution of SREs in human genes in terms of DNA strand-asymmetry patterns. Under a neutral evolution model, each mononucleotide or oligonucleotide should have a symmetric (Chargaff's second parity rule), or weakly asymmetric yet uniform, distribution throughout a pre-mRNA transcript. However, we found that large sets of unbiased, experimentally determined SREs show a distinct strand-asymmetry pattern that is inconsistent with the neutral evolution model, and reflects their functional roles in splicing. ESEs are selected in exons and depleted in introns and vice versa for ESSs. Surprisingly, this trend extends into deep intronic sequences, accounting for one third of the genome. Selection is detectable even at the mononucleotide level, so that the asymmetric base compositions of exons and introns are predictive of ESEs and ESSs. We developed a method that effectively predicts SREs based on strand asymmetry, expanding the current catalog of SREs. Our results suggest that human genes have been optimized for exon and intron discrimination through an RNA landscape shaped during evolution.
しかし、Cornelius G. Hunterはそれを容認しないという。これは「進化論なき生物学が存在する」あるいは「進化」に言及しなくて済むなら言及してはならないという、学校教育から進化論を排除するために古くからある創造論者の主張が根底にあると思われる・。
対応する創造論者の主張(by Mark Isaak)はこれ：
Evolution matters because science matters, and too many people (including some presidents) are willing to believe that science is something you can pick and choose from, with "good" science being anything that supports your own views and "bad" science being anything that doesn't. Physicists are great guys because they say nothing to offend us, biologists are mad scientists leading us down the path to perdition with their genetic meddling, evolutionists are self-delusional fools, and anyone studying environmental science is a left-wing tree-hugging extremist whose sole goal is to destroy the American economy and lead us to one-world government. If scientists in a given discipline argue about any conclusion, whoever says what you want to hear is the right one. Too many people can't accept that although scientists are not perfect, and do make mistakes (sometimes whoppers), science isn't something you can pick through like a buffet, accepting only what is to your "taste" and designating the rest inedible. If people feel free to reject the science of evolution, they feel free to reject any science on no better grounds. Whether my students accept evolution may have little direct effect on my future. Whether they understand biology, ecology, environmental geology (water is a big issue in my community), and other subjects and can make informed decisions regarding scientific issues does matter. If they feel free to reject evolution as part of a "buffet" approach to science, their other choices will be no better informed.で、Cornelius G. Hunterのエントリの最後は陰謀論めいている：
進化論が問題になるのは科学が問題になるからだ。複数の大統領を含む、あまりにも多くの人々が、「自分の見方を支持してくれる良い科学と支持してくれない悪い科学から、科学をつまみ食いできるものだ」と信じたがっている。「物理学者は我々を怒らせることを言わないから偉大な人々であり、生物学者は遺伝子に干渉して我々を破滅に導くマッドサイエンティストであり、進化論者は自己妄想の馬鹿であり、環境科学の研究者は米国経済を破壊し世界統一政府を作ろうと言う極左である。」科学者がその分野で結論を論じたとき、我々が聞きたいことを言うのが正しい科学者だ。あまりにも多くの人々が、「科学者が完ぺきではなく、誤りを犯すものであり、科学が食べたいものだけを選べるカフェテリアではない」ことを認めようとはしない。人々が進化論を気ままに拒絶するなら、正当な根拠なくどんな科学でも気ままに拒絶するだろう。学生たちが進化論を受け入れるか否かは私の将来にほとんど影響を及ぼさないだろう。彼らが生物学や生態学や環境地質学（水は大問題）や他の分野を理解して、科学的問題について情報に基づく判断をできる否かは、問題になる。彼らが進化論を科学に対するカフェテリアアプローチとして拒絶するなら、他の問題についても情報に基づいて判断できなくなる。
[CA042. Biology can reasonably be taught without evolution. (訳)]
For reports such as this are taken to be objective, scientific confirmations of evolution. They often find their way into the popular literature, text books, Internet discussions, origins debates and so forth. Because evolution is believed to be a fact, we have lost the ability to rightly evaluate scientific evidence. All evidence must point to evolution, even if it doesn’t.
このような報道は、進化論の客観的で科学的な確認であるとみなされる。彼らは一般書や教科書やネットの議論や起源論争などに、自分たちの道を見つける。進化が事実だと信じられているので、科学的証拠を正しく評価できなくなってしまった。すべての証拠は進化を指し示す。たとえそうでなくとも。
[Cornelius Hunter: "Scientists (Do Not) Find a Fingerprint of Evolution" (2010/02/04) on Darwins-God, also on Uncommon Descent]
