header photo

Creation Science Fiction™

Exposing The Lies One Layer At A Time

Another Day, Another Creationist Fail!

I interact with a lot of creationists on facebook or witness their conversations with others. One well moderated group is called Creationism and it is also one of the largest. In a not so popular or well moderated group I recently witnessed this exchange where a creationist posted an article, then argued against the article's content. It was almost as if he either did not read or understand what he posted, but it isn't the first time this individual has done this.

This guy named Jorge Rodriguez, a dog trainer from near Los Angeles, was claiming there is no way for "new information" to be added to a genome on a topic he posted with a link to an article called How New Genes Arise From Scratch - Quanta Magazine. Someone pointed out that "de novo" genes that arise from non-coding DNA certainly is adding new information to a genome by quoting the article he posted:

"The researchers were able to trace the series of mutations that converted the silent piece of noncoding DNA into an active gene. That work showed that the new gene is truly de novo and ruled out the alternative — that it belonged to an existing gene family and simply evolved beyond recognition."

Look at the creationist's response:

The article clearly said it ruled out that it belonged to an existing family. In an amazing display of ignorance, the creationist claimed the article said exactly the opposite of what was written. He also confused "revolves" with evolved. He was given several examples of new information being added to genomes, including two complete genome duplications that were critical in the evolution of vertebrates along with the complete studies, and yet still refused to accept that new information was being added. Some people are just beyond help. 

A few years ago Richard White came up with Aalto's Law to describe the phenomenon where creationists post links to studies or papers that actually show the opposite of what they claim. We then discovered that the law should be named after the person making it and not the subject, so it was changed to White's Law.


Go Back