This response (by John, above) is attempting to point you toward Dennis Venema’s (Trinity Western University) teaching to prove on a very scientific level that common ancestry is the better, more scientific explanation for the created world. The first few parts, including the one here, build some principles of science and frankly take the common leap of assumption – namely, that Evolution (macro) has been successfully tested for 150 years. This statement is a presupposition at best and is really where the thinking Christian community really gets a little perturbed. We have never witnessed a species “birthing”, in any way, another species. We have never seen a so-called closely common species survive it’s “ancestral brother” by way of fit/might. We have only observed an existing [metaphor]400-mile cubed machine with millions of parts and started to take it apart. Then we notice a milieu of other machines that work in many ways the same, so we begin to start taking these apart – all the while, mind you, BEING that first machine and not, in any stretch of the imagination, even coming close to understanding what it truly means to be human by way of science. Science looks at humanity like a textual critique looks at a love-letter: they miss the point altogether and end up staying home alone on Saturday night. There has been no successful testing of macroevolution- that is, one species bearing another.

As Patrick mentions earlier, we have no problem, scientifically or otherwise, with microevolution- that is variations within the species. Jacob (my eldest) is a mini-me. Katherine (my youngest) is a mini-Jacob and me. Our middle child Ben, however, is a mini-Hugh – my wife’s father. This is very mild and simplistic, but you get the idea. Given crisis circumstances, those traits if focused and restricted would produce verifiable (to a degree) predicted results. This is how animal breading goes. In the case of hybridization (plants and animals), one still CANNOT hybrid between species, only within them. You can hybrid a lemon and a grapefruit, but NEVER a grapefruit and a barn-swallow. You can hybrid a bulldog and a great dane, but never a bulldog and a crappie. You get the point.

Venema, gets to the point in part 5 , here, and shows his hand while he is looking at a PART of the genomics of INSULIN in a human, chimpanzee and a gorilla. He finds a lot of similarities and shows numbers of odds within quintillions and provides seemingly impressive data – did I mention he is a FRUIT FLY scientist? Anyhow, this methodology could lead someone to look at all things blue: blue water, blue orchids, blue frogs, blue stone, etc.- and conclude that they are all from a common source. It is looking at the material that makes up a portion of a portion of a part of an ingredient of a component of a system of an organism and concluding origin.

Bad science, bad philosophy, blasphemous theology.

God made each animal “according to it’s kind” (Genesis 1-2 – and THIS IS a BOOK that has be tested successfully for thousands of years!)