The north and the south thou hast created them: Psalm 89:2
"Reasoning requires premises: axioms or truths taken for granted.
Notice the premise of reasoning stated in a recent article on Science Daily: “Because all living organisms inherit their genomes from ancestral genomes, computational biologists at MIT reasoned that they could use modern-day genomes to reconstruct the evolution of ancient microbes.” They used an evolutionary assumption to reason to an evolutionary result. Isn’t this circular?
The article was about trying to put together a picture of life before the Cambrian Explosion. Their reasoning included “the ways that genes evolve: new gene families can be born and inherited; genes
can be swapped or horizontally transferred between organisms; genes can be duplicated in the same genome; and genes can be lost. Only the first in that quartet, though, can sing of innovation. The other factors can only process or lose existing information. How, though, are new gene families “born”? It’s so improbable for a single gene to be “born” by chance (online book), let alone a whole family of genes, that the notion of chance giving birth to a gene is essentially falsified. Evolutionists cannot merely assume evolution to think that evolution can solve this problem.
More circularity is evident when they assumed an evolutionary timeline to determine when genes came into existence:
After assuming evolution to trace evolution, they ended by saying they had proved evolution."
CEH
"Reasoning requires premises: axioms or truths taken for granted.
Notice the premise of reasoning stated in a recent article on Science Daily: “Because all living organisms inherit their genomes from ancestral genomes, computational biologists at MIT reasoned that they could use modern-day genomes to reconstruct the evolution of ancient microbes.” They used an evolutionary assumption to reason to an evolutionary result. Isn’t this circular?
The article was about trying to put together a picture of life before the Cambrian Explosion. Their reasoning included “the ways that genes evolve: new gene families can be born and inherited; genes
More circularity is evident when they assumed an evolutionary timeline to determine when genes came into existence:
The scientists traced thousands of genes from 100 modern genomes back to those genes’ first appearance on Earth to create a genomic fossil telling not only when genes came into being but also which ancient microbes possessed those genes. The work suggests that the collective genome of all life underwent an expansion between 3.3 and 2.8 billion years ago, during which time 27 percent of all presently existing gene families came into being.The article used other phrases to describe complex things “coming into being,” such as “the birth of modern electron transport,” and, “we can speculate that having access to a much larger energy budget enabled the biosphere to host larger and more complex microbial ecosystems.”
After assuming evolution to trace evolution, they ended by saying they had proved evolution."
CEH
