A high degree of similarity of genetic information in an ape and a human means absolutely nothing
Macro-evolutionary changes demand large-scale changes from one type of organism to another. Evolutionists argue that this occurred gradually over a long period. One serious objection to this view is that all functional changes from one system to another must be simultaneous (see Denton, 11). For example, one can make small changes in a car gradually over a period of time without changing its basic type. One can change the shape of the fenders, it color, and its trim gradually. But if a change is in the size of the piston, this will involve simultaneous changes in the cam shaft, block, and cooling system. Otherwise the new engine will not function.
To make this point in terms of the genetic code, one cannot go from small gradual changes in a simple genetic code to a more complex DNA molecule without major simultaneous changes, particularly not by random mutations.
Small, random changes to “Mary had a little lamb. . .†will never produce King Lear, even if all the letters of the alphabet and punctuation are present. The first small random change might read, “Mary sad a little lamb.†The next, “Mary sad a litter lamb.†And the next, “Mary sad a litter lgmb.†With each single change the message gets more garbled. It is a long way from King Lear and going in the wrong direction. Only an intelligent being can reform the same letters of the English language into King Learâ€â€by simultaneous and systematic redevelopment.
The English alphabet has twenty-six letters; the genetic alphabet has only four, but the method of communicating by sequence of letters is the same. Information scientist Hubert P. Yockey insists, “It is important to understand that we are not reasoning by analogy. The sequence hypothesis applies directly to the protein and the genetic text as well as to written language and therefore the treatment is mathematically identical†(Yockey, 16). It turns out that a single strand of DNA carries the same amount of information as one volume of an encyclopedia.
Each new form of life has its own, unique code that, although it is similar in the letters used, differs vastly in the message conveyed. One can use the very same words and convey an entirely different message. Hence, the evolutionist argument from the high similarity of the words in an ape and a human being do not prove common ancestry. The two sentences “You do love me†and “Do you love me?†have the same words but convey a totally different message. With ingenuity one could construct a paragraph (or even a whole book) in which exactly the same sentences which conveyed a completely different message. A very rudimentary example might go something like this:
John came before Mary. Mary came after John [= later than]. So John and Mary came together [= at the same place].
Compare this with the same sentences in a different order which convey a different meaning:
Mary came after [= pursued] John. John came before Mary [= in her presence]. So John and Mary came together [= in a personal relationship].
A high degree of similarity of genetic information in an ape and a human means absolutely nothing. A high degree of similarity of genetic information in an ape and a human means absolutely nothing. It is the way the pieces are put together that makes a world of difference. Hear this evolutionist’s testimony: “When we get down to the business of trying to establish an evolutionary series of sequences, we cannot find the linear, primitive-to-advanced arrangement we had expected.†In fact, “instead of a progression of increasing divergence, each vertebrate sequence is equally isolated [e.g.] from the cytochrome sequence for the dogfish.†Thus, “in this and countless other comparisons, it has proved impossible to arrange protein sequences in a macro-evolutionary series corresponding to the expected transitions from fish > amphibian > reptile > mammal†(Thaxton, 139–40).
Geisler, N. L. (1999). Baker encyclopedia of Christian apologetics. Baker reference library (Page 227). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books.
