The 1% human-chimp difference claim just got blown out of the water. Dr. Casey Luskin has the details on this breaking science story. LISTEN:

https://idthefuture.com/2060/

Very telling

Rapid DNA repair in plants acts as a crucial defense, preventing foreign chloroplast DNA from integrating into the nuclear genome. This mechanism preserves genome stability and highlights a universal process relevant to understanding genetic integrity and disease in other organisms, including humans.

The genes which are responsible for the development of squid eyes are the same in humans, however in humans they are involved in the development of legs.

As you should know, according to The Modern Evolutionary Synthesis (aka Neodarwinism) the more species are distant from each other the more dissimilar their genes should be (especially which are responsible for the development of certain traits) which as turns out, is often the opposite.

Very often we see identical genes in distant species which are responsible for the development of totally different proteins, tissues and even organs. And in contrary we have numerous examples of almost identical organs in different species which are encoded by dissimilar genes.

One of the most famous examples is a "Pax6" gene which is identical in humans and Drosophila fly however our eyes and the eyes of a fly are tremendously different anatomically and functionally. You can even transplant these gene from one to another and nothing in morphology will change.

The issue is that genes are just libraries for RNA-mediated cellular processes and cells use these genes according to their needs. The old orthodox dawkinsian "gene-centrism" is no longer a viable idea. Genes themselves are regulated and orchestrated by RNA and various epigenetic mechanisms. That is why we have the same DNA in each cell type (liver cells, nerve cells, blood cells, kidney cells etc) producing very different cells. The same genes can be "read" in diverse ways.
This is the reason why DNA comparison based on gene sequence similarities can be fallacious in establishing the evolutionary relatedness.

Solid and reasonable explanation

https://youtu.be/2daqAfYL47g

Epigenetic modifications can occur much more rapidly than the accumulation of advantageous DNA mutations (neodarwism). This explains instances of rapid adaptation or alteration of traits in domesticated species.

In my view the following propositions represent metaphysical laws that prove theism:

* Non-existence (non-being) can never give rise to existence (being)
* Potentiality can never give rise to actuality
* Non-life can never give rise to life (self-reproduction and maintaining order against entropy)
* Non-sentient matter can never give rise to sentience (consciousness, qualia)
* Impersonality can never give rise to personality
* Non-rationality can never give rise to rationality (intelligence)
* Non-intentionality can never give rise to intentionality (aboutness)
* Non-information (chaos) can never give rise to (complex) information
* Non-value can never give rise to value
* 'Is' can never give rise to ought (morality, moral obligation)
* Imperfection can never give rise to perfection
* Contingency can never give rise to necessity
* Finitude can never give rise to infinity

A growing body of evidence, crystallized in studies like "Origin of primate orphan genes: a comparative genomics approach," presents a formidable challenge to the neodawinian orthodox view.

So true 😄

Hundreds of human genes exhibit distinct "on" or "off" expression patterns, rather than gradual changes. This switch-like behavior, influenced by hormones and genetic factors, is linked to conditions such as infertility, immune response, and vaginal atrophy.

So not gradual changes, rather major saltations

The only type of explanation that adequately accounts for this type of phenomenon is a goal-directed, or intelligent, causation.


https://evolutionnews.org/2025/06/evolutionary-obstacles-to-the-origin-of-introns/?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR6d9l-mt9fcVZHj35Z2pb6W3sJWOGcS3wdMfHwzbEtoXGHVPUbUIQOW9pkIJQ_aem_JMGL580-dSem8kTp-rptSQ

“Unique Human Body Parts That Evolution Can-not Explain” ——says The Independent article below.

According to the “Independent article” , the human chin and the human male “ testicle structure” seems to have no evolutionary explanation or meaning.
The article goes own to explain how humanity “allegedly” evolved from so-called lower lifeforms and how evolution is an ongoing process.

Special Creation By God Explains Everything.


https://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/human-evolution-body-part-chin-b2778143.html

lol

https://youtube.com/shorts/hkVBg5Igtow?si=C3-ZhQkyK0cVCAGC

Brainless Learning

What Can a Cell Remember?

• The article explores the emerging field of research investigating whether single cells possess the ability to learn and remember, challenging the traditional view that memory is solely a function of multicellular nervous systems.

• Inspired by Barbara McClintock's question, 'What does a cell know of itself?', researchers are uncovering evidence of basic cognitive phenomena like memory and learning in unicellular organisms and nonneural human cells.

• Nikolay Kukushkin's research demonstrated that human kidney cells can 'remember' patterns of chemical signals presented at regular intervals, a memory phenomenon previously observed only in animals with nervous systems.

• The study of memory in single cells dates back to the early 20th century, with experiments by Herbert Spencer Jennings showing that the ciliate Stentor roeselii could learn and adapt its behavior based on past experiences.

• Researchers are finding that cells outside a nervous system can be changed by their experiences in ways that encourage survival, suggesting that 'more ancient forms of memory' may play a complementary role to synaptic plasticity.

• Kukushkin's team found that both nerve and kidney cells could differentiate chemical patterns, with spaced intervals of stimuli leading to longer-lasting memory imprints, demonstrating the spacing effect at the cellular level.

• The findings suggest that memory is a continuous process, with all single cells, including plants and various cell types, memorizing in the same way, and the burden of proof should be on demonstrating differences rather than similarities.

https://www.quantamagazine.org/what-can-a-cell-remember-20250730/