Re: humans irreducibly complex?

Rich Daniel (
Mon, 24 May 1999 17:49:02 -0400 (EDT)

David Tyler wrote:
> Rich Daniel wrote:
> > In a very few years, we'll know the complete DNA sequences for man, chimp,
> > and gorilla. I'll make you a bet: There will be no human genes that are
> > not also in chimps and gorillas, with very minor differences....
> I know you have offered this "bet" to Paracelsus, but before this
> exchange gets too polarised, I would like to inject the thought that
> creationists have no reason to take you up on it. Design
> considerations suggest that the task of DNA is very similar for Apes
> and mankind - the DNA ought to be very similar.

Ah, but Paracelsus made the claim that humans are irreducibly complex.
I interpret this as meaning that we have physical structures that cannot
have evolved from an apelike animal. This in turn would imply that we
have genes that cannot have evolved. If something different was intended,
please clarify.

> > Someone who believes there is a huge gap separating man from apes should
> > expect hundreds of genes in man that bear no similarity to chimp genes.
> But is the gap to be found in the type of tasks genes do? If the
> answer is "no", then why should creationists expect to see a gap
> here?

I don't understand your point here. Are you perhaps saying that the
gap is caused by the presence of an immaterial spirit in man, rather
than anything physical?

Rich Daniel