Common descent of humans and other apes

Dredging up a fascinating claim from @lee_merrill:

I was aware that Behe believes in common descent, I happen to disagree with him there.

Well, I do understand Behe’s position on common descent, and I disagree with him, because surely multiple new groups of protein-protein interactions would be required to get from chimps to humans.

This looks like another example of a prediction of a design hypothesis presented as fact.

Lee, how sure are you about this, since you have yet to identify a single one?

How many new groups must be required, and how much money would you bet on that estimate?


I will just note this is yet another example of ID Doublethink. Here @lee_merrill is firmly convinced that new protein interactions must exist in humans and chimps because - well, just because they must. No other reason given.

Whereas at other points he claims it if firmly established that no such interactions have evolved in the malaria parasite because none of Behe’s critics have identified any.

The same reasoning should apply to humans/chimps. If ID predicts novel protein interactions in humans, wouldn’t ID “scientists” have found the by now?


I would say it’s not so much doublethink as it is a total rejection of the scientific method.

Or at least be looking for them, instead of producing repetitive rhetoric?


What the hell is this weird obsession with new PPIs as if the Swiss army knife of biology? Is there any sort of biological problem or life challenge @lee_merrill doesn’t think more PPIs is the solution to?

1 Like

Even to the point of fabricating ones that don’t even exist!

1 Like

This topic was automatically closed 7 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.