Progress after the Royal Society conference?

[Rumraket (Mikkel R.)]

@lee_merrill

@AndyWalsh

Oh, and since they kept showing a contrast of common descent versus separate creation, there are better, more direct ways of testing for that too…

But no one who holds to separate creation says that the different proteins were created by chance! “Even on our conservative test, the probability that chance could produce the observed levels of ancestral convergence for just one of the eight datasets of 51 proteins is ≈1×10−19 and combined over 8 datasets is ≈1×10^-132.” But that’s the first I’ve heard of that view, I expect nobody subscribes to that.

Then why would separate creation predict ancestral convergence, the exact result expected on evolution?

If it is not an accidental byproduct of the creation-process, then it is intentionally created to look like evolution. Why?