Reasons to believe

[KichigaiNeko]

Oh this is just precious!

Global Distribution of Herpes Simplex Virus Supports Biblical Account of Human Origins - By Dr. Fazale Rana November 11, 2013

http://www.reasons.org/articles/global-d...an-origins

To address this question, researchers from the University of Wisconsin at Madison used the type I herpes simplex virus (HSV-1) as a model system.1 Though not responsible for the common cold, this virus serves as an excellent case study because some strains cause oral mucocutaneous lesions (cold sores) and others cause deadly encephalitis.

To better grasp the relationship between virulence and genetic make up, the researchers sequenced and compared the entire genomes (consisting of about 152,000 base pairs, or genetic letters) for 31 different HSV-1 strains collected from around the world. The scientists discovered that the viral strains clustered into six groups that corresponded to different parts of the world. The groups labeled III, IV, V, and VI consist of strains found in East Africa. These groups tend to be the most diverse and appear to be the oldest. It seems as if the HSV-1 virus had its origin in East Africa. Meanwhile, group I locates to Europe and North America and group II pinpoints to East Asia.

Using molecular clock analysis, the researchers estimated the strains outside of Africa arose around 50,000 years ago (± 17,000 years) and the European and North American strains separated from the East Asian strains about 33,000 years ago (± 11,000 years). They also discovered a strain that they interpret to be of Amerindian origin that arose about 16,000 years ago (± 5,000 years).

The geographic distribution and time scale for the origin of the various viral strains corresponds closely to the results of human genetic variability studies that track the origin and spread of humanity around the world. For more on these previous studies, check out the following articles:

“Were They Real? The Scientific Case for Adam and Eve”
“A Burgoo of Human Origins Discoveries”.......

Dr. Fazale Rana
In 1999, I left my position in R&D at a Fortune 500 company to join Reasons to Believe because I felt the most important thing I could do as a scientist is to communicate to skeptics and believers alike the powerful scientific evidence—evidence that is being uncovered day after day—for God’s existence and the reliability of Scripture. Read more about Dr. Fazale Rana

Thing is that this idiot is utilising 50,000 years and trying to squeeze it into 6,000 years of creationism! Just as bad as the Ham et al

[Esquilax]

The following foundational beliefs help shape how we interpret the data.

The Bible (including Genesis 1–11) is the error-free word of God.
The creation account of Genesis 1 follows a basic chronology.
The record of nature is also a reliable revelation from God.
The message of nature will agree with what the Bible says.
The Bible contains a selective summary description of God’s creation activity (e.g., no mention of dinosaurs, bipedal primates, quantum mechanics, or the existence of other solar system planets).
God gives humans the privilege to fill in the details, carefully, through patient, ongoing exploration and increased understanding of the natural realm.

Gee, I wonder why I shouldn't take this seriously?

Seriously, it's amazing: every single "creation science" website out there has a variation on this statement. "We assume the bible is one hundred percent accurate." Every last one of them. They're proud of it.

What in the fucking hell?

[pocaracas]

Curious... I read this news recently... and back then it was heralded as proof that mankind arose in Africa and spread through the world at pretty much the correct time frame as human genetic variability and archeological studies suggest.

What they found was was "clear support for the out-of-Africa hypothesis".

"Our results clearly support the anthropological data, and other genetic data, that explain how humans came from Africa into the Middle East and started to spread from there," Brandt added.

The study even seemed to back up the theory that human population of the planet was begun by a small group of pioneers who managed to cross the Sahara and escape the continent.

"There is a population bottleneck between Africa and the rest of the world. Very few people were involved in the initial migration from Africa," Brandt continued. "When you look at the phylogenetic tree from the virus, it's exactly the same as what the anthropologists have told us."

The results also seem to back up the theory of a land bridge over the Bering Strait, due to the fact that a Asian strain was found in Texas.

[Zen Badger]

Remember too that places like AIG and ICR openly proclaim in their mission statements that any evidence that disagrees with scripture is ignored or rejected.

Therefore tossing any notion of impartial science straight out the window.

And the cretinists that hang around here wonder why we don't take the likes of Hovind and the Hamster seriously :roll eyes:

[Esquilax]

Remember too that places like AIG and ICR openly proclaim in their mission statements that any evidence that disagrees with scripture is ignored or rejected.

What's really funny is that I think both of those sites use exactly the same wording in their statement of faith, when they do proclaim that. Like one copy/pasted from the other. Or their gross hivemind secreted the same thought to two of its human nodes accidentally.