Genetic Clock

 And God blessed them. And God said to them,

Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it....

Genesis 1:28 ESV

"The idea of an evolutionary genetic clock in which DNA sequences steadily change, like a clock ticking off time, has played a major role in the ideas shaping modern biology. 

As employed by evolutionists, this time-measuring technique compares DNA sequences between different species to estimate supposed rates of evolution based on the amount of changes in individual DNA letters (A, T, C, or G) in the DNA. 

When two totally different types of creatures are compared (e.g., horses and chickens), their differences are made to match up with evolutionary time through a procedure that calibrates the data with deep-time estimates taken from paleontology. 

While scientists that work in the field know this, the general public is completely unaware of this little trick.
 
Despite the fact that the genetic clock data are clearly manipulated to conform to vast amounts of evolutionary time, the results rarely support the overall evolutionary story. In fact, the following problems are often encountered.

1. Different genes give widely different evolutionary rates.
2. Different types of organisms exhibit different rates for the same type of gene sequences.
3. Genetic-clock dates that describe when these creatures supposedly split off to form new creatures (called divergence) commonly disagree with paleontology’s timescale despite being calibrated by it.

Q: What kind of data would researchers get if the assumptions of

evolution and deep time were not used to bias the molecular-clock models? 

Q: Would the DNA sequence variation actually provide usable information to help test creationist predictions about origins? 

Interestingly, we have a variety of reported studies from both secular scientists and creationist researchers in which DNA clocks were measured empirically—without deep-time calibrations—and yielded ages of only 5,000 to 10,000 years, not millions. Each of these test cases are discussed below, but first let’s visit the closely related concept of genetic entropy.

Genomic Entropy and Genetic Clocks

During the production of egg and sperm, DNA mutations can occur and be passed on to the next generation. When these are empirically measured within a family’s pedigree, an estimate of the mutation rate can be achieved. Scientists have actually measured this rate in humans in a number of studies and found it to be between 75 and 175 mutations per generation.
Using this known data about mutation rates, a variety of researchers have used computer simulations to model the accumulation of mutations in the human genome over time. It was found that over 90% of harmful mutations fail to be removed over time and are passed on to subsequent generations. 

Because this buildup of mutations would eventually reach a critical level, it was postulated that humans would eventually go extinct at a point called error catastrophe. 

This incessant process of genome degradation over time with each successive generation is called Genetic Entropy. More amazing, the process of Genetic Entropy is closely mirrored by the trend of declining human life-span documented in the Bible, especially in the 4,300 years since the global Flood. 

In addition to these genetic simulation studies, prominent evolutionists have shown that the problem of mutation accumulation in the human genome is accompanied by the inability of natural selection to remove them—an aspect of genetics completely contrary to evolutionary assumptions.
The conclusions of these studies in modeling Genetic Entropy have been spectacularly confirmed by two additional secular studies based on empirical data that provided the same results, along with a timescale that paralleled Biblical history. Both studies examined the amount of rare single nucleotide differences in the protein-coding regions (exons) of the human genome called the exome. 

One study analyzed 2,440 individuals and the other 6,515. 

Over 80% of the rare variability was considered to be harmful (associated with heritable disease), and researchers attributed the presence of these mutations to “weak purifying selection.” This essentially means that the alleged ability of natural selection to remove these harmful variants from human populations was somehow powerless to do so—the exact same results observed in the computer simulation studies discussed above.
A major benefit of this type of genetic data is the fact that protein-coding regions are less tolerant of mutation than other parts of the genome, providing more reliable historical genetic information about human populations than more common types of variability. 

In addition, this type of data can be conveniently integrated into demographic models over known historical time and geographical space. When the researchers did this, they discovered a very recent and massive burst of human genetic diversification primarily associated with Genetic Entropy. One of the research papers stated, “The maximum likelihood time for accelerated growth was 5,115 years ago.” 

The other paper uncovered a similar timeline, which places the beginning of human genetic diversification close to the Genesis Flood and subsequent dispersion of people groups at the Tower of Babel. 

Importantly, this recent explosion of rare genetic variants clearly associated with Genetic Entropy also follows the same pattern of human life expectancy rapidly declining after the Flood.

Mitochondrial DNA Variability and Genetic Clocks

One other important realm of molecular-clock research demonstrating a recent creation comes from examining mutation rates in mitochondrial genomes. 

The mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) of an animal is typically inherited from the mother’s egg cell, and the mtDNA mutation rates can accurately be measured in pedigrees to produce a specific clock for that species. 

When these clocks are calibrated not by evolutionary timescales but by using the organism’s known generation time, a more realistic and unbiased estimate of that creature’s genetic clock can be obtained. By comparing these mitochondrial clocks in fruit flies, roundworms, water fleas, and humans, one creation scientist demonstrated that a creation event for all of these organisms (including humans) occurred not more than 10,000 years ago.
 
Other creation scientists also conducted a study into human mtDNA variation in which they statistically analyzed over 800 different sequences and reconstructed a close approximation of Eve’s original mitochondrial genome. 

They found that “the average human being is only about 22 mutations removed from the Eve sequence, although some individuals are as much as 100 mutations removed from Eve.” The most recent empirical estimate of the mutation rate in human mitochondria is about 0.5 per generation. Based on this rate, even for the most mutated mitochondrial sequences, it has been determined that “it would only require 200 generations (less than 6,000 years) to accumulate 100 mutations.”

Lest critics say that these mtDNA studies are suspect because they were performed by creationists, it should be noted that evolutionists were actually the first to document these Biblically supportive timeframes. 

Buried within a secular research paper back in 1997, the same trends recently observed by creationists regarding human mtDNA mutation rates were first reported but received little attention in the evolutionary community. 

The authors of the paper stated, “Using our empirical rate to calibrate the mtDNA molecular clock would result in an age of the mtDNA MRCA [most recent common ancestor, or the first human woman] of only ~6,500 years.”
One year later, another secular researcher remarked on this study, stating,

"Regardless of the cause, evolutionists are most concerned about the effect of a faster mutation rate. For example, researchers have calculated that “mitochondrial Eve”—the woman whose mtDNA was ancestral to that in all living people—lived 100,000 to 200,000 years ago in Africa. Using the new clock, she would be a mere 6000 years old."

 
The article continued to note that the new findings of faster mutation rates pointing to mitochondrial Eve about 6,000 years ago also contributed to the development of mtDNA research guidelines used in forensic investigations adopted by the FBI. Now, over 17 years later, and using even more mtDNA data, creation scientists are spectacularly confirming this previous unheralded discovery.
 
In addition to the mtDNA clock data, scientists have also analyzed the Y chromosomes of modern men, which they found to be only

about 300 mutations on average different from the consensus sequence of a Y-chromosome Adam. 

The researchers state that “even if we assume a normal mutation rate for the Y chromosome (about 1 mutation per chromosome per generation), we would only need 300 generations (about six thousand years), to get 300 mutations.”

This massive effort has just produced a huge dataset that the researchers call “a global reference for human genetic variation.” In their report, they state:

"Analysis of shared haplotype lengths around f₂ variants suggests a median common ancestor ~296 generations ago (7,410 to 8,892 years ago), although those confined within a population tend to be younger, with a shared common ancestor ~143 generations ago (3,570 to 4,284 years ago)."

Amazingly, these are fairly accurate dates for both the original creation event and the Babel dispersion after the Flood.." 

ICR

The two verses on Genetics

"There are two brief passages in the Creation account we can use to draw some conclusions about human genetic history.
And the Lord God formed man out of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and the man became a living being. 

Genesis 2:7
And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall on Adam, and he slept; and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh in its place. Then the rib which the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman, and He brought her to the man. 

Genesis 2:21–22
These simple statements have profound implications.
---They put a limit on the amount of diversity we should find in people living today.
---The Bible clearly says the human race started out with two people only.

Q: But how different were these two people?
A: There is an intriguing possibility that Eve was a clone of Adam.

The science of cloning involves taking DNA from an organism and using it to manufacture an almost perfect copy of the original.
*Here, God is taking a piece of flesh, with cells, organelles, and, importantly, Adam’s DNA, and using it to manufacture a woman.
Of course, she could not be a perfect clone, because she was a girl! 

Q: But what if God had taken Adam’s genome and used it to manufacture Eve?
A: All he would have had to do was to leave out Adam’s Y chromosome and double his X chromosome and, voilá, instant woman!

I do not know if Eve was genetically identical to Adam. The only reason I bring this up is because we have two possibilities in our Biblical model of human genetic history: 

*one original genome 

*or two.

Your genome is like an encyclopedia (almost literally). 

And, like an encyclopedia, the genome is broken down into volumes, called chromosomes, but you have two copies of each volume (with the exception of the X and Y chromosomes; women have two Xs but men have one X and one Y).
Imagine comparing two duplicate volumes side by side and finding that one word in a particular sentence is spelled differently in each volume (perhaps “color” vs “colour”).

*Can you see that if Eve was a clone of Adam, there would have been, at most, two possible variants at any point in the genome?
*If Eve was not a clone, however, there would have been, at most, four possible variants at any point in the genome (because each of the original chromosomes came in four copies). 

*This still allows for a lot of diversity overall, but it restricts the variation at any one spot to 2, 3, or 4 original readings.

Q: Does this fit the evidence?
A: Absolutely! Most variable places in the genome come in two versions and these versions are spread out across the world. There are some highly variable places that seem to contradict this, but most of these are due to mutations that occurred in the different subpopulations after Babel.

*There are indications, however, that Eve may not have been a clone.

The ABO blood group is a textbook example of a gene with more than two versions. 

There are three main versions of the blood type gene (A, B, and O). However, many, but not all, people with type O blood carry something that looks very much like a mutant A (the mutation prevents the manufacturing of the type A trait on the outside of cells).
*So here is a gene with more than two versions, but one of the main versions is clearly a mutation. This is true for many other genes, although, as usual, there are exceptions.

The important take home point is that essentially all of the genetic variation among people today could have been carried within two people, if you discount mutations that occurred after our dispersion across the globe. This is a surprise to many." 

CMI

Net Gain Needed -- (No Net Gain Observed)

...God created.... Genesis 1:1

"Lee Spetner, an Israeli biophysicist, in his book Not By Chance! deals a death blow to the Neo-Darwinian theory which explains that as the information that codes for living things (on the DNA molecule) is copied during reproduction, that mutations occur and are inherited.
--Natural selection has been observed but it cannot in and of itself create information.
--Mutations are the alleged source of all the new information needed for evolution. Spetner shows that the chance of getting the required mutations for cumulative selection is far too small.
--Since changes are by point mutations and are all, without exception, losses of information, this cannot lead to macro-evolution which requires a net gain of information."
Heinz Lycklama, Ph.D.

Genes Undermine Evolution

....but became vain in their imaginations,....Professing themselves

to be wise, they became fools,

Romans 1:21,22

"Developmental biologists have observed a small set of genes coordinating organismal development of body
plans—and these are present across the multicellular kingdom, in the various phyla and classes.
Evolutionists call this the ‘Developmental Genetic Toolkit’. According to evolutionary thinking, this complex toolkit must have originated in some common ancestor to all the phyla.
---But that common ancestor must have existed prior to first appearance of these phyla—in other words, prior to the Cambrian Explosion.
---The common ancestor (whose identity is still unknown) must have existed in the Pre-Cambrian— prior to the origin of multicellular life. In short, 

*the genes that control body plans had to have 

originated when there were no bodies. 

*The genes that control embryological development had to have originated when there were no embryos."

EV&N

Epigenetics Simplified

"You’re probably familiar with the phrase, “You are what you eat.”

But did you know that you are also what your mother and grandmother ate? The budding science of epigenetics shows that our physical makeup is about much more than inheriting our mother’s eyes or our father’s smile.

We are accustomed to thinking that the only thing we inherit from our parents is genes—packets of information in DNA that give instructions for proteins. These genes determine our physical traits such as hair and eye color, height, and even susceptibility to disease.

But we also inherit specific “modifications” of our DNA in the form of chemical tags. These influence how the genes express our physical traits. The chemical tags are referred to as “epigenetic” markers because they exist outside of (epi-) the actual sequence of DNA (-genetics).

Let me use an analogy to explain. The following sentence can have two very different meanings, depending on the punctuation used. “A woman, without her man, is nothing” or “A woman: Without her, man is nothing.”---

The words of both sentences are the same, but the meaning is
different because of the punctuation. The same is true for DNA and its chemical tags. The sequence of DNA can be identical but produce different results based on the presence or absence of epigenetic markers. For example, identical twins have the same DNA sequence but can have different chemical tags leading one to be susceptible to certain diseases but not the other.

Parents can pass down epigenetic markers for many generations, or

their effect can be short-lived, lasting only to the next generation. Either way, the changes are temporary because they do not alter the sequence of DNA, just the way DNA is expressed.

God knew that organisms would need the ability to adapt in a world that was no longer “very good.” (Genesis 1:31)

God likely designed organisms with epigenetic mechanisms to allow them to change easily and quickly in relation to their environment.

These types of changes are much more valuable than random mutation and natural selection because they can produce immediate benefits for offspring without harming the basic information in the actual sequence of DNA. " 

  AIG