Re: Yet another Budikkka hole: the Reptile/Mammal Colossal Hole

"jabriol" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "Zachriel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > "jabriol" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > > "Budikka" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JaBrIoL) wrote in message
> > > news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> > > > > > Why do we have almost identical DNA to chimpanzees if we are not
> > both
> > > > > > related to a common ancestor?  Why is mouse DNA so close to ours
> if
> > we
> > > > > > are not connected?
> > > > >
> > > > > 75% of our DNA is shared with a banana.
> > > > Do you have a reference for this, or is this yet one more in a
> > > > tediously endless line of Jabriol Lies(TM)?  **GIVE A REFERENCE**
for
> > > > this or admit this is yet another lie.
> > >
> > > http://old.smh.com.au/news/0107/27/national/national22.html
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Your cite says 30%. This is pretty dramatic evidence of our relationship
> > with all life. A look at cell structure shows many similarities.
> >
>  I thought I read 60%,..
>
> here a question, if there was a designer, would he not use same building
> material?

Certainly a designer would. But the designer would also borrow across what
we call lines of descent. We would have flightless birds with hair, apes
with feathers, horses with human heads, dogs with bird-talons instead of
paws. We would not see vestigial legs on whales, or feathered-wings on
flightless birds.

I really don't think you understand the nested-hierarchy. It is very clear
that each branch of the tree-of-life can only have characteristics modified
from its ancestors. You just won't find feathers on dogs.