Evolution is probably the most obviously true theory in all of science. Questioning its general validity is so ridiculous it drives the eyebrows right off of my face. I’m a person who thinks the Big Bang theory is most likely wrong, so I don’t buy into every theory thrown my way, by any means- but questioning Evolution is like questioning the boiling point of water, for gosh sakes. Wait- maybe the Creator is fooling us about the boiling point, also, just like the pesky geological strata and detailed evolutionary record He fools us with. Many of these IDers/ creationists also believe that Earth is only like 6,000 years old. That’s only wrong by a factor of ONE MILLION. You just can’t argue with these biblical literalists. Notice that most of the kooks who buy into this creationist nonsense are Americans. How damn embarrassing.

Kevin, Chicago, USA/ Illinois

I wonder ... if eventually we will be able to deliberatley turn on or off certain of these genes .... thus allowing species to 'morph'. Maybe we will learn that there are control mechanisms that allow life forms to 'activate' certain genes in response to external environmental pressure.

Cool!

William Halverson, VAllejo, CA USA

Is this why Christians have a fish symbol on the back of their cars?

Stuart Kelly, Sutton Coldfield,

Just because humans share genetic markers in common with other creatures does not PROOVE that we evolved from them... It only suggests that we shared the same environmental conditions during development. ALL earthlings look like the trauma vectors that gave rise to the adaptive processess called 'progressive'.

This guy is an ego looking for a bank account appropriate to his low estimate of a general audience of uninformed intellectual cretins known as a 'book market'.

george, Summerville, South Carolina, USA

Mason: No, monkeys did not evolve from humans. Nor did humans evolve from monkeys. Both evolved from a common ancestor, so some characteristics are shared and other characteristics are different.

Sue Burnett, Pontypridd, Wales

It is argued that similar DNA means that creatures posessing it are related by evolution. Similar DNA and similar appearance can as easily or better be explained by saying that a Master Designer used similar building blocks to accomplish the desired appearance.

Earl, Benton, Illinois

I love creationists - whenever additional evidence s found that fills in the evolutionary tree, it is espoused as 'proof' that an intelligent designer must have been responsible! You just cannot beat that form of logic :-)

Michael, Chicago, USA

The Tiktaalik is plausible ancestor of land tetrapods, having an articulated forefin that could have been used to move in shallow water and to propel itself partly onto land. That activity would have become worth doing by then (Ca. 375 mybp) as plants and insects were about on dry land that could have been a food source. So the progressive but undirected nature of evolution is nicely confirmed by the existence of this bridging species or missing link. The fossil was described in 2004 and was nice to find as it fills in the gap from marine vertebrates such as bony fish to land species such as frogs, as predicted by Mr C.Darwin in his interesting book on the evolution of species, that was published a few years ago by Mr Murray. Copies may be had at a reasonable price from most good booksellers and I would advise the other writers in this forum to read it.

Edward Tuddenham, London, UK

If things are sufficiently complex, the wish becomes the father of the thought. Evolution? I just don't buy it.

Doug, Prescott, Az

this new "evidence" doesn't seem to prove or disprove anything. is it such a far stretch to think that if god created all living things they would all share some matching characteristics? look at all the works of any single artst and you'll find common threads thoughout their paintings. some may be based on the same theme, others may use a particular time of day, while others may share the same setting. and all those paintings, while in their own ways, are different from the rest they all use the same materials to accomplish the diversity. maybe the genome is God's medium, as the paint is to the artist.

bill, charleston,

Another becon of knowledge shone into the murky shadows of our evolution... hurra for science! hurra for knowledge! hurra for Dawkins! I pitty these godbothering creationists who roam in the darkness of ignorance.

MIchael, Belfast, N.Ireland

So what the evidence says is that the human bone structure did not in fact evolve over millions of years, but was there 375 million years ago and was just switched off until a convenient time? That is evidence for design not evolution.

Richard, Sea Cliff, NY

WE all know that man invented "god" and "god" didn't invent man. This further illistrates why we need our Omega 3.

What I would like to know what caused those genes to be switched on in our brain to make us humans the lowest form of life on this earth.

Lance, Batthurst, NSW Australia

Well what about monkeys? Did they evolve from earlier forms of humans? They do share quite a bit of genetic similarity with us, about 96 percent according to a *National Geographic article. This is something i want to know if this emerging theory isn't shot down quickly.

*http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/08/0831_050831_chimp_genes.html

Mason, Ferndale, MI

Actually, this is used in bacterial and mycotic (fungal) research also. By looking at the genes in various lifeforms, it is possible to see the siblings that have moved by looking for precentages of homogenius string preservation in the DNA. Closely tied lifeforms will have a good percentage of similarities as they have a common predessor. Most of the more advanced (than a few very simple bacteria and viruses) have genes that are switched. There is a region of DNA at the head of the gene section for just this among other functions.

Wes Byrd, Iowa City, Iowa USA