How do creationists explain Homologies?

>>/pol/

>>8189759
That's a fucking cesspool; also, evolutionism is science.

>>8189725
Using Abelian Categories.

>>8189787
Could you give me an example?

>>8189725
Creationist here. We prefer cohomology because it can be endowed with a ring structure.

>>8189797
In an abelian category all morphisms have kernels and cokernels, and therefore images and coimages.

So given a complex of objects of the category, [math]{C^ \bullet } = ...\mathop \to \limits^{{\partial _{n + 1}}} {C^n}\mathop \to \limits^{{\partial _n}} {C^{n - 1}}\mathop \to \limits^{{\partial _{n - 1}}} {C^{n - 2}}\mathop \to \limits^{{\partial _{n - 2}}} ...[/math]

We can define the kth homology [math]{H_k}\left( {{C^ \bullet }} \right) = \frac{{\ker {\partial _k}}}{{\operatorname{im} {\partial _{k + 1}}}}[/math].

File: fig15_7-1.jpg (79KB, 685x427px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 685x427px

>>8189801
An example could be usefull.

For example an homology, is the presence of the same components (although with modifications) in all the anterior limbs of the vertebrates.

Interestingly, horses have a ulna and a radius fused togheter.

>>8189814
And that would explain the similiarities in the molecular and structural structure of different species how... ?

>>8189821
It does. You are just a brainlet.

>>8189823
Nice, I'm glad that we have finally disproven the theory of evolution today.

File: image.jpg (14KB, 125x120px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 125x120px

>>8189787
>>8189801
>>8189814

I keked, thanks!

File: similarities.gif (180KB, 750x646px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 750x646px

>>8189725
Common design=common designer.
Anything else is heresy to them.

>>8190028
Should that pic be in favor of the creationists?
It almost looks like satire on creationism

>>8189725
>Big Bang created hydrogen

Why wasn't the student kicked out there and then?

>>8190497
>It almost looks like satire on creationism

creationists are parodies of themselves. they don't need help.

So I am both a geologist and Christian. I am NOT a creationist. But I surround myself with people on both extremes, when I'm with fellow scientists and when I'm with fellow Christians.

What I've learned is that there's a selective understanding of science from Christians and a selective understanding of religion from scientists.

Christians, other than direct family members and friends who I know that are informed enough not to be total dumbasses, have at best a high school level of understanding of science. Computer Sciences, Engineering, Business, and other noble degrees people often get, do not teach you about the origins of life and our planet. Which leaves even well educated Christians with a lifetime of shallow understanding of science on par with a 14 year old highschool student. These are the type of people who become 'creationists'

I find the same ignorance on the opposite end. Too many times coworkers try to belittle me and religion in general with only a superficial understanding of spirituality.

sage

>>8190543
> I find the same ignorance on the opposite end. Too many times coworkers try to belittle me and religion in general with only a superficial understanding of spirituality.

This is the /sci/ence board. If you want to make such a bold claim, at the very least you should define what you mean by "spirituality", and explain if you are making some non-trivial claim about our shared reality, such as the existence of spirits, souls, angels, gods, afterlife, etc., and then explain on what basis do you hold these beliefs?

Sometimes, when two sides are in strong disagreement, the truth lies in the middle. And other times, sometimes one side is just right.

File: 1466573723976.jpg (57KB, 526x240px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 526x240px

>>8190497
It gets worse. Much worse.