Molecular Decay Of Enamel-specific Gene In Toothless Mammals Supports Theory Of Evolution

Biologists at the University of California, Riverside report new evidence for evolutionary change recorded in both the fossil record and the genomes (or genetic blueprints) of living organisms, providing fresh support for Charles Darwin's theory of evolution.

The researchers were able to correlate the progressive loss of enamel in the fossil record with a simultaneous molecular decay of a gene, called the enamelin gene, that is involved in enamel formation in mammals.
Enamel is the hardest substance in the vertebrate body, and most mammals have teeth capped with it.

Examples exist, however, of mammals without mineralized teeth (e.g., baleen whales, anteaters, pangolins) and of mammals with teeth that lack enamel (e.g., sloths, aardvarks, and pygmy sperm whales). Further, the fossil record documents when enamel was lost in these lineages.

Science Daily Article

Another piece of evidence evolution is real, backed up by science and not just one 2000 year old book too. Its interesting how its becoming harder and harder to deny the existence of evolution yet still people try. Anyway, enjoy the article its very interesting stuff. In my opinion its another nail in the coffin of creationism, i look forward to hearing what they have to say to debunk this!

I'm so fed up with these scientists and their "proof" . . . all it shows is that some animals have lost their enamel. Obviously, that's what the creator wanted. If this is proof, where are the mammals with top teeth enameled and bottom row not? Where is the missing link?

If I want to know the truth, I ask my pastor/priest. I can read the bible and "feel" the truth. Your silly findings are set up to show what they want to show . . . if it was true, I'd feel it in my heart/gut.











Disclaimer: the following was written with much sarcasm and a severe lack of reason or scientific understanding. The views expressed in the above statements do not reflect the thoughts or feelings of the poster, nor do they have any basis in reality.

reply to post by solomons path


Please tell me that was sarcasm?

please...

Please read all disclaimers . . .


I gave you a S&F. Great article, great study. I'm just baffled when people look at findings and fail to see the broader connections to the other disciplines and how they all point to support of evolutionary theory. I'm sure this study won't sway anyone, but I appreciate it.

reply to post by solomons path


Phew! I must of missed the disclaimer thinking it was your sig.


Yeah im sure it wont sway anyone either, to be honest it was not intended to.