RESPONDING TO THE CRITICS
Refuting Dr. Stefan Frello—Again (PART ONE)
Another Critic Fails to Counter Separate Ancestry
By Donny Budinsky
This is part one of an ongoing series of articles responding to arguments put forth by Dr. Stefan Frello, a PhD Biologist. Rather than a single sizable technical article, my objective is to break up each reply in a manner that keeps the information digestible and engaging to all who are reading it.
Introduction
In part one, I focus on the first of Dr. Frello’s comments, the Y chromosome. In this reaction series, I acknowledge Dr. Stefan Frello’s generous gift to creation science by refuting his spurious arguments and misleading statements. The critics have put forth their best arguments to counter the overwhelming evidence supporting our (Standing For Truth Ministries) Biblical model of ancestry—and their best have failed. This is precisely why I call their attempts to debunk our arguments a gift because they showcase just how superior the Biblical creation model is to the theory of common descent.
Dr. Stefan Frello continues to provide reasons for why he believes his view of origins best explains the data but ends up helping to reinforce the special creation viewpoint. He actively seeks to undermine arguments for creation. He does this because the evidence he fights against have succeeded in overturning the position he holds to, evolutionary theory. Since it is important that we address our critics, I intend to make this series of articles comprehensive in their content. This series will reveal the truth about the state of the origins debate.
As I have done in past articles responding to critics with a PhD, I will respond point by point.
The Response
Stefan Frello:
Concerning the Y-chromosome, you have never refuted that accumulation of Bonobo/Chimp differences are faster than that of Chimp/Human.
My response:
Dr. Frello’s first argument is an unsubstantiated declaration. I have certainly addressed his assertion. I will do it again here. He may not like the way that I have answered it—but that doesn’t mean I haven’t. Before I directly provide a counter to his statement, I want to expound on the significance of this particular subject matter (the Y chromosomes of humans and the great apes).
Champions of common descent (such as Dr. Frello here) have been ineffective in their struggles to answer the Y chromosome dissimilarity challenge that precludes (makes impossible) human evolution. When you calculate for overall architecture, size differences, and gene content, humans and chimpanzees have a Y chromosome that is less than 30% the same! The chimp Y is only half the size as the human Y. It has been estimated that the chimp Y might only comprise roughly two-thirds of the gene families found on the human Y.
Differences Continued
There exists large portions of the chimpanzee Y chromosome that lack a corresponding sequence on the human Y chromosome. Researchers with an evolutionary bias claim there have been substantial structural changes and reorganizations since the hypothetical split (this data works to exclude this invented split). The chimpanzee Y also contains more large palindromic sequences compared to the human Y. These are all considerable changes in a condensed period according to the evolutionary timeline. This is not just about gene loss either. Defenders of ape-to-man evolution must account for both gene decay and gene addition. This point will be valuable later in this article.
Visually, you can see just how different the human and chimpanzee Y chromosomes are by looking to figure 1 (originating from a 2017 paper on the sex chromosomes of the great apes) of this response. (1) At the time of the 2017 paper, the differences were about 35%. The newest percentage (less than 30%) is based on 2023/2024 data. The data isn’t getting any better for proponents of evolution. The more information we get, the less viable evolution is.
Figure 1
In figure 1, you can see that the human Y and gorilla Y are more similar to each other (when all aspects of the Y chromosome are considered) than either are to the chimpanzee Y. What is the significance of this reality? This is a break in the evolutionary nested hierarchy—since evolutionary scientists believe humans and chimpanzees share a more recent common ancestor than they do with gorillas. In the visual, you can see the human, chimpanzee, bonobo, and gorilla common ancestor goes back to around 7 and 10 million years (at least 1-2 million years older than the common ancestor for the homo and pan lineages).
The 2017 paper on the great ape Y chromosomes nicely expresses the surprise evolutionary researchers had when confronted with this remarkable data (that any objective thinking person would see as contradicting the ape-to-man story of evolution) (2):
Despite a recent divergence of these species (∼7 million years ago [MYA]) (9), their Y chromosomes differ enormously in size and gene content, in sharp contrast to the stability of the rest of the genome. For example, the chimpanzee Y is only half the size of the human Y, and the percentage of gene families shared by these two chromosomes (68%) that split ∼6 MYA (9) is similar to that shared by human and chicken autosomes that split ∼310 MYA (7). Puzzlingly, in terms of shared genes and overall architecture, the human Y is more similar to the gorilla Y than to the chimpanzee Y even though human and chimpanzee have a more recent common ancestor (8).
The separate ancestry model best explains the data we have for the Y chromosomes of the great apes. How do advocates of common descent, such as Dr. Frello, explain such extreme differences in just 6 million years since their imagined split from a common ancestor? Protectors of evolutionism have only been able to present untested rescue devices (mating habits, faster rates of gene conversion and faster substitution rates, to name a few) and just-so stories to counter this mind-blowing evidence that annihilates their position.
I will now begin to negate his initial claim by answering according to the way I have previously done so in a published article titled “Have the Critics Answered the Y Chromosome Dissimilarity Challenge?” (3) This response sufficiently answers his chimp/bonobo, human/chimp, challenge, and establishes firmly that creationists don’t have the same obstacle to overcome as apologists of human evolution. Firstly, I describe the objection. Then I answer it:
Part Two – Engaging an Objection
What about the Y chromosomal differences between chimpanzees and bonobos? Chimpanzees and bonobos can interbreed (and produce fertile offspring). Therefore, it is safe to say they’re related and can be traced back to a common ancestor in the past (4500 years ago to a common Ark archetype). Can the differences between these two species be explained even though the differences between humans and chimpanzees cannot? Absolutely!
Part Three – The Answer
Firstly, chimpanzees are missing the entirety of their heterochromatic (densely packed DNA containing repetitive sequences) arm on the Y chromosome! On their own, these make for remarkable differences between human and chimpanzee Y chromosomes. How and when did these colossal discrepancies take place? Get ready for an assembly of creative evolutionary stories to answer this challenging question!
Secondly, chimpanzee and bonobo differences are not sequence specificity but multiplication and deletions of large pieces of DNA. Since the differences are predominantly gene loss (deleterious changes), but human and chimpanzee differences consist of both gene loss and gene gain, explaining differences between the former (chimpanzees and bonobos) is explainable, while accounting for differences between the latter (humans and chimpanzees) is not achievable. Protectors of evolutionism can surely believe that humans and chimpanzees are related—but awkwardly for them–this conviction is not scientific. It is a pseudoscientific belief—since it is contrary to the empirical scientific data.
Defenders of ape-to-man evolution are heavily invested in their evolutionary philosophy. This is why so many followers of this falsified theory have refused to tap-out—and have instead invoked fanciful rescue mechanisms as a means to explain this highly discriminatory information.
The reality: gene loss can happen rapidly. If a Y chromosome suddenly loses a million DNA letters due to a large gene deletion mutation, this will amount to a significant percent difference, even though it’s based on only a single mutation.
As we can distinctly see, it is Dr. Stefan Frello who has not yet answered this precluding challenge to his perspective on origins. This is again an example of what I mean when I say the critics have given us Biblical creationists a gift (many gifts for that matter), because their frequent echoing of already-debunked talking points, and lack of effort in engaging our answers in a sophisticated way, is testimony to just how powerful the evidence is for Biblical creation.
The ball is now in Dr. Frello’s court. How does he address the Y chromosome dissimilarity challenge in an empirical manner? For example, how will he succeed in establishing the evolutionary model as having superior explanatory power for the data that exists on Y chromosomes (humans and great apes)? The image below (figure 2) is the visual representation of the less than 30% similarity between the Ys of humans and chimpanzees that I referred to earlier:
Figure 2
Due to its lack of recombination (the process of swapping genetic material between or within chromosomes—that result in new chromosomal combinations), one would reason the Y chromosomes of humans, and the great apes, would be more stable than the autosomal nuclear DNA (bi-parentally inherited). However, when you compare the human Y with the chimpanzee Y (in figure 2), you can see the chromosomes are less than 30% similar. As a matter of fact, this information meets the expectations of the separate ancestry model that I argue for. Figure 2 strongly suggests 3 different created kinds within the great apes. These would be the chimpanzee/bonobo kind (both being traced back to a common Ark archetype), the gorilla kind, and the orangutan kind. Of course, humans would be their own independent kind. This data is incredible verification of Biblical creation. This is also a direct refutation of what militant evolutionist Aron Ra has labeled the “Phylogeny Challenge”.
As creationists, we don’t assume humans and chimpanzees are related through common ancestry (tracing back to a common ancestor roughly 6 million years ago). Therefore, it is of no shock to us that the Y chromosomes in humans and chimpanzees would be so radically different. Creationists can account for both similarities and differences. Similarities are not the issue. It is the differences that make all the difference. Why do I say this? I say this because when the differences are too great, like what we see in this data, and the evolutionary model has no good convincing explanation for it, we can safely rule out common descent as a viable option for our origins.
I am not interested in just-so stories and farfetched or imaginative ideas from Dr. Frello. He can make assertions all day—but if these proclamations are not supported by solid data—all these rescue devices amount to are more unverified talking points from his evolutionary philosophy.
Part two will answer his comments on mitochondrial DNA and “fossil sequences” (Homo Neanderthal, Homo heidelbergensis, and Denisovans). Stay tuned! Part two is going to be fun.
References
1 – https://www.researchgate.net/figure/The-sex-chromosomes-of-great-apes-compared-cytogenetically-Ideograms-of-G-banded_fig1_314264544
2 – Cechova, Monika et al. “Dynamic evolution of great ape Y chromosomes.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America vol. 117,42 (2020): 26273-26280. doi:10.1073/pnas.2001749117
3 – Have the Critics Answered the Y Chromosome Dissimilarity Challenge? | Standing For Truth. Patreon. Published 2024. Accessed February 15, 2025. https://www.patreon.com/posts/have-critics-y-120111934
4 – Makova KD, Pickett BD, Harris RS, et al. The complete sequence and comparative analysis of ape sex chromosomes. Nature. 2024;630(8016):401-411. doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-07473-2
Refuting Dr. Stefan Frello (Part One) The Y Chromosomes of Humans & Great Apes
WWW.STANDINGFORTRUTHMINISTRIES.COM
RESPONDING TO THE CRITICS
Refuting Dr. Stefan Frello—Again (PART ONE)
Another Critic Fails to Counter Separate Ancestry
By Donny Budinsky
This is part one of an ongoing series of articles responding to arguments put forth by Dr. Stefan Frello, a PhD Biologist. Rather than a single sizable technical article, my objective is to break up each reply in a manner that keeps the information digestible and engaging to all who are reading it.
Introduction
In part one, I focus on the first of Dr. Frello’s comments, the Y chromosome. In this reaction series, I acknowledge Dr. Stefan Frello’s generous gift to creation science by refuting his spurious arguments and misleading statements. The critics have put forth their best arguments to counter the overwhelming evidence supporting our (Standing For Truth Ministries) Biblical model of ancestry—and their best have failed. This is precisely why I call their attempts to debunk our arguments a gift because they showcase just how superior the Biblical creation model is to the theory of common descent.
Dr. Stefan Frello continues to provide reasons for why he believes his view of origins best explains the data but ends up helping to reinforce the special creation viewpoint. He actively seeks to undermine arguments for creation. He does this because the evidence he fights against have succeeded in overturning the position he holds to, evolutionary theory. Since it is important that we address our critics, I intend to make this series of articles comprehensive in their content. This series will reveal the truth about the state of the origins debate.
As I have done in past articles responding to critics with a PhD, I will respond point by point.
The Response
Stefan Frello:
Concerning the Y-chromosome, you have never refuted that accumulation of Bonobo/Chimp differences are faster than that of Chimp/Human.
My response:
Dr. Frello’s first argument is an unsubstantiated declaration. I have certainly addressed his assertion. I will do it again here. He may not like the way that I have answered it—but that doesn’t mean I haven’t. Before I directly provide a counter to his statement, I want to expound on the significance of this particular subject matter (the Y chromosomes of humans and the great apes).
Champions of common descent (such as Dr. Frello here) have been ineffective in their struggles to answer the Y chromosome dissimilarity challenge that precludes (makes impossible) human evolution. When you calculate for overall architecture, size differences, and gene content, humans and chimpanzees have a Y chromosome that is less than 30% the same! The chimp Y is only half the size as the human Y. It has been estimated that the chimp Y might only comprise roughly two-thirds of the gene families found on the human Y.
Differences Continued
There exists large portions of the chimpanzee Y chromosome that lack a corresponding sequence on the human Y chromosome. Researchers with an evolutionary bias claim there have been substantial structural changes and reorganizations since the hypothetical split (this data works to exclude this invented split). The chimpanzee Y also contains more large palindromic sequences compared to the human Y. These are all considerable changes in a condensed period according to the evolutionary timeline. This is not just about gene loss either. Defenders of ape-to-man evolution must account for both gene decay and gene addition. This point will be valuable later in this article.
Visually, you can see just how different the human and chimpanzee Y chromosomes are by looking to figure 1 (originating from a 2017 paper on the sex chromosomes of the great apes) of this response. (1) At the time of the 2017 paper, the differences were about 35%. The newest percentage (less than 30%) is based on 2023/2024 data. The data isn’t getting any better for proponents of evolution. The more information we get, the less viable evolution is.
In figure 1, you can see that the human Y and gorilla Y are more similar to each other (when all aspects of the Y chromosome are considered) than either are to the chimpanzee Y. What is the significance of this reality? This is a break in the evolutionary nested hierarchy—since evolutionary scientists believe humans and chimpanzees share a more recent common ancestor than they do with gorillas. In the visual, you can see the human, chimpanzee, bonobo, and gorilla common ancestor goes back to around 7 and 10 million years (at least 1-2 million years older than the common ancestor for the homo and pan lineages).
The 2017 paper on the great ape Y chromosomes nicely expresses the surprise evolutionary researchers had when confronted with this remarkable data (that any objective thinking person would see as contradicting the ape-to-man story of evolution) (2):
The separate ancestry model best explains the data we have for the Y chromosomes of the great apes. How do advocates of common descent, such as Dr. Frello, explain such extreme differences in just 6 million years since their imagined split from a common ancestor? Protectors of evolutionism have only been able to present untested rescue devices (mating habits, faster rates of gene conversion and faster substitution rates, to name a few) and just-so stories to counter this mind-blowing evidence that annihilates their position.
I will now begin to negate his initial claim by answering according to the way I have previously done so in a published article titled “Have the Critics Answered the Y Chromosome Dissimilarity Challenge?” (3) This response sufficiently answers his chimp/bonobo, human/chimp, challenge, and establishes firmly that creationists don’t have the same obstacle to overcome as apologists of human evolution. Firstly, I describe the objection. Then I answer it:
As we can distinctly see, it is Dr. Stefan Frello who has not yet answered this precluding challenge to his perspective on origins. This is again an example of what I mean when I say the critics have given us Biblical creationists a gift (many gifts for that matter), because their frequent echoing of already-debunked talking points, and lack of effort in engaging our answers in a sophisticated way, is testimony to just how powerful the evidence is for Biblical creation.
The ball is now in Dr. Frello’s court. How does he address the Y chromosome dissimilarity challenge in an empirical manner? For example, how will he succeed in establishing the evolutionary model as having superior explanatory power for the data that exists on Y chromosomes (humans and great apes)? The image below (figure 2) is the visual representation of the less than 30% similarity between the Ys of humans and chimpanzees that I referred to earlier:
Figure 2
Due to its lack of recombination (the process of swapping genetic material between or within chromosomes—that result in new chromosomal combinations), one would reason the Y chromosomes of humans, and the great apes, would be more stable than the autosomal nuclear DNA (bi-parentally inherited). However, when you compare the human Y with the chimpanzee Y (in figure 2), you can see the chromosomes are less than 30% similar. As a matter of fact, this information meets the expectations of the separate ancestry model that I argue for. Figure 2 strongly suggests 3 different created kinds within the great apes. These would be the chimpanzee/bonobo kind (both being traced back to a common Ark archetype), the gorilla kind, and the orangutan kind. Of course, humans would be their own independent kind. This data is incredible verification of Biblical creation. This is also a direct refutation of what militant evolutionist Aron Ra has labeled the “Phylogeny Challenge”.
As creationists, we don’t assume humans and chimpanzees are related through common ancestry (tracing back to a common ancestor roughly 6 million years ago). Therefore, it is of no shock to us that the Y chromosomes in humans and chimpanzees would be so radically different. Creationists can account for both similarities and differences. Similarities are not the issue. It is the differences that make all the difference. Why do I say this? I say this because when the differences are too great, like what we see in this data, and the evolutionary model has no good convincing explanation for it, we can safely rule out common descent as a viable option for our origins.
I am not interested in just-so stories and farfetched or imaginative ideas from Dr. Frello. He can make assertions all day—but if these proclamations are not supported by solid data—all these rescue devices amount to are more unverified talking points from his evolutionary philosophy.
Part two will answer his comments on mitochondrial DNA and “fossil sequences” (Homo Neanderthal, Homo heidelbergensis, and Denisovans). Stay tuned! Part two is going to be fun.
References
1 – https://www.researchgate.net/figure/The-sex-chromosomes-of-great-apes-compared-cytogenetically-Ideograms-of-G-banded_fig1_314264544
2 – Cechova, Monika et al. “Dynamic evolution of great ape Y chromosomes.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America vol. 117,42 (2020): 26273-26280. doi:10.1073/pnas.2001749117
3 – Have the Critics Answered the Y Chromosome Dissimilarity Challenge? | Standing For Truth. Patreon. Published 2024. Accessed February 15, 2025. https://www.patreon.com/posts/have-critics-y-120111934
4 – Makova KD, Pickett BD, Harris RS, et al. The complete sequence and comparative analysis of ape sex chromosomes. Nature. 2024;630(8016):401-411. doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-07473-2
Categories