Every cell in one body has the exact same DNA. When cells replicate, they seperate the two halves of each DNA and send half the DNA to each new cell. The cell then recreates the match for each of the halves, with the end result being two cells with identical DNA.

Thank you. That is all I ever want to hear when someone is trying to argue any point. If someone can admit they might be wrong then that is enough for me.

Are you sure only 1/3 of the world is Athiest? Russian and China both outlawed the existance of G-d quite a few years ago.

Oh, and Jews make up .02% of the worlds population.  22% of Nobel prize winners are Jewish. (Damn anti-semites!)  3 of the 4 most important people to modern (I think here modern means post idusrial revolution) thought were Jewish, and the 4th person was Darwin .  Those 4 people being , Einstein, Freud, Marx, and Darwin.  I only bring this up because I think its fun and silly, and completely ironic.  However, at the same time, you can't discount the thoughts of a people just because they are a minority when they have proven to as influential as they have.

100% of the inhabitants of the world don't know for certain how the world was created.

Cells actually create the exact opposite of the DNA, called RNA, which sends it to a new cell, which then translates it into the same DNA.

As i've said, as soon as you admit that you may be wrong you lose a validity.

As i've said, as soon as you admit that you may be wrong you lose a validity.

You're wrong  .

What exactly is a validity? Just sounds like a bit of an ego battle to me. It takes more fortitude to know you might be wrong than to be stubborn.

Fair enough. I could've sworn there were Shinto/Buddhist things in Hong Kong though.

Also, dragons do exist. They live in Komodo. *hide*

I realized my question to Christians could be slightly insulting...

So I'll rephrase, "do you guys have texts that explain the creation in a non literal way, and if you don't how do you explain the fact that Day is discused during day 1, but the sun is not created until day 4? Especially since the Light was called day and Dark was called night, but stars, sun and moon did not exist.

The Latter-day Saints have four basic Adam stories, those found in the Bible, the book of Moses, the book of Abraham, and the temple�each seen from a different angle, like the four Gospels, but not conflicting if each is put into its proper context. And what is that context? One vitally important principle that everyone seems to have ignored until now is the consideration that everything is presented to us in these accounts through the eyes, or from the point of view of, the individual observers who tell the story. Historians long ago came to realize that the boast of German Geschichtswissenschaft�to report what happened at all times "wie es eigentlich geschah," the whole truth, the complete event in holistic perfection as it would be seen by the eye of God�is a philosopher's pipe dream. And, indeed, it is from the philosophers that we got it, rooted as the fathers and the doctors are in the sublime absolutes of Alexandria: There is God and God only, and his holy and infallible book was written by his very finger, untouched by the human mind. We must credit the Moslems with carrying this doctrine all the way. Not only is it the crime of Shirk to credit the existence of anything besides God, but his book is as divine and ineffable as he is. I have been told that it is presumptuous for mortals, let alone infidels, to pretend to understand anything in it.

The Latter-day Saints, inheritors of the Christian version of this teaching, are constantly converting statements of limited application to universal or at least sweeping generalities. To illustrate, I was told as a child that the Rocky Mountains, the Appalachians, and the Andes all came into existence overnight during the great upheavals of nature that took place at the time of the Crucifixion�an absurdity that plays into the hands of critics of the Book of Mormon. But what we find in the 3 Nephi account when we read it carefully is a few sober, factual, eyewitness reports describing an earthquake of 8-plus on the Richter scale in a very limited area. Things that appear unlikely, impossible, or paradoxical from one point of view often make perfectly good sense from another. The Nautical Almanac gives the exact time of sunrise and sunset for every day of the year, yet astronauts know that the sun neither rises nor sets except from a particular point of view, the time of the event being strictly dependent on the exact location. From that point of view and that only, it is strictly correct and scientific to say that the sun does rise and set. Just so, the apparently strange and extravagant phenomena described in the scriptures are often correct descriptions of what would have appeared to a person in a particular situation. You and I have never been in those situations. To describe what he sees to people who have never seen anything like it, the writer must reach for metaphors and similes: "His eyes were as a flame of fire; the hair of his head was white like the pure snow;� his voice was as the sound of the rushing of great waters." (D&C 110:3; italics added.) There was no fire, no snow, no rushing waters, but that is as near as Joseph Smith and Sidney Ridgon could come to telling us what they experienced when "the veil was taken from minds, and the eyes of understanding were opened!" (D&C 110:1.) They were reporting as well as they could what they had seen from a vantage point on which we have never stood.