Cell Memories (Identity)

by dhw, Wednesday, August 13, 2014, 22:46 (3754 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: Perhaps this is another example of Americans murdering our beautiful English language. “Assume” in British English = to take for granted that something is true. If you assumed that God dabbled in the Cambrian, you could not favour a different explanation. 
DAVID: We may have inherited the language from you guys, but we have improved it in any ways. I fully known the meaning of 'assume', but it is certainly not as strong as 'I know for a fact'-Nobody said it was. Taking something for granted is not the same as knowing it for a fact! You wrote, concerning the Cambrian: “I assume God stepped in.” You then wrote: “I do not prefer dabbling as the method He used.” Your two statements are contradictory. We bulldog British never let go. Give in.-DAVID: That is exactly where we disagree. If the cells were brilliant enough the same result is probable.
Dhw: Then you agree!
DAVID: Note the proviso: 'if the cells were brilliant enough'. They are not according to current research.-Note the context. You wrote that “your theory has no way of fitting the history we have found. Certainly not the Cambrian gap.” I wrote: “You may not believe cells are capable of it [= intelligent design], but if they were, that would give us the same outcome as your preprogramming or your dabbling hypothesis” (i.e. innovations, the Cambrian etc.). All three hypotheses fit the history of evolution. The fact that you don't believe my hypothesis is irrelevant.-Give in, give in.
You cannot win.
Equivocation
Is a sin.