Evolution v Creationism: guided evolution? dhw? (Evolution)

by David Turell , Saturday, March 21, 2015, 22:15 (3533 days ago) @ dhw
edited by David Turell, Saturday, March 21, 2015, 22:44

dhw: In other words, the article which was the key to understanding the argument for design is no such thing because the author thinks he's found a solution and according to you he hasn't, whereas you have.
> 
> I am in no position to challenge you or him, but I will gladly take your word for it that Wagner's solution ignores certain key factors. So I will return to the solution of an intelligent, inventive mechanism, to which you have half agreed in principle, and I shan't call it “genotype networks”. We are now back where we started-My point is he has no solution and you have fallen for his verbiage. He has computer simulations, and gets lots of grant money because he is supporting the preferred paradigm of Darwinism. His viewpoint and mine are exactly opposite. My approach is exactly that of the ID folks. He clearly points out the problem and then talks around it. I'm sorry you can't see it. The problem is finding proteins that can work. He admits to millions of them in the potential library. The fact that he can change a letter and get a new protein doesn't mean it will work. Finding ones that work is the issue. It is perfectly true if you find a protein that does not work the animal may probably die. Most mutations researched now are shown to be deleterious. This means most attempts at change are wrong. It takes time to get it right by his method. That time has been shown not to exist, based on genetic studies.