Identity (Identity)

by David Turell @, Tuesday, August 25, 2009, 19:54 (5567 days ago) @ xeno6696

What I don't understand is why David seems convinced that showing that evolution can happen in short time frames somehow makes a designer more palatable. I also don't see why beautiful and complex animal relationships also do this: . Maybe I'm just enough of a materialist that I'm missing an incredible subtlety here, but it just isn't enough to justify the belief in a creator. Just as we don't need to explain the origin of life to use evolution, we don't need to explain how clownfish and anemone became "friends." It doesn't nullify common descent or genetic transmission. - I don't know what is difficult to understand about my position. Evolution takes time. There are rates of mutation that have been calculated. Most mutations are either bad or neutral. Only some (about 30%) can be useful. Therefore, short time or long time is an important consdieration. I have noted that epigenetic changes can be an important 'short time' mechanism. The ability of RNA to manage genes in DNA is another very important consideration. The more complex the evolutionary machinery, the more it suggests a supernatural origin. Codes come from intelligence. Unless one accepts the Darwin version of DNA, no code ever pops up by chance. - "symbiosis is explained adequately by selection" This declarative statement has no proof.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum