Book review of Nature\'s I.Q. (Evolution)

by David Turell , Friday, September 11, 2009, 02:27 (5551 days ago) @ xeno6696

The odds for the reqired chance mutations increase exponentially. I firmly believe the DNA?RNA code guides evolution and drives it forward.
> 
> But if we are the result of accrued changes (which you don't deny), what on earth is there even to argue about?-Remember the Darwin quote from dhw: I am a form of theist and I believe evolution occurred. 
> 
> Epigenetics discusses changes to phenotype that aren't the result of DNA translation. This is still evolution to me. I guess I don't see the point that you keep trying to drive home about all this...-The point is this. We have 3.6 billion years to get to H. sapiens under a passive and cumbersome process. Speed really didn't pick until the Cambian Explosion, over 500 million years ago, with the arrival of enough oxygen in the atmosphere. If it is shown that the evolution in this latter period required so many mutations that there is not enough time available, that is one discovery for my point of view. The second way my prediction will be proven is if the calculated odds are so monumental, beyond a probability bound of let's say 10^-100, that will prove my prediction that DNA/RNA is coded to drive creation, so that we appear rather directly, not by a wandering passive process, Darwin Theory.