Bacterial motors carefully studied (Introduction)

by dhw, Sunday, April 10, 2016, 14:00 (3149 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: I keep pointing out that speciation is so difficult that NOBODY knows how it happens, and I keep agreeing with you that it involves new molecules (though I prefer to talk more generally about cells) and new arrangements, and innovation by definition cannot have a pre-existing picture, and thank you for acknowledging that some mechanism must exist to solve the problem. That is my whole point. There has to be a mechanism, but we don't know what it is. -DAVID: Agreed. I've simply used a new tack to go one layer of complexity deeper than 'cells'. We've now discussed choosing new molecules and molecular arrangements. I understand that this is still insufficient evidence for you.-We need to be clear about evidence for what. The complexity of the cell is mind-boggling, and it is fair enough to break it down to its individual components in order to emphasize just how mind-boggling it is. I have long ago accepted this as evidence for design, and hence a powerful argument against atheism. But that is not the subject we have been discussing, which is the question of how speciation takes place. We know that cells and their component parts must undergo radical changes in order to produce innovations. The complexity of the process provides no “evidence” for your hypothetical explanation (preprogramming and/or dabbling) or for mine (an autonomous IM, possibly God-given). But since yours goes so far as to demand God's active participation even in matters of lifestyle (the monarch) and natural wonders (the weaverbird's nest) - regardless of cellular complexity, and apparently all for the sake of humans - it is not just a matter of "evidence". I simply find my hypothesis more cohesive than yours!