God is quite busy
Out of context: Reply #210
- Started
- Last post
- 301 Responses
- teleos0
Darwinian mechanisms have been shown impotent in doing anything beyond trivial adaptive change (and even in these trivial cases it's speculative that it's Natural Selection acting on random variation). Experiments with thousands of generations of Drosophila and the Malaria virus have demonstrated this. Throwing deep time at the issue doesn't help anything. All the probabilistic resources in the history of the universe aren't going to purchase you specified information, which is replete throughout all life. Darwinian mechanisms may have some minor explanatory power with regard to survival of the fittest, but not arrival of the fittest. There must be a top-down information source. Where do we KNOW specified information and complex functional machinery come from? A mind.
The best option on the table for origin and development of all phyla on this planet is: front-loading. The evidence points to some kind of front-loaded "uber cell". All the information was present from the very beginning. This harmonizes with the evidence: ancient urchins that have been found have all of the genetic information for limbs and digits, just unexpressed. Why? How does that fit into a Darwinian framework? It doesn't. How does the abrupt appearance of fully formed body plans, organs and novel cell types fit into a Darwinian framework without any clear gradualistic pattern of intermediate forms? It doesn't. Yet it fits right in line with a design based paradigm. Programmers code in information in the form of packages called "functions" which are triggered by events at a later time. All the information was there, it wasn't cobbled together by the magical chance worshiper formula of Natural Selection + Random Mutations. NS+RM does not produce specified information, it destroys. It ensures extinction.
Tired 19th century steamboat era explanations which reflect the intellectual fad of time, will no longer do. Darwinism is dead in the water. We have new data. Out with the old.
- A mind? or THE MIND OF THE UNIVERSE!********
- cute. Tell me more about this mind of the universe.teleos
- despite being articulate, you are obviously not a biologist, evidenced by your complete lack of understanding of the issuespifflink
- i hope you are in any government office or in a position to affect public policyspifflink
- *aren't, sorryspifflink
- unfortunately, chances are someone who believes this dogma is though. sigh.spifflink
- A mind? or THE MIND OF THE UNIVERSE!