Evolution discussion

Other discussions not related to the Permanent Portfolio

Moderator: Global Moderator

Post Reply
User avatar
Jan Van
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 717
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2010 5:42 am
Location: Charlotte, NC

Re: Evolution discussion

Post by Jan Van » Tue Aug 19, 2014 2:36 pm

dualstow wrote:Dark siders? What are we, Satanists?
If we were, we would have a monument to sell you!  ;D
"Well, if you're gonna sin you might as well be original" -- Mike "The Cool-Person"
"Yeah, well, that’s just, like, your opinion, man" -- The Dude
User avatar
Mountaineer
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4959
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2012 10:54 am

Re: Evolution discussion

Post by Mountaineer » Tue Aug 19, 2014 3:22 pm

dualstow wrote:
Mountaineer wrote:   Too bad we Christians are not perfect spellers or proof readers like the "dark siders". 
Dark siders? What are we, Satanists?  :D Nah, we're just Dawks-siders.
The day is not over yet, but you are in a commanding lead for the "Hoot of the Day" award!  ;D

... Mountaineer
DNA has its own language (code), and language requires intelligence. There is no known mechanism by which matter can give birth to information, let alone language. It is unreasonable to believe the world could have happened by chance.
User avatar
Mountaineer
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4959
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2012 10:54 am

Re: Evolution discussion

Post by Mountaineer » Tue Aug 19, 2014 4:14 pm

Desert wrote: One more quick comment:  I know I'm just one of many in this thread, but I do want to say that I'd prefer to have this thread be more about evolution and less about religion.  I know the two can sometimes feel inseparable, but as much as possible, I'd love to focus in on how some of you have managed to come to a belief in evolution.  When I read or watch videos about evolution, I probably feel like some of you do when you're reading about religion.  It just seems too preposterous to be true; so many impossible holes to fill, so much contradiction, and no ability to test the theory in the present. 

So what are your favorite sources of evidence for evolution?
Desert and Pugchief,

I really appreciate what you are saying about more focus on evolution and less on religion - that would be great with me as I too am curious what leads the evolutionists to have faith in that hypothesis, just as I think they are curious as to how I can have faith in an unseen God.  I've been thinking quite a lot about it since Desert's post and had it reinforced with Pugchief's +100.  So far, I'm struggling because it seems Christianity and Creationism are directly and closely linked just like Evolution and Atheism, Environmentalism and perhaps Agnosticism (that one is a stretch), and peanut butter and jelly in a PB&J sandwich, but my point is by my observation of the practitioners, environmentalism and evolutionism are just as much a religion as Christianity is, albeit those involved in it don't see it that way most likely.  To refresh you, a god is what you put your trust and identity in or derive meaning and security from; when you worship at the throne of envionmentalism or evolution, that is your religion.  In our postmodern culture, those who put their trust in themselves and not an external source of right and wrong, have really made themselves their own god - and thus their thoughts are their own religion.  So, any help or insights you guys can offer - I'm all ears.  I think I'm missing something. 

... Mountaineer
DNA has its own language (code), and language requires intelligence. There is no known mechanism by which matter can give birth to information, let alone language. It is unreasonable to believe the world could have happened by chance.
User avatar
moda0306
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 7680
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 9:05 pm
Location: Minnesota

Re: Evolution discussion

Post by moda0306 » Tue Aug 19, 2014 4:26 pm

Mountaineer,

It's a scientific theory. Not a hypothesis. :)

There is a difference. 

I'll have more to say later but am swamped.
"Men did not make the earth. It is the value of the improvements only, and not the earth itself, that is individual property. Every proprietor owes to the community a ground rent for the land which he holds."

- Thomas Paine
User avatar
Mountaineer
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4959
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2012 10:54 am

Re: Evolution discussion

Post by Mountaineer » Tue Aug 19, 2014 4:58 pm

moda0306 wrote: Mountaineer,

It's a scientific theory. Not a hypothesis. :)

There is a difference. 

I'll have more to say later but am swamped.
Sticking strictly to "evolution", it seems it is more of a "scientific hypothesis" than a "scientific theory" but I am certainly no expert on the definitions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothesis

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory
MangoMan wrote: Mountaineer, I can't speak for others on the forum, but I used to really enjoy most of your posts, until MT started the Figuring Out Religion thread which seems to opened the door to more religion/Jesus/God/Christianity as an answer to everything. I feel almost like I am being proselytized when I read many of your posts now. I don't mean to sound like I am attacking you personally, because I am not; I respect your opinion and wisdom. We all know by now how Christianity is extremely important to you and how intertwined your thought process with it is. I just don't want to see it used as a basis to discuss virtually every topic here.

If I am off-base here, my apologies, and I am open to other member's opinion.
No apology necessary.  I asked, you answered.  Point taken.  I'll try to behave myself and keep the religion to the Figuring Out Religion thread unless something seems to be begging a religious response ... If that is the case, would it be better to just answer by saying I posted the answer in the Religion thread? 

To address your proselytized comment: I'm guilty as charged.  I just try to do my best to keep people from going to that "place that shall not be named", to give a paraphrased shout out to Harry Potter the "V" thing.  I do have to say that as my eyes have become more fully opened, many things do result from causes that fundamentally have a religious answer.  But, I respect your position and am open to other thoughts, as long as they don't muzzle me too severely  ;) .

... Mountaineer
DNA has its own language (code), and language requires intelligence. There is no known mechanism by which matter can give birth to information, let alone language. It is unreasonable to believe the world could have happened by chance.
User avatar
dualstow
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 14232
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
Location: synagogue of Satan
Contact:

Re: Evolution discussion

Post by dualstow » Tue Aug 19, 2014 5:10 pm

I wish I had my evolution books with me. I'd type excerpts here occasionally, but they are in storage as my home is still undergoing renovation.

Thought of the day: I once read that if white Australians lacked hats & sunscreen, they would quickly evolve the same skin pigment as the aborigines.  (I guess you'd also have to take away cars and the luxury of spending most of the day indoors).
Sam Bankman-Fried sentenced to 25 years
User avatar
Mountaineer
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4959
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2012 10:54 am

Re: Evolution discussion

Post by Mountaineer » Tue Aug 19, 2014 5:19 pm

dualstow wrote: I wish I had my evolution books with me. I'd type excerpts here occasionally, but they are in storage as my home is still undergoing renovation.
Surely, you do not mean your home is evolving?  Was it not created to acceptable long-lasting standards? :o

... Mountaineer
DNA has its own language (code), and language requires intelligence. There is no known mechanism by which matter can give birth to information, let alone language. It is unreasonable to believe the world could have happened by chance.
User avatar
moda0306
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 7680
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 9:05 pm
Location: Minnesota

Re: Evolution discussion

Post by moda0306 » Tue Aug 19, 2014 6:40 pm

Desert wrote:
dualstow wrote:
Desert wrote: Dualstow, I think I'll go with the Dawkins book, even though I'm pretty sure I'd enjoy the Hitchens book more.  It seems like Dawkins is the leading voice for evolution these days.  Correct me if I'm wrong...
He's up there. Watchmaker is not a new book, but I think it will be revered as a classic.
Yeah, it sounds like it.  And Dawkins seems to be maybe the most outspoken proponents of evolution.  I'll check it out. 

By the way, my job is really getting in the way of my reading and discussing things on this forum.  Can anyone think of a solution to that problem??  :)
ERE... I mean, The Bible even says, it's easier for a camel to fit through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to get into heaven :).
"Men did not make the earth. It is the value of the improvements only, and not the earth itself, that is individual property. Every proprietor owes to the community a ground rent for the land which he holds."

- Thomas Paine
User avatar
Mountaineer
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4959
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2012 10:54 am

Re: Evolution discussion

Post by Mountaineer » Tue Aug 19, 2014 7:14 pm

Desert wrote:
dualstow wrote:
Desert wrote: Dualstow, I think I'll go with the Dawkins book, even though I'm pretty sure I'd enjoy the Hitchens book more.  It seems like Dawkins is the leading voice for evolution these days.  Correct me if I'm wrong...
He's up there. Watchmaker is not a new book, but I think it will be revered as a classic.
Yeah, it sounds like it.  And Dawkins seems to be maybe the most outspoken proponents of evolution.  I'll check it out. 

By the way, my job is really getting in the way of my reading and discussing things on this forum.  Can anyone think of a solution to that problem??  :)
I once had a boss that really pushed me to the brink.  The only thing that kept me from doing something really stupid was a sign I posted over my desk:

Remember, Families Require Food!

... Mountaineer
DNA has its own language (code), and language requires intelligence. There is no known mechanism by which matter can give birth to information, let alone language. It is unreasonable to believe the world could have happened by chance.
User avatar
Benko
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1900
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2011 9:40 am

Re: Evolution discussion

Post by Benko » Tue Aug 19, 2014 7:34 pm

On a vaguely related note:

Image

I miss the far side...
Last edited by Benko on Tue Aug 19, 2014 8:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
It was good being the party of Robin Hood. Until they morphed into the Sheriff of Nottingham
User avatar
dualstow
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 14232
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
Location: synagogue of Satan
Contact:

Re: Evolution discussion

Post by dualstow » Tue Aug 19, 2014 7:49 pm

Desert wrote:   So it's the generation of new, positive mutations that I don't YET see evidence for.  Men with wings, women with a horn growing from their foreheads, things like that.  Characteristics that are not contained in our present DNA sequences; i.e., not a dominant or recessive gene.
There are humans who have grown something like a horn, but they tend not to get dates. (I can't imagine why.  ;)) Wings would take time. There would have to be humans who started growing some flap of skin on their arms and or/back, and they'd have to have a lot of descendants. I don't think the ladies would go for it. As you already know, you won't see anything like that which is portrayed on Heroes or X-Men. These things take eons.

There are less visible mutations, like a guy in Finland who has a natural resistance to stroke and heart disease.
Sam Bankman-Fried sentenced to 25 years
User avatar
Mountaineer
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4959
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2012 10:54 am

Re: Evolution discussion

Post by Mountaineer » Tue Aug 19, 2014 8:10 pm

dualstow wrote: There are less visible mutations, like a guy in Finland who has a natural resistance to stroke and heart disease.
Doesn't everyone resist those .... until they have the 'big one'? 

Then it evolves to be called unnatural succumbing (in Finland).  ;)

... Mountaineer
DNA has its own language (code), and language requires intelligence. There is no known mechanism by which matter can give birth to information, let alone language. It is unreasonable to believe the world could have happened by chance.
User avatar
dualstow
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 14232
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
Location: synagogue of Satan
Contact:

Re: Evolution discussion

Post by dualstow » Tue Aug 19, 2014 8:22 pm

Nah, this guy and several others with the same mutation have something special going on. They could live on doughnuts, vodka and linguine al fredo and still be better protected than someone with so-so genetics on a diet of kale and oatmeal.
Sam Bankman-Fried sentenced to 25 years
User avatar
l82start
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 1291
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 9:51 pm

Re: Evolution discussion

Post by l82start » Tue Aug 19, 2014 8:45 pm

dualstow wrote:
Desert wrote:   So it's the generation of new, positive mutations that I don't YET see evidence for.  Men with wings, women with a horn growing from their foreheads, things like that.  Characteristics that are not contained in our present DNA sequences; i.e., not a dominant or recessive gene.
Wings would take time. There would have to be humans who started growing some flap of skin on their arms and or/back, and they'd have to have a lot of descendants. I don't think the ladies would go for it. As you already know, you won't see anything like that which is portrayed on Heroes or X-Men. These things take eons.

There are less visible mutations, like a guy in Finland who has a natural resistance to stroke and heart disease.
wouldn't wings also take an environmental advantage? people living in tree tops being attacked by a predator, and the guy with a little extra skin gets a little further from the base of the tree when he jumps out of it, increasing his survival prospects (and future mating prospects) over the guys that just fall straight down into the mouths of other waiting beasties... (magnified over many many generations millions of years?)
-Government 2020+ - a BANANA REPUBLIC - if you can keep it

-Belief is the death of intelligence. As soon as one believes a doctrine of any sort, or assumes certitude, one stops thinking about that aspect of existence
User avatar
dualstow
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 14232
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
Location: synagogue of Satan
Contact:

Re: Evolution discussion

Post by dualstow » Tue Aug 19, 2014 9:50 pm

I'll see if I can find the study in the morning.
Sam Bankman-Fried sentenced to 25 years
User avatar
l82start
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 1291
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 9:51 pm

Re: Evolution discussion

Post by l82start » Tue Aug 19, 2014 10:39 pm

Desert wrote: Hmm, yeah, I suppose if a flying squirrel evolved into something with wings, that would work.  But take a look at those two critters, and you'll find they are entirely different.  Evolution has a problem, in my view:  The changes, or mutations, must necessarily be small so they don't result in the utter failure of the new life form.  But they have to be significant enough to confer an advantage, in order to be naturally selected.  Wings are useless for a land animal (or fish).  In fact, they're worse than useless.  Who needs wings when you're trying to outrun your buddy when a tiger's chasing you (you don't have to be faster than the tiger, but ya gotta be faster than your buddy).  And what woman in her right mind wants to reproduce with some bird boy with little wing stubs.

Evolution is a tough one to prove.  I'm trying not to just stand back and ridicule, but I'm also darn happy I don't bear the burden of defending the theory.  Although I'm trying to take a fresh look at the latest defenses, I'm not new to the theory.  It's looking pretty tired.
well in this case the wings or proto wings would confer some small advantage, the ability to stay aloft for a few seconds longer than your buddies (you don't have to be faster able to jump glide better than the tiger, but ya gotta be faster able to jump glide better than your buddy) as for breeding that's a tough one.. but look at how many species develop weird plumage, mating rituals, sounds etc to attract a mate, that stuff developed some how...
-Government 2020+ - a BANANA REPUBLIC - if you can keep it

-Belief is the death of intelligence. As soon as one believes a doctrine of any sort, or assumes certitude, one stops thinking about that aspect of existence
User avatar
dualstow
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 14232
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
Location: synagogue of Satan
Contact:

Re: Evolution discussion

Post by dualstow » Wed Aug 20, 2014 5:25 am

l82start wrote: wouldn't wings also take an environmental advantage? people living in tree tops being attacked by a predator, and the guy with a little extra skin gets a little further from the base of the tree when he jumps out of it, increasing his survival prospects (and future mating prospects) over the guys that just fall straight down into the mouths of other waiting beasties... (magnified over many many generations millions of years?)
There are a million directions in which evolution can go and you guys are picking one direction and saying, Why didn't this happen? I don't know. I had a book on biophysics but it had too much math so it made way for something else.  :) My best guess is that people and people-sized things are just too heavy. Notice that most creatures that develop flight tend to be small. Insects, bats and birds. Even birds that get too big become flightless.
Sam Bankman-Fried sentenced to 25 years
User avatar
dualstow
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 14232
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
Location: synagogue of Satan
Contact:

Re: Evolution discussion

Post by dualstow » Wed Aug 20, 2014 5:32 am

Desert, I can't find the study so far. If I recall, this was in the 90s, and I'm pretty sure it was in Time magazine. I don't know whether they identified something in his DNA, but his body was proven to produce something that protected him from atherosclerosis. (Interestingly, I recently learned that Lithuanian Jews may have the opposite, a tendency toward hypercholesterolemia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithuanian_Jews#Genetics By the way, the wiki page on the Founder effect is an interesting vignette of evolutionary studies).
Sam Bankman-Fried sentenced to 25 years
kka
Full Member
Full Member
Posts: 73
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 12:46 pm

Re: Evolution discussion

Post by kka » Wed Aug 20, 2014 8:22 am

The problem is that evolution has multiple meanings.

"When evolution is defined as mere change over time within species, no one disputes that such evolution is a fact. But neo-Darwinian evolution -- the great claim that unguided natural selection acting upon random mutations is the driving force that produced the complexity of life -- has many scientific problems because such random and unguided processes do not build new complex biological features. Neo-Darwinian evolution is a theory that has been falsified by the evidence."

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2011/08/ev ... 49111.html
User avatar
l82start
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 1291
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 9:51 pm

Re: Evolution discussion

Post by l82start » Wed Aug 20, 2014 9:18 am

dualstow wrote:
l82start wrote: wouldn't wings also take an environmental advantage? people living in tree tops being attacked by a predator, and the guy with a little extra skin gets a little further from the base of the tree when he jumps out of it, increasing his survival prospects (and future mating prospects) over the guys that just fall straight down into the mouths of other waiting beasties... (magnified over many many generations millions of years?)
There are a million directions in which evolution can go and you guys are picking one direction and saying, Why didn't this happen? I don't know. I had a book on biophysics but it had too much math so it made way for something else.  :) My best guess is that people and people-sized things are just too heavy. Notice that most creatures that develop flight tend to be small. Insects, bats and birds. Even birds that get too big become flightless.
i am not picking the example to say why it didn't happen, i was using the example given to expand on the manner in which these things do happen (as best i can remember.. not an expert) and yes flight begins in small light weight animals not big ones...  BTW some do become pretty large and still fly, condors, eagles and pterodactyls..
-Government 2020+ - a BANANA REPUBLIC - if you can keep it

-Belief is the death of intelligence. As soon as one believes a doctrine of any sort, or assumes certitude, one stops thinking about that aspect of existence
User avatar
Benko
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1900
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2011 9:40 am

Re: Evolution discussion

Post by Benko » Wed Aug 20, 2014 9:28 am

I think part of what goes in for some people in this debate is that either you believe in evolution and everything that goes with that, or you are "one of those"  who believes in God, etc.  The fact that some of the science may be lacking in some areas, is less relevant. 
It was good being the party of Robin Hood. Until they morphed into the Sheriff of Nottingham
User avatar
Jan Van
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 717
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2010 5:42 am
Location: Charlotte, NC

Re: Evolution discussion

Post by Jan Van » Wed Aug 20, 2014 10:34 am

Benko wrote: I think part of what goes in for some people in this debate is that either you believe in evolution and everything that goes with that, or you are "one of those"  who believes in God, etc.  The fact that some of the science may be lacking in some areas, is less relevant. 
And that "the science may be lacking in some areas" is to be expected. It takes a while to figure things out. So if you aren't "one of those" you're not prone to think that "God made it happen", but you'll just wait and see what science comes up with...
"Well, if you're gonna sin you might as well be original" -- Mike "The Cool-Person"
"Yeah, well, that’s just, like, your opinion, man" -- The Dude
User avatar
dualstow
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 14232
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
Location: synagogue of Satan
Contact:

Re: Evolution discussion

Post by dualstow » Wed Aug 20, 2014 11:29 am

Jan Van wrote: ...
So if you aren't "one of those" you're not prone to think that "God made it happen", but you'll just wait and see what science comes up with...
Exactly. This is as much a Science discussion as an evolution discussion. Atheists and agnostics don't claim to have all the answers, and in fact when you get down to the level of "it's a wave, but it's a particle...but it's a wave", I think there is as much of a satisfying sense of wonder as religious people have.
Sam Bankman-Fried sentenced to 25 years
User avatar
Mountaineer
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4959
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2012 10:54 am

Re: Evolution discussion

Post by Mountaineer » Fri Aug 22, 2014 9:08 am

TennPaGa wrote:
Desert wrote: I'll take this a step further.  If one subscribes to the theory of evolution, you have to be pretty depressed about the future.  The most "successful" humans (in terms of quantity of offspring they're contributing to the future gene pool) are the poor and the uneducated.
Looking at it from the other angle, I'd say it's kind of ironic that in order to be "successful" as defined by American culture, it helps to have no offspring.

$245,340: Cost of raising a child born in 2013
Boy, there is another topic with likely wide ranging perspectives - Define "success".

... Mountaineer
DNA has its own language (code), and language requires intelligence. There is no known mechanism by which matter can give birth to information, let alone language. It is unreasonable to believe the world could have happened by chance.
User avatar
Mountaineer
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4959
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2012 10:54 am

Re: Evolution discussion

Post by Mountaineer » Fri Aug 22, 2014 7:36 pm

Desert wrote:
Mountaineer wrote:
Desert wrote: One more quick comment:  I know I'm just one of many in this thread, but I do want to say that I'd prefer to have this thread be more about evolution and less about religion.  I know the two can sometimes feel inseparable, but as much as possible, I'd love to focus in on how some of you have managed to come to a belief in evolution.  When I read or watch videos about evolution, I probably feel like some of you do when you're reading about religion.  It just seems too preposterous to be true; so many impossible holes to fill, so much contradiction, and no ability to test the theory in the present. 

So what are your favorite sources of evidence for evolution?
Desert and Pugchief,

I really appreciate what you are saying about more focus on evolution and less on religion - that would be great with me as I too am curious what leads the evolutionists to have faith in that hypothesis, just as I think they are curious as to how I can have faith in an unseen God.  I've been thinking quite a lot about it since Desert's post and had it reinforced with Pugchief's +100.  So far, I'm struggling because it seems Christianity and Creationism are directly and closely linked just like Evolution and Atheism, Environmentalism and perhaps Agnosticism (that one is a stretch), and peanut butter and jelly in a PB&J sandwich, but my point is by my observation of the practitioners, environmentalism and evolutionism are just as much a religion as Christianity is, albeit those involved in it don't see it that way most likely.  To refresh you, a god is what you put your trust and identity in or derive meaning and security from; when you worship at the throne of envionmentalism or evolution, that is your religion.  In our postmodern culture, those who put their trust in themselves and not an external source of right and wrong, have really made themselves their own god - and thus their thoughts are their own religion.  So, any help or insights you guys can offer - I'm all ears.  I think I'm missing something. 

... Mountaineer
Mountaineer, I didn't explain my earlier comment very well, I think.  What I meant to say was this:  While the debate over evolution can appear to be a debate between science and theology, or between those that believe in God and those that don't, I think it's also worthwhile to look at evolution in isolation.  In other words, look at it and see if it stands on its own feet, not whether it effectively competes with some other view.  I guess the reason I want to look at it this way is because I went through 25 years as an athiest/agnostic who couldn't accept evolution.  I really wanted to accept it.  I wanted to free myself of all religious "hangups" and just go about life.  And I pretty much did that.  But each time I'd go to a museum, planetarium, etc., I'd be reminded that the only naturalistic explanation for the origins of humans was evolution.  And every time I'd look at it, with an intensely secular mindset, I just couldn't buy it.  So I was going in with a strong bias FOR evolution, for a naturalistic explanation, but couldn't find one. 

But others seem to just accept evolution and run with it, including, of course, the majority of educated scientists.  But of course society is often wrong, and often for lengthy periods.  Accepting what we're spoon fed is not healthy, and it bothers me a lot that many on this board question so much in the world, but seem to be able to just sit back and accept a notion like evolution. 

So, the goal of my comment was simply this:  I want evolution on trial in this thread, not religion.  We have the other thread to question religion; here, I want to question evolution.  I want to look at the naturalists' holy grail and subject it to the ridicule it's begging for. 

:)  How's that for honesty?
Excellent explanation, perspective, and goal.  Thank you.  Honestly  8)

... Mountaineer
DNA has its own language (code), and language requires intelligence. There is no known mechanism by which matter can give birth to information, let alone language. It is unreasonable to believe the world could have happened by chance.
Post Reply