| Parsimony could be a cop out. Attempts to hold contested territory exclusively+ |  |  | |
| Re: Intelligent design by Jackson Pollock? -- Frank | Post Reply |  |
Forum |
|
Posted by: DWA 05/02/2008, 23:38:19  (About author)
Edit |
Frank quotes DWA's quote:"DWA: These findings present a major challenge for the inves- tigation of life-history evolution, even under the simpli- fied conditions of laboratory culture. As biologists seeking to understand the patterns and consequences of natural selection, we need to acknowledge that our parsing of the text of evolution may be radically different from the actual meaning and substructure of that text. The true story, the devils at work, may be much richer in causally important details than we have imagined." Frank:"That is probably true, but shouldn't it be a lot simpler if it were just up to the efficiency-seeking goals of a competent and intelligent designer? If things look ass if they evolved in a slipshod and haphazard manner, then why demand intelligent input to make the mess? " It is apparent to me that some of "you", unlike my linked author, are a bit too eager to take the possibility of ID off the discussion table. What's the big rush, anyway? Also, the complexity and mixed signals/pointers in DNA processes should not be so easily brushed aside before a complete understanding/knowledge. Room should be made for ID along with "evolution" (probably vastly over-simplified). It's simply impossible to be certain that there are not invisible communication links and avenues of influences. .-) Do you yourself also live in one of those secure-pretendng gated communities? '-) |
| Post Reply | Email Friend | Alert |
|
Previous | Next | Current page |
|
