Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: JustSayNoToNannies

ALWAYS?! really, that is the criteria? It is a silly argument anyway since we now know we need to deal with the complexities of digital DNA code, which is why I would expect no macro change at all. Just as was observed.


23 posted on 02/04/2013 4:45:22 PM PST by D Rider
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]


To: D Rider
[fishtank:] If evolution is true, life would have started out simple and then evolved in complexity over time.

[PapaBear3625:] The premise is false. We still have bacteria and other single-celled organisms. Evolution does not result in more complex organisms, it results in organisms that are better at surviving in their ecological niche, though the mechanism of less-capable organisms dying off. An organism that does well-enough in its niche will stay mostly unchanged.

[fishtank:] The premise is accurate if you are discussing Darwinian evolution.

What PapaBear3625 posted sounds thoroughly Darwinian to me. Do you have a quotation of Darwin where he says life always evolves toward greater complexity?

ALWAYS?! really, that is the criteria?

It is for fishtank's original claim above to be true.

It is a silly argument anyway since we now know we need to deal with the complexities of digital DNA code, which is why I would expect no macro change at all.

Why would you expect that?

25 posted on 02/05/2013 7:22:41 AM PST by JustSayNoToNannies ("The Lord has removed His judgments against you" - Zep. 3:15)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson