Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: exDemMom; MrB; metmom; cpanther70

To: MrB

Could not the predictive ability of your working theory also be predicted by the theory that all the ADAPTIVE ability you see and base predictions on is “built into” the organisms you study, and not a matter of adding these abilities through ADDITION of information through mutation?
Aren’t you just observing adaptation and attributing that to “evolution”?

Not really.

If I were going to assume a created system, first of all, I would not expect adaptive changes, since presumably, components of the created system would have been specifically designed for the niche they occupy and wouldn’t need to adapt.

But let’s say that despite that, some change is occurring anyway. In that case, I would only be able to look at the change within any given species in isolation; I would not be able to look at how a given change in, e.g., a protein, occurred in one species and make any predictions about how that protein would have changed in another species. In fact, I wouldn’t even be able to assume the same protein exists—arguably, an organism designed to live in a barrier reef has drastically different needs than an organism designed to live in a temperate deciduous forest, so I wouldn’t assume design similarities between them.

I don’t see anything consistent with a designed world in actual practice. Everything I see is consistent with an evolved world.


Really? Think of primitive man in a desert using tools to make fire or a wheel and then thousands of years later, a soldier on a battlefield in say Norway in the dead of winter pushes a button in a tank and destroys a target.

Man hasn’t evoloved but he sure has adapted! God gave man all he needed and along the way we’ve adapted to cold, not to mention created software to plan and implement modern weapons effective in almost any environment.

I can’t help but see a designed world, as it just seems too fantastical a slim to none chance all of what we’ve experienced to this point was and is driven by non-intelligent forces.


206 posted on 08/23/2011 6:23:43 PM PDT by tpanther (Science was, is and will forever be a small subset of God's creation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies ]


To: tpanther
If I were going to assume a created system, first of all, I would not expect adaptive changes, since presumably, components of the created system would have been specifically designed for the niche they occupy and wouldn’t need to adapt.

Operative words: If I were going to assume a created system, first of all, I would not expect adaptive changes.

This is purely ad hoc reasoning that doesn't have anything at all to do with reality or possible reality, merely taste and notion.
209 posted on 08/23/2011 6:29:09 PM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 206 | View Replies ]

To: tpanther

What I found amazing is that a person could actually state “what _I_ would expect in a created world”, referring to the self as the “Ultimate Authority On Truth”.


241 posted on 08/24/2011 5:22:09 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 206 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


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