To: snowballinhell
So what miraculous intervention do the "Somebodies of consequence in biological sciences" attribute the beginnings of life today, Most biologists just don't think about origins questions, but those that do, do not pin much hope on miraculous intervention by Venusians. Just painfully slow responses of increasingly stubbornly persistent pre-DNA congeries of adhering, self-sustaining entities. See Wolfram, See Woese, and see Kauffman for current best musings on the subject.
145 posted on
12/07/2003 10:22:43 AM PST by
donh
To: donh
So what it's going to be, in one post you hold up evidence of variation as proof for evolution, in the next post lack of evidence as proof of evolution. Whats it going to be or are we now onto the " Well if there is fossil (of which millions have been found)evidence we say it was slow but if we can't find any , then those mutations were fast.
So if you find a fossil with any sort of a change after the fact, does it then move into the category of slow change to fit your ever evolving theory??
Which is it The no body of consequence supports the primordially soup, or per you latest post, they don't have an opinion at all.
Hold on if life is so simple to create because of it's "painfully slow responses of increasingly stubbornly persistent pre-DNA congeries of adhering, self-sustaining entities" I think I'll brew me up a batch of life (maybe I can get it to mow the lawn).
When times are turbulant, creatures change faster, and opportunities to fossilize are rarer--so the fossil "gaps" you're so fond of are exactly what you would expect to see in interzonal geographic layers: when times are turbulent.
Yes this is very true if you use the second hole stuffer theory, problem being is WE HAVE fossils from "turbulent period" which show NO change.
Donh all you have done here is posted over and over evidence of variation, but nothing but conjecture for inter species evolution. The vast variation in Canis for example does not preclude that a Great Dane evolved from a Chihuahua.
As far as using lack of gravity between galaxies as an argument for accepting lack of evidence for evolution is a big leap, I could just as well used that analogy of proof of GOD, we can all make that little leap can't we?
And please the Fido and Fluffy and the kids link?
150 posted on
12/07/2003 11:42:41 AM PST by
snowballinhell
(Me thinks something is afoot)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson