[Right Wing Professor]

That's precisely where Darwinists are hurting science. They show very small evidence, and then propound on it's applicability to massive and diverse changes.

You mean like Newton saw an apple fall, and inferred the motion of the planets was a result of gravitation?

RWP, predict something about NS that has not been seen, and will be according to NS?

I'm presuming you mean evolution here. A NS prediction will be that any new antiobiotic will eventually result in a mutant population of bacteria resistant to the antibiotic.

An evolutionary prediction: the chimpanzee genome will be published this summer. I haven't seen it yet. Most genes will be very close in sequence to human genes; a fair number will be identical; very few will be closer to non-primate genes than human genes, and none will be closer to invertebrate genes than human genes. There will also be no more similarities to furry medium sized animals than can be expected from their phylogenies, despite any superficial similarities of niche or appearance. There will be a close relationship between the layouts of the genes on the chromosomes of humans and chimps, barring one break of a single chromosome into two.

That enough? You want some predictions about other soon-to-be-sequenced genomes?

[Dark Knight]

Gee RWP,
I heard a clone had a different fur color than it's clone donee.

Genetics is where real science is, as far as biology is concerned.

>>I'm presuming you mean evolution here. A NS prediction will be that any new antiobiotic will eventually result in a mutant population of bacteria resistant to the antibiotic. <<
Which antibiotic and why? What is the mechanism? Crappy and undefined prediction yields crappy and undefined results.

>>An evolutionary prediction: the chimpanzee genome will be published this summer. I haven't seen it yet. Most genes will be very close in sequence to human genes; a fair number will be identical; very few will be closer to non-primate genes than human genes, and none will be closer to invertebrate genes than human genes. There will also be no more similarities to furry medium sized animals than can be expected from their phylogenies, despite any superficial similarities of niche or appearance. There will be a close relationship between the layouts of the genes on the chromosomes of humans and chimps, barring one break of a single chromosome into two. <<

Which genes and why? What are the functions of those genes that you are predicting and why are you predicting them in particular?

I am very glad you are retreating into the genetic science part of biology. After all, I have been very clear, that I "believe" genetics will be the science that really explains evolution. Not NS.

Hail the god of Bacteria!!!
DK

[Dark Knight]

>>I'm presuming you mean evolution here. A NS prediction will be that any new antiobiotic will eventually result in a mutant population of bacteria resistant to the antibiotic.<<

Only if antibiotics use the techniques we currently use. A rather dumb assumption, doncha think? Targeted DNA antibiotics will be the rage, if I read ScienceDaily enough. We will even be able to exploit new pathways to kill them.

So you now have an argument that NS can be killed by Intelligent Design, in non evolutionary ways because...

DK