[AndrewC]

Oh, dear! It appears your jailers are making you parade around with your underpants on your head, for the whole world to see. How humiliating to be forced to show what nobody was supposed to see

Ad Hominem befits you. And I do read. You evidently don't. I have posted this for years. I have also posted Dr. Shapiro's comments from ISCID.

Yaakov
Hi James, It seems to me that what you are saying throws out Darwinian(or NeoDarwinian) theory of evolution as the "major" means of evolution of life on Earth and now this 21st century evolution sees a much more elegant and orgerly mechanism to induce a guided development of life when needed. Do I understand your propositions correctly

Masciarelli
My wild question: Jim wrote: "cells are capable of altering their genomes in non-random but not rigidly specified or pre-determined ways." Could this mean that cells are making 'choices' about how to react, adjust & develop to input?

James Shapiro
Yaakov, you get the message. Evolution, yes, Randomness and gradualism, only in the fine-tuning after the heavy lifting has been done.

[Physicist]

Splendid! I particularly like how you inserted the question about teleology in between the first question and its answer, to make it appear as if Shapiro were endorsing the imputation of teleology. But Shapiro is wrong in asserting that because toolkit-based changes can be very complicated with respect to genes, that they are not gradualistic with respect to the genome as a whole.

Furthermore, not all mutations occur through this mechanism: there are still base pair substitutions, transposons, and the like. So there is plenty of room in the model for both small changed over long periods and dramatic changes over short periods.

Uh, oh! Sounds like the most feared hobgoblin of the creationists: Punk-Eek! Are you sure you aren't selling your soul to the Devil by going down this road?