Replies

You haven't defined "complexity" at all - feel free to jump in at any time and fill that hole. Neverthless, you've pretty clearly taken advantage of a certain equivocation between complexity and goodness, so let's just boil it down to the bare minimum - is the toad's genome "better" than yours? Why or why not?

I have equated nothing with goodness

I have stated that EVOLUTIONARY charts show increasing complexity as the evolutionary line progresses.

I have never seen an evolutionary chart that shows an amoeba being the RESULT of human evolution.

I have never heard the theory postulated that lifeforms were intrinsically more complex in earlier stages of evolution.

This seems to me (threw that in just so you can ignore the rest of this comment) to be consistent with the term 'evolution' which in and of itself carries an impression of positive change (as opposed to the terms 'random change' or 'devolution')

You then instituted straw man arguments concerning better and goodness. According to you, if these things even exist, it would be based only on my own perception.

To answer your question, it seems to me (getting tired of that yet) that the toad's genome is perfect for the toad, and my genome is perfect for me.

Why?
Sounds like an argument for intelligent design doesn't it.? Thanks for pointing it out.