You mean on own goal by ReMine, don't you? I mean, consider this example. He says
Humans transpose designs anywhere useful (into cars, buildings, etcetera) Transposition is ordinary design practice. But lifes designer avoided that.But then just above in his chart the transposition row lists lateral transfer and endosymbiosis as examples. Both are very well supported by the evidence. Unless he is arguing that lateral transfer doesn't happen and endosymbioisis didn't happen, it appears "life's designer" does employ transposition.
No. You took a statement out of context and omitted the vast majority of the argument. Before you rushed off to note Remine's listing of transpositions in the chart he developed, showing where the evolutionists made their stands, he then explained his view, which you conveniently omitted with your over-hasty and misrepresentative 'But':
Here is the WHOLE passage:
Evolutionists could forever circumvent those fossil difficulties, if complex traits were rampantly transposed between morphologically-distant lineages – here called Transpositions. This exceedingly powerful evolutionary explanation could potentially explain-away the twofold absences of gradualism and clear-cut ancestors/lineages. (Indeed, that notion lay at the core of Syvanen’s evolutionary theory, which assumes lateral DNA transfer between higher-lifeforms.[4]) Transposition patterns, if sufficiently sturdy, would nullify the fossil record’s testimony against common descent – therefore Message Theory predicts life’s design avoids Transposition patterns.
Humans transpose designs anywhere useful (into cars, buildings, etcetera) Transposition is ordinary design practice. But life’s designer avoided that. Life’s designs are re-used, not randomly anywhere useful, but in confined “theme and variation” patterns that resist Transposition interpretations. This feature profoundly distinguishes life from human-designed systems.
The substantial absence of Transposition patterns from macroorganisms (at morphological, embryological, and biomolecular levels): Resists Transposition explanations(E9), Syvanen’s theory, and “gene’s from Space” (Hoyle’s theory) Resists Exobiology(E13) Shows life’s designer is unordinary
Life’s hierarchy patterns (cladistic and phenetic): Supplies biodiversity for above-named purposes – while leaving “ancestors” out!(E1) Unifies all life together, as product of one designer Resists Transposition explanations(E9) Provides background, against which, “convergences”(E6) are ‘seen.’ Allows deep (rather than superficial) embedding of bio-message; making it: resistant to mutation, and inseparable from survival Resists incompleteness(E12). The above properties retain perceptibility even when lifeforms are severely unavailable.
These properties are vital for Message Theory.
The traits evolutionists call “convergences”(here including “parallelisms”), favor Message Theory – which explains their abundance. {Similar arguments apply to biomolecular patterns called “concerted evolution.”(E14)} These complex designs are: sufficiently similar (to demand special explanation), yet sufficiently non-identical (to negate Transposition/Atavism explanations), and systematically-placed (to negate explanation by common descent). Evolutionists are left with their least plausible explanation – independent origin of similar complex designs – such as your eyes and octopus eyes!
“Convergences” are abundant (at morphological, embryological, and biomolecular levels)[16]) because they: Help link diverse life-groups together, as products of one designer Help thwart attempts to ‘impose’ ancestors and lineages onto life’s pattern[17] Demand explanation, while resisting naturalistic explanations
Hence, he is totally consistent...and he hoists the naturalists by their petards.