Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: edsheppa
You mean on own goal by ReMine, don't you?

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.

777 posted on 12/07/2005 11:44:00 AM PST by Paul Ross (My idea of American policy toward the Soviet Union is simple...It is this, 'We win and they lose.')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 768 | View Replies ]


To: Paul Ross
I don't think I took it out of context, but I see you're employing a seldom-used obfuscatory tactic of adding extraneous non-context. For example, what does convergence have to do with transposition? (Answer: nothing.)

Does ReMine or does he not say that life avoids transpositions? Well, that is false. Transposition is rampant. He mentions lateral gene transfer but omits stuff like retrotransposons and hybridization and ordinary chromosomal crossover, the latter two being fundamental drivers of evolution. It is simply ridiculous to say that life eschews transposition. One might even say that if an organism doesn't protect its genome, it will be a victim of transposition.

The guy's a kook. To claim that biology will resist naturalistic explanations when the evidence for evolution has convinced generations of biologists is just plain kooky.

779 posted on 12/07/2005 12:23:41 PM PST by edsheppa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 777 | View Replies ]

To: Paul Ross
Here is the WHOLE passage:

Wow! Is there a school where ReMine learned to write scientific-seeming gobbledegook like that? Joyce would be proud.

783 posted on 12/07/2005 12:39:25 PM PST by Thatcherite (F--ked in the afterlife, bullying feminized androgenous automaton euro-weenie blackguard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 777 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson