Do you know a brief explanation?
Are you kidding???
A brief explanation might make sense and be understandable.
They have to ramble on and on and on and on filled
scientific words like maybe, might,could have ,possibly,etc,etc,etc. Never making a coherent statement
to prove how brilliant they and there theories are.
example
The distinctions between theism and polytheism would have been less powerfully made, and less clear an object lesson to the original hearers of Genesis, if they had been introduced along with an entirely new cosmology.
It is precisely because the cosmology is otherwise the same as that of surrounding, polytheistic, cultures that the central point -- animals, celestial objects, etc, are mere objects devoid of inherent divinity, and only their (singular and transcendent) Creator is worthy of worship -- is made stark and obvious by comparison.
Well, stark and obvious to the original hearers anyway. Modern antievolutionary creationists seem to entirely miss the point, focusing obsessively on the details of the cosmology rather than on the central teaching to which the cosmological details are only incidental. In this miss-focus, Hyers argues, creationists actually compromise scripture through the demeaning (and pointless) task of trying to make it fit with modern, secular science.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1605656/posts
DNA "could" modify itself with no outside help, say biologists
"may" also actively modify themselves
"some" single strands of DNA are "capable" of
it raises the possibility
has the potential to
We can only speculate
"If" we have indeed found one way that DNA can change itself spontaneously,
WKB,
all scientific theories, without exception, are provisional. it is a form of philosophical conservatism which is deeply rooted in the scientific method.
you don't like this.
ok.
we get it.
now, don't let us catch you complaining out the other side of your head that science pontificates of having absolute certainty in its theories.