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

To: CarrotAndStick; Fido969
Not debunked.

If life were subject to the kind of random change that evolution would require (and it is clearly not), it would have destroyed itself long ago. An accidental increase in useful information is denied by the second law, and all those loony dissertations that attempt to 'debunk' this fact are illogical nonsequiters that endlessly play with words to the point of destroying language as effectively as evolution would destroy life.

17 posted on 05/09/2007 7:27:39 AM PDT by editor-surveyor (Turning the general election into a second Democrat primary is not a winning strategy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: editor-surveyor

“...endlessly play with words to the point of destroying language”

I would have to agree.


30 posted on 05/09/2007 8:13:49 AM PDT by Maelstorm (Great assertions require great empirical proof.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

To: editor-surveyor
Not debunked.

I have replied to Fido969. Please follow the exchanges therein, below.

70 posted on 05/09/2007 2:14:47 PM PDT by CarrotAndStick (The articles posted by me needn't necessarily reflect my opinion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | 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