Replies

(* I’m taking your word for the fact that fish have TLR-4.)

Not a good idea.

(* I’m taking your word for the fact that fish have TLR-4.)

Not a good idea.

For most purposes, probably not. But it can be appropriate in a debate to grant someone's premise even if you don't know if it's valid or not. It's like Coyoteman asked: "what will happen when your religions beliefs are subjected to the same tests?"

Southack thinks it's a problem for the theory of evolution that fish have the same piece of code that coral and mammals do but use it for something else, and use a different piece of code to accomplish the task instead. So I'm just assuming his set of facts and asking for his theory to explain them. If it's ID, how is it intelligent to do such "code switching"? Since in his view, computer programs seem to be the yardstick by which scientific theories are measured, would he call that intelligent programming?