[DallasMike]

See the quote in Post 77 as an example of what I was saying about so many people with a chemistry background not fully accepting the current Darwinian view. I don't think that we should toss out evolution altogether, but, like the chemist quoted, the accepted view of evolution just doesn't seem to pass muster when you get down to the biochemical level.

[GodGunsGuts]

Dude, you're all over the map. First you say that evolution is a fact. Then you say evolution has its limits. Then you go on to tell me about “so many people” with chemistry backgrounds not fully accepting Darwinian evolution, and that the “accepted view” of evolution doesn't pass muster at the the biochemical level. It seems the more you type, the less you believe in Darwin's godless creation myth. So by all means, keep typing!

[CottShop]

[[I don’t think that we should toss out evolution altogether, but, like the chemist quoted, the accepted view of evolution just doesn’t seem to pass muster when you get down to the biochemical level.]]

It sure doesn’t! I can see how some people might accept generalizations about how ‘arms evolved out of fins’ or soem such very vague assumptions, but when you actually start diggign deep, down into the microbiolgical systems that make up each species, it becomes, not increasingly less complex as one might expect, but infact MORE complex abnd intricate, and we discover how much more interelated and interdependent each system really is. Gald to see that at least chemists are able to state their itnellectually honest assessments abotu hte issue

[GodGunsGuts]

http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/6112