[[I’d think by now you’d realize this paper doen’t have any new or original content.]]
Really? Because I’ve certainly not seen a single person come forward and poke any holes in it other than to point our a scant few minor mistatements that have absolutely nothign to do with hte entral themes offered.
Tell me JS- what ‘isn’t new or original’? And what has been provided scientifically to refute the claims made? I’ve certainly seen nothing provided here- infact, what I see is an evolving importance emergingthe deeper we look biologically.
Simply wavign your arms and dismissing somethign isn’t a valid coutner argument- I’d have htought you’d have realized that by now?
That has nothing to do with whether it is new or original. Here's a book from 1985 that covers the ground much more thoroughly than your article.
Secondly, life does in fact maintain and repair itself without violating any laws of thermodynamics, and populations do change as environments change. There is no physical process required by theories of evolution that has not been observed.