Nor do I dispute it. Think of lobsters as ocean roaches.
Thanks for the clarification.
Nor do I dispute it. Think of lobsters as ocean roaches.
Thanks for the clarification.
To my evo buddies: But isn't this still a case of pre-existing genes being turned OFF? I except the validity of the experiment as something that could happen in nature, but disagree with the idea that it makes shrimp to fly evolution more likely.
What you need is a way to show that new genes can evolve to create complex structures that were not there before. This only explains that genes for previously exisiting structures can be turned off. Unless you want to take the position that the original life form(s) had all the genes for all the potential animals in the Earth's history in it (them) from the git-go. This position strikes me at least as most improbable, though Behe has suggested it.
Even, as has been suggested, if you could get a T-rex from an ostrich by turning on genes, it does not mean that the latter evolved from the former. How did the T-rex "know" that someday it may need to evolve into the imrobable ostrich? How did it organize itself in advance with that kind of flexiblity, with all of those 'ostrich' genes turned off? Were they just waiting around in the T-rex for 60 million years?
To confirm evolution you must show how it can ADD NEW INFO in genes, not turn on or off swithces for previously existing info- unless that 1st cell had all that potential in it from the start. If that is the case, and it may be, it would support Theistic Evolution much more than the naturalistic kind.