What do you mean? The main phenomena being reported is asserted completely definitively. They say exactly what the phenomena is, when and where it occurs (in the lab, unobserved as yet in the cell but expected to occur there also) and the exact DNA sequence associated with the phenomena (not given in this popular article of course, but in the research paper).
They seem to state definitively everything that so warrants. What, specifically, do you think should have been stated definitively that wasn't? Or is your complaint entirely cynical and hypocritical (i.e. you would have made the accusation of dogmatic assertiveness with equal felicity if they did say more definitively)?
Evo articles are ALWAYS
full of if, could have, might have, may have,
might possibly be, etc etc etc.
Actually evolution is only mentioned one time in the article, in connection with the inference that this phenomena must not be deleterious, and is likely functional in some as yet unknown way, because otherwise evolution would have eliminated it.
So the one mention of evolution IS definite: evolution eliminates purely deleterious traits, so this one must be otherwise. Ironically it's all the questions about the design related functions of this phenomena (what precisely it does functionally, are there other phenomena of the same type, etc) that are -- however properly due to the need for further research -- couched in maybe's and possibly's.
One of the main reason I stay with
"Thus says The LORD"
No you don't. The LORD sayeth nothing whatever about computers and computer networks, for instance, but here you are.
No you don't. The LORD sayeth nothing whatever about computers and computer networks, for instance, but here you are.
Weak very weak
" What do you mean? The main phenomena being reported is asserted completely definitively."
The title and the first paragraph say you are wrong.
"DNA ""could"" modify itself with no outside help, say biologists"
Spirals of DNA, once thought to be merely the passive memory banks that preserve life’s blueprints, ""may"" also actively modify themselves under certain conditions, according to Princeton University scientists.
Are "could and may" definitive words .