Replies

Thanks, I forgot to mention, that while piling info on top of info, by adding changed info on top of changed info, you might, just might accidently create a simplistic complexity- HOWEVER, Macroevolution DEMANDS that trillions of accidental creations of very complex information ‘must have occured’ ‘sometime i n the past’- It had to have occured trillions of times in millions of species (perhaps even billions) and not only that, but every highly complex change must not have negatively affected previous complexities-

Bottom line is that there HAD to be a syatem of metainfo inpalce EVEN IF we’re to attempt to concider a macroevolutionary process while ignoring al lthe other impossibilites macroevolution faces outside of htis one example of a very serious problem for Macroevolution.

how many impossibilites, high imporbabilities and serious problems does it take to falsify a hypothesis? We’re not talking about just a few inconsequential problems that ‘could be’ logically overcome somehow, We’re talking serious impossibilites at trillions of steps in every single species all down htrough hte ages- This simply can’t be glossed over. Change affects not just the cell it changes, but it also affects many other systems nd subsystems- explanations for Macroevolution however ignore these and try to make it seem as though simple changes could result in complex systems- even IC systems,