"ANY theory that explains the evolution and diversity of life must have a significant non-random component. There are simply too many combinations in the genetic code for anything interesting to appear spontaneously as a result of random mutations and assembly of bases ... The requirement that every code must produce a living animal ... is highly restrictive, and rules out the overwhelming majority of possible codes."
~ Brian Cox & Andrew Cohen, Wonders of Life: The Book of the Acclaimed BBC TV Series
I agree that there must be a non-random element to the evolution of new functional genetic information, but is natural selection really adequate to do the job? Can it really function as a "blind watchmaker"? So far, I've seen no good evidence for this. Only assertions and storytelling.
On the eye evolution story
The Oversimplified Eye Evolution Fairytale
On evolution being a "law" or an "underlying theory" akin to thermodynamics or relativity
Why Do We Invoke Darwin?
Why We Invoke Darwin: Philip Skell Responds
Giving Thanks for Dr. Philip Skell
ID The Future: Philip Skell Interviews
On life being an inevitable consequence of the laws of physics (the thesis of episode one)
Front-Loading & Theistic Evolution: Dr. Stephen Meyer Explains
See also
Rockstars of Scientism: Brian Cox's Orwellian Conclusion
Rockstars of Scientism 2: Nye & Dawkins
In Defense of Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed and Intelligent Design
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment