Re: If Evolution is Wrong What is Right?


"Jim McGinn" <jimmcginn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:SO%if.27822$tV6.5948@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> "Richard Dawkins" <Dawkins@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:sa%if.17$bP4.468@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Evolutionists often claim that if the evolutionary process were hung up
>> on
> a
>> small local adaptive maximum, a large genetic change like a
>> recombination,
>> or other genetic rearrangement, could bring it to another hill that has a
>> higher peak, and place it higher up on that hill than it was before.
> Large
>> adaptive changes are, however, highly improbable. They are orders of
>> magnitude less probable than getting an adaptive change with a single
>> nucleotide substitution, which is itself improbable. No one has shown
> this
>> to be possible either.
>>
>> http://www.trueorigin.org/spetner1.asp
>>
>
> Richard,
>
> Let's say that I accept your premise that the evidence indicates that
> evolutionists have been mistaken all along and that there now exist
> rational, scientific reasons to reject evolution as the ultimate cause
> of biological organisms. The next question is what are our alternatives
> and do these alternatives survive the same scrutiny? Do you have an
> alternative? What is your alternative? Have you scrutinized it with the
> same rational and scientific rigour that you scrutinized evolution?
> Please
> show us.
>
> Jim
>
Intelligent design.
Scrutinized and holds up scientifically.
The false premise that you present is that,*same rational and scientific
*rigour* that you scrutinized evolution.*
Evolution is a failure and the more science uncovers the more everything
points to an intelligent designer.
My only wish is that science would move forward at a faster pace to bury
this horrible and untestable theory without a shred of evidence to back it
up.
I'll give evolution 10 years more at the most.
The insurgents within the indoctrinated walls are going to be the major
cause for the 10 years waiting period.
Time to start picking another theory.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: If Evolution is Wrong What is Right?
    ... scientific reasons to reject evolution as the ultimate cause ... >> and do these alternatives survive the same scrutiny? ... Aren't you going to show us the evidence? ... employ rationality and logic to scrutinize and reject evolution. ...
    (sci.anthropology)
  • Re: Random genetic changes
    ... Evolution is genetic change, so random genetic change is a form of ... I like the 'sieving of variation' description - it suggests the wealth ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Random genetic changes
    ... Evolution is genetic change, so random genetic change is a form of ... the _way_ a species changes over time is determined by the ... individual is propelled toward a more leaf-like appearence, and so on, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Testing Evolution Via Genetic Drift.
    ... >> It sounds as though we all agree that drift has specific ... Evolution is normally *defined* to be genetic change ... *Even* deleterious changes fit into that definition. ...
    (sci.bio.evolution)
  • Re: Addressing Scientific Reductionism
    ... such modular organization has been strongly ... A small amount of genetic change can ... by natural selection. ... theory of evolution the greatest thing since sliced whitebread. ...
    (sci.bio.evolution)