GaryGaulin
Posts: 5385
Joined: Oct. 2012
|
| Quote (midwifetoad @ Dec. 28 2012,23:27) | | I don't see anything contrary to standard evolutionary theory at those links. Perhaps you could give me a specific example. Epigenetics is pretty old stuff. I expected to see something from you that is outside the mainstream. |
This theory does not have to be "contrary to standard evolutionary theory". You are now just making false analogies, while trying to brush off Genetic Algorithm type beak adaptation models having proven to have been hogwash.
DNA code does not even change over seasons, like once thought/taught. Paradigm led to failed predictions GA models would seem to have verified. Likewise, the GA based world-view proved loaded with problems, one of them being it's not a realistic model of finch beak development. Where you have no realistic model, you have none, period. The theory I explain has the right model for that, and it sure did not come from Charles Darwin. Came mostly from David Heiserman, with some Arnold Trehub there too.
Science goes where the evidence leads. Not keeping up with changes epigenetics has already caused is what leads to eventually finding yourself outside the mainstream.
--------------
The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.
|
