Joined: Oct. 2006
|Quote (Daniel Smith @ Jan. 29 2009,18:49)|
|I agree that front-loading requires enormous knowledge and foreknowledge, in fact it would require omniscience. But this data (or knowledge of it) is only required of the creator, it does not have to be front-loaded into the organism. What we're talking about here are flexible genetic programs loaded into a number of proto-organisms by an omniscient being. It stands to reason that such a being could streamline such genomes to the bare essentials and utilize genome duplication, chromosome rearrangement and other information multiplying mechanisms - as well as error correction techniques - to bring about whatever changes are necessary to keep a balanced ecosystem on this planet.|
I have no idea what you mean by a 'flexible genetic program'. Do you? I think you are hoping it makes sense to a computer programmer but not being one, you don't know.
From the rest of what you write, it sounds like you are invoking the mainstream theory.
'proto-organisms with streamlined genomes' - OK, although you might get some disagreement about how streamlined they were.
'utilize genome duplication, chromosome rearrangement and other information multiplying mechanisms' - no disagreement there.
'error correction technique' - biologists call it 'natural selection'.
The main quibbles would be with the need for a creator and the assertion that there is a 'balanced ecosystem'.
|In the short time I've been posting here, I've posted several examples that are consistent with this view: |
A reason this is not science is that everything is consistent with it.
ETA: There is also the small matter that if it requires omniscience, then you have to demonstrate that omniscience exists.
All sweeping statements are wrong.