Joined: Jan. 2006
|DT can't seem to get his arms around the concept of randomness. For example he says here |
First of all prove it’s random. As far as physics can tell us, at the atomic scale and upwards there is no such thing as random - every effect has a cause and this chain of cause and effect is in principle traceable back to the origin of matter. There is some debate whether quantum events are truly random but the mutations you refer to are chemical changes at the atomic scale and completely deterministic as far as anyone knows.
Hey Dave, try this: Set up fifteen pool balls and try to knock the last ball into a hole by hitting the first ball. You can't do it except by sheer luck because each time one ball hits the next ball, any error in its trajectory is magnified. By the time you get to the fifteenth ball, the magnification is so great that the random motion of the molecules in the first pool ball is enough to completely destroy your aim. Remember Heisenberg's uncertaintly principal? It'll get you in the end and it's all at the atomic level or higher.
|Secondly, random mutation plus natural selection has NEVER been observed creating a new cell type, tissue type, organ, or body plan. Each and every one of novel cell types, tissue types, organs, and body plans must be accounted for in evolution. The proposition that RM+NS is responsible is purely an argument from ignorance i.e. “if not RM+NS then what else”?|
Dave, have you ever seen a cell type, tissue type, organ or body plan produced by ANYTHING? I'd guess no. So why do you single out RM+NS? Do I get any points by accurately pointing out that nobody ever saw Jesus produce a new tissue type? I'll bet not.
P.S. The pool ball example is not mine, but I can't remember who originated it.