Joined: Dec. 2008
|Quote (Albatrossity2 @ May 14 2009,23:54)|
Are you just over here to fling poo? Or do you want to discuss your alleged scientific perspective?
If the latter, here is a definition of front-loaded evolution from Telic Thoughts a while back.
|Front-loading is the idea that the designer made the first organisms with the future in mind, and that the original design influenced the course of evolution.|
I’ll assume that this is the working definition; if that assumption is incorrect, please advise and we can talk about the actual definition.
But if it is the definition, I’ve no idea how one could generate a testable hypothesis based on it. Do we have the “first organisms”? No, so how would we examine them? Do we have a clue about the “original design”? I’m pretty sure we don’t. Do we know who the designer is? No, so how would we ask him/her/it about motives? What is the nature of this alleged "influence" over the subsequent course of evolution, and how do we find evidence for it?
Perhaps I’m wrong, but I’d really appreciate an answer to the question - How do you generate a testable hypothesis, and, more importantly, how do you proceed to do the testing, with this definition as the explanatory principle?
Front-loading is such a broad statement. At one end it could be identical to TOE (ala Demski's latest with the Designer changing the environment to force the changes) or at the other end a bug with a gigantic genome that contained all of the genes to create dinosaurs and roaches.
Although the latter would also require foreknowledge as it would need to synchronise the changes with the various climate and astronomical events (eg planning the flip over to mammals just when the big meteor hit 70 odd million years ago.