Joined: July 2007
|Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Mar. 11 2010,10:01)|
|Quote (Joe G @ Mar. 11 2010,09:55)|
Too bad that biological community has no idea if the transformations required are even possible via mutational accumulation.
And your proof for that is what? Those words? Anything else?
And all YOU have is to try to bash ID with your ignorance.
Why don't you wow us all then and give a demonstration of the EF in action.
You couldn't support your position if your life depended on it.
The argument has already happened. My "position" is the default. You've already lost, you just don't realise it.
As for not answering questions- well limpdick tell me-
How can we test the premise that the bacterial flagellum "evolved" via an accumulation of genetic accidents?
I'll answer that once you answer how we can test the premise that the bacterial flagellum was intelligently designed?
Also, which bacterial flagellum did you have in mind here? There are many variants. Any one in particular? I'm afraid I don't know what the variant is called that is on the banner at UD.
It isn't in any textbooks. And it isn't in any peer-reviewed paper.
As we've seen from the "cosmos" thread even it is probable you would not be able to understand it.
IOW asswipe your position is all smoke and mirrors.
And that's why almost every working biologist in the entire world takes that position. And a few bible bashing IDiots at bible-university and you think otherwise. So what.
My "proof"= nothing in peer-review.
There isn't any data which demonstrates mutations can accumulate in such a way as to give rise to new protein machinery, new body parts and new body plans.
Chromosomes. are. all. connected. It is one long polymer. Called the DNA. - oleg t
simple English (hint: "equal" and "interchangeable" aren't synonyms)- JohnW
"Genetic mutations are mistakes"- evolutionary biology
"Genetic mutations aren't mistakes"- Intelligent Design and Timothy Horton