Erasmus, FCD
Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007
|
| Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Feb. 25 2009,03:07) | Is Denial really Thomas Cudworth?
| Quote | | I don’t want to hear, for the umpteenth time, how a light-sensistive spot might have retreated into a depression, and then could have been accidentally covered over by some semi-transparent skin which later could have become a lens, etc. I want to see specific mechanisms for all of these changes in terms of particular point mutations along the genome, and related developmental changes. I want to see checkable numbers given for mutation rates, I want full lists of ecological competitors inhabiting the Ordovician ocean, I want accurate CO2 and ultra-violet levels and other relevant environmental data over the period of time in question, etc. Most such details are lacking in Darwinian accounts. We can’t test the efficacy of RM + NS if we don’t have precise information regarding both the mutation side and the selection side. |
an-open-challenge-to-neo-darwinists-what-would-it-take-to-falsify-your-theory/
If not, they are brothers in tard. |
OM you bastard you beat me to it by some 20 odd hours.
Note that this design inference was the fisherian type and not the bayesian sort of thing.
--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK
Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG
the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat
I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles
|
