Joined: Oct. 2009
|Quote (Otangelo @ Nov. 15 2015,18:26)|
|[quote=OgreMkV,Nov. 15 2015,15:07] |
|Quote (OgreMkV @ July 27 2015,11:56)|
If you will look very carefully, you will discover (as I have) that there is no mention of Junk DNA by any ID proponent until well after biologists have given evidence for it. Even further, they don't explain WHY ID predicts junk DNA... or no junk DNA.
Mutations cause organisms to degrade (many ID proponents). Total failure. It's trivial to show that many mutations are positive.
etc. etc. etc.
Well, was coded, complex specified information and interdependent , irreducible complex systems predicted by the ToE ? Or where are the transitional fossils prior the Cambrian explosion ? Or that genes and functional parts would be re-used in different unrelated organisms ? Where are the millions of intermediate forms that should be there ? Did it predict that DNA repair mechanisms would be found ? Or that adaptation to the environment, aka micro change, would be a built in mechanism in the genome ?
These findings are all in line with what we expect to find if a intelligent creator were in play.... and we did.
Let me explain something to you. Meyer is a liar. If you think that Precambrian fossils don't exist then you are ignorant of reality. The only question becomes, "Are you willing to learn?"
I personally spent about 9 months digging into the issue you mention in response to writings by ID proponent Meyer. Do you know what I found? Not that he was wrong, but that he purposefully lied in his book about what science says on those subjects.
How do I know he lied? Because that is only possible explanation for having so many papers misrepresented to be the exact opposite of what they actually said.
Now, here's the question again. Are you willing to learn?
I can provide you with about 25,000 words and about 75 peer-reviewed research papers that show that there are plenty of Pre-cambrian fossils, that explains the origin of the body plans (which are pre-cambrian, the millions of intermediate forms that you think don't exist, and what evolution actually is.
Do you want them, will you read them, and will you admit that you are wrong afterwards?
Finally, I would like to point out that you are demanding information, very specific information, when you cannot respond in kind about intelligent design.
Tell us, in detail, what does ID predict about DNA repair enzymes? Why? What part of ID results in that prediction?
You tell us, in detail, where does information in the ID paradigm come from? What evidence do you have that such a source exists? (And, please say "the design". Because circular logic is so much fun to play with.)
So, the ball is in your court. If you are willing to learn, I will happily explain to you, in detail, where ID proponents have lied to you. Are you tough enough to handle it? And can you respond to the same level of detail about your own pet notions?
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.