Post reply

Reply to the message by dhw

Name:

E-mail: (optional, won't be displayed directly)

Leave this field empty:

Homepage: (optional)

Leave this field empty:

Location: (optional)

Remember me (cookie)

Category:

Subject:

Formatting help

skip to input

format text bold: [b]bold text[/b]
format text italic: [i]italic text[/i]
insert hyperlink: [link=http://example.com/]link text[/link] / [link]http://example.com/[/link]
set text color: [color=#rgb]colored text[/color]
font size: [size=small]small text[/size]; [size=large]large text[/size]
insert list: [list][*]list item[/list]
insert image: [img]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; left: [img=left]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; right: [img=right]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; thumbnail: [img=thumbnail]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; thumbnail left: [img=thumbnail-left]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; thumbnail right: [img=thumbnail-right]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]

:-)
;-)
:-P
:-D
:-|
:-(

Message:

> TONY: [i]Well, aside from the fact that we have exactly 0 observations of species divergence [...] (Hypothesis] 4 has 0 observations to support it, in terms of speciation....[/i]-You think 3 and 5*** may be &#147;closer to the truth&#148;. May I ask how often these have been observed? If we had first-hand observation of new species (broad sense - not different types of dog) being created, then there&apos;d be no discussion. Nobody knows how it happened, and that&apos;s why we have to speculate, so non-observation can hardly be regarded as a reason for rejecting any of the hypotheses.-TONY: [i]What you have missed out on is the &#147;big picture&#148;. No life, or program, exists in a bubble, and climate/chemical change are the least of its worries. [/i][Well, not if climate/chemical change leads to starvation, or the inability to breathe, or to reproduce!] ...[i]life depends on other life in order to exist. This utterly rules out 1 & 6 because it requires communication and planning between cells, not only of different species, but of completely different types of life. (Flora & Fauna simultaneously.) [/i]-I&apos;m not so sure that cows need to communicate and plan anything with grass, but I agree that there is interdependence between different organisms. My apologies if I&apos;m being dense here, but I don&apos;t see how this rules out 6 but rules in 3 and 5*** (let&apos;s forget 1, since none of us like it). If life depends on other life in order to exist, and this requires communication and planning between cells etc., then cells must be able to communicate and plan. In that case, 6 remains extremely relevant. If you are saying, as David does, that cells are not capable of communicating and planning, how does separate creation (3) explain the interdependence and ability to cooperate and plan? And how does a change of computer programme in one organism (5) explain the ability of other organisms to cooperate and plan with the newcomer? -*** The six hypotheses are: 1) Evolution happened through innovations caused by random mutations; 2) Evolution didn&apos;t happen: God made every species independently at the same time; 3) Evolution didn&apos;t happen: but God made every species separately at different times; 4) Evolution happened: God preprogrammed the first cells to pass on every stage of it; 5) Evolution happened: God directed it through innovations, as he inserted sequences of new computer programmes into different existing cell communities; 6) Evolution happened through innovations created by intelligent cell communities, whose intelligence may or may not have been created by a God.