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:

> DAVID’s comment (on the frog post) : [i]A frog tongue snaps out and snaps back. Its saliva must act this way to handle the speed of the action. Not a process that could develop stepwise. Many, many animal activities are like this, with no sensible way for development by Darwin's theory.[/i]
> 
> DAVID’s comment: [i]Note the special enzyme to obtain phosphorus and digest the insects. How were these enzymes found by evolution's search among giant proteins? Further, digestive enzymes don't harm the plant. How was that defense arranged simultaneously with the development of the digestive enzyme itself? Not stepwise. In humans our stomach acid is equal to battery acid, and our stomachs are protected. Same issue of how was that developed? Darwin's theory doesn't work.[/i]
> 
> DAVID’s comment (earlier one on carnivorous plants): [i]Usual problem. This did not develop step-wise. Trapping is one step but without digesting enzymes, why bother? Saltation, once again.[/i]
> 
> Once more, many thanks for these amazing “natural wonders”. They are an education in themselves. I can understand your delight in sniping at Darwin, and I share your opinion that these complex processes could not have come about through random mutations followed by gradual, stepwise refinements. However, each time you snipe, I think back to your earlier insistence that all such processes can only have been brought about by God specially preprogramming them 3.8 billion years ago, or personally stepping in to mess around with the chemistry of the frogs/plants, because these froggy/planty tricks were essential to keep life going so that humans could evolve. Fortunately, you have now modified your stance and conceded that organisms may have an autonomous inventive mechanism designed by your God, who only steps in if he’s not happy with what’s going on. May I then, as we join forces in rejecting Darwin’s hypothesis of random mutations and gradualism, also assume that in all these cases you now believe that the cell communities of the organisms concerned may have used their (perhaps God-given) autonomous intelligence to design these processes, or do you still think your God preprogrammed them / personally dabbled them for the sake of humans?