“I can't say that I have spent a whole lot of time working on a “scientific” alternative to Darwin's theory of evolution.” betty boop
Neither you or any other Creationist.
Yet you seem to insist that SOME element of the evolution you claim to accept has a physical basis - yet you have absolutely no idea, nor do you care to make a conjecture, as to what the physical basis is.
Is it intellectual laziness?
You have been discussing an issue you don't really understand for many years now. You don't understand the scientific basis for Darwinian evolution or the scientific physical basis for the evolution you claim you believe in either.
Heck, you don't really even understand what DNA is or what it does - yet are quite certain, somehow, that is isn't able to do it on its own.
Would you take the word of someone who doesn't understand an internal combustion engine that burning gas alone was not necessary and sufficient to provide the energy required to make the car go - that there must be some outside force acting upon the car?
I sure wouldn't. Thus I take your conjecture that DNA, which you don't understand, is not necessary and sufficient to producing a living organism without external and somewhat miraculous “marching orders” - with about the same level of confidence - that being zero.
Yet you seem to insist that SOME element of the evolution you claim to accept has a physical basis — yet you have absolutely no idea, nor do you care to make a conjecture, as to what the physical basis is. Is it intellectual laziness? I sketched out this model a few years ago:
You'll note the model contains a "physical basis"
and an informational component that looks at the algorithmic complexity of each of the five levels.
This model is based on Alex William's work, fleshed out with a bit of Grandpierre and Chaitin. The proposal of quantum and biological vacuum fields (Fig. 3) is my hypothesis.
But of course, the model does not deal with evolution per se, only "self-making," irreducibly complex biological systems in nature. In short, what biological systems are, not just what they "look like."
I hope you'll find the model interesting.
