Ping!
You seem fixated with poofting.
I have yet to see a materialist provide a really good reason why that's *necessarily* a bad argument.
Rule #1: No Pooftahs!
The poof objection goes something like this: An ID theorist claims that a given organic system (the bacterial flagellum perhaps) is irreducibly complex or that it displays functional complex specified information. In a sneering and condescending tone the materialist dismisses the claim, saying something like “Your claim amounts to nothing more than ‘Poof! the designer did it.’”
This is not the comeback proponents of the Theory of Evolution, what you seem to call "materialists", use. Instead, it is pointed out that 'irreducible complexity' has been thoroughly debunked through demonstrations and examples of separately evolving subcomponents of so-called irreducible mechanisms (like your aforementioned flagellum).
Additionally, the term 'emergent property' has nothing to do with a lazy attempt to dismiss the question of how a given ability developed. No evolutionary scientist has ever said "Sentience is unexplainable, so it must have just emerged out of nothingness". Feel free to cite a source if you have one. What this article is claiming is a totally incorrect definition of what an emergent property is.
An emergent property really is an ability derived from multiple systems working in concert, performing a task that none of the individual parts could do individually. A simple example would be the ability for you to jump. This is achieved through the cooperative use of muscles and bones. Muscles alone cannot do it - they would have no leverage. And bones certainly could not propel you into the air on their own. Together though, they can accomplish the job - an emergent property.
Now, looking at consciousness - the 'mind', if you will - it is derived from the combined efforts of many different process centers of the brain. These subcomponents, including memory, motor control, reasoning, recognition, and others, all have clear evolutionary histories. As they developed, the tendency for them to work together to enhance the chances of the host population's survival was favored by natural selection. As a result, the members of the population that improved on the 'emergent property' of consciousness were rewarded with a better chance of contributing to the next generation of the species. Apply this principle down through the millennia and it is no mystery how this emergent property developed.
No poofery required.
It may be difficult for “materialists” to prove that consciousness is an emergent property of the brain (although, considering how much we can affect consciousness by doing things to the brain, it doesn’t seem farfetched), but that certainly doesn’t lend weight to any other explanation of where it comes from.
While any objective thinking person realizes that materialism is total bunk, it does not follow from this that common origin is bunk.
Okay, materialism is spooty and ID is just way better stuff. What chapter and verse tells us how to make cold fusion work?
There's nothing like scientific hand-waving. OK, except for dogmatic empiricism, like, "we know that evolution happened, so..."
The swine flu has characteristics of both the pig flu and the human flu. It is mostly the swine flu, which generally does not infect humans. It recombined with the human flu and produced this new strain. This is a variant of the Spanish flu of 1918. From what I remember the flu virus has 9 strands of RNA and any combination may be packaged. Since this is an RNA based virus, there is a much higher mutation rate.
Most of the strains come from Asia because a lot of pigs and fowl are grown on farms in close proximity to humans. Strains from all three can recombine. producing a totally new strain.