Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: donh
You have simply found an incredibly longwinded way to reject my suggestion that evolution did not always work the way it works in prokariotes.

Evolution is not just about prokaryotes and you know it. My statements apply to all evolution and you know that also. The problem is the requirement of 'fitness' which supposedly drives ALL evolution. My concise argument, which you continue to fail to address is:

1. the experiment is false because it does not punish as yet useless novelties.
2. that evolution is impossible because the gradualness of it cannot be achieved due to the necessity of each miniscule change making the organism more fit at each and every point.

Now stop trying to confuse the issue and address the points I have made above about evolution and in post# 1329 about abiogenesis. They are completely different questions which you continue to try to confuse with each other for some 100 posts already.

1,338 posted on 05/13/2003 7:06:02 PM PDT by gore3000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1308 | View Replies ]


To: All
Non-stalking placemarker.
1,339 posted on 05/13/2003 7:13:58 PM PDT by PatrickHenry (Felix, qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1338 | View Replies ]

To: gore3000
.You have simply found an incredibly longwinded way to reject my suggestion that evolution did not always work the way it works in prokariotes.

Evolution is not just about prokaryotes and you know it.

A fairly idiotic attempt to distract from how tissue-thin your fundamental argument is through irrelevant agreement.

My statements apply to all evolution and you know that also.

Repetitive blue drivel at it's finest. I know no such thing. Nobody writ in concrete that fitness test failures are necessary for evolution to take place. They only become important when vast treasures of nutrients are in permanent short supply, relative to our ability to procreate.

1. the experiment is false because it does not punish as yet useless novelties.

Hogwash. prove it. You don't know squat about what the rules were before meat machines existed, and you've provided no compelling evidence whatsoever, for about an eon now, to suggest why I should take seriously the notion that there was nothing before meat machines. What's a virus?

2. that evolution is impossible because the gradualness of it cannot be achieved due to the necessity of each miniscule change making the organism more fit at each and every point.

As you know, but conceal from the audience, this is Behe-ist drivel that was disproved before Behe even published. How do you account for the immune system trying literally millions of failed combinations to drive out a foreign body before stumbling on the right one?

Now stop trying to confuse the issue and address the points I have made above about evolution and in post# 1329 about abiogenesis.

If I needed someone to guide and direct my conversations, I'd look up my ex-wife--you're not qualified on a breathtaking basis.

They are completely different questions which you continue to try to confuse with each other for some 100 posts already.

Even if you break your arm trying to pat yourself on the back, the points you have made are all predicated on the absurd notion that there was nothing before prokariotes. My argument is pretty simple, but it's easy to understand how you could get confused.

1,372 posted on 05/14/2003 3:17:43 PM PDT by donh (u)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1338 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson