More Denton: Reply to Tony (Introduction)

by David Turell , Sunday, August 02, 2015, 14:50 (3191 days ago) @ dhw


> TONY: ... don't all weaver birds create extremely SIMILAR nests? Is what we are looking at inventive, or simply variation on a theme?
> 
> DAVID: Thank you for this wonderful point. If weaverbirds set out to invent their nest design in a population of birds, one would expect several different designs instead of all the same...
> 
> dhw: Once a pattern is successful, it is passed on: this applies to habitats and lifestyles and (for David, not Tony) all the innovations that led from bacteria to humans. What designed these protopatterns?-Of course 'once a pattern is successful it is passed on', but that fudges the issue. I've seen all sorts of birds nests that are successful for all sorts of birds. Why is each nest specific for each type of bird? It all makes evolution look patterned and planned or designed. Tony's point holds.-> dhw: Thank you both for your support. (Glad you joined in, David. Any chance of your informing Tony why you think he's wrong over common descent?)-My view is firm. I believe in the science of aging fossils, even if the estimates vary by 10-20%. Over 3.8 billion years of life, the inaccuracies are of little import. There is a progression from simple to very complex, with gaps that refute Darwin and chance. Therefore evolution occurred but not as a natural process. It was guided by God. And this removes any sense of my agreement about your continuous use of the word 'autonomous' in regard to an onboard IM. In this scenario only 'semi-autonomous' works. Gerald Schroeder, the Orthodox Jewish theoretical physicist, explains how the OT with proper interpretation fits our science in his books. Don't take every sentence in the OT literally. They require interpretation.