(December 26, 2016 at 1:15 pm)AAA Wrote: I think that putting mechanisms in place to preserve the integrity of the genetic code is more moral than letting our genetic code degrade to the point where we suffer defects and functional disparities.
I don't think our genetic code degrades, but I'm not sure what you mean by that. Wouldn't a stable genetic code be more in line with a deliberate design, and allow for fewer things like Necrotizing fasciitis, the rabies virus and the terrifying amalgam of toxins that nature has developed? Human designers seek efficiency, safety, and reliability in their inventions. Wouldn't an intellect capable of designing a universe be even more efficient, since it would not be limited by resources and a lack of sufficient information and experience?
"Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape- like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered."
-Stephen Jay Gould
-Stephen Jay Gould
