(January 10, 2020 at 12:27 pm)Yukon_Jack Wrote:(January 10, 2020 at 10:05 am)Mister Agenda Wrote: Mutations are constrained by chemistry, they can't be just anything and therefore can't be TOTALLY random. And natural selection is a de-randomizing process. In fact, when environmental conditions are stable, it is most likely to preserve the status quo, delaying or preventing speciation (though genetic drift would still be in play). I have a good layman's understanding of the modern synthesis of the theory of biological evolution and some familiarity with the ideas of the extended synthesis; and I've read a couple of Darwin's books so I believe that I have a good grasp of his initial proposals on the matter.
I suppose it would have been quite a coincidence if I had guessed right since I haven't seen the video. What was the one you were referring to?
You haven’t even seen tours video yet you proclaim falsely of a straw man. You are a classic case of dishonest stupidity!
When your friends here can’t combat honestly , they resort to childish name calling,
Very little cerebral activity here
(January 10, 2020 at 10:42 am)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: After they found DNA precursors in comets I stopped laughing at ID people and started laughing at their parents. Their kids can help it if they were born stupid.
https://youtu.be/VUfNEHl44hc
If you found something that looked like a piece of metal , would you assume an automobile would inevitably be created from it? There is no such thing as a simple cell and Tour highlights the profound impossibility of abiogenesis
(January 13, 2020 at 4:18 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:Quote:There is no such thing as a simple cell
This bit is nonsense on the face of it. Cells vary in complexity, and some are 'simpler' than others.
Boru
This creationist claim that complex cells, like we see today, couldn't have come about via natural processes, is, among other things, al strawman.
No scientist is claiming that the first cells were anywhere as complex as the cells we see today, with their: organelles, microtubules, vacuole, etc already extant in early cells.
All that first cells were most likely constituted of, is RNA, lipid membrane, and a fluid.
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.