(February 18, 2016 at 1:22 pm)Pandæmonium Wrote:(February 17, 2016 at 10:13 pm)AAA Wrote: It's not just complex, though. There are so many purposeful interactions that need to take place in order for the cell to regulate itself. These interactions are dependent on intricate structures, which are dependent on sequence of characters in DNA. When you remove one enzyme, the whole system might no longer be able to function. So the problem is that in order for it to work well enough to evolve (reproduce), you need tens of thousands of nucleotides in a proper sequence. It couldn't get there gradually, at least not by mutation and natural selection.argument from incredulity.
You are dismissing something based on your own inability to either believe or at least entertain the evidence as currently provided. Unfortunately this is not sufficient to form a counter hypothesis. You require some study or body of literature that explains an alternative proposal which has the verifiable and testable data behind it allowing it to be reproduced. If you could provide some that'd be swell, please.
No, actually I don't need to put forward an alternative in order to reject an explanation that doesn't hold up. I don't have to accept an inadequate cause just because it is the only choice. I can rather say I don't know. Better yet, I can use the cause that is adequate: designer. I don't have to prove the inability of gradual processes leading to thousands of specified nucleotides. That is the null hypothesis which we assume to be true. We must then try to support the alternative hypothesis (gradual processes are sufficient). That would be like me telling you to prove that God doesn't exist using repeatable and testable data, which we both agree isn't a fair request. Both theories about the past are impossible to investigate using the conventional scientific empiricism which you are talking about.
