900 Top Scientists Sign Statement Skeptical of Macro-Evolution (page 11)

cofty

False dichotomy - I'm anti-theist and a really nice person.

Any chance of answering my questions Perry?

I once made the mistake of adressing you Cofty. I asked you were did the DNA code language come from. You simply stated that there was no code. That was the last time I took you seriously. And so no, i don't think I can communicate with you.

MAS*H

Perry, is there a "language" in all chemical reactions and or molecules? As you seem to judge people on their ability to identify 'codes' correctly and be somewhat of an expert in identifying a code when you see one, do you think that the structure of Tris(dibenzylideneacetone)dipalladium(0) is a 'code' in the sense of Information Theory? Or perhaps you think that in this case it is just a chemical compound?

At what point do you start saying a chemical compound or polymer is 'coded with a language'? When it seems complicated? When it acts a catalyst in chemical reactions? When it is 'perfect' according to some picture you hold?

Do you really not understand why we refer to DNA as a code, whilst not actually believing it is a true code in the language sense?

MAS*H

“We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural
selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the
evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged.”

Would it not be better to concentrate on the modern evolutionary synthesis?

Why is the above statement so shocking? Skeptical enquiry should be encouraged in science. Certainly evidence should always be carefully examined. Evidence that contradicts the evolutionary thoery should certainly be looked at... it is of course a falsifiable theory.

Obviously the theory will need to be adjusted to encompass new evidence as and when it comes along. Perhaps though, you are suggesting, evidence could be presented to bring the entire body of knowledge to be proven incorrect? If so, what is this evidence?

Band on the Run

Perry,

How many millions of scientists around the world refused to sign the statement? I suspect the signers are such a small minority that the statement is a joke.

Ocean1111

What next? Question plate tectonics, the big bang, gravity and the date of the last ice age? Yep. lol, welcome to the "imaginary universe".

Remember even Darwin stated his theory did not address speciation, it just layed out a concept framework. Imo even "evolution" has "evolved" beyond anything Darwin would have imagined. He was not an atheist either, it appears the only threat he posed was to the narrow Catholic "sciences", and people making money off the Darwin ideas then proceded to "mutate" his ideas to fit their agenda as they also "evolved" into an academic Catholicism; its a circle. To Darwin God is who "created" "evolution" go figure.

In reality it all must actually be seemless universally and even supra-universally, so science and religion could agree, it is the seamstress and ironers who cannot. In reality it must be a whole and it already is perfect, it is the "human being" that is the problem, that much can be proven. And thus the "human being" is not going to hack the knowledge of reality as the "human being" is trying to do. At some point it must be taught as originally intended, from the Source of the whole.

Its actually just logical, but the human brain is easily confused by logic and subject to interpretations of it, hence the controversy over "evolution" never really evolves much, imo.

LogCon

cofty asked ' ... How does human chromosome 2 prove that we share a common ancestor with primates?...'

Humans and primates both have iron in their blood and breath oxygen.

Yup, we're related all right.

Billyblobber

Why is this "Perry" guy dodging every single question thrown his way?

designs

Because......

cofty

I asked you were did the DNA code language come from. You simply stated that there was no code. - Perry

That is a blatant misrepresentation. Please find the thread.

You were arguing that there was "information" in the genome and that information needs an intelligent mind. I responded that there is no "information" in that sense. Information is a metaphor.

Just because you can't answer some reasonable questions there is no need to sink to the level of lying for Jesus.

900 Top Scientists Sign Statement Skeptical of Macro-Evolution

Share this