-Scientific American:."Chance
plays a part in evolution.(for
example, in the random mutations that can give rise to new traits),
but evolution does not depend on chance to create organisms, proteins or
other entities. Quite the opposite: natural
selection, the principal known mechanism of evolution, harnesses nonrandom
change by preserving 'desirable'
(adaptive).features
and eliminating 'undesirable'.(nonadaptive).ones.".[SA
81]
Answer:.Of
course, chance plays a part. In fact any man can blurt out that chance
is a factor in whatever happens. Who's to argue? I even agree to that.
But let's consider chance intelligently and not as the.Scientific
American.article
presents chance.
Let's look at what Dr. James
Coppedge, an expert in the science of statistical probability has
to say. Then come back here.
Evolution's
natural
selection relies upon random
copying of errors.(mutations);
therefore should we not expect to find countless information adding mutations?
None have been found.
What this part of the.Scientific
American article is saying is that 'Oh no! We dedicated fanatically
religious
evolutionists do indeed believe with all faith, assurance, hope, conviction
and pride, that evolution is so solid that it doesn't have to depend upon
any little 'ol thing like chance, but since evolution is so wonderful in
endowing us with what we all believe and for sure now is the be
all end all providing answers for questions anyone has regarding his
existence and just is so amazingly all encompassing; that is, it envelopes,
it blankets, it covers, it enwraps, it surrounds, it achieves, it constitutes,
it includes, it encircles everything about life, it would therefore just
happen to then, also by chance huh, include a chance component.
'But to do this we evolutionists
really have to bypass the fact that our beloved natural selection cannot
explain the origin of complex, self-reproducing life forms and we, the
most highly trained, the most throughly educated, the most remarkably and
specially focused educated persons the world has ever seen, really have
no way to explain this essential step in our evolutionary belief of life,
but hey, what the hell, because were so indoctrinated religiously in evolution,
we still believe it anyway!'
And what about
adaption?
-Scientific American:."As
long as the forces of selection stay constant, natural selection can push
evolution in one direction and produce sophisticated structures in surprisingly
short times." [SA 81]
Answer:.Oh
really! I speak facetiously:
Well I suppose that the forces of natural selection have not remained constant.
In the long time natural selection already has had it hasn't produced anything
but a lot of conjecture.
And what, pray tell, determines the constancy required to produce sophisticated
structures in short times? It sure isn't the haphazard.tenets
of evolution!
-Scientific American:."Evolutionists
say "Biochemistry, computer
simulations and observations of 'natural' order, such as crystals and snowflakes,
show that evolution is highly probable."
Answer:.The
difference between crystals in rocks
and proteins
in living organisms is profound.
Break a crystal and you just get smaller crystals; break a protein and
you don't simply get a smaller protein; rather you lose the function completely.
Large crystals have low information content that is simply repeated, while
the protein molecule isn't constructed simply by repetition. Those who
manufacture proteins know that they have to add one amino
acid at a time and each addition has about 90 chemical steps involved.
