The answers I’ve accepted & promote, fit far better into the grand scheme of everything, than those you have advanced.
"god did it" fits "everything" meaning it really fits nothing. It has zero explanatory power.
For example, when posters like
@George-ananda ,
@Tinkerpeach , and others present their evidence & experiences with unseen intelligent entities, you’re just like other skeptics on here. You have no explanation and so prefer to claim they’re “mistaken,” rather than examine the rational presentations of their evidence.
I don't require explanations or rebuttals to point out special pleading, arguments from ignorance or bare assertions.
If you think I “make stuff up”, prove it.
No. It's upto you to show that you can support your claims with actual verifiable evidence. If you can't, then the conclusion is that you're making up stuff. Don't ask me to do your homework.
Actually, my claims & beliefs do fit the facts. (Including the unexplained phenomena.)
That makes no sense. Unexplained phenomena are unexplained. To say your claims explain things that are unexplained is like talking about a married bachelor.
Both of us have the same facts / evidence. Our interpretations of the facts is where we differ.
No.
I think I’m quite clear: that no extant species, or population thereof, can evolve to the point of forming a new Family taxon; certainly not a new Order, much less a new Class or Phylum.
What do you mean by that?
New species, even new Genera, yes. But they’ll still be classified within that Family. (Or Order… that classification system is always in flux.)
If species would evolved to a point where they would no longer belong to the same famil / order / phylum, then evolution would be disproven.
In evolution, nothing can outgrow its ancestry...
Alright.
1) The evolution of the genetic code which builds proteins that then are arranged to form the bacterial flagellum, or any of hundreds of other molecular machinery in the cell.
2) The cell itself, and the membrane encasing it.
Note that the evolution of the cell took place some 3.5 billion years ago. So naturally it will be quite hard to unravel how it occured.
But to claim that it could not have occured is quite a claim, which you will have to demonstrate.
If all you got is pointing out that we don't know exactly how it happened, then you are simply making a huge argument from ignorance right out the gates.
"etc"?
You can't say "etc" when both examples you gave were both demonstrably wrong and / or fallacious.
Yes.
It's demonstrated to being nothing but an argument from ignorance.
Nutshell: "
I don't know how this can be reduced, therefor it can't"
I know you’d like to think so, but no evolutionary mechanisms — even under lab-controlled conditions — have been observed to produce irreducibly-complex systems.
False.
The citrate metabolic pathway in e. coli is such a mechanism.
It required 2 independent mutations. Remove 1 and citrate metabolic pathway no longer works.
It's not rocket science.
Then there's also the KNOWN mechanism of "repurposing" of parts, where parts take on new functions as evolution goes on.
Building "IC" structures through gradual evolution really isn't hard.
(And the humorous example of turning a mousetrap into a tie-clasp, was no refutation.)
It actually was as an analogy, since it illustrated perfectly how repurposing of parts / function can build so-called IC structures quite easily.
I am the Worship Leader at our Church, we are not professionals, we are simple musicians whom Love to Worship our Lord in Song, and in Praises unto his name!
