« Links Mentioned on the 11/13/15 Show | Main | Can People Be Saved through Natural Revelation? »

November 14, 2015

Comments

Meyer...

Many argued that there must be a high proportion of functional sequences among all possible sequences so that a random search for a new functional sequence would have a high probability of success.
Let's say, for the sake of discussion, that a 'random search' would require a 'high proportion of functional sequences'.

What if the search isn't random, Amy?

Have you thought about that?

Have you investigated that?

Is it the claim of the theory of evolution that the search is random throughout sequence space?

Answer: The search - according to the the theory of evolution - is isn't random throughout sequence space.

The search is concentrated near functioning sequences.

Why?

Because a lot of mutations change the existing sequence very very little.

correction:

Answer: The search - according to the the theory of evolution - isn't random throughout sequence space.

Why is it the Christian apologetics organizations and political think tanks that are doing all the hard-hitting intelligent design work, and not universities, the NSF, the NIH, etc.? Why can I count the number of biology Ph.D.s who publicly support intelligent design on one hand? Why does the Discovery Institute hire so few biologists, and so many lawyers? What is Stephen Myer, a history and philosophy Ph.D., doing talking about protein folding?

Oh right, that's because if any biologist with a university position DARES to speak the TRUTH about the obviously false theory of evolution, then the U.N. Secular Humanist Anti-Christianity Death Panel has him or her fired right there ON. THE. SPOT.

The reason Christian apologists are doing this task and not biologists is because the Christian worldview contains the obvious truth regarding the origins of life. The data discussed in the video that we now know about generating new organisms will never hit mainstream academia for the reasons implied by Phillip A's post. This shows that seeking the truth (wherever it leads) is not what evolutionary scientists are in the game for. This is a battle of worldviews...always has been.

I can think of two pretty compelling reasons:
1) Apologists are so blinded by their faith that they discount any and all empirical evidence that contradicts their old scriptures
2) (and this is worse) Apologists are cynically manufacturing fear, uncertainty and doubt about evolution hoping to keep the sheep in line.

Phillip A, Bill K,

You're both committing genetic fallacies.

It's better to respond to what Meyer says instead of running down his qualifications.

And it's better not to speculate about the thoughts and motives of others: You just don't know.

Do you like it when people tell you your thoughts and motives?

Responding to what Meyer says is easy.

If you don't find it easy, then hold your peace and study.


RonH:

"The search - according to the the theory of evolution - isn't random throughout sequence space."

So evolutionary processes are random when directed-processes are inconvenient and directed when random processes are inconvenient?

How convenient! :)

kpolo,

When I said...

The search - according to the the theory of evolution - isn't random throughout sequence space.
...I was not invoking direction.

According to the theory (1) mutations act on existing sequences and (2) frequently don't change the existing sequence much.

Can we agree on 1 and 2? I think so.

So the random search is concentrated (in sequence space) near existing sequences.

Hence the random search is not random throughout sequence space.

______________________________________________________________________________________

We hear: All of sequence space is SO BIG!!!

But mutation of existing functional sequences doesn't search all of sequence space.

And you know what?

Known functional proteins are not uniformly distributed all over sequence space.

Known functional proteins are, in fact, grouped in 'families' whose members share sequence similarities.

As predicted by the theory of evolution.

It's better to respond to what Meyer says instead of running down his qualifications.
Ron, this quote, and the entire post containing it was a very fair and reasonable set of thoughts. I wish all of us, myself included, could always do that well.

Thanks for that.

Great post, Amy! Very informative.

The comments to this entry are closed.