Intelligence isn’t finding them. The non-intelligent evolutionary process of genetic variations filtered selection feedback finds them slowly in step-wise fashion one generation at a time. Same as the last 436 times you asked the same question and were given the same scientific explanation.
I can agree that the health of the animal is environmental dependent but the structure is different. How does the development environment change the structure of the animal?
My daughter’s left arm is longer than her right arm. Does that count as part of the structure?
I understand that difference to be due to her playing the violin. So it is environmental.
Ok fair enough.
The evolutionary question is how a process like this turns an arm into a wing with flight feathers. As narrow as the design argument is this is where I think they have a leg up.
Mutations change gene interactions which in turn changes development. The reason species are physically different from each other is the mutations that differ between them.
How does the development environment change the structure of the animal?
The physical and biochemical “context” or environment of the cell is crucial for determining which genes are turned on and off at a given time. This in turn is crucial for determining the structure of the organism.
Have you read the population genetics literature?
You have made, yet again, a category error in defining your question:
“If Evolution is true…” < the Fact you can still state your case as a False Dilemma of this sort, suggests your comprehension of all our discussions is distinctly inadequate!
There are TWO (2) ways for Evolution to he TRUE!:
If there is no God, evolution can be true by virtue of explaining where the diversity of life forms come from;
If there IS God, Evolution can be true if God chooses to use Evolutionary principles and processes as one of two (2) ways he executes his role as Creator.
Do you understand how choice (2) is a viable way for Evolution to be true?!
I think there’s actually three. A sort of deism. Perhaps there’s a God that created the universe, not even knowing or caring about it’s contents, and in that universe life still evolved as an unintended byproduct.
As I have often put it, our universe was a science project for an 8th grader from an advanced alien species. The stated goal was to create a universe with nebulae and black holes, but no life. The 8th grader came up short, and was given a C-.
Heck, once we start slicing … there are probably DOZENS more forms.
So let me amend the statement to read:
2 ways for evolution to be true!"
What do you think the driver of this process is? The energy from the sun or the design of the organism that takes energy fr the sun to produce the energy rich carbohydrates? If the boss is the organism, then you are making a case for intelligence. If the boss is energy, then you make a case for naturalism.
You answer “sure”.
And yet i still wait for you to consider guided evolution to be the best way to interpret Old Earth Creationism.
I think there is evidence of origin events that make all evolution guided problematic. The eukaryotic cell is an example. Certain evolution being guided is a credible idea.
How do you know that non intelligence found them? Who gave timothy horton the authority to declare that no intelligence of any sort was involved in this process. Does your science, the purported exacting means of discovering all truth give you this authority or do you give yourself this authority. Since we know that science, by definition, does not give it, then it is safe to say that Tim Horton is like me and Bill Cole: a rather zealous religious person who leans on his faith quite often.
And i allow for that… though it seems strange when someone insists guided biochemistry is not an adequate answer.
Other than Adam & Eve (and the above) just where would you require or suggest super-natural special creation?
Because we can empirically observe the processes working with no external intelligent input required. Unless you think gravity is caused by invisible gravity fairies and genetic mutations are caused by invisible mutation pixies. Then you’re in Bill-Science territory.
Eukaryotic cell and first multicellular life are major innovations. Birds are another as flight feathers are built from very precise keratin transcription that requires hundreds of different types of this protein and a very precise design. The less dramatic the innovation the higher the odds of common descent.
Hah! Just this morning we had a thread started on the very subject
Of course Bill ignored the evidence like he always does. Things which refute his fantasy world tend to upset him.