Its not the same thing. He is arguing for design; not saying it cannot evolve. You have created a straw man.
How is what I said wrong? Phylogenetic signals and protein homology are not evidence for molecular evolution argued by participants here?
- Molecular similarities provide evidence for the shared ancestry of life. DNA sequence comparisons can show how different species are related.
This was just quoted by @Frank_robert
and your evidence for that assumption is? we do know that a minimal watch\cell-phone\PC need at least few parts to be functional. thus we cant start with a single or even two parts. thus there is no stepwise to made such objects and this is also true for biological systems.
Fair enough. I was using the definition of evolution used by legitimate scientists, but Behe uses a particular definition of the word “evolve” that includes processes that require a god or some other “intelligent designer.” He believes the bacterial flagellum could not have evolved without the intervention of such a “designer”.
Would you agree that is an accurate description of Behe’s position? If so, how would it be shifting the burden of proof to ask him or his supporters to justify that position with evidence?
That is not the part you got wrong. Try again.
That is actually incorrect, as this video demonstrates. The simplest clock consists of only two parts.
You ‘know’ lots of things that are untrue.
Here’s a functional timepiece that consists of only two parts - a nail and a marked tree-stump.
.
Most of the markings are unnecessary, and it would even work without the treestump.
And both the stick and the stump can have other functions and uses.
first of all, even two parts is probably too complex to evolve, since we are talking about two genes at once. second, this might be true for a sundial. but its not true for a digital watch. in addition, we also cant go from a sundial to a digital watch by small steps.
@Rumraket provided a model for denovo gene birth and I listed 5 evidences for evolution. The mere labeling macro evolution speculation does not falsify evolution.
You will need to
much faster to sway anyone outside of the uncommon descent circle,
Even human production systems don’t assemble multi-part objects at once. Its done one step at a time. You are really out of this world.
only if you involve intelligence. but you cant do that without intelligence.
Why is intelligence required for a stick to serve as a support for a climbing plant such as ivy?
Why is intelligence required for stump to bind soil together and lessen soil erosion?
You ‘know’ lots of things that are untrue.
Unsupported assertions rejected.
@scd might be correct that we “cant go from a sundial to a digital watch by small steps.” Who knows?
What I am puzzled about is why he thinks this would mean something like the bacterial flagellum could not have evolved from something else by small steps. It’d be nice if he could explain his reasoning.
You just asked for evidence for a hypothetical. This is embarrassing. Are you embarrassed? You should be.
Every time you use that analogy, you are being intentionally dishonest. Stop that.
Non sequitur. No logic, no points.
this cant happen if we are talking about internal organ for instance. can you show how we can get a digital watch by small steps without involving any external objects?
for the same reason that a digital watch cant evolve from other object by small steps.
why? because thats refute your argument?
No answer too.
Human watchmakers make watches in small steps using external objects (which are the parts of the watch).
I do graphic design, and my designs are done in small steps starting from a blank document to the finished piece with different design elements (like images, colors, texts etcetera).
You are saying utter nonsense.
but not in a functional small steps.
And just what is that reason?
the same reason that make you think there is no stepwise from a sundial to a digital watch.
You make the same false analogies over and over. Bacteria are living cells that have mutations when they self replicate. It is the natural selection of mutations that is responsible for evolution. If we build a self-replication watch it will not evolve, it will simply replicate an identical watch.