Common Design Theory, Revisited

[Meerkat_SK5]

@Faizal_Ali

It’s not going to be published in any serious scientific journal.

I actually agree with this but the reasons behind this will not be based on the merits but on bias.

@John_Harshman

I hope you understand that very few of the people you mention below are biologists or even scientists of any sort.

I know. I just included them anyways to fellowship with Christians on this forum since I have been ignoring them, for the most part, all this time.

@John_Harshman

Nevertheless, I will predict that any of them who bother to respond will not find your theories very sound or even comprehensible.

Well, like I said before, if they have any further questions, I will do my best to answer and make it easier for them to accept my claim.

@Faizal_Ali

But I think this is an instance where a person is best served by brutal honesty from someone whose opinion he seems to value. FWIW.

I agree.

@Mark_Sturtevant

With some tongue in cheek I would suggest submitting the paper to the Journal of Theoretical Biology. They have on more than one occasion published related papers.

Are you saying submitting it directly to a scientific journal is the best way forward in your opinion?

@Tedinoz

Are you using the “Royal we”, or are you extending some degree of “ownership/investment” in this theory to all the persons who responded to the various threads on PS, or perhaps even PS itself?

Yes, actually. There is no way this paper would have gone the distance without the contributions of PS users, specifically the non-believers on this forum. Is this going to be a problem? I thought the main purpose of this forum was to find a way to end the origins debate.