It is a simple question. I have no idea what you think I am claiming.
I didnāt ask about your beliefs. I asked for the evidence that convinces you Behe is wrong.
1 Like
Give me a break. You were, and maybe still are, going to assert that we have no way of knowing the sequence of the mitochondrial genomes of breeding lines of corn from the 40ās, 50ās, and later years. That is patently absurd, and I trust that you will disabuse yourself of this idea.
3 Likes
Iām not sure this sort of thing is amenable to evidence. We are getting into theology here. I think the idea of God intervening at various points in natural history is ludicrous, not to mention it would require a creative interpretation of Genesis, especially the part where God finished creation and declared it very good and rested.
Itās not absurd if itās true, Professor Hunt.
Prove your point. Show your work.
Otherwise, everyone else here will understand that you are just making stuff up because you donāt like the truth of the matter.
2 Likes
If you are claiming that evolution created tURF-13 de novo and very rapidly, then we have even less reason to be confident current sequences are accurate representations of what they were decades ago, donāt we? After all, anything could happen. Evolution is pretty much magic.
Hell half the proteins in maize could have evolved de novo in the last 50 years the way you tell the fable.
You donāt really understand any of this, do you? You do not need to be working so hard to convince everyone here of this - your point has been made.
4 Likes
You donāt get to implicitly use probabilities in your argument only when itās to your advantage.
Iām closing this thread to give @art a break. Letās wait till his response. Then we will reopen this.
2 Likes