Reviewing Behe's "Darwin Devolves"

Already have. Eyes are a perfect example. We see different adaptations for sight in different lineages, and they follow a tree-like pattern.

1 Like

So what? What does the tree like pattern tell you about the change mechanism?

It tells us that it is evidence for evolutionary mechanisms such as random mutation and natural selection since these mechanisms would produce a tree-like pattern.

1 Like

A tree like pattern in not a new feature. We are observing lots of new features in the nested pattern.

And do those new features follow a tree-like pattern? Yes. The common ancestor of birds and bats did not have wings. Therefore, we would expect to see different wings evolve in each lineage, and that is exactly what we see.

1 Like

This tells you nothing about the cause of the new features.

Yes, it does. The combination of random mutations, natural selection, speciation, neutral drift, and vertical inheritance would produce a tree-like pattern for shared and derived features. Finding such a pattern in life is evidence for those mechanisms.

1 Like

Evidence of a mechanism is not evidence that the mechanism caused the feature. The tree like pattern could be caused by a mechanism that you have not yet identified. What you are missing is evidence the mechanism can build FI and not just break it down into non function. If we do an independent experiment with a sequence, random change with selection that a new functional sequence surfaces will fail almost every time.

Hmmm…so who is this dude Josh who has encouraged me to discuss science here???

I highlighted a key word for you there Bill. Can you tell us what that key word is?

1 Like

So you are building your theory of the diversity of life with greater than 10^30 different organisms on a mechanism that fails almost every time?

What if it fails 99.99999 percent of the time?

We know from empirical experiments it doesn’t. We know from experiments changes which produce as little as a 0.1% advantage can be selected for and become fixed. Why do you think making up bullshit numbers helps your case?

1 Like

Bill is very close minded to evidence but at least he doesn’t turn tail and run when his mistakes are pointed out like some IDers we know.

What experiments? Are these bacteria? How does that relate to multicellular organisms?

ZOOM! Go the goalposts! Gotta come up with some deflection, any deflection to avoid the topic. Do bacteria and multicellular organisms both reproduce using their DNA Bill? Do we know of mechanisms which cause changes to DNA during reproduction?

Why did you dodge this question Bill?

What happens when the environment changes and 2-3% of the previously neutral changes become beneficial? What will then happen to those mutations?

I am asking for you to support your claim. You said there are experiments so show the experiments and demonstrate they are relevant.

Provide the data which shows mutations “fail” 99.99999% of the time. Sorry Bill you don’t get to pull your usual greased pig defense this time.

1 Like

I asked a question and did not make a claim. You claimed to have evidence and are failing to back up your claim. Well, I guess were done here.

Here are two of many papers with evidence for how beneficial mutations get fixed in a population.

The Distribution of Fitness Effects Among Beneficial Mutations

Distribution of fitness effects among beneficial mutations before selection in experimental populations of bacteria

We were done years ago when you decided to check your brain at the door. But go ahead and run from the discussion and the evidence. You always do.