Tickets for Swamidass & Behe event are all gone. Every seat filled

[swamidass (S. Joshua Swamidass)]

@BenKissling

You said that when you learned more science you realized “everyone actually agrees with this”, and started talking about Kimura and neutral theory. The audio of this video is hard to hear but you very clearly said that Kimura showed that “while natural…positive selection driven change could not account for molecular machines, could not account for changes in DNA and that neutral mechanisms could.”

You went on to mention molecular machines again. I remember this part of the debate very clearly because I immediately almost jumped out of my seat. Did you misspeak?

No, I did not misspeak. It is well known that positive selection alone cannot account for molecular machines. You also need constructive neutral evolution: Constructive Neutral Evolution. If I recall correctly, I said “Neutral Theory as described by Kimura” does not explain new functions, which is entirely accurate, but Constructive Neutral Evolution does, as do many other mechanism.

Don’t forget: X-Men Constructive Neutral Evolution.

@T_aquaticus

@BenKissling

We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged.

I would agree with that statement, and I accept the theory of evolution. I think there are more evolutionary mechanisms than just random mutation and natural selection, and those are included in the modern theory of evolution. I also agree that we should carefully examine every single theory in science, since that is what science is all about

Exactly.